Making up a god-man? Just thinking outloud.

Until I became interested in Christianity I never doubted there was a person called Jesus.

Of course, like most Westerners, and a great many others I suspect, the image I carried around was one of a tall, bearded, white(ish) long haired imperious yet humble, stand out in a crowd person who strode around Galilee in a spotless white robe head and shoulders above everyone else preaching his version of salvation etc.

I never believed all the miracle rubbish, but accepted that he was handed over to the Romans by the Jews and crucified.

In my teenage and young adult world of girls, rock music, and partying I couldn’t really care less what happened to Jesus. He was crucified. The end.

But these days some questions nag at me and so I ask them.

And here’s one of my favorites.

If Jesus was a real historical figure, but simply a man who got things a bit wrong with his preaching and got crucified for his trouble, why did his followers go to all the trouble of making a god out of him, attributing miracles to him, founding a religion out of his teachings,writing gospels about him, the Epistles and the fantastic stories about him, perpetrate the fabrications, the blatant forgeries, the interpolations etc etc ad nauseum?

Try to imagine the tracks you would have to cover to  erase every trace of the real man behind the god if he actually wasn’t a god?

Yet, if he was really doing all the things claimed of him as a divine being you would expect something to show up in history? (outside of the bible of course)

But if he was just a man then the answer would likely be no, you would not necessarily expect anything to show up, as apocalyptic preachers were likely a dime a dozen around this time so who’s going to really notice another one?

And the argument immediately becomes circular.

Why pick a nobody and make a god out of him when chances are that, unless every source of his background was erased someone somewhere is going to expose the lie eventually?

I mean why bother going to all that trouble when you could simply invent him?

As Jeremy Clarkson is wont to say: ”How hard could it be?”

Ark.

 

Oh, I meant to add this:

If any of you clever clogs have worked out why I choose the title ”Getting vexed over flags” for the last post award yourself 1000 points. 🙂


203 thoughts on “Making up a god-man? Just thinking outloud.

  1. Hahahaha! Yep, when something is true-blue real, it just doesn’t take so much invention, imagination, and effort to prove something that… OH… was apparently planned start to finish over 1,000 years prior! WHOOPS! Sorry, that would be incorrect — actually from Alpha to Omega is the precise vernacular/theology. 😒

    And then there’s that bit of 17-years of absolute NOTHINGNESS that no one has any halfway decent explanation for… that is, for a god-man. No, that’s not exactly right either! I meant to say THE one and only Son of God vanished, whoosh, and no one said a damn thing about it!!! 😝 Hmmmmmmmm… as the classic song goes “things that make you go… Hmmmmmmm.” To self…

    HEY!!! How tha hell did this wool get over my eyes and head… AND for so long… like 2,000 plus years!? 😵

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I think this is why I get so annoyed by people like O’Neill, who despises those who believe Jesus the Nazarene was made up, and even though he is an atheist ”and a rationalist” he often comes across sounding like he moonlights for Christian apologists. Somewhat in the vein of Ehrman, only with a crude mouth and a bit more hair.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Coincidence (or as a ‘Charismatic used to tell me “God-incidence’) I was reading just yesterday the JC’s missing years were spent in England; at Glastonbury on and off, and working in the Cornish tin mines learning the trade.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Two things. Acts Seminar concludes there was no early church in Jerusalem, so that probably rules out any actual followers. Second, Where are Jesus’s brother’s family, cousins, uncles, aunts, and their extended families? Also, setting the story two to three generations earlier almost gurantees a total absence of verifiable evidence.

    And then we have the Mark problem. The earliest account of the story doesn’t have a resurrection. The author simply says a young man was there at the tomb. He says: “He has risen.” That’s in English. But let’s look at that word (the verb) in the original Koine Greek. ἠγέρθη (ēgerthē): meaning, Get up, Awake, Stand.

    The Koine Greek word for resurrection (as in, of the dead) is anástasi

    That word is not used in the original Mark text referring to Jesus.

