DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**corsar-caribean** · 12-26-2007, 07:48 AM

i believe that the jesus story that we have is mostly myth. but i also believe that jesus existed. i don't see why these two things must be mutually exclusive.

for me, there have always been two christianities: the core version, which is what jesus said, advocated, and bore out through example and which i feel confident backing up with my own logic; and the common version, or what in younger days i termed "peasant christianity." (you lose the level contempt as you grow older, thank god)

the common version is the version that ignores jesus' message and focuses on the fireworks display of his miracles and the gory detail of his death in order to best transfix and control the unwary and easily impressed masses. people who are deep into the common version can be identified easily; they call themselves christians but act like new testament jews and would be the first to re-crucify jesus were he to show up.

people who are into the core version are less easily spotted: many of them pretend to be common christians and have learned to keep their mouths shut in church and at family gatherings, but they think deeply in ways that those around them are not ready for about their faith. others have simply decided that they don't need the training wheels of a social group to keep them on the right path to god and have pedaled off on their own. some even call themselves atheists.

these two varieties correspond to the two sides of the story we have inherited: the myth and the message. take away the myth, and the message is untouched. but people have difficulty seeing that. and who can blame them, after all, after the immense effort that has been put into convincing them that the myth and the message are the same thing over the centuries?

bill hicks keeps me sane: "a lot of christians wear crosses around their necks. do you think when jesus comes back he's gonna want to see a ***ing cross?"

aahh.

12-26-2007, 07:48 AM	#5
corsar-caribean Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 434 Senior Member	i believe that the jesus story that we have is mostly myth. but i also believe that jesus existed. i don't see why these two things must be mutually exclusive. for me, there have always been two christianities: the core version, which is what jesus said, advocated, and bore out through example and which i feel confident backing up with my own logic; and the common version, or what in younger days i termed "peasant christianity." (you lose the level contempt as you grow older, thank god) the common version is the version that ignores jesus' message and focuses on the fireworks display of his miracles and the gory detail of his death in order to best transfix and control the unwary and easily impressed masses. people who are deep into the common version can be identified easily; they call themselves christians but act like new testament jews and would be the first to re-crucify jesus were he to show up. people who are into the core version are less easily spotted: many of them pretend to be common christians and have learned to keep their mouths shut in church and at family gatherings, but they think deeply in ways that those around them are not ready for about their faith. others have simply decided that they don't need the training wheels of a social group to keep them on the right path to god and have pedaled off on their own. some even call themselves atheists. these two varieties correspond to the two sides of the story we have inherited: the myth and the message. take away the myth, and the message is untouched. but people have difficulty seeing that. and who can blame them, after all, after the immense effort that has been put into convincing them that the myth and the message are the same thing over the centuries? bill hicks keeps me sane: "a lot of christians wear crosses around their necks. do you think when jesus comes back he's gonna want to see a ***ing cross?" aahh.
	Quote