[net.religion] Evidence of Christianity

jones@inuxe.UUCP (Mike Jones) (11/06/84)

I have been reading these articles concerning the
"evidence of Christianity" with great concern.
I am a Christian. I am terribly sorry to see that
there are those who can't see the love that Jesus
Christ has for them. I am just as distressed to see
and hear of "Christians" who look down on those 
who do not believe, for one reason or another. That
kind of attitude is unbiblical, and will result in 
the same fate as those they are looking down upon.
It is a shame some poeple act that way, and I am not 
pointing fingers to any net writers on either side
of the coin, but we have all seen these type of people.
I do not wish anyone to die and "burn in hell."
I have a special relationship with the God that 
created the world (the same God whose son died and
rose for you) that anybody can and do deny that is 
real. If only for a day I could give you the inner peace
in all situations that I have, you would never be 
the same again. 
I know that I am going to get replies with what I 
have written, and I welcome them. That's why I wrote.
If only you could see Jesus...

yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) (11/07/84)

Mike, I see Jesus quite clearly. He is a counterfeit. Those who believe
in him and/or follow him are entirely doomed. Please don't wish that on
me. On the one hand, your sympathy is well-intentioned. The attitudinal
posture from which it derives however is basically anti-all
non-Christians.

bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) (11/07/84)

In article <ucf-cs.1680> yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) writes:
>Mike, I see Jesus quite clearly. He is a counterfeit. Those who believe
>in him and/or follow him are entirely doomed. Please don't wish that on
>me. On the one hand, your sympathy is well-intentioned. The attitudinal
>posture from which it derives however is basically anti-all
>non-Christians.

A number of people in this forum (myself included) have brought into question
the historical accuracy of the roots of Christianity.  Yiri has recently gone
so far as to declare Jesus a counterfeit.  Fair enough.  The response this
elicits is going to get me flamed at by *all* sides of the issue, so here goes:

Granted, the historical Jesus may or may not have been as portrayed in what
we now call the New Testament.  So What?  In the grand tradition of collective
movements history may have been rewritten to give legitimacy to a particular
world-view.  Again, so what?  Like any social movement, Christianity is only
weakly predicated on the historical accuracy of its genesis.  It is strongly
predicated, for good or for bad, on the much larger body of ideas embodied
in the NT as interpreted by modern Christians.

Yiri has pointed out that Christianity may have been a paganization of a form
of Judaism.  Again, a valid point.  It needs to be further pointed out that
modern Christianity bares about as much resemblance to the primitive apostolic
Christianity as it does to modern Judaism.  So far as I can tell, there is
not one person posting to the net as an identified Christian who would have
made it through the Inquisition intact.  The Protestant reform did a 
remarkable job of virtually returning Christianity to the pre-Roman gnostic
sects, though even modern Gnostics don't seem to recognize that.  Reading
the gnostic texts may prove to be an enlightenment to some.

There are lots of Christians who will disagree.  To some, the historical
accuracy of Christianity's roots is essential for faith.  To me, that's
putting a whole lot of eggs in a very weak basket.  The obsession with
morality, salvation and repentance also obscures that which I find
Christianity's most compelling point -- the emphasis upon forgiveness,
humility, charity, self-reflection and (above all) love that drew it
out of the political and religions climes of the first century.

What's the point?  The point is that most, if not all, forms of modern
Christianity have deviated from the historical roots of the faith.  The
point is also that it doesn't matter.  The body of the faith takes on
its own validity which transcends the question of its original legitimacy.
Thank goodness that's so.  I'd sure hate to deal with a modern Torquemada!

						Byron Howes

(As an aside, there is an important difference between Christians and Jews
to be illustrated here.  Christians seem to be redactionists by definition.
The philosophical continuity of interpretation and history does not seem
to be as important to Christians as it is to Jews, at least as I have
inferred from friends and postings in net.religion.jewish.  That's why
there are so many Christian sects and so few Jewish ones.  I suspect this
is because Christianity is not centered on anything as concrete as The Law,
and because much of what substitutes is *itself* an interpretation [by
Paul] of Jesus' statements.  I expect to be roundly corrected on this
hypothesis!)

-- 

						Byron C. Howes
				      ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch

kjm@ut-ngp.UUCP (Ken Montgomery) (11/09/84)

[Yirmiyahu BenDavid]
>Mike, I see Jesus quite clearly. He is a counterfeit. Those who believe
>in him and/or follow him are entirely doomed. Please don't wish that on
>me.

Being an agnostic, I have to wonder how anyone can know whether they
or anyone else are "doomed".  "Doomed" to what?  What is there to be
afraid of?  Sounds like paranoia to me, Mr. BenDavid.

--
"Shredder-of-hapless-smurfs"
Ken Montgomery
...!{ihnp4,seismo,ctvax}!ut-sally!ut-ngp!kjm  [Usenet, when working]
kjm@ut-ngp.ARPA  [for Arpanauts only]