Proof That Jesus Lived, But ?

[Open_Minded]

On a personal level - I have not always considered myself Christian. I am the daughter of a man who had books all over the house about the "Jesus Myth" as I was coming of age. For years I was a skeptic ... on that count. I do not consider myself a skeptic anymore - regarding whether Jesus lived (or not). To me - the multiple writings - from different pens - about this one life just grew too fast and spread too far in a time period before the press and modern communication to be mere "myth".

 

Finding the historical Jesus is about impossible - but ... I do believe he existed and that he had such an impact on people that those writings grew and distributed at a rate that even the skeptics can not wash away.

Well.... I hate to challenge you on this point, but that last comment about the distribution rate is something the skeptics cannot wash away? Actually, it can be taken as an indication of it not being based around a historical personage: <snip>

 

Your point is well taken but please do keep in mind the other point I made in that same post ....

 

Simply put ... the scholars are (and have been) arguing about this for decades. They will continue to argue and at this point in time it is not possible to prove either way.

 

Because the reality is that I could go find opinions to rebut the point of view you brought into the discussion. We could go round and round until the cows came home or until the "rapture" and neither one of us could prove our point.

 

In the end you are correct.....

 

My point is, that even this point about the causes for the growth rate is far from a compelling argument. I do agree though, that it can never be proven either way that he existed or didn't exist. Back full circle, do we need a historical basis for faith?

 

Last night our meditation group met, we are currently discussing the book Beyond Belief : The Secret Gospel of Thomas by Elaine Pagels. http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/037543342...glance&n=283155

 

Now the Gospel of Thomas is having a very serious impact on the scholarship of early Christianity. And whether one agrees (or disagrees) with Pagels writing - she is a well respected scholar in the area of the Nag Hammadi texts - her writings expect people to think. To think about where our faith is based.

 

So... last night we got into this very discussion. Since the Abrahamic religions are more dependent on history than many of the other world religions - what are the problems that are unique to this mindset? In other words - on a personal and cultural level - right back to what you asked, Antlerman. "Do we need a historical basis for faith?"

 

On a personal level - I would say "no". I have not ever been in a position to need factual historical events to serve as a foundation for my faith.

 

I also think Christianity and Islam and Judiasm are all going to have to deal with this question on cultural level. Archealogially speaking - the cards are being forced. We no longer live in a time where force can be used to hide the truth. Information is just too available. Scholars - like Elaine Pagels - can write to the average lay person and sell their books at reasonable rates and distribute them effectively and efficiently world wide. The dark ages are in the past - and although we may feel we are being enveloped by religious extremists on all sides - the reality is that the truth is coming to light.

 

As an example of this reality let me tell you a little story.

 

We have two discussion groups. One meets on Sunday morning before our meditative service. The other meets on Monday evenings.

 

The last weekend of February our group had a booth at a wellness expo. We sold three of Elaine Pagels' books and waited until this first Sunday of March to start our study. So, on Sunday three new people came in who had never been to our group. One of the individuals was a lady old enough to be my mother. She came in late - because she had had something going on in her own church and couldn't get out until late.

 

We introduced ourselves when she sat down and she proceeded to tell us all how thrilled she was that a mainstream Lutheran congregation was discussing the Gospel of Thomas. In this conversation it came out that she is a member of another ELCA lutheran church in the same community (there are three in our town). As she was leaving her church she mentioned to one of her friends that she was heading out to our church for our study. Her friend was aghast and told this woman that she had read about the study in the local newspaper and was so upset that she called the Bishop's office.

 

The lady telling this story winked at me and told me she would be having lunch with the Bishop's wife this week and would be sure to put in a good word for what we are doing.

 

The point I'm trying to make - is these questions scare the hell out of a great number of people. But they can no longer squelch the truth. One way, or another, Christianity is going to have to deal with its history. Right now the three Abrahamic traditions are in the throws of extremists for many reasons. But one HUGE reason is they are afraid of the truth.

