Beginning of Christianity

[Ajahn]

[ QUOTE ]
When I was in College I took a course called “Historical Jesus” (girlfriend at the time was taking the course). I seldom went, but did attend the last day of class when the professor gave his take on what history tells us about the ultimate question of Jesus status as supernatural figure. I will do my best to paraphrase.

He said that Jesus lived in a time where cooky crackpot alternative apocalyptic nuts roamed the streets—mostly without any significant followers. When Jesus, who wasn’t too far from this mold, actually started to develop a following and began to call into question the Jewish Clergy, he was discredited to the public, and put to Death as a threat to the order. Here is where things become interesting. After Jesus died, Jesus's followers (none of whom was previously impressive in the slightest) by all rights should have disbanded, lucky to have their skins intact, as Jesus at this point was not a popular guy. Instead, they claim he was resurrected, and at great cost to themselves and without any financial backing or incentive became absolutely devoted zealots with his ressurection as the foundation of their belief. His conclusion was that the only explanation was the disciples truly believed in the resurrection.

Assuming this is a reasonable accounting of the “history” involved, why did Jesus’ disciples insist he had resurrected and risk their necks for seemingly no gain and a lot of hardship when they would have been so much better off slinking away?

This isn’t meant as a “proof” or to convince anyone of anything, it is just something that seems interesting about the origins of Christianity.

Anyone else find this sufficiently puzzling to comment?

[/ QUOTE ]


1. lol @ that class in college

2. Christianity is astrology worship and has evolved from wayyyy older mythologies.

[luckyme]

[ QUOTE ]
What happened to his body then? Not only did he speak to them but he appeared before them & walked among them. He even appeared before a crowd of over 500 people.

[/ QUOTE ]

link to the Utube clip please.

luckyme

[RoundGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Not only did he speak to them but he appeared before them & walked among them. He even appeared before a crowd of over 500 people.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is not possible for a dead man to walk, talk, or appear alive to a crowd of 500 people. What possible reason would I have to believe this?

[Brad1970]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not only did he speak to them but he appeared before them & walked among them. He even appeared before a crowd of over 500 people.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is not possible for a dead man to walk, talk, or appear alive to a crowd of 500 people. What possible reason would I have to believe this?

[/ QUOTE ]

For a mortal man...you're right...not possible.

[RoundGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not only did he speak to them but he appeared before them & walked among them. He even appeared before a crowd of over 500 people.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is not possible for a dead man to walk, talk, or appear alive to a crowd of 500 people. What possible reason would I have to believe this?

[/ QUOTE ]

For a mortal man...you're right...not possible.

[/ QUOTE ]
And what possible reason would I have to believe that Jesus was not a "mortal man".

Oh wait, because he walked, taiked, and appeared alive after his death, right?

I see how this goes. A nice round circle. Nice chatting with ya.

[Splendour]

An interesting and easy to read link on archaeology discoveries made of the City of Jericho:

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/jericho.html

[Keyser.]

[ QUOTE ]

Assuming this is a reasonable accounting of the “history” involved, why did Jesus’ disciples insist he had resurrected and risk their necks for seemingly no gain and a lot of hardship when they would have been so much better off slinking away?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm reading Bertrand Russell's "Why I am Not a Christian" right now, and this one part seems as if could shed some light on your question:

[ QUOTE ]
He says, for instance, "Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come." Then he says, "There are some standing here which shall not taste death till the Son of Man comes into His kingdom"; and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that His second coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of His moral teaching. When He said, "Take no thought for the morrow," and things of that sort, it was very largely because He thought that the second coming was going to be very soon, and that all ordinary mundane affairs did not count.

[/ QUOTE ] http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

basically, Christ's followers wouldn't care about what could happen to them because they believed the second coming was imminent.

[Lestat]

You have to understand something very important:

Nothing was recorded about Jesus or His apostles during His life or immediately after his death. The earliest written accounts didn't appear until 60 years after His death. And most current gospels weren't written until a couple of hundred years after His death.

So your professor bases his conclusion on inconclusive evidence. It can't be said for sure what anyone did immediately after the crucifixion or during Jesus' life.

[jogsxyz]

Monty Python's Life of Brian is just as plausible as any of the four gospels. And what about the many versions that didn't make the cut into the bible.

[Splendour]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Assuming this is a reasonable accounting of the “history” involved, why did Jesus’ disciples insist he had resurrected and risk their necks for seemingly no gain and a lot of hardship when they would have been so much better off slinking away?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm reading Bertrand Russell's "Why I am Not a Christian" right now, and this one part seems as if could shed some light on your question:

[ QUOTE ]
He says, for instance, "Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be come." Then he says, "There are some standing here which shall not taste death till the Son of Man comes into His kingdom"; and there are a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed that His second coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was the belief of His earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good deal of His moral teaching. When He said, "Take no thought for the morrow," and things of that sort, it was very largely because He thought that the second coming was going to be very soon, and that all ordinary mundane affairs did not count.

[/ QUOTE ] http://users.drew.edu/~jlenz/whynot.html

basically, Christ's followers wouldn't care about what could happen to them because they believed the second coming was imminent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Christ himself never said it was imminent. He said this:

"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." "Two men will be in the field; one will be taken and the other left. Two women will be grinding with the hand mill; one will be taken and the other left." "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come." (Matthew 24:36, 40 & 42)

It was only humans who reasoned it was imminent.