I'm still not interested in Jesus. Bleck. 2000 year old zombies.
Did you ever think "There's no book of Judas?" Sure he got the rap but for selling information to the Romans? First off, the Romans didn't pay for information, they cut pieces off you until you told whatever you knew. Plus, the "secret sign" always got me. In every book it's the only thing that's repeated verbatim by everyone "the one I shall kiss is the one you seek," If it was such a secret, how come they all knew it?
If there was a Jesus, and he was killed by the Romans, who benefited most? Judas? Not likely. John spent the rest of his days living well off the legend he helped create, and the guy he probably had whacked. Think about it. They were living pretty well during hard times. Lots of followers, plenty of offerings, and then this guy goes nuts and pisses off the big money guys.
Read any of the letters of John. They're all about establishing more churches and building up the religion like a business - John was a businessman.
The Godfather of his day had a sit-down with John to "work out" the problem. Romans, Sopranos, six of one...
I find it amazing that a kiss had to be given to show the Romans which person was Jesus. If you have a group of people taking instruction from, or following somebody, why would it be so hard to figure out who the main guy was? If one is giving a speech and all the others listening, would the speech maker not appear to be the main guy?
The Bible takes such a simple thing and makes it a mystery. Why? Who would not know?
Good point, Michael. In your example, It would take a complete lack of common sense not to recognize Jesus.
Actually, kissing and selling a Jesus is a bullshit of a "fulfilled" prophecy in the old testament, fabricated by the writers of gospels in the new testament, so the whole Christian religion be taken seriously.
The "artists" writers of the gospels made the Proverbs 27:6, Psalms 41:9, and something from a Jeremiah verse as the fulfilling of "Messiah" or "Christ", as being kissed and sold as to sell gospel literature to suckers.
Christians do not realize that gospels is just religious literature used to supports Christian religion. Gospels are not history, just fantasy of a "fulfilled" prophecy of a Christ.
I have yet to come across any valid evidence that Jesus ever existed (If someone else has than please let me know where I can read this information). Yet, it is possible he did exist and if so, then the claims are false or exaggerated. I "believe" in nothing. I use logic and reason to formulate rational conclusions.
I "believe" in nothing. I use logic and reason to formulate rational conclusions. Well said Keith. I agree.
I just noticed the A., B., C., not-a-poll above, "claims are false" "claims are exaggerated" ???
Duh, you think?
No, I don't believe he existed. As we're never likely to know the truth we can only make an educated guess. Given the lack of any official mention of Jesus Christ by any of the pagan societies of the time it seems, if he did actually exist, he wasn't considered to be of very much importance. The probability of a supernaturally intelligent individual appearing mundane is absurd, and the idea that the lord works in mysterious ways is, in this case, feeble. Biblical 'truth' has never stood up to scrutiny. Claims to unquestionable truth have been made to look infantile, as facts, or the lack of them, have mythologised the whole book. The story of Jesus seems to be an attempt at describing human perfection as prescribed by the religious moralists of the day. Religious stories have to be imagined if only to raise them above mortal limitations. I think the life of Christ may have been seen as a fact by the very people who invented it. It's certainly interesting.