Why Would You Hate Jesus, And Think He's A Myth || Spoken Word

[grannynara]

This is very subjective, not objective. Spoken like a true, die hard Christian.  And so it goes on...our way, or no way, the Christian motto. I have no problem with the Lord Jesus...I love Jesus, too, wait...am I allowed to love Jesus, even if I haven't been "saved?" Mother Theresa loved Jesus, but according to Christians, she's doomed to everlasting hell, because she wasn't "saved" according to their rules. Sorry, I can't accept that..I'm moving on.

[FATKIDPWNS]

I find it interesting as well why people are willing and SEEKING to go out of their way to argue away huge portions of their finite existence, trying to convince the so-called happy-delusional Christians that there's nothing more to this life. I did it when I was an atheist. But, on atheism, life has no purpose or objective meaning. Making it your purpose to convince others of life purposelessness is rather ironic. I enjoy the "Mad at a Myth" poem. Very powerful. Cheers.

[robocoastie]

except for the fact that I didn't say the man Jesus didn't exist.

[robocoastie]

@robocoastie what IS a speculation though is christians believing he did. The only documents stating he did is from biased theological sources and NOT historical records. That point has been proven ad nauseum in all research. Heck even seminaries know that and seminary trained pastors do! This is why those who follow the historic Christian faith rather than the modern feel good versions we have so prevalent today say: I can not by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ or come to him.

[MadAtAMyth]

@robocoastie - Really? The only ones? No unbiased Jewish or Roman historians? No independent corroboration from other sources? Everyone fooled but you? "That point has been proven ad nauseum in all research." What are you smoking? "Heck even seminaries know that and seminary trained pastors do!" Fo shizzle, Robo! Really, I don't even know where to begin. Would you please read a book not written by agitating atheists with axes to grind and then come back to play on another day? This is silly now.

[robocoastie]

@MadAtAMyth that is correct. And I've actually quoted from theological texts whereas you've just said typical off the cuff frustrated modern evangelical remarks, and strawmen. Fruitless discussion. You're the one who has to provide the evidence. So show us these historians. Universities filled with historical and biblical scholars are waiting. Or did you not realize that biblical scholars tend to not believe the theology rubbish?

[MadAtAMyth]

@robocoastie - Okay then, sir, how many of your statements, already made here, would I have to refute before you would admit your bias? Would one be enough? You state, "The only documents stating he did (exist) is from biased theological sources and NOT historical records." If I provide a single historical source will you admit that you are wrong? Or will you begin an attempt to discredit that historical source? (PS-Your personal dismissal of ancient manuscrpits do not make them nonexistent.)

[MadAtAMyth]

@robocoastie - I feel like I should clarify the issue in question before we allow it to digress... I am simply saying I believe that Jesus is an historical person and that this belief is supported by historically documented evidence...you are saying he did not exist and is instead a myth and that there is no historical corroboration for my belief in his actual existence. We are not arguing over whether diverse opinions about Jesus (like yours) have arisen since. That is a given.

[robocoastie]

too many non sequitur's there and your making the typical misuse of the word "theory" which in my experience when done equals an even further lack of scholarly understanding on the persons part. So I can already tell any attempt at dialogue will be a waste of time. I'll you two to split hairs amongst yourselves again.

[MadAtAMyth]

@robocoastie - Non sequitur (pronounced /nɒnˈsɛkwɪtər/) is Latin for "it does not follow." It is most often used as a noun to describe illogical statements. What does not follow the weight of most scholarly opinion are your conclusions regarding the historicity of the man, Jesus of Nazareth--Also, theory is a technical term from Ancient Greek. It is derived from theoria, θεωρία, meaning "a looking at, viewing, beholding", and refers to contemplation or speculation" You are speculating. It fits.

[johnnywindknots]

This is awesome! I couldn't have made a sillier defense of Christianity if I tried. Hey, bad poetry guy, maybe people don't get mad at those other myths because Santa and the T-Fairy don't get up in people's faces over what they do with their sex organs. Or because the Tooth Fairy doesn't view women as second to men. Or because Santa doesn't make it a point in life to persecute homosexuals. Or maybe people don't like the Jesus myth because it leads to this type of shitty poetry.

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots Thanks for taking the time to write such a pointed comment. I appreciate your interest in my work, even if you vehemently disagree with my style and conclusions. I might add that you do seem at least a little bit angry, and also terribly misinformed about the historical person known as Jesus. Myths don't generally have the influence for nearly 2 millenia that Jesus has had. Nor do they inspire the heights of magnanimity that Jesus has. Perhaps you should take another look...

[johnnywindknots]

@MadAtAMyth - I am likely more familiar with both the myth and "historical" person of Jesus than most; not only was I raised in the church, but my father is a beloved minister, and I was once an enthusiastic theology major at a Christian college with the intent to follow in my father's footsteps. Ironically, it was while steeped in theology coursework that I realized how silly the whole myth is- and it is, after all, a myth, and one that borrows shamelessly from earlier pagan myths, at that.

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots-I appreciate your dialogue. I want to be kind here but your eagerness to trivialize Jesus as a "silly myth" on the basis of some incomplete college coursework and an undefined daddy experience doesn't even begin to compare to past and current views of brilliant scholars, scientists, philosophers, and others who have completed the coursework and had different experiences. It's only fair to point that out. The weight of history does not support such frivolous outlier contentions.

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots --The well-respected Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard writes in Theories of Primitive Religion that "The evidence for this theory… is negligible." “The first real parallel of a dying and rising god does not appear until A.D. 150, more than a hundred years after the origin of Christianity. So if there was any influence of one on the other, it was the influence of the historical event of the New Testament [resurrection] on mythology, not the reverse.

