Don't Crucify the Messenger

[drunkenshoe]

Just the title chosen for the thread...

[Baruch]

Keep it up ;-)  I sometimes won't agree with you, but I can tell anyone, whatever path you are on, you are on the right one for you.

[aitm]

In my search for higher understanding, I came back to the bible which I learned to despise and was able to see new truths I hadn't allowed myself to see before.

If you think that "higher understanding" can be found in the babble, you must have started out underground. Keep climbing, there is reality up here, common sense and knowledge. You seem stuck in the gibberish and illusion area.

[Mike Cl]

My belief is that there is no actual separation between creation and the creator, and that "we are the eyes and ears of God". Therefore, our interpretation of this reality is a fragment of universal understanding, and to see more, we must look, listen, and think in all directions. In that search, common trends emerge like adaptation, duality, and harmony. The potential of humanity is crippled by a lack of acceptance that these natural trends are ruling factors for our behavior as well, or at least how we should try to be. Harmony is one of the worst because we tend to want it on our terms rather than taking it as it comes. In my search for higher understanding, I came back to the bible which I learned to despise and was able to see new truths I hadn't allowed myself to see before. Everyone can do this, but it is a matter of choice.

I remember sitting in a campground one day, years ago.  (I used to love camping and still love 'nature').  I was in the middle of my most serious 'searching' phase.  I was alone and all was as quiet as nature ever gets.  I watched a spider eating a fly, while the fly struggled.  Then I really turned my attention to 'nature' and began the process of understanding the alarming aspect of it.  It is all predicated upon death and savage death.  That fly was alive and was being eaten.  The antelope suffers horribly while being killed by the lion.  It's not the lion's fault, for that is what the 'creator' wanted--that is what the 'creator' crafted.   All animals must gather energy to live.  Which means all of them must kill.  Even the cow, who eats no meat, must kill plants to live.  Life feeds upon life for it's energy.  Plants don't have to do that, for they get their energy from minerals and sunlight. (Yes, I am aware that another natural system exists in which sunlight plays no part.)   this is the system the 'creator' built.  Why this system?  It makes no sense, for I could have crafted a much better and compassionate system.  I don't see your creator as possessing love, compassion or mercy.  The 'natural trends' that I see, are death and destruction, pain and suffering.  And that point of view makes no sense if there really is a creator.  For a being or presence to be so powerful to be able to create a universe and all it contains, to be so devoid of the basic human goodness, compassion or love is nonsensical.  There is no room for such a creator.  So, I simply see a universe that is, and the process that brought it into being, as being always there.  And that system is totally neutral.  Whatever meaning is in that universe, we, as individuals, must supply.  So, your meaning is different than mine.  So, my observations have brought me to a point that is just about opposite from yours.  And I arrived at mine through stopping, looking and listening and simply following what is and not what I wish it to be. 

[WanderingWonderer]

I remember sitting in a campground one day, years ago.  (I used to love camping and still love 'nature').  I was in the middle of my most serious 'searching' phase.  I was alone and all was as quiet as nature ever gets.  I watched a spider eating a fly, while the fly struggled.  Then I really turned my attention to 'nature' and began the process of understanding the alarming aspect of it.  It is all predicated upon death and savage death.  That fly was alive and was being eaten.  The antelope suffers horribly while being killed by the lion.  It's not the lion's fault, for that is what the 'creator' wanted--that is what the 'creator' crafted.   All animals must gather energy to live.  Which means all of them must kill.  Even the cow, who eats no meat, must kill plants to live.  Life feeds upon life for it's energy.  Plants don't have to do that, for they get their energy from minerