Official debate with local pastor.

[Abracadabra]

The Pharisee murdered Christ because

Before 70 AD the temple/religious establishment was in the hands of the Sadducees not the Pharisees. By the time your silly gospel shit was written out the raison d'etre of the Sadducees ( the temple) no longer existed and they faded from history leaving only the pharisees to serve as the bad example in your little holy fairy tale.

I see your history is as shitty as your theology.

I didn't mean to imply that they were the same individuals. I simply meant that they were people who were carrying on a similar dogma and needed to gain support for it. They would still be 'scribes' for sure. And if they were religious authoritarians, then they were also "Pharisees" by the meaning of the term. And clearly they would have needed to be both "scribes" and "Pharisees" if they were managing a religious doctrine that nails Jesus to the Torah.

However, I must confess, that as an ex-Christian I do tend to favor theories that "save face" for Jesus.

Jesus as a Mahayana Buddhist not only makes perfect historical sense, and is in perfect alignment with his moral teachings. But it also explains why he so thoroughly disagreed with the immoral teachings of the Torah.

It also saves face for the man. Being a misunderstood Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva who was actually trying to renounce the horrible immoral teachings of the Torah is highly admirable.

I personally feel that this make far more sense than the theories that he was a totally made up work of fiction. Although, I must confess that I can't rule that out either.

None the less, as a demigod son of the God of Abraham he would need to be pretty darn despicable. He would basically need to inherit the same egotistical jealous hateful traits of the God of Abraham.

It's clear, even from the New Testament rumors, that the guy who gave rise to these rumors did not agree with the immoral teachings of the Torah. In fact, at the end of the story when he supposedly cries out "Father forgive them for they know not what they do" (assuming he actually said this at all), this would only go to show that even Jesus didn't agree with condemning people who weren't fully aware of what they were doing.

So that flies in the very face of what Christianity has become. Christianity has become a religion where people are condemned for merely not believing in Jesus. Yet, in these very fables they have Jesus requesting that God the Father should forgive people who are clearly doing horrible things simply because they don't fully understand what they are doing.

It's just the most inconsistent self-contradicting fable ever created.

It can't be the "Word" of some supposedly all-wise all-perfect God because it's utter nonsense and riddled with contradictions. Therefore it must be something else.

My theory that Jesus was most likely a Jewish Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva is highly compatible with history on many levels. Mahayana Buddhism was at it's peak right around the time Jesus was supposed to have lived. A Bodhisattva would have taught and behaved precisely how Jesus was said to have taught and behaved. And even according to the New Testament rumors, Jesus clearly did not even agree with the teachings of the Torah. On the contrary he taught moral values far more in line with Mahayana Buddhism. In fact, Jesus didn't even add anything new to that. It's a carbon copy of the moral values that were being taught by Mahayana Buddhism even before Jesus was said to have lived.

So it's a workable theory to "save" Jesus as a decent man.

As the demigod son of the God of Abraham there would be no reason at all to respect him. On the contrary, he either would have had to have been rebelling against his "father" or his father would have had to have had a major change of heart (i.e. a total change of character). But that flies in the face of the idea that this God is supposed to be stable, dependable and trustworthy.

So Jesus as a demigod makes no sense at all.

He was either a misunderstood Mahayana Buddhist Bodhisattva, or he was a totally made up work of fiction. Take your choice. I chose the former simply because it seems far more probable to me based on the New Testament rumors