A question about Jesus and the Gospels

[Truth Bearer]

No his lineage stopped as the ossuary that was found was a small one containing a baby must have died very young.About his brothers do you not believe they also some of the apostles?I was taught in Greece and not once was I told he had any brothers nor sisters.The book exposes the myth about Christ that in reality he was just a humble orthodox Jew who believed in greater Israel.The author even tracks down Christs real father being a Roman soldier of who must have seduced Mary and then did a runner.Now come on mate this is pretty controversial stuff.

[Paulos Melas]

If you really want to be driven in a theological question about Jesus Christ
(or should I say Jesus and Christ) the historical facts are irrelevant.
Jesus Christ is not necessarily a historical person. We bare no proofs on that.
Christ is mostly a symbol, an idea, around which christianity and the dogma of salvation was developed.
Even if there was a historical jesus resembling the life of the Lord it does not mean that he is the pre defied true jesus.
Christ is the personification and reproduction of much older cults like Dionusus and Orpheus, imported into the one "monotheistic" religion of that time Judaism.
Christianity, formed in Alexandria encompassed many important greek perceptions for the world along with the aschetism of the Pythagoreans.
It was elevated to the level of the sole imperial religion by emperor constantine when it also took its final form.
Nonetheless nothing points towards a historical christ but rather a mythological figure that personilises the faith.
So for me the historical accuracy is irrelevant.

[Lakonian]

Originally Posted by Paulos Melas

If you really want to be driven in a theological question about Jesus Christ
(or should I say Jesus and Christ) the historical facts are irrelevant.
Jesus Christ is not necessarily a historical person. We bare no proofs on that.
Christ is mostly a symbol, an idea, around which christianity and the dogma of salvation was developed.
Even if there was a historical jesus resembling the life of the Lord it does not mean that he is the pre defied true jesus.
Christ is the personification and reproduction of much older cults like Dionusus and Orpheus, imported into the one "monotheistic" religion of that time Judaism.
Christianity, formed in Alexandria encompassed many important greek perceptions for the world along with the aschetism of the Pythagoreans.
It was elevated to the level of the sole imperial religion by emperor constantine when it also took its final form.
Nonetheless nothing points towards a historical christ but rather a mythological figure that personilises the faith.
So for me the historical accuracy is irrelevant.

Seems you have logic afterall....well said.

[Truth Bearer]

The tomb of Talpiot proves that a Jesus existed.

[Paulos Melas]

Thanks Laconian. All the best

[Andrew]

First of all I must say that I don't know a lot of thinks about Christian faith
..only those that tought us in school and never gave them importance.I also think that fath is somethink personal and everybody has his theory.

First of all I think that we must separate the Real Jesus from the Jesus that our Church presents us.

The Real Jesus was a Neoplatonic philosopher product of his time . In fact , after hellenistic times we have the contact between greek philosophy and Oriental Mysticism.
Greek philosophy itself is divided in presocratic (search of nature) and postsocratic (emphasizing on human). Socrates brought the revolution by declaring that the "essence of a man is his psyche" and by that he ment rational and irrational spirituality.Before Socrates , the presocratics did a good work by being rationals , but in the most important thinks (life-death) they didn't get any answers . So after socrates , with Plato we have a turn to IRRATIONALITY ...we have an undefined "creator" , mixed with Pythagorean beliefs of recarnation. These last are a "mathematical" approach of the old Orphic believes . A great example for me that's showing the change is this:
ANAXAGORAS (presocratic) says that humans are intelligent because they have hands and by grapping and comparing objects they became intelligent.This is what modern science believe.
ARISTOTELES (postsocratic) says humans have hands because they are intelligent and nature (Creator) gives hands at a beeing that can use them.
The difference is an undefined authority that offers things meritocraticaly.
Also with Plato we have the difference between material and immaterial (Things and Ideas) and the fact that "Idea" is better than the "Object".
Orientals on the other part were always Mystics and so had always their Creator that commands and you must obey ...without searching the truth.
So we come to the Neoplatonism of Jesus Christ. He created a philosophy based on:
1) Platonic "material" and non "material" (heaven and earth)
2) Aristotelic "meritocracy" to gain Heaven you must act in a certain way
3) A big mass of oppressed population that tried everything to liberate from the Romans but failed ... So Jesus offers "tolleration" and patience . He gives hope by offering an eternal heaven and so makes oppressed life easier.

Then we have the postconstructed Jesus ("the Myth")

Long after Jesus died the Roman Empire starts to have stability problems. So they need to choose a philosophy that will save the empire. Christianism is the best they have and they add more "guarantee" things.
1)"when slapped offer the other cheek". That is the best way to guarantee the non-revolution of the slaves ..they became robots that must tollerate Masters and wait until death saves them.
2) But "suicide" is illegal (you go to hell). That is a clever way to avoid suicide among unhappy slaves ...they continue to live...and work.
1 + 2 ) You have a working-opressed mass that tollerates it's masters, don't fight among them and against authority and don't commit suicide. That I call ...CONSERVATION OF THE AUTHORITY IN THE SAME HANDS AND CONSERVATION OF THE WORKING MASS (they don't kill each other and they don't suicide).
So the Romans decide to "use" this philosophy for the mass. To make it attractive to the mass they create the christian martyrs to whom the opressed mass can relate to. In that way the new "faith" can diffuse quicker among slaves and that is the reason why they first "hunted" Chriastianism. In this way it is always more attractive because , slaves hate masters and love what masters hate. BTW , Romans before Christianism they never hunted a religion
3) When Constantine legalizes all faiths ..in reality we have a preponderance of Christians ..So the already non-reacting slaves say THANK YOU to the masters and stop hating them.
4) "πίστευε και μην ερεύνα" is a good command for maintaining status quo and the obbedience of the slave to the master without many questions.