    Anástasi is used in regards to Jesus in ther much later works of Matthew, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, Corinthians, Hebrews, 2Timothy, and Revelations.

    So, the author of the oldest version of the story, Mark, certainly knew the word, but didn’t use it in the passage at the tomb, choosing instead the past tense of the verb for getting up/standing (like from bed in the morning): ēgerthē.

    Liked by 1 person

        1. I find him hysterical, and such hubris that he has taken it upon himself to open a entire , blog dedicated to educating atheists on history, yet notwithstanding his own qualifications, all his arguments seem so similar to the average Christian apologist when discussing the historicity of JC.
          You’ll remember the dialogue from Unklee’s blog over the TF? 🙂

          Definitely an odd one….

          Like

          1. This post was prompted by Pastor Mel’s link to a post he wrote featuring O’Neill disparaging Carrier in O’Neill’s inimitable style. You know how he writes, of course?
            From this I went over to O’Neill’s blog and read a few posts and then the idea for this post popped into my head.

            O’Neill was on Unklee’s Nazareth post and you and he ”had at it” over the TF.

            If I recall you said you admired his suave delivery style and wonderful dress sense, or something.
            😉
            Are we more or less on the same page now, Mister Z?
            Please note: Links can be supplied.

            Like

          2. Really, I spoke to him over there? Must have been ages ago. Can’t even racall ever visiting his den. I thought you were talking about his foray here recently. Yeah, I saw Mel’s little digs and assumed the “atheist” he was talking about was O’Neil. Had to laugh at his disgust at Carrier’s polyamorous lifestyle.

            Liked by 1 person

    1. JZ:

      I still like the Stations of the Cross version used by Sauniere, where (14, is it?) sure as hell looks like some guys burgling the tomb and evacuating the deceased by moonlight.

      Don’t go there—Sauniere is a whole study in himself. (But what did he know that others didn’t?) (Brrrr). As for the Pope paying him off, it would have been far cheaper to simply pop him off.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Here’s another question to ponder.

    If “apocalyptic preachers were likely a dime a dozen around this time”, why is the New Testament still hanging around today? Seems like we should have quit talking about Jesus a long time ago. What do you suppose makes Jesus different from the other dime-a-dozen preachers?

    Like

          1. Nobody thought Jesus was the Messiah. That’s the reason they crucified him. And that’s what makes it so interesting that the Jesus narrative is still hanging around today.

            Like

          2. Apparently there were a lot of people that thought he was, but you are correct that quite a number who disagreed. But again, what evidence is there?

            Like

          3. Is this what you regard as evidence?
            I was hoping for at least something more specific.
            Perhaps the fact we are ”talking” about him is largely due to the false beliefs that have been indoctrinated into our culture?

            Like

          4. But as you pointed out there have been thousands of false beliefs taught throughout history. Why is the false belief of Christianity still the subject of blog posts?

            Like

          5. Have you ever heard the phrase a lie can run around the world before the truth has got out of bed?
            An analogy that compares very well with Christianity.

            But you still have not identified the evidence you consider valid?

            Like

          6. Ah … and there I was thinking you might actually be punting for at least a semi -reasonable discussion.
            And here you are, Senor Dickhead!

            I am not sure how long I am prepared to put up with you masturbating all over my blog?

            Like

          7. With all due respect I do not think it’s reasonable to ask me to provide you with evidence that Jesus is the Messiah there’s an entire Old Testament dedicated to that

            Like

          8. Right. the thrust of the article was that Jesus was made up by men. The thrust of the article was not whether or not Jesus was the Messiah.

            Like

          9. The post merely questioned whether there was any historicity to the character, and the problems involved if the character was simply a man rather than a god.

            You are a believer and this is why I asked you for evidence.

            Like

          10. It is not that difficult to convince the credulous.

            What is more curious is if he was a god there was no contemporary evidence or mention of him … at all.

