The historical Jesus--dead wrong, literally.

[KichigaiNeko]

Personally I like Thor, Dagda and Morrigan myself

[Phil]

Personally I like Thor, Dagda and Morrigan myself

You dare omit the one true god Dagon?

[KichigaiNeko]

Of Course silly!!

---

And the 40,000 greater and lesser gods we have bowed and scraped at over the past 50K-70K years

[DeistPaladin]

I'm going with the Norse-Germanic gods. Their afterlife rocks.

[Aardverk]

You should take the Bible seriously because of its tremendous inlfuence it has.

OK, it's easy to mock this statement but if Barre had said 'you should take Christians seriously because of their tremendous influence' I would be 100% in agreement. They are a terribly dangerous bunch, often full of hate and ignorance. The Americans in particular are not afraid to show it either - they are definitely the worst as a short stroll through their forums will quickly demonstrate.

I have no idea where Barre is heading with this bit of analysis, no where useful I expect, but why mock someone trying to raise yet another valid criticism of the Christian book? Little by little the message is getting through to Christians that the real 'good news' is that there are no gods and that they were lied to as children. Maybe Barre won't influence many of them but why try to discourage him? We all try to spread the word in our own ways - mainly ineffectively.

Keep up the good work Barre but try to do it without flaunting your qualifications - it makes it difficult to take you seriously.

[Minimalist]

I disagree. The bible itself is irrelevant. What matters are the crimes of its adherents down through the centuries. As far as what is in it goes it does not matter. They are perfectly willing to kill each other over tiny points of doctrine that they may disagree on.

[KichigaiNeko]

You should take the Bible seriously because of its tremendous inlfuence it has.

OK, it's easy to mock this statement but if Barre had said 'you should take Christians seriously because of their tremendous influence' I would be 100% in agreement. They are a terribly dangerous bunch, often full of hate and ignorance. The Americans in particular are not afraid to show it either - they are definitely the worst as a short stroll through their forums will quickly demonstrate.

I have no idea where Barre is heading with this bit of analysis, no where useful I expect, but why mock someone trying to raise yet another valid criticism of the Christian book? Little by little the message is getting through to Christians that the real 'good news' is that there are no gods and that they were lied to as children. Maybe Barre won't influence many of them but why try to discourage him? We all try to spread the word in our own ways - mainly ineffectively.

Who said anything about discouraging him?? Yes that little collection of stories has caused a great deal of grief and anger and multitudinous spin-off/ copycat crimes against humanity.

What I take objection to is that to "understand the bible" one must look at ALL the stories from ALL the cultures around ALL the world and also realise that people have never stayed in one place but have moved around quite alot over the millennia. It takes and "understanding" of Ancient History, Anthropology, Archaeology and their relevant sub-disciplines ...not just the book itself.

[Barre]

Two verses in (g)Mark especially reveal the plot line of Jesus' last hours:

Mark 14:62-63:

Again the high priest questioned him,82 “Are you the Christ,83 the Son of the Blessed One?” 14:62 “I am,” said Jesus, “and you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand84 of the Power85 and coming with the clouds of heaven.”86 14:63 Then the high priest tore his clothes and said, “Why do we still need witnesses? 14:64 You have heard the blasphemy!

Mark 15:34

15:34 Around three o’clock55 Jesus cried out with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

What did Jesus mean when he said, "And you will see". . ..?

The statement was Jesus' way of defending his claim to be the Messiah. I am interpreting the verb in the sense that the high priest will [soon]
see the inauguration of the Messianic Age as proof that he is the Messiah.

How that expectation failed is reflected Mark 15:34. Instead of an imminent arrival of the messianic age, Jesus wound up dead with a hope of the Messianic Kingdom dying with him, so according to Ur-Mark.

Needless to say, this interpretation of the last hours of Jesus will be not be widely accepted as it is distrubing to think that could have been so tragically wrong about his identity and mission.

I know think that this portrayal of Jesus is the historical Jesus due to the presence of certain artistic traits such as a triple irony in its portrayal of Jesus as a tragic hero that seems more literary than historical. Irony as here defined is

"dramatic irony.
5. an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected."

In gMark we have these ironies:

- Jesus is mistaken about his identity and mission as the Messiah.
- The Sanherin's verdict of blasphemy is justified.
- Jesus' own executioner is made the mouthpiece of the author's (correct) assessment of Jesus.