Showing posts with label stephens. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stephens. Show all posts

Friday, August 21, 2015


191. Jesus Christ in the eyes of a non-Christian. Part Seven

We were discussing that how did Christianity grow from a few demoralized, persecuted, leaderless followers to the largest religion in the world?

The answer is, because Jesus repeatedly appeared to his followers after his death, and even to one of his  enemies, like Saul (St. Paul). There is nothing more convincing to any person than a visit, while one is awake and in full senses, than a visit and talk with a dead person whom one knew well when that person was alive. All doubts vanish, never to appear again. Even threat of painful death does not make one renege. It is no wonder that almost all of his 12 disciples (and others like Stephens and St. Paul), except John and perhaps one other (who were not killed), stood steadfast when they were violently executed. Some were beheaded; others were crucified, or stoned to death or pierced by pine needles or arrows.

That is why his death and resurrection were so important to God’s plan

Now, after I have discussed the four aspects of his life: his message, his miracles, his death, and his resurrection, what do I conclude?

Power of God was with him. Nobody before and nobody after him had that much power!

We are forced to arrive at that conclusion by the richness of the above mentioned four aspects and by the fact that the fruit of his labor resulted in the largest single creed which humanity has adopted. A tree is recognized by its fruit.

 

Nonetheless my rational mind cannot accept certain aspects of the popular and fundamental beliefs of Christianity. These are listed below. 

1.      Jesus was the Son of god

2.      Three gods or one God

3.      Man is made in the imitation of God

4.      Redemption of sins by Jesus

 

God is fundamentally different from human beings. Let me repeat what I wrote before ( blog 113):

. God can be conceptualized as energy, or something even more subtle than energy, with a supermind. You can raise an objection that how can energy have a mind. We already know it can happen. Human brain is an example. It is made, mainly, of nerve cells. These cells have the power to think. Thoughts arise from certain nerve cells in the brain. I can communicate with them and they with me. When I address my brain cells and say “how are you doing?” I am certain that some brain cells have received the message, otherwise I would not be conscious of it. The message had to be received and interpreted by brain cells to come to my consciousness. The cells may reply “we are fine”. Again, to come to my consciousness, some brain cells must have formed the thought and sent it to me. Either the same or some other brain cells interpreted the thought. These cells communicate with each other instantaneously, at the speed of light (we know the speed, because all messages are carried by electrons, which travel at the speed of light). If our brain, a collection of billions of cells, made of atoms, and atoms made of subatomic particles, such as electrons and protons and neutrons, can have thoughts of pain, pleasure, compassion, jealousy, and anger, why not God, a collection of pure energy, have a mind?

 

Such a limitless mass of subtle energy cannot have sons and daughters like humans have. It is like saying that electricity has sons and daughters and husbands and wives. There cannot be three Gods; the Father, the son and the Holy spirit. Holy spirit is the kinetic energy of unchangeable God. The two cannot be separated, like milk and its whiteness, the fire and its ability to burn. Let us see what St. Paul had to say in New Testament:

6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live. (1 Corinthians 8:6).

Man is a creation of the Creator. It is not made in the image of God or in imitation of God. What has limitless mass of energy in common with a biped carbon based animal?

This mote’s concept of Jesus does not include the belief that he came to redeem our sins. He came to show us a path through his message and through the example of his noble death and resurrection.

I did not find any message of Redemption in the gospel of Mark. At any rate, to think that we are exculpated from evil deeds, because Jesus Christ has taken our sins and had to sacrifice his life for our sins, is not rational . This notion is not worth serious consideration.

And anyway what are the sins of human beings for which they are going to be punished in hell, by being burnt alive by fire for centuries if not forever?

All our acts, good or bad, are the result of three factors, or rather two factors; intention, nature and nurture. One is the result of one’s nature, which is produced by one’s genes, which one gets, half from one’s mother and half from one’s father. The other part of a person is constructed by where one is nurtured, or where one grows up. The environments; parents, teachers, peers, culture, etc. Neither in nature nor in nurture  one had any control.  A just God is not going to punish us for our sins, because our intention was mostly derived from factors which were not in our control  (See blog 54).

 As far hell is concerned I have discussed it in blog 119 (1). Here are some excerpts:

 

“Years ago (probably twenty-five), somebody casually remarked, “There is no hell, just heaven. God is kind and merciful; therefore, there cannot be a hell”. That remark gnawed on my ( this mote ) mind for years. The more I thought, the more I was convinced that there cannot be hell”……….

….“Isn’t it true that you have a son who is causing you great suffering because he drinks and………”(Sri Yogananda talking)

The man’s jaw dropped “How did you know? Yes, this has been the greatest sorrow of my life”

“Then may I make a suggestion”

“Yes”. The man was eager for a solution.

“All right take him out for a walk in the hills, and have two trusted friends waiting there for you. They should pounce upon him and bind him. Then let them build a huge roaring fire. Let them throw your son in the fire”

The man was flabbergasted. “Are you mad to make such a suggestion?”

“Exactly so! Yet you ascribe such behavior to God, who created you and instilled in you that love for your child. How dare you attribute to Him feelings so callous and punitive that He will take all of His children that have done wrong and cast them in eternal flames?”  

 

A final remark to this seven blog series : All systems fail at the altar of human self-interest. Whether it is any religion or ideology, such as communism. Only certain individuals surmount this hurdle through selflessness.
 .....................................................................................................
(1) ‘Finding the joy within you, by  Sri Daya Mata’                                                      

Friday, June 12, 2015


181. Jesus And The Historians. Part three

 

We were discussing the five arguments which Aslan furnished to support the notion that Jesus thought that  the aims of his revolution could not be achieved without violence. Please read blogs 179-180 first.

  1. Kingdom of God ( heaven ) did not necessarily mean that it had to be established on earth, in Palestine, in near future. As a matter of fact, nowhere did Jesus specify the geographical nature or the time of this kingdom. Look at these statements:

43 If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out. [44] [a] 45 And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell. [46] [b] 47 And if your eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, (Mark 9:43-47)

23 Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God!”24 The disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said again, “Children, how hard it is[a] to enter the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”( Mark 10:23-25)

Any impartial person, after reading these passages, will conclude that Jesus is referring to heavens, because he is contrasting it with hell: those who enter life, after stumble, with one foot, one hand, one eye; go in kingdom of God; two feet, two hands, two eyes; are thrown into hell. Rich people, in general, usually have a better life, in this world, than the poor, because their money can buy all the comforts which poor lack, then, if kingdom of God refers to this world then why Jesus said that it was impossible for rich to enter it.

I chose passages from Mark, because that is the earliest gospel, there are similar passages in other gospels. For example, “ …..that many Gentiles will come all over the world and sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob….” (Mathew 8:11; Luke 13:28-30)). These prophets had died long time ago!

The author has a different take in this matter. He thinks that ‘kingdom of God’ and a ‘call to revolution’ are simply interchangeable terms. He further adds that Palestine was under Roman occupation. There was no other way to freedom except use of force.( page 120). Jesus agreed ( according to Aslan ) with the zealots that a change of whole system of government was needed, which included political. ( page 121)

There are passages in gospels which state that the kingdom of God is near, which can be interpreted as pointing to a violent rebellion, throwing the Romans out ( as happened few decades later), and establishing a new society based on new principles. Maybe, Jesus understood that his noble death ( which he predicted was going to happen ) and resurrection will result in a moral revolution in human beings. Persons like Peter, Paul, Stephens, and James (brother of Jesus) did achieve Kingdom of God in this world.

 

  1. The author reconciles Jesus’ message of love and peace, to use of force against the Romans, by the  argument, that  his commands to ‘ love your enemies’ and ‘turn the other cheek ‘ did not apply to treatment of foreigners and outsiders but was meant only within the Jewish community. This is a preposterous argument and not worthy of discussion. Laws of God are the same for everybody.
  2. Author states that Jesus was crucified for the crime of  sedition. Sedition must be aimed against Roman state, because crucifixion was reserved for treason, sedition, rebellion and banditry. Therefore, author argues, that Jesus was promoting sedition. His point of view is probably correct. Jesus was a revolutionary, though a peaceful one, but Roman and Temple authorities considered him a threat. That does not make him a violent revolutionary but he might have been perceived as such. To make his point valid, author had to argue that the other two bandits crucified along with Jesus had to be resistance fighters too. There is no evidence to support it.
  3. Aslan contends that Jesus was calling for revolution with the use of force, because he was primarily a Jew, and Jews were rising up against Roman rule. Jesus could not have been unaffected. Palestine was seething with rebellion in the 1st century, which finally resulted in driving the Romans out in 66 A.D, and have a Jewish rule for four years. There were revolts near about Jesus’ time; Judas the Galilean, Fourth sect; etc.
    This is an indirect deduction without any evidence. Revolutionary Jesus is not mentioned in any of the four gospels, letters of Paul, and by Josephus or Tacitus.
     
    To be continued