            Like

          11. The Jesus narrative? Yeah, I see a lot of people following the beatitudes, especially evangelical Americans.

            You follow Paul, not Jesus. Nobody follows Jesus, except for perhaps the Dali Lama.

            Liked by 2 people

          12. The sentiments were around long, long, long before Jesus.

            For example, Turn the other cheek?

            Lao Tzu, said it this way: I treat those who are good with goodness. And I also treat those who are not good with goodness. Thus goodness is attained

            Zhuangzi said it this way: Do good to him who has done you an injury.

            Rishabha said it this way: My Lord! Others have fallen back in showing compassion to their benefactors as you have shown compassion even to your malefactors. All this is unparalleled.

            Mahavira said it this way: Man should subvert anger by forgiveness, subdue pride by modesty, overcome hypocrisy with simplicity, and greed by contentment.

            In Hinduism its said this way: A superior being does not render evil for evil; this is a maxim one should observe; the ornament of virtuous persons is their conduct. One should never harm the wicked or the good or even criminals meriting death. A noble soul will ever exercise compassion even towards those who enjoy injuring others or those of cruel deeds when they are actually committing them–for who is without fault?

            And Siddhartha Gautama said it this way: Conquer anger by love. Conquer evil by good. Conquer the stingy by giving. Conquer the liar by truth.

            But tell me, did western civilisation ever proceed by turning the other cheek?

            Did the US?

            Do you follow the beatitudes?

            Liked by 1 person

          13. JB:

            lots of narratives are still hanging around today—if antiquity increases virtue, some of them far more virtuous than the Christian narratives.

            Like

          14. Pop along to your library, or get on the web … you may be surprised. Or read my other comment.

            But don’t fret it—only one of them all is the Bible truth. The rest, pre and post JC, are obvious forgeries by Satan …

            Liked by 1 person

    1. Seems like we should have quit talking about Jesus a long time ago.

      Oh, we have.

      These days, the talk is all about greed. It’s just that they call it “Jesus” because that works as a marketing ploy.

      Liked by 4 people

    2. JB:

      “why is the New Testament still hanging around today?”

      I’d say partly military force (rack, thumbscrews, stakes etc) on one hand and the same reasons why KFC and Big Macs are universal today—marketing.

      Oops, and gullibility coupled with the almost universal fear/dread of death.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The point is that there have been dozens of marketing ploys around religion throughout the history of mankind. Why does Christianity Prevail after a couple of millenniums?

        Like

        1. Why does (in various locations, some with greater head-counts) Buddhism, Jusdaism, Hinduism, Islam prevail, after millenniums?

          Is Christianity unique?

          Like

          1. Of course Christianity is unique. That’s the reason I’m asking the question about why it’s still hanging around. You raised a great point. Why didn’t Judaism squash Christianity in the first century?

            Like

          2. Christianity isn’t unique … okay, given the names of the players, yes, it is unique. But the plot of the play is neither unique nor original. Other gods-on-Earth were born of virgins (some springing from the forehead of greater gods) and others crucified. Some brought love, some brought war (JC, anyone?).

            No Jesus in Asia, or the Americas, until taken there—and in the case South America imposed by total unmerciful ferocity. But that aspect was covered by written excuse beforehand in the merciful compassionate Good Book too, no?

            Like

          3. I’m not well enough versed to challenge this point. But how can you relate such smugness to the history of the Holy Inquisition, persons (they are legion) like Matthew Hopkins, the forced ‘conversion’ of innocents?

            So JC himself may be off the hook but as sure as holy hell his followers most definitely are not. So Jesus is just the excuse used by the ruthless and vicious to acquire great wealth and power?

            It’s all very well being a dreamer …

            Like

          4. Ruthless, vicious people will use whatever name is most convenient to acquire great wealth and power. The question remains, how did the name of an insignificant, unremarkable carpenter’s son come to wield such power?

            Like

          5. You may ask the question of how and why insignificant, unremarkable Trump came to wield such power and they will be talking about that for thousands of years if he does not hit the nuclear launch button in the near future.

            Liked by 1 person

          6. Carpenter’s son, God’s son, or even the son of an angel standing in for the boss … I don’t know.
            But who/whatever he was, it’s not really amazing what a good Publicity Officer and a dumbed down (uncritical) desperate populace can achieve.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Jesus was executed as a disgraced criminal. He was belittled, mocked and discredited before his execution.
            Your faith in his publicity officer is astonishing. Your faith in the stupidity of 1st century humans is even more impressive.

            Like

          8. The same way the name of Lenin, and Stalin, came to wield such great power. Exactly the same way, in fact.

            Like

          9. You’re switching channels now. But I’m glad you brought this up.

            Both Lenin and Stalin came to power by force. Rivals to their power were exterminated. (Since brought it up, I’m certain you know who they slaughtered first.) They did not operate in ‘exactly the same way’. Not even close.

            Lenin and Stalin did not establish movements lasting two thousand years. There aren’t millions of people around the world singing the praises of Stalin.

            Liked by 1 person

          10. I should imagine the threat of burning in hell for eternity unless you love and worship God was quite an eye opener for a superstitious ancient and uneducated people.

            Like

          11. SK:

            Only if one were dim enough to believe it. Which had to be almost everybody ‘cos the ones who declared themselves otherwise quickly get rounded up and sorted out (amazing what being guest of honour at a barbecue can do for one’s beliefs). As always, Might Makes Right.

            If they brought back ‘active’ evangelism of that nature today I would quickly renounce my pacifism and meet them from the shadows with their own techniques. I don’t think I’d be alone, either.

            Liked by 1 person

          12. Argus: “‘…cos the ones who declared themselves otherwise quickly get rounded up and sorted out (amazing what being guest of honour at a barbecue can do for one’s beliefs)”

            You’re thinking about The Hunger Games, not 1st century Christianity.

            Like

          13. JB:

            I was referring to the vast Public Relations/Spin industry grinding Him out post execution.
            I believe they did similar with Lenin in Russia (but had the good sense to keep the cadaver).

            Not to digress, we are told that the Americans dumped, Osama bin Laden’s corpse at sea, which effectively prevented it becoming an object of veneration or source of ‘holy relics’.

            (Relics too were/are big industry—I had a girlfriend once with a piece of the ‘Blessed Dominic’ set in glass. A very devout Catholic we got along splendidly together) (she, not me). For myself I found/find the idea of sawing up corpses as fund raisers a bit repugnant, but different strokes for different folks …)

            Like

          14. JB (at 1405)

            Oops?

            I gave you a happy ‘like’ for your comment. Well done, you~! 🙂 🙂

            Like

          15. Really? By all means, show me the indications of the early church being in Jerusalem.

            The first sign of Christianity we have is Paul, in Cilicia (Turkey), writing (to no one in particular) the outlines of the religion. Barnabas, his cohort, was a Cypriot. Then we have him in Corinth (Greece) writing to tiny bands of followers in Antioch (Turkey)… which is to say, where the northern diaspora was. Then we have bands in Damascus, Cyprus, Pamphylia, Galatia, Macedonia. All Asia Minor.

            Many of Paul’s later “letters” were forgeries.

            It’s not until the 4th Century until we find a letter talking about James in Jerusalem.

            Acts is mostly fiction, written in the first decades of the 2nd Century.

            The Talmud doesn’t even begin to discuss Christians until the middle ages.

            Like

          16. Apparently you misunderstood.
            Your speculation is vacuous nonsense. You have offered no facts. Spewing conjecture is how YOU run away from a reasonable comment.

            Like

          17. why it’s still hanging around

            Hinduism, Buddhism, Toaism, Mohism, Zoroastrianism etc. are all far, far older, and they’re still “hanging around.”

            So, what’s your point?

            Liked by 1 person

          18. Because ”he” was made into a god.
            And this is the overriding point that is odd.

            Many people who are vehemently anti-Jesus the god-man are nevertheless still desperate to show there was a real man behind the god.

