Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site mcnc.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!bch From: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Evidence of Christianity Message-ID: <2340@mcnc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 7-Nov-84 12:22:35 EST Article-I.D.: mcnc.2340 Posted: Wed Nov 7 12:22:35 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 9-Nov-84 06:44:42 EST References: <660@inuxe.UUCP> Reply-To: bch@mcnc.UUCP (Byron Howes) Organization: North Carolina Educational Computing Service Lines: 61 Summary: In article yiri@ucf-cs.UUCP (Yirmiyahu BenDavid) writes: >Mike, I see Jesus quite clearly. He is a counterfeit. Those who believe >in him and/or follow him are entirely doomed. Please don't wish that on >me. On the one hand, your sympathy is well-intentioned. The attitudinal >posture from which it derives however is basically anti-all >non-Christians. A number of people in this forum (myself included) have brought into question the historical accuracy of the roots of Christianity. Yiri has recently gone so far as to declare Jesus a counterfeit. Fair enough. The response this elicits is going to get me flamed at by *all* sides of the issue, so here goes: Granted, the historical Jesus may or may not have been as portrayed in what we now call the New Testament. So What? In the grand tradition of collective movements history may have been rewritten to give legitimacy to a particular world-view. Again, so what? Like any social movement, Christianity is only weakly predicated on the historical accuracy of its genesis. It is strongly predicated, for good or for bad, on the much larger body of ideas embodied in the NT as interpreted by modern Christians. Yiri has pointed out that Christianity may have been a paganization of a form of Judaism. Again, a valid point. It needs to be further pointed out that modern Christianity bares about as much resemblance to the primitive apostolic Christianity as it does to modern Judaism. So far as I can tell, there is not one person posting to the net as an identified Christian who would have made it through the Inquisition intact. The Protestant reform did a remarkable job of virtually returning Christianity to the pre-Roman gnostic sects, though even modern Gnostics don't seem to recognize that. Reading the gnostic texts may prove to be an enlightenment to some. There are lots of Christians who will disagree. To some, the historical accuracy of Christianity's roots is essential for faith. To me, that's putting a whole lot of eggs in a very weak basket. The obsession with morality, salvation and repentance also obscures that which I find Christianity's most compelling point -- the emphasis upon forgiveness, humility, charity, self-reflection and (above all) love that drew it out of the political and religions climes of the first century. What's the point? The point is that most, if not all, forms of modern Christianity have deviated from the historical roots of the faith. The point is also that it doesn't matter. The body of the faith takes on its own validity which transcends the question of its original legitimacy. Thank goodness that's so. I'd sure hate to deal with a modern Torquemada! Byron Howes (As an aside, there is an important difference between Christians and Jews to be illustrated here. Christians seem to be redactionists by definition. The philosophical continuity of interpretation and history does not seem to be as important to Christians as it is to Jews, at least as I have inferred from friends and postings in net.religion.jewish. That's why there are so many Christian sects and so few Jewish ones. I suspect this is because Christianity is not centered on anything as concrete as The Law, and because much of what substitutes is *itself* an interpretation [by Paul] of Jesus' statements. I expect to be roundly corrected on this hypothesis!) -- Byron C. Howes ...!{decvax,akgua}!mcnc!ecsvax!bch