For Allonehhob: response to "Part 1 reply to Iasius" & "Continue to Iasius"

Submitted by iasius (India), Nov 14, 2005 at 07:45

A good teacher can explain truth without too much difficulty provided he is himself convinced of it, but defending its antithesis needs a very shrewd lawyer. And when that fails, you entrust the case to a preacher/evangelist. No matter that neither actually believes it!

Despite my sincere appreciation and admiration for the time and trouble you obviously took over rationalizing the "sword" in Luke 22:36 and for putting up a veritable semantic extravganza, so as to render a theological complexity simple enough for me to comprehend, I rather feel you have completely missed the point I have been trying to make.

In a nutshell, I had said simply this: 1) The Christ (IESAPL) of Pauline Christianity (whose historicity Allonehhob is trying to prove) and ‘Christ-like' claimant/s to messiahship who may have lived at the time, are as divorced from one another as imagination is from reality. 2) The hero of synoptic gospels, evidently, appears no more than a Pauline plagiarization of the career (or careers) of a person (or persons) claiming to be ‘messiah' in the Jewish tradition. 3) The real person or persons, if any, whose life stories Paul adapted, had a political mission. Even remote aspiration to be Paul's make-believe, purportedly ‘world-saving Jesus' was absent, simply because the Jewish messiah's role is clearly defined in the messianic expectation itself: emancipation of the Jewish nation, return to self-determination and subsequent rule according to Mosaic law, which are, all of them, essentially political in nature. Nor could the Jews, collectively, have ever conceived of a world saviour because they clearly divided humanity between themselves and Gentiles as a result of their ultra conservative – even chauvinistic - outlook. Proselytization was out. For instance, in Joshua's conquest of Canaan, they took no captives to subsequently convert to Judaism – they simply killed them off. So, with no motive to ‘save' larger humanity through change of belief (even assuming such a thing is possible), all they expected of their messiah were ultra-conservatism and patriotism, albeit inspired and shaped by an extreme form of xenophobia. As far as they were concerned, only total restoration of Mosaic law would please Jehovah so that He would have no excuse to punish the Jewish nation again, which was all that ultimately mattered to them, apparently unperturbed by spiritual well being of the non-Jewish world. (As an aside, if only it could be established that David Ben Gurion was descended from King David, the 20th century Zionist might perhaps qualify infinitely more as ‘messiah' than Paul's ‘Jesus' because he succeeded in founding an independent Jewish state in 1948 where Jesus Christ (IESAPL) had failed!).

EVIDENCE OF NON-SYNOPTIC SOURCES that are at least as old as, if not older than, the gospels and PLAIN COMMON SENSE should ordinarily suggest how the Jesus of the gospels is most likely to be a myth. Moreover, proffering of Jewish messianic prophesy as endorsement for the Pauline Christ is flawed.

It makes no difference to me today whether or not Christ (IESAPL) is linked to violence. But if it is proved (as it appears from evidence to that effect emerging), it sure will to Christianity that has spent two millennia trying to prove he was an embodiment of love and goodwill.

I wish to know where I have been uncivilized in expressing my indignation about the Big Lie.

Please remember, Christ (IESAPL) has nothing at all to do with Christianity. He was dead and gone when the skullduggery was initiated in his name. I quote from synoptic sources only because that source has been used to subvert mankind in Europe, Africa and the Americas all these years, and is now turning its avaricious eye on Asia (Ecclesia in Asia). I reiterate, it is the fabricated image of Christ (IESAPL) that is to blame, NOT Christ (IESAPL) himself: frankly, we are only really beginning to learn about ‘him' now, thanks to the Nag Hammadi and Dead Sea Scrolls.

A retrospect of the religion reminds one of a few quotes: 1. Pope Leo X – "It has served us well, this myth of Christ"; 2) Michele Sindona – "My operating philosophy is based on my personality which is unique in the world, on well-told lies …." [Yallop, p. 129]; 3. Pope John Paul I – "I have noticed two things that seem to be in very short supply in the Vatican. Honesty and a good cup of coffee." ["The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Crisis of Christianity", N.S.Rajaram, Minerva Press, London, p.35].

A Piece of Rationality Be Upon You!

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".