            And it is the god nonsense that is really the myth that has caused all the other nonsense, as all normal people realise. There was obviously no Jesus-god character because if some Miracle-Working Lake Tiberius Pedestrian who attracted thousands upon thousands of followers during his supposed three year … or two year ministry described in the same manner as if Elvis came to town there would have been evidence.

            Yet there is no contemporary evidence for him whatsoever.

            And this makes the case of, ”Well, why not simply invent him?” seem more plausible.

            I am not stating this is in fact what happened, but the odds are pretty high in favour of this being the case.

            And of course, there are those who considered he was made up even back then.

            Like

          19. We’re not talking about him today in any historical context. We’re not talking about him in any general cultural/societal context, either. Do you, or anyone for that, follow, for example ”But I tell you, don’t resist an evildoer. On the contrary, if anyone slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.”? Or how about “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

            Nothing, however, Jesus said or did was new or original. Nothing. It was all said by many, many people long before him, and often said much, much better.

            But again, we’re still also talking about Lord Krishna, Siddhartha Gautama (The Buddha), Confucius, Mozi, Zoroaster, Lao Tzu, Zhuangzi, Mahavira… Not to mention Odysseus, Alexander the Great, Heracles, Cesar Augustus, Qin Shi Huang…

            So, again, what’s your point?

            Liked by 1 person

          20. “Nothing, however, Jesus said or did was new or original. Nothing. It was all said by many, many people long before him, and often said much, much better.”

            You made my point. Why is Jesus still worshiped?

            Like

          21. Just ban me, Doug.
            I ask too many good questions. I make too many salient points. You’re not prepared to deal with this level of conversation.

            Like

          22. Ban me!
            Silence my dissenting voice!

            Your question has nothing to do with the topic. It’s obvious to anyone who can follow a conversation.

            Your atheist worldview doesn’t explain why Jesus is still worshiped. Before you lose your mind and start calling me names, let me quickly say that I haven’t PROVEN anything.

            I haven’t proven Jesus really lived.
            I haven’t proven Jesus resurrected.
            I haven’t proven Christianity is true.
            I haven’t proven anything…except…
            …that you have no explanation for why Jesus is such a big deal.

            Like

          23. I didn’t ask for proof. You couldn’t offer any either.
            All I asked was, what, if any, evidence did you have, and why do you worship the biblical character Jesus?

            Surely you aren’t embarrassed to answer such a straightforward question?

            Liked by 1 person

          24. No, no, your point concerned the age of the belief… So, by your reasoning, Buddha is far better than Jesus, and Krishna, in-turn, is far, far, far better than Buddha.

            Like

          25. Of course you didn’t… Except for perhaps these instances:

            Why does Christianity Prevail after a couple of millenniums?

            The point remains that if Jesus was just a regular ordinary guy then why are we still talking about him?

            Of course Christianity is unique. That’s the reason I’m asking the question about why it’s still hanging around.

            Really? Which narratives are still hanging around that were contemporary to first century Christianity?

            So, by your reasoning, Buddha is better than Jesus.

            Glad we sorted that out.

            Like

          26. Of course, you never wrote:

            Why does Christianity Prevail after a couple of millenniums?

            or

            The point remains that if Jesus was just a regular ordinary guy then why are we still talking about him?

            or

            Of course Christianity is unique. That’s the reason I’m asking the question about why it’s still hanging around.

            or

            Really? Which narratives are still hanging around that were contemporary to first century Christianity?

            Like

          27. Lots of reasons.
            One of them being that you clowns can’t explain why Christianity continues to thrive centuries after the founder was executed.

            Like

          28. Lots of reasons.
            One of them is that nobody can explain why a scruffy, unremarkable, Jewish criminal still impacts cultures around the world.

            Like

          29. Oh, that one is easy … Colonialism and Missionaries.
            However, the only thing I am really interested in is why you worship Jesus the Nazarene.