[Guest Ghost In The Machine]

 

What would happen to Christianity as a religion, and what would happen to our own personal faith, if some archealogist somewhere found an ossuary with the inscription - "Jesus of Nazerth - King of the Jews" - inscribed on it (filled with bones).

 

 

Who says that tha Vatican isn't already sitting no them in order top prevent that knowledge from being released to the masses? There WAS a lot of ado about Jesus' brother James' ossuary. I know everyone said that it was a fake, but do you really think we'll ever know the truth?

 

Such a discovery would destroy the basic tenets of the Xian church. I hope it does happen.

[Antlerman]

The last weekend of February our group had a booth at a wellness expo. We sold three of Elaine Pagels' books and waited until this first Sunday of March to start our study. So, on Sunday three new people came in who had never been to our group. One of the individuals was a lady old enough to be my mother. She came in late - because she had had something going on in her own church and couldn't get out until late.

 

We introduced ourselves when she sat down and she proceeded to tell us all how thrilled she was that a mainstream Lutheran congregation was discussing the Gospel of Thomas. In this conversation it came out that she is a member of another ELCA lutheran church in the same community (there are three in our town). As she was leaving her church she mentioned to one of her friends that she was heading out to our church for our study. Her friend was aghast and told this woman that she had read about the study in the local newspaper and was so upset that she called the Bishop's office.

 

The lady telling this story winked at me and told me she would be having lunch with the Bishop's wife this week and would be sure to put in a good word for what we are doing.

 

The point I'm trying to make - is these questions scare the hell out of a great number of people. But they can no longer squelch the truth. One way, or another, Christianity is going to have to deal with its history. Right now the three Abrahamic traditions are in the throws of extremists for many reasons. But one HUGE reason is they are afraid of the truth.

I think this is the answer to your first question:

I mean think about it, Christianity would have proof Jesus existed, but it's also proof that the resurrection did not involve the physical body of Jesus. My questions to the Christians who frequent this board are:

1. What would happen to your personal faith?
   
2. Is your faith based on something other than the literal interpretation of the Bible?
   

Things like the Gospel of Thomas, archeology, science, etc. are already exposing the bones of Jesus and the non-historical nature of the many tales of the Christ. Your story of that woman and her friend from the other church shows what would happen to the church if the actual bones were discovered:

1. Some wouldn't be affected by it because their faith is based around a personal experience and external evidence either way is irrelevant
   
2. Some would fight (either politically or violently)against the change, first attacking the crediblity of the evidence, then personally attacking those who promote or support the change
   
3. The political machine controlling the institution would support the greater will of the people who keep it in power. People create Christianity
   

Your woman from the other church illustrates it well. For some, history and tradition are everything, as their beliefs are part of a social experience, and change is percieved as a threat to that social experience. For others it's based on a personal experience and change is status quo for them, i.e. personal growth is what is important. The institution will be pursuaded politically which to support. Christianity is an institution that is created by culture. "Truth" in the Church is whatever the masses will it to be.

 

BTW, that was a great story. She sounds like a very cool woman. Your numbers are growing!

[Open_Minded]

Things like the Gospel of Thomas, archeology, science, etc. are already exposing the bones of Jesus and the non-historical nature of the many tales of the Christ.

 

"... are already exposing the bones of Jesus..."

 

I love that statement. It is so true. In the end .... like Mr. Grinch said so many posts ago ... it is not going to be ONE discovery. But science, archealogy, literary analysis, etc... will chip away until the entire skelton is revealed. As a Christian ... I honestly think this is the best thing that could happen to Christianity.

 

Your woman from the other church illustrates it well. For some, history and tradition are everything, as their beliefs are part of a social experience, and change is percieved as a threat to that social experience. For others it's based on a personal experience and change is status quo for them, i.e. personal growth is what is important. The institution will be pursuaded politically which to support. Christianity is an institution that is created by culture. "Truth" in the Church is whatever the masses will it to be.

