debunking jesus (Page 3 of 4)

Long post, I'll respond in full after the weekend but yes, I cannot deny the goodness found in a messiah or that others have spiritually profited from this, I admitted I had.
The crux is to debunk, which means did J C exisit and althought some good comes from this proposed myth, more bad has emerged.
Historical fact is but a strut in the debate of debunking not the end all and be all.

My question would be why, because of the commendable preachings of perhaps half truths and commendable incorporable life views  ideas and philosophies, would someone yet believe in the ministry and personage of JC even if he is debunked, which surely means there is an alterior motive to entice peoples into this belief system?
The argument is not why do you say there is no goodness in Christ, there is some but was he a real person and if not ,why?
Who created the myth and why?
For the benfit of mankind?
Mankind has not benefitted from this, only some ,more misery and spiritual dulling has been  the end product and will contiune to be so.

What If he never existed and what if he did exist? What sort of box are you trying to open? What if you did prove he didn't exist what then, what would you do? What would be the metaphysical fallout? Where would it stop? Why do you want to rob someone of a deeply held belief? Would the world be any different then it is now, would it change who you are now? Might something else have popped up in it's place? These are the question I have. It's history..What of the Gospel of Judas? It is for you to believe or not. This is about belief... not right or wrong.  ( I still hate the kid who told me santa didn't exist...)
People need myths, we need our stories, and we need these things more then we need a faster computer.
I wouldn't consider myself a Christian, I am an Animist.

Despite all the anti-Christianity material I have read over the years (and there was plenty) probably the simplest and most elegant 'debunking' of Jesus would have to be Joseph Campbell. I recommend 'The Hero with a Thousand Faces'. From Campbell's point of view, it is largely irrelevant whether Jesus existed as a real person or not or whether he was who he claimed he was. Jesus Christ is part of mankind's 'monomyth' and contributes to our culture and self understanding (if you know what you are looking at).

Ha! Great opening line. I am also sorry I did not get your humour with the reference to Santa. I though you were serious. Sarcasm can sometimes be difficult to discern on a forum. My apologies.
Of course I am not calling you retarded for believing in the 'spirit' of myth. I also think they're wonderful. Like Campbell says, I think that the world has lost its myths and this may be part of the reason things are so messed up and people so lost. Another reason, I would add, which is in fact an extension of Campbell's thought, is that the world is messed up not only because it lost its myths (or many of them), but because it began sometime ago to take them literally. I might also add that it is mess up partly because it created (or was introduced to) false myths designed to confuse and subdue, but that's for another thread. The Jesus myth can be wonerful. In a class I took called Culture, Myth and Symbol (which was taught be a one-time student of Campbell's) that I greatly enjoyed, we focused on the the transformative power of myth, especially as it is expressed in ritual. Hero of a Thousand Faces was one of the required readings, along with several of his articles. This was before I had even thought of questioning Jesus' existence. Like many non-Christians, I believed he was probably a wise Jewish preacher or something that lived about 2000 years ago and 'caused quite a stir. I thought the Christians were silly for making him their God or Son of Man, but didn't think much of the whole affair. What struck me in that class was that we studied Christian 'myth', which at the time I thought was distorted history, as just that. As myth. No discussion of Jesus life or the 'historical' side of the Gospel story. Just lumped J.C. and Christian mythology with the rest of them (for the sake of analysis in this course). This was done without ever denouncing J.C. as purely mythical. Campbell doesn't do this, neither did Prof. Prattis (the lecturer in this class). From this perspective as psychopractor states above, the historical aspect of it is irrelevent. It is not irrelevent in this discussion however. I believe that literalizing the J.C. story is a source of many problems, not the least of which is the loss of the 'spirit' in the myth which becomes replaced with worship of a deity that didn't exist. Would you agree with this or disagree? Cheers.

I picked up this book today from my bookshelf. With a tiresome gaze, as I had been up all night with stomach problems, I shuffled over to my bookshelf and thought to myself "Why did I buy this book?" Not completely knowing the answer, I nonetheless brought it downstairs and sat it on my coffee table. And just now, I saw this post. The book is called 'The Pagan Christ' by Tom Harpur, and I think his words are extremely pertinent to this debate currently underway. 

[center]

[/center]
[center]

[/center]

So it's important to be aware of the different perspectives. It's all too easy to get obsessed with historical facts, wherein you miss the true deeper meaning that surrounds all things. It takes both a skeptical and intuitive mindset to truly plumb the depths of the human mind, and the written history that is the result of this faculty, but if one is able to balance these two states of mind, which symbolically represent the left and right hemispheres of the brain, I think it would result in a more level-headed and truly meaningful dissertation of the Knowledge that is always available to us.

Ok, I'm getting confused.

In one breath David Icke and others say that Jesus never walked the earth, that it is a myth, that Constantine brought scolars together who brought many religions together ,took the best bits/fables, to establish a one world religion that all could accept, ergo, Catholisim=Universal.

That the "Messiah, Virgin birth" fable , appears in many ancient civilisations and it was just copied by those who wished to decieve.
Putting forth apparent facts of historians at the time of Christs ministry making no mention of such a man in the Middle-Eastern region at the supposed time.

Then in the next breath, that a man called Jesus did walk the earth but as an enlightened being, in touch with the true source, his crucifiction was staged and he lived for many years after this event and had wives and children.

So, do we accept that he was not the son of the biblical God, who would forgive the world it's sins because an entity died on a cross, that the God of the Old Testament traveled around in space-ships and that others have contorted and twisted his life into what they want the world to believe, that he and his followers knew this and left the clues for us to discover of the true nature of what actually occured, who he was, a voluteer helper soul in touch with the true source trying to help us see throught the illusion and cover-ups?

I suppose what I should realise is, while one story, the main, may be debunked somewhat, it does not make the sub-plot infeasible.

Did I just answer my own question? *Slaps Forehead*

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/bigge … %20Stories

i havent seen this said too much before, not in these terms.  its often said that JC definitely didnt look like all the light-browned haired and blue-eyed nordic kinda looking guy many artists have portrayed.  the KT didnt believe the crucifixion story and hated that part just as the cathars did.  one drawing at their prison at Domme, in France had them picting him as almost hunchbacked.  and short. 

this is from http://www.mythandmagick.bravehost.com/ … hrist.html

and curiously, in talking to Lipstick Mystic one time about healing, and JC, who she had seen and worked with, in her OBE's and such, told me he did look very much like a teddy bear.  was short, very dark, lots of hairy little body, swarthy and sweeter than all get out.  that he was so nonjudgemental and so sweet and caring and so approachable that she was totally amazed.  very very friendly.  and when i ran across this i thot, well, thats interesting and connects.  she said he healed by a/the "divine blueprint" method. and that no past lives were involved anymore, and all that came with living earthlives and all that.  that, that he, like many good healers, apparently real ones, see ppl they way they would be without any intereference, the way they were designed to be, from the original blueprint.  simply remarkable and fascinating.  i believe that.  all is pristine and efficiently working when done.  its a big basket of energy there, thats needed for that, but plugs in nicely when ur into it and know how to let that thru.  i really dig that. 

she said he's very disappointed that ppl dont really "get" him, and the last thing he wants or expects is ppl to whore (whOREship) him.  and that he loathes ppl and religions speaking for him.  he's very gentle and only cares about PEOPLE.  thats his job.  he takes it seriously.  there's a big difference in that and KRISTOS, and all that.  thats actually completely different and almost completely misunderstood, as that power has always been around and lives in the universe as a strong enlightened energy force that we operate with locally and farther.  all that can be looked up and researched.  wont get into that here.  but look at this writer's whole section on this.  she is interesting and does her homework.  he packs a punch though.  in the old manuscripts i have, when everybody dies, he comes to each and every one after they get settled and approaches and is very hospitable.  from the reading i did with those, id suspect he takes on the look they think he has.  from what theyve seen and been told.  what they believe.  he comes and then goes, and its all very sweet.  and meaningful.  the ppl tell him they didnt expect theyd be important enough for him to show up.  theyre amazed he did so.  and he tells them that he always does it, after a few days or weeks, after theyre settled.  ive read similar to that, in many disconnected sources.  he comes when theyre in a comfortable environment, when theyre more ready or like that to accept "more."  anyway.  here he is almost looking like he needs help himself.  theres a couple of lines in there with ancient writers almost calling him deformed.   hmmmm.  makes him very very human.  i have also read the C's say his father was Tonatha, an angel.  VS alien, off world spiritual being, et al.   and i also saw somewhere (where i dont save these things for whatever reason), another source, has him fathered too by a being with a very similar moniker, with a similar spelling and pronounciation.  just more stuff that blends and reveals how we dont know hardly anything about hardly anything like we think we do.  i take it all in and mess around with it.  it doesnt matter really, but its is unreal info.  prob why i dont save it and argue it.  i skip over lots of "facts" and such.  like "AMEN" after prayers.  when one gets into looking that up and going round--big surprises for the average sheep/le.  again, a very DEEP rabbit hole.