            Like

          30. So, you believe Christianity spread by following the teachings of Jesus?

            Please, do show me where Colonial Europe advanced following this rule: “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

            I look forward to reviewing your answer.

            Like

          31. Typically when someone writes Why does Christianity Prevail after a couple of millenniums? the reader will, generally speaking, assume the person is drawing attention to the longevity of the thing in question.

            That’s a general English reading of those words.

            Like

          32. Glad we’ve cleared that up.

            So why do you think Christianity prevails after a couple of millenniums? As you’ve pointed out there are hundreds of upstart religions that have come and gone. You don’t even think Jesus actually existed. So how can we explain a fictional character surviving millenniums of scientific and cultural change?

            (Please don’t say ‘Buddha’ again.)

            Like

          33. Hinduism has come and gone?

            Buddhism has come and gone?

            Zoroastrianism has come and gone?

            Taoism has come and gone?

            They’re all far, far older, so by your reasoning, they’re all far, far better.

            Like

          34. Wrong.
            Oldest religion is not automatically the “best” religion. Again, that is YOUR reasoning, not mine.

            You’re not capable of addressing my question because you don’t understand the question.

            Like

          35. Here’s another one:

            Please, do show me where Medieval and Colonial Europe advanced following this rule: “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”

            I look forward to reviewing your answer.

            Like

          36. You want a simpler question?

            OK, try this one:

            Please, show me where Medieval and Colonial Europe advanced following this rule: ”But I tell you, don’t resist an evildoer. On the contrary, if anyone slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.”

            I look forward to reviewing your answer and marvelling at the persuasive civilisation-building power of Jesus’s teachings.

            Like

          37. You want a simpler explanation?

            Ok, try this one.

            I didn’t say it so I don’t need to defend it.

            I look forward to reviewing your reply that will demonstrate a complete lack of critical thinking skills.

            Like

          38. Of course, you never wrote:

            Why does Christianity Prevail after a couple of millenniums?

            or

            The point remains that if Jesus was just a regular ordinary guy then why are we still talking about him?

            or

            Of course Christianity is unique. That’s the reason I’m asking the question about why it’s still hanging around.

            or

            Really? Which narratives are still hanging around that were contemporary to first century Christianity?

            Like

          39. So why do you think Christianity prevails after a couple of millenniums? As you’ve pointed out there are hundreds of upstart religions that have come and gone. You don’t even think Jesus actually existed. So how can we explain a fictional character surviving millenniums of scientific and cultural change?

            (Please don’t say ‘Buddha’ again.)

            Like

          40. Again, I didn’t know Buddhism, for example, had come and gone. I didn’t know Hinduism had come and gone.

            I’m confused, therefore, as to what you are trying to say.

            How about you try and explain exactly what you meant by all your appeals to the importance to longevity…

            Please, do try and be exact.

            Like

          41. Here’s the question: why do you worship Jesus of Nazareth? Answer it honestly and without being an idiot and you are free to comment.

            Like

          42. According to you, I’m already an idiot.
            Dickhead.
            Arsehole.
            I answered that question with what you cited as the reasons for Christianity’s growth. I’m sure it is frustrating when your own answers are sent flying back at you.

            You’re afraid me. It’s dangerous to let me speak uncensored. I ask questions you can’t answer. Silencing me is the smartest thing you’ve ever done.

            Enjoy the echo chamber!

            Like

          43. Banned? No, simply moderated. Now, let’s cut the nonsense . Please tell us all why you worship Jesus of Nazareth.
            The truth …. for a change. Okay?

            Like

          44. Agreed. Moderating my comments was nonsense. Let’s be done with it.

            The reason I worship Jesus are the same reasons you cited for why a scruffy, unremarkable, Jewish criminal still impacts cultures around the world.

            Like

          45. Branyan, don’t run away

            How about you try and explain exactly what you meant by all your appeals to the importance to longevity…

            Please, do try and be exact.

