On Tue, 4 Jan 2000, Robert Owen wrote:
> I must confess to you all that I am missing the entire point;
> suppose authenticated evidence was available that would
> persuade any reasonable person that the probability of the
> historical existence of the individual denoted in the "New
> Testament" by our current anglicized name "Jesus" is at
> least as high as that of Ikhnaton, Pericles, Alexander, Plato,
> Constantine, or Attila the Hun for that matter?
Robert, there is a distinct qualitative difference in knowing
whether or not Jesus really existed and whether some of his message
has a basis in "historic fact" -- meaning he could have been
an "alien" trying to do spin control on the evolution of
humanity or simply an Eastern guru trying to transplant
alternate explanations for unknown phenomena into Judaic
mindsets; and Jesus as a fictional construct -- meaning he
was the invention of individuals trying to alter the power
structures and politics of an era.
In one case you've got billions of people believing in an
absolute fabrication, in the other you've got billions of
people trying to follow the possible insights of someone
who may have been either a very wise man or a superior
evolved life form.
Very very different things. I guess in my mind, the question
is do you group Jesus with Plato or the individuals who committed
the Watergate break-ins?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:02:05 MDT