 

And again you hit the nail on the head ... in a very real way. Although the synod office has been supportive of our congregation's small efforts ... I am not niave. I am very well aware that if there is enough political pressure from lay people that the synod could withdraw support. As I've said in other posts, the lay people have to take the lead in this area, it has to be demanded from the ground up. My hope - and trust - is that this is a prime period in history for an inter-spiritual movement to take hold.

 

BTW, that was a great story. She sounds like a very cool woman. Your numbers are growing!

 

Thanks, Antlerman. She does sound pretty neat doesn't she? I'm hoping she continues to come. Her daughter has been part of our group for 3-4 months, and tells me that her mother is known as a "heretic" in the other church. She speaks about her mother with pride.

 

The world needs more apostates and heretics.

 

Yes, the numbers grow very slowly ... I do hope we can get a core group off the ground. There is much work to do in the larger culture with peace-building between different religious perspectives. But, we can't do our part until we have a good solid core of committed individuals. We just keep trying and trust that if it is meant to be, it will happen.

[spamandham]

My apologies for unfounded assumptions.

 

If you mean faith as in my belief in a Sacred Oneness that is in all, through, all and beyond all (in the sense that the ALL is more than its parts) then I would say - the question has absolutely no bearing on my "faith". My faith is not, and never has been dependent upon the physical (flesh and bones) resurrection of Jesus.

 

Interesting. Can you describe "Sacred Oneness" more?

 

Spamandham, my influence of my beliefs are not contingent on Jesus being a real person, and I think Open Minded feels the same way.

 

...then you would seem to fit right in with the original Christians rather than the modern concept of Christianity. I think I already knew that about you Amanada.

[Open_Minded]

If you mean faith as in my belief in a Sacred Oneness that is in all, through, all and beyond all (in the sense that the ALL is more than its parts) then I would say - the question has absolutely no bearing on my "faith". My faith is not, and never has been dependent upon the physical (flesh and bones) resurrection of Jesus.

Interesting. Can you describe "Sacred Oneness" more?

 

Hello Spamandham...

 

Hmm "Sacred Oneness" ....

 

For me those words point to an interconnectedness within and through all of creation. This interconnectedness, interdependence, oneness, etc... is appreciated within the sciences, within awareness of the natural world, most world religions are aware of this infinite ONENESS within all through all and beyond all.

 

Since it is infinite - it is impossible for humanity to fully grasp - but we are aware of it.

 

I think the word "God" is comfortable for me - in connection with this interconnectedness or Oneness - because as I am aware of it on a subjective level - it as infinite LOVE, WISDOM and infinite AWARENESS (or Consciousness) in all through all and beyond all (in the sense that "beyond all" is greater than the sum of its parts - not "beyond all" as separate from its parts).

 

Does this answer your question?

[spamandham]

Hmm "Sacred Oneness" ....

 

For me those words point to an interconnectedness within and through all of creation. This interconnectedness, interdependence, oneness, etc... is appreciated within the sciences, within awareness of the natural world, most world religions are aware of this infinite ONENESS within all through all and beyond all.

 

I guess I don't see how this is different from the word "universe". No faith, religious or otherwise, is necessary to realize that we are not entities distinct from the universe itself. The oneness idea does not seem to me to fit well within the constructs of Christianity, where god is objectively distinct from his creation and sacrifice was necessary for sin etc.

[jrmarlin]

Not to derail the thread, but what if: instead of finding the controversial bones of Jesus, they found the personal, actual writings of St. Paul? And in those writings, he describes how he planned to change xtianity to what he thought it should be. In other words, Paul pretty much cops to the whole thing.

 

Now THAT would fuck up the theology! If Paul was completely discredited by his own hand, there goes at least half of traditional xtian belief.

 

Interesting that you mention this... They have the Dead Sea scrolls but it's very hard to find people who can translate them verbatum, due to the language they were written in. The Dead Sea scrolls would change a great deal as far as religion. But unfortunately, with this find, there are still disputes as to its translation. My hope is that they do manage to get them completed and publish them. I have heard from a friend of mine who has "ins" in this situation that there would be no more xianity if all in those scrolls are revealed. I don't know about that but I would be very interested to see if it's true.

[jrmarlin]

While I am not convinced that Jesus was a myth -- as there are too many writings from other countries of such a person who came there to study their religion. My objections is not with Jesus but Jesus followers who have grossly misquoted, denied contradiction, judged others for not having the same beliefs as they and have basically reeked havoc on other religions, nations and cultures. Those are the people my beef is with -- certainly not with Jesus.

 

I believe a lot of people here merely say Jesus because he emplifies the continual mantras the fundies that invade state without thought or discernment. They just say the same thing over and over. This is frustrating. I have an on-going debate with a fundie -- as much as one can have with a fundie -- and even though he quotes Genesis 3 as women being subserviant to man, then he says in other areas of the Babble, that men are to honor their wife and lay down their life for them.

 

Well, which is it, is the male human species a master or a servant. He skirts around the issue very quickly when I say to him those two things are completely in direct opposition to one another. This is frustrating because he never has an "answer" -- a well thoughtout answer. Now, Amanda and OM have well thought through answers. Not the cliche, "Well, the bible says so so it must be true..."

[Open_Minded]

Spamandham you bring up some good points.

 

See ... the one thing I've learned in interfaith/interspiritual dialog is how language can get in the way.

 

One the one hand our individual experiences are quite subjective. On the other hand humans feel the need to communicate about these experiences. So .... please do be patient with me as I try to explain my position and do keep in mind that I accept the subjectivity of my own point of view.

 

You say ...

The oneness idea does not seem to me to fit well within the constructs of Christianity, where god is objectively distinict from his creation and sacrifice was necessary for sin etc..

 

Well - on the one hand this is certainly true. Christianity as most people experience would fall into this category. But there is a very real stream of contemplative Christianity which dates back into the earliest years. Some believe Paul was a mystic and the Gospel of John is a mystic's writings. (I don't think this can be proven.) But - there is a real history of contemplative Christianity dating into the 1st century after Christ.

 

You also say...

I guess I don't see how this is different from the word "universe". No faith, religious or otherwise, is necessary to realize that we are not entities distinct from the universe itself.

 

All major religions have contemplative branches and there are many parallels between these different expressions of the meditative experience. The ONENESS experience is just such a parallel. But, there does seem to be a cultural difference in the way the ONENESS experience is perceived &/or manifested.

 

Here is where I truly wish someone from a Buddhist background would jump in - because I can not speak for that tradition.

 

I will speak from the Christian perspective though. Although parallels from all the major world religions can be found in relation to the "Oneness" experience. Within Christianity this experience is considered "Union with God" or an experience of the Alpha and Omega (Cosmic Christ).

 

These terms are cultural (specific to the Christian culture). From a personal perspective - when I had my own experiences the ONLY language I could use to define them was Christian language. The only way they made sense to me was in the construct of the TRINITY and the Alpha and Omega.

 

Now ... I have experience in interfaith/interspiritual dialog. I am convinced at the core - the experiences are universal. We may perceive this universal "core" experience in ways that are unique to our culture - but the "core" attributes of the experience can be recognized across culture.

 

Does this help answer your question?

[Amanda]

They just say the same thing over and over. This is frustrating. I have an on-going debate with a fundie -- as much as one can have with a fundie --

JrMarlin, at least this person will debate with you! I have a close fundamentalist friend, very intelligent, that refuses to talk to me about Biblical beliefs. I can see where it is really negatively impacting her life, as she refuses to even watch Harry Potter, nor buy a table because it has a carving of a Greek Goddess on it! We don't want to promote sorcery or other Gods, do we?

 

Please let me know your secret of breaking to the other side with this person.... should you attain it.

 

I also believe Jesus was a real man. Yet, there's a lot of information I've learned on this site which has caused me to refine my beliefs. It did not happen over night. Sometimes I hear something and don't buy it right away, or don't know how to really take it. Sleeping on it for a few days and reasoning through it while alone seems to help with the adjustments to these new ideas. The fundy your debating is probably assimilating more than you realize.