[johnnywindknots]

@MadAtAMyth - Perhaps Pritchard forgot about Osiris? That aside, it is undeniable that the vast majority of the stories found in the OT are derived from earlier Mediterranean myths. Can you have a NT without the OT? Additionally, your statement referencing the work of "brilliant scholars" works just as well as a defense of Islam and Judaism. Careful, there.

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots - "Perhaps Pritchard forgot about Osiris"--"...it is undeniable that the vast majority of the stories found in the OT are derived from earlier Mediterranean myths"--Are you serious? Perhaps you could make a factual statement that one could examine? Since the most reputable scholars conclude that Jesus is not a myth, but an actual historical person who was executed by the Romans and whose body then disappeared, you have some work ahead of you. Fringe conspiracy theories aside...

[johnnywindknots]

@MadAtAMyth Phil, I have a proposition. Would you be interested in having a formal, extended debate on what we've been discussing? What I imagine is this: I will set up a website where we can post and track our arguments, and others can comment on the validity of our respective cases. It would be a civil volley of ideas, perhaps on a weekly or biweekly schedule, and would give us a better forum than YouTube. We can follow the formal rules of debate or modify them as needed. What do you say?

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots - I've done debate like this already. I'd rather meet for coffee and discover if you're more interested in truth or churning out arguments to waste time and support a pet theory. There are plenty of people already talking past each other and another 2000 years of it has no appeal. We could just exchange our favorite websites containing our favorite debates and go on with our lives. No one can see beyond what they will believe and this has all been covered before. But, thanks.

[johnnywindknots]

@MadAtAMyth Perhaps I was not clear concerning my intent for this debate: I was hoping to have a sustained, civil, and intellectual exchange of ideas - specifically avoiding "talking past each other." I am very interested in truth, Phil. Help me see it . I believe Socrates said it best: "The unexamined life is not worth living." Don't you agree? As an evangelist, I thought you would relish this opportunity. But, if you've already "done debate like this," may I read the transcript?

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots - You are becoming more clear as we go on with this but I'm still not sure if I can be of any real help to you. Perhaps you could answer 3 simple questions... 1-On what criteria of historical evidence do you base your "belief" that an actual person by the name of Socrates ever even existed? And 2-how do you arrive at the conclusion that he said, "The unexamined life is not worth living" or anything else for that matter? And 3-what, exactly, was it that you wanted to debate?

[johnnywindknots]

@MadAtAMyth You are right. I don't think you can be of any real help to me. Our earlier exchange interested me, but the character limit in this medium is ill-suited to good debate, so I suggested the other. I wanted to debate the claims you make about myths and their social roles, but never mind. Thanks for being a good sport, though.

[MadAtAMyth]

@johnnywindknots - No problem. I'm probably even a worse debater than I am a poet anyway and our time will probably be better spent just being honest with ourselves. People can make up their own minds about Jesus without our silly biased arguments to guide them. Probably enough info on wikipedia for that. Good fishing to ya!

[robocoastie]

@MadAtAMyth may I jump in this one? Some think Socrates may not have existed as a single person but rather a collection of teachers with their teachings lumped into a character. That I've read was actually a common thing to do in early writings just like the Jesus tales are. Some think the NT books are exactly like that as well which is why there's yet to be found any "original" documents, the earliest being found recently dated approximately 125AD and only a scrap of John.

[MadAtAMyth]

@robocoastie Sure, jump in! Why do you think I asked the questions about Socrates? You guys are are cherry-picking fringe theories and ignoring the enormous weight of critical scholarship. Maybe when you exhaust yourselves here we can move on to alien impregnation and government conspiracies about 9-11. I'll bet there are a few quacks you could quote to verify those theories too. Look, Jesus was a real guy and history confirms that. Spewing obscure biased misinformation won't alter that fact.

[robocoastie]

@johnnywindknots good point. Didn't some parts of the early church find the "OT" useless in fact and only used some of what we now call the NT? Coptics weren't they?

[collectorx91]

@johnnywindknots "Somewhere between the babbling baby in the manger and the bloody lamb on the cross, He must be making you crazy!"...thank you for proving the point of poem.

[StockMarketCompanion]

STRONG! Keep it going...

[billyoz]

robocoastie - do you believe Socrates existed?

[robocoastie]

You're assuming that atheists believe Jesus is real to be mad at or that they place any credence in the bible myth. Thereby your whole argument is merely a strawman fallacy.

[epicecho124]

@robocoastie Who said he was talking to atheists? People DO hate Jesus. But no one hates Batman but he Joker. This is a very good argument.

[epicecho124]

@robocoastie There is enough proof in the lives Jesus has changed. Like mine. 

[robocoastie]

@epicecho124 the same could be said of Ishtar, Zeus, Apollo, Chrishna, the Budha, and so on and so on. You changed yourself by choosing a philosophy. Only modern christianity teaches that we are actually "changed" in the way you are implying anyway. The historic christian and "roman" faith which led to the protestant movement teaches "I am by nature sinful and unclean" and that we are "not worthy of his mercies". I suggest you learn some real theology before you try to spew more modernist junk

[billyoz]

Talent, guts, and the message that all need to hear. Nice job Phil!!

[cool29801]

I really liked this, I thought the guy was atheist at first, but it got deep. Thanks for the video :)

[NigelFreeride]

Thanks, Cody. I have trouble with The Trinity as well some times. Excellent poem. Appreciate you pointing it out to us Wranglerbarn fans.

Dave

Moraga, CA

[PoeticDevotion1]

wow this is hott I am loving this