            Like

          46. JB: (yours of 0232)

            Elvis was just an ordinary guy—and he’s still venerated too (and lots of people have seen him since he ‘died’).

            Everyone is ordinary until they get talked about, and once talked about they get talked about. Ol’ Adolf was just a failed would-be artist until he became God.

            Like

          47. “Everyone is ordinary until they get talked about…”
            Bingo! That’s what I’ve been saying!
            Elvis was talked about because of his music.
            Ol Adolf was talked about because he started killing a bunch of folks.
            But why the hell did people start talking about a dead, Jewish carpenter?

            Like

          48. For a while there everyone was talking about Harry Potter.

            Millions are still talking about (after how many hundreds of years?) Mohammed and God.

            Millions are talking about (after how many possibly thousands of years?) Krishna and Vishnu Saraswati and Siva and that cute little guy with the trunk …

            Millions are talking about Donald Trump.

            As many more about Donald Duck and his rich uncle …

            It never ceases to amaze me how many are talking about the East Enders …

            Like

          49. I have lived in Australia for the last 12 years; however I believe they now have an electricity generator you can pedal.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. The miracle is that the common urge to find reason, purpose and continuity in existence (particularly one’s own) has not resulted in popular beliefs showing a great deal less absurdity than is found with all the front-runners. Perhaps it is because beliefs have to cater for imaginations that cannot go beyond envisaging existence in a bodily form. Thus the idea of forming part of a choir gathered round a throne spending the rest of time singing praises doesn’t fill them with utter horror and dread. Imagine the sheer tedium!
    The Jesus story also gives something more human to focus on whereas the god concept, even as a sort of oversized daddy in the sky, is too daunting.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Better to be an Islamist, then—instead of what you’re offering they offer all the booze you can desire PLUS 72 houris all of your very own … eternity boozing and copulating, much more appealing than harps and praises … even beats the Norse boozing and fighting …

      Liked by 1 person

        1. I’d take the booze and sex any eternity over endless grovelling ‘in endless praise’ of the unreliable inconstant unpredictable vengeful dread flighty Great God … brrrrrr~!

          Like

  5. Time then to take a leaf from Christianity’s own book?

    The previously mentioned Matt Hopkins had a good technique (or two) that could be used on all priests of all denominations to find the answer to a simple question: is this guy benefitting humanity? … You know, tie his arms and legs together and toss him into a (deep, wide) duck-pond. If he floats he’s definitely being kept up by The Devil, if he sinks he’s a goodish guy, but only if he gets out of the sacks and makes it ashore under his own steam is God declaring him worthy of keeping.

    All priests, proseltysers of all religions that are active. God will look after his own, no?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Where I’m going with this—if it’s not obvious you should be in a church somewhere.

    As for Christianity, it provides answers to the ages old fears of Mankind, especially that Death thing. Damn’ good answers too, if you don’t think but just accept the Lord Jesus Christ as your saviour.

    Okaaaayyy … so you do.
    Good on you, well done.

    But you aren’t a real Christian if you don’t share, and to share you need a church or you risk being staked as a heretic. You need the armed might of law to protect you from other Christians, or other ‘unique’ pathway to God* religions.

    But which church?
    Ask any church-going Christian of any brand, he/she will set you right …

    So: which is the One True path to God, hmmm?
    By God I mean (of the thousands) YOUR one. Just name Him/Her/It. But don’t get it wrong, for God’s sake. Brrrr~!

    And why that one, hmmm? I would say because of an accident of birth.

    * They are all the one, the only, the sole, the unique Pathway to God.

    Like

  7. ” … accident of birth.” The story in a nutshell. Jesus is still hanging around for whom? Mostly Anglo-Americans who are such by that “accident of birth.”

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Worse, Mak. They want what someone else has worked for and use the stories to blackmail it out of them. Just look at the immense wealth of most major religions and/or their franchises.

      Religion is all about control—of wealth and power, nothing else. That ‘salvation’ and such stuff is simply the bait and the hook; all the average fish need do is swim on by.

