True, it’s just a little too magical for my brain to process. To me he was a prophet and probably a good dude… but that’s probably about it.
To worship a guy as a literal God because his mom had a tale to tell about why she was pregnant, was the beginning of the end of religion making sense for me.
That’s not the only reason. Jesus claimed to be God, His followers worshipped Him, He performed miracles and ultimately died and rose again and was seen by many. Then ascended into heaven like a month later.
The truth is even better: the masses were too dumb for his educated metaphors, the priests got in a huff, the colonizers decided they could solve a problem for the local leaders.
His followers got organized and staged an early death (crucifixion takes 20 hours not 3) with anaesthetic on a sponge, dude healed up for 3 days in a cave covered in myrrh etc and guarded by loyals, then showed up to his ragtag band of radicals and gave them the heads-up. Sends Thomas off to South India because he needs a challenge. Grabs peter paul and mary and off they go to Rome, incognito, to undermine the heart of the empire with some radical ideas.
After a couple of decades building community in Rome, Issa retires to Kashmir, just in time for the big buddhist conclave. He injects compassion and the notion of a self sacrificing avatar into the venerable but vibrant philosophy. He and Mary settle down and enjoy the lovely isolated valley and he dies an old man, having made a difference.
For a start, He would have been hanging there for possibly longer than three hours as he was already dead. Still baking in the sun. Keep in mind He was really brutally whipped before going there which would be enough to kill somebody, as well as staying up for hours, sweating blood long before as well. Crucifixion would have very much killed someone in that state in three hours. Every breath He’d take would cause his back to scrape against the rough wood and cause excruciating (literally) pain. Lastly, His side was pierced and it showed His lungs had collapsed. Then He was buried in a tomb, and guarded by ROMANS, not loyals. In the state He was in, He would have very much died there in the course of three days if He was somehow still alive. Not recovered.
How does it have the markings of a gambit? No idea how a guy can survive that and just be okay. And also, were the disciples in on it? If so, how come they died refusing to renounce it? Jesus would have had to do this without their knowing as well.
The supposed water walking event wasn’t documented by anyone until 5 decades later. Paul never mentions it, all the other early writings don’t mention it, only in about 81AD or so did it appear. Where did Mark get it? We have no clue. Maybe he saw the optical illusion of people walking by water looking like they are walking on water, maybe local magicians were using the rocks underneath and he heard about, maybe it was symbolic that Cephus was involved and he wanted to talk more smack about the man (Mark really hated him), maybe there was a local play that had a god in it that did it. Point is the chain of evidence was broken.
And the deaths of the apostles are even more poorly documented. There was a huge incentive to lie about everything. We don’t know how James died, we suspect he was very old when it happened, there is a possible reference to him being killed as an old man but for what crimes we don’t know. The idea that he was killed for his beliefs doesn’t show up until nearly two centuries later in text form.
There couldn’t have been rocks underneath as Peter began to sink. John was the one who talked smack about Peter.
For historical accounts from that time, 5 decades after is rather close. Most records we have about history from that point in time are written centuries later. Generally copies of copies, etc. When mark wrote it though, there’d be several other guys who would have been there who could have said “actually this didn’t happen”, by this point they were spreading all over the world, but they already accepted Mark’s gospel.
Also worth noting that the 5 decades date primarily comes from the presumption that Jesus couldn’t have told the future in the Olivet discourse. Which if Christianity is true, the account could very well have come earlier.
True, it’s just a little too magical for my brain to process. To me he was a prophet and probably a good dude… but that’s probably about it.
To worship a guy as a literal God because his mom had a tale to tell about why she was pregnant, was the beginning of the end of religion making sense for me.
That’s not the only reason. Jesus claimed to be God, His followers worshipped Him, He performed miracles and ultimately died and rose again and was seen by many. Then ascended into heaven like a month later.
The truth is even better: the masses were too dumb for his educated metaphors, the priests got in a huff, the colonizers decided they could solve a problem for the local leaders.
His followers got organized and staged an early death (crucifixion takes 20 hours not 3) with anaesthetic on a sponge, dude healed up for 3 days in a cave covered in myrrh etc and guarded by loyals, then showed up to his ragtag band of radicals and gave them the heads-up. Sends Thomas off to South India because he needs a challenge. Grabs peter paul and mary and off they go to Rome, incognito, to undermine the heart of the empire with some radical ideas.
After a couple of decades building community in Rome, Issa retires to Kashmir, just in time for the big buddhist conclave. He injects compassion and the notion of a self sacrificing avatar into the venerable but vibrant philosophy. He and Mary settle down and enjoy the lovely isolated valley and he dies an old man, having made a difference.
For a start, He would have been hanging there for possibly longer than three hours as he was already dead. Still baking in the sun. Keep in mind He was really brutally whipped before going there which would be enough to kill somebody, as well as staying up for hours, sweating blood long before as well. Crucifixion would have very much killed someone in that state in three hours. Every breath He’d take would cause his back to scrape against the rough wood and cause excruciating (literally) pain. Lastly, His side was pierced and it showed His lungs had collapsed. Then He was buried in a tomb, and guarded by ROMANS, not loyals. In the state He was in, He would have very much died there in the course of three days if He was somehow still alive. Not recovered.
Your last paragraph sounds AI generated lol
Nah, the story has all the markings of a gambit. It was retconned on the spot.
How does it have the markings of a gambit? No idea how a guy can survive that and just be okay. And also, were the disciples in on it? If so, how come they died refusing to renounce it? Jesus would have had to do this without their knowing as well.
And i can walk over water. You just have to believe me
If you can get me several people who saw it and are willing to die for that fact, I’d believe you
The supposed water walking event wasn’t documented by anyone until 5 decades later. Paul never mentions it, all the other early writings don’t mention it, only in about 81AD or so did it appear. Where did Mark get it? We have no clue. Maybe he saw the optical illusion of people walking by water looking like they are walking on water, maybe local magicians were using the rocks underneath and he heard about, maybe it was symbolic that Cephus was involved and he wanted to talk more smack about the man (Mark really hated him), maybe there was a local play that had a god in it that did it. Point is the chain of evidence was broken.
And the deaths of the apostles are even more poorly documented. There was a huge incentive to lie about everything. We don’t know how James died, we suspect he was very old when it happened, there is a possible reference to him being killed as an old man but for what crimes we don’t know. The idea that he was killed for his beliefs doesn’t show up until nearly two centuries later in text form.
There couldn’t have been rocks underneath as Peter began to sink. John was the one who talked smack about Peter.
For historical accounts from that time, 5 decades after is rather close. Most records we have about history from that point in time are written centuries later. Generally copies of copies, etc. When mark wrote it though, there’d be several other guys who would have been there who could have said “actually this didn’t happen”, by this point they were spreading all over the world, but they already accepted Mark’s gospel.
Also worth noting that the 5 decades date primarily comes from the presumption that Jesus couldn’t have told the future in the Olivet discourse. Which if Christianity is true, the account could very well have come earlier.