> point of view. You're right, it is. However this is ok,
> because offensive points of view are quite fine as long
> as they are given in the name of religion. Thats right,
> my religion (Atheism) allows me to say whatever it is I
> like without the effects of typical social norms.
> In fact in my religion, we believe that the bible was
> written by a local drunk (I think his name was Gary) in
> a bar. It turns out the bet was that he could write just
> about anything he wanted to and people would buy it.
> Seems he threw that whole "Noah's Ark" bit in there to see
> just how much he could get away with. He was right though
> -- and more right then he could have ever imagined because
> not only did they (many people) fall for his joke, but
> they even started killing people because of it.
Here's something that gets me seriously disliked if not berrated by
bible-thumpers.
I have for some time now believed that Jesus is predominantly a
fictional character. Sure there is some (weak) evidence to the
existence of a man fitting the biblical character, and Christians
because they have a unique need for Jesus to be a real person (no
other religion in history that I'm aware of has suffered from this
particular delusional need), will go to completely rediculous lengths
to "prove" to me (or anyone else) that I'm wrong. More than anything
else in the world, christians bend over backwards to find some
explanation that makes Jesus a real person when the evidence just
doesn't add up. Now the stories in the Christian bible all pre-date
christianity -- the names may have been changed (to protect the
innocent?) but the stories are the same stories from greek and roman
and other pre-christian traditions. The son of god, the lamb of god,
etc, etc... It's called a "christ archetype" or "christ myth".
So what _does_ add up is that these stories were adapted by Christians
early on and as with most cults, the impetus of course was to preserve
and support the growth of the cult. So to that end the cult obscured
(the meaning of "occult") the source of their modified and
ever-growing mythology (although it hasn't grown much in recent
years). I don't say mythology to be derogatory btw - it just describes
the stories and ideas we use as a group to relate to one another and
as such actually has a fairly deep and important communal meaning.
Anyway the preservation and support of the growth of the Christian
cult worked more so than with any other cult group in history,
ultimately resulting in the assimilation of Rome and Christian
dominance for the last 2000 years. What's so convincing about
christianity after all? They have a _real_ god (Jesus) -- and he's the
_only_ god, or at least, the only god anyone should worship (depends
on your interpretation of the bible). So right away the propaganda
devalues all other faiths and is especially potent because the
followers of other multi-deity religions know that their Gods are
symbolic, not literal. (Although modern people have conveniently
forgotten that people knew this, just like the fact that people knew
the earth was round long before Columbus commit genocide in haiti
which we've also forgotten).
So what does that make the bible? It's an interesting collection of
stories which contains some interesting insight into the lives and
beliefs of the people who wrote it (and / or edited it). It does
contain quite a bit of good moral grounding, but like anything written
by men, it also contains some less than laudable moral content. The
character of Jesus is a good one and he presents some really good
teachings, and imo the world would have been a much better, much less
bloody place (Crusades, Inquisition) if the Christians had claimed and
believed from the beginning that he was a symbolic character just like
all the other gods.
According to many, I'm evil for bringing up the fact that people don't
go to war in the name of symbolic characters. And yet, there can be a
lot of value in the teachings of symbolic characters and even
science-fiction (i.e. Aldous Huxley's Brave New World). But I'm an
evil person for propogating the idea that the world might have been a
better place if the Christians hadn't had that justification for
killing all those people. That the world would be a better place if
Jesus were a literary character. I like Jesus -- as a matter of fact,
I _LOVE_ jesus. I love him even _MORE_ as a literary character than as
a real person, because his good to harm ratio is so much better that
way.
s. isaac dealey 954.927.5117
new epoch : isn't it time for a change?
add features without fixtures with
the onTap open source framework
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=44477&DE=1
http://www.sys-con.com/story/?storyid=45569&DE=1
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