      Stories seed blackmail, money gathered by false pretences, not good.

      Like

  8. John Branyan, you say “Eternity burning in Hell is optional, not mandatory.”

    What? during Jesus’s times are you saying these poor uneducated downtrodden unshaven smelly goat and camel herders who are dressed in dusty robes and worn sandals heard Jesus preaching about God and immediately thought the science tells me the weather is controlled by natural phenomenon and preying to this God is not going to bring me healthy crops and I will not believe in heaven and hell because that isn’t true either?

    These ancient people were so superstitious they feverishly worshipped gods for centuries before Jesus and thought gods controlled everything that happened and with Jesus spouting the threat of hell from this new god what would you expect them to do? Hang on, don’t you fella’s still believe……..oh shit, nothing has changed.

    Liked by 2 people

      1. Nobody is holding a gun to my head.
        Not in New Zealand, but I gather things are quite different in the US of A. If not a literal gun, certainly blackmail and extortion seems to run rife. I wouldn’t mind if you’d just keep your organic robots within the Homeland/Fatherland, but you export them all over the world. Sadly one cannot discuss (or argue) productively with a well programmed organic robot.

        And are they ever well programmed! (Credit where it’s due.)

        Like

          1. The whole religious bit, which I summarise—

            ‘Put your entire faith in Me, uniquely Me, and my officers—or you will roast in Hell for all eternity!’ comes across as blackmail.

            The funding of religious systems (nothing unique to Christ, I’m sad to say) by draining ill-afforded Widow’s mites to build Vaticans and the modern equivalents in religions (Christianity isn’t unique) all over the world and all through recorded history.

            We can be more specific if you’d like?

            Like

          2. I’ve not heard the gospel that you quoted. I think you invented that.

            I’m gonna go out on a limb and say you’ve not payed a single red cent in extortion money to the Vatican.

            Like

          3. It’s a summary, not a gospel. Gospel is (I understand) a corruption of ‘God’s word’ in olde English.

            I don’t have lifetime enough to read all the gospels of all the gods so I nit-pick. I take my nits from the nearest basket—anyone can, anywhere, there’s oodles of them; but my summary is from a lifetime of observation.

            I’ve paid no more to the Vatican than to any of the many bludging priesthoods—when compelled to attend ‘divine service’ in the navies (RN, RAN, RNZN) and the collection sock came round I’d just rattle it and pass it along.

            Like

          4. Put a few shekels in my collection bucket and I promise you won’t go to hell. Put a few more in and I shan’t insert these long skinny pins into my John Branyan doll.

            Okay, just jestin’ about the doll and pins—but your immortal soul is in serious danger if you’ve picked the wrong path to follow. And don’t forget, hell is for all eternity and it’s rather unpleasant there (trust me, I’ve been told by experts).

            Like

      2. It was not a fair and reasonable decision for ancient people to make when they are terrified of burning in hell. Many of them would likely have been reluctant to stop worshipping any of the many older gods due to fear of what might happen if these gods turned against them, however when the Christian God demanded no other gods to be worshipped and if you do not worship me you may die in hell for eternity, it was a compelling reason to switch sides.

        Like

  9. And I managed to deprogramme myself, thanks to someone pointing out the Basic Laws of Thought/thinking; and letting me run with them alone.

    Try this thought:

    a loving merciful compassionate omnipotent God and the Holy stake is a contradiction.

    Or this:

    Free will and God’s omniscience is a contradiction.

    My point? Contradictions are impossible. (Think about it, I dare you …)

    Like

    1. Indeed … but there are folks I sometimes spell it out for, in full:

      Contradictions are impossible.
      If you find an apparent contradiction, look to the premises because one of them at least is false.

      So far nobody has ever challenged me on my ‘contradiction’ about gentle loving merciful compassionate God and his holy stake.

      The other blatant ‘contradiction’ which everyone goes silent on is the clash between ‘Free Will’ and God’s omniscience … sorry all: it’s one, or the other—cannot be both.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s