But the problem are the "damn Greeks". They from antiquity have only one "divine" commanment that Nietzsche found it in homer "αίεν αριστεύειν και υπείροχον έμμεναι άλλων" , "always be the first and over the others".It is the very source of every greek virtue and vice. In the ancient greek society you have a post in it "if you are special" . The edonist Aristippos postulates "Virtue is not the perpuse of life.The purpuse is happiness and virtue is the instrument that helps you get happiness". And the Greek man is happy when is "special" in the society. He doesn't want to die without making something that will make him "famous and special". Paradise for him is die knowing that they will remember him after his death.That tendency of perfection and intollerance of imperfection caused the "eugenic" procedures, by which the Spartans through the kachectic childs from the kliff Kaeadas and the rest of the Greeks use to leave them "exposed" in the forest. It is the case of the mythological Oedippus who was exposed because he had swollen feet (that explains his name). These methods today seem raw and dishuman , but we must admit their eugenic value on eliminating the pathological genes and causing an improvement of the mean human form. Maybe it is the reason that meda Sparts «καλλιγύναικα» (Sparta having beautiful women) .By this tendency to "be special and among the others" you have a competition , an antagonism ,that chooses the best. So we have a competizional system that causes evolution by antagonism and natural selection.One wants to run faster than the other , he trains and evolves himself ..and by the way we have the Olympic games. One wants to be smarter than the others , so he learns to dialectize and philosophize and we have greek philosophy. Same thing in the Athenian Democracy. We have a jungle that will permitte only to the more convincing orator/politician/general to dominate in agora among others.The same competition and selection of perfection is seen also in the "Cup of Bathykles" that should be given to the wiser of the Seven Sapients (τῷ σοφίστῳ) , the "apple of the discord" (μήλον της έριδος) that should be given to the most beautiful goddess or the reply of Alexander the Great when before dieing was asked "who will succeed you" and he replied "the strongest" (τῷ κρατίστῳ). But as I said, competition is also the mother of greek vices. Competition caused discord and division that caused the faintness of the grecity and it's final submission to the Romans.
The credence in that Homeric command is not good for a slave in the Empire . And not even the Greek tendency of "searching the truth" by making questions without having an organized clergy that limits your thought. So what they do. Under Justinian and by Church support they deside to transform the "hellen". They condamn his past as "pagan" , that is enemy of the church , they deconjungate him from his past and they "install" him new programms ...they make him christian ..good slave. After the trasformation , church helps and promotes the new "hellenicity" , the christian hellenicity and now we have the transform of the Eastern Roman Empire in the Byzantine Empire that expresses this new Hellenicity . During Byzantine times , the Church has political role , because it controles the "sheeps" of the Empire and it becames more and more rich by "selling tickets to heaven".
I don't know if it is related with what you search , but it is the story as I've summarized it.

About Hercules and Socrates I say ...
1) Socrates ...is a similar figure with Jesus with the only difference beeing the fact that he lived in a lesser Mystic society so he didn't ended son of God. With his example he showed that he didn't feared death and that his rivals couldn't harm him by killing him. In a certain matter by choosing to die got what I said before ..recognition ,fame ..and in the Greek way it is a Good Death.
2) Herakles ..hmmm.. He is a pre-Greek figure probably of the paleoindoeuropean culture. We find similar features in many indoeuropean cultures and what he rappresents , i think is, that ABSOLUT STRENGTH ONLY IS NOT ENOUGH FOR HAPPINESS. Hercules can't control himself ..he does a great mythical achievement and later on he blowes it by being drunk .I think it is always a struggle between Rational and Irrational . Hercules is what our soul wants to be but dies , because he can't compromise . We , if we want to live we must leave some of our irrational passion and compromize . The 12 labors are "maschuline achievents" that can bring glory .. but also inutile. Euripides makes his Hercules say ..what if I've defeated monsters when I cant save my family ??? Hercules reminds the boy that sooner or later must abbandon some part of the seek of glory , because he can't always win against nature and must so compromize to achieve happiness.
So to conclude I think that Herakles symbol for the Greeks was:
1) If the son of Zeus suffers so will you mortal human
2) Is a good symbol to immitate when seek glory , but
3) be aware to compromize sooner or later if you want to have a peacefull and happy life.

[Promethean Fire]

Brilliant Andrew, i love it!

[South of Heaven]

Great post.

[zefs]

Great post. Jesus was molded in to the new-Hercules in order to spread the religion outside of Israel/ Palestine to the Gentiles. To add another spin to story google Nicolas Notovitch. He found Tibetan manuscripts in were they say he spent six years studying with Buddha.

[Promethean Fire]

Originally Posted by zefs

Great post. Jesus was molded in to the new-Hercules in order to spread the religion outside of Israel/ Palestine to the Gentiles. To add another spin to story google Nicolas Notovitch. He found Tibetan manuscripts in were they say he spent six years studying with Buddha.

Try not to swallow everything you read brother, apply analyses to everything. The Tibetan story is as far fetched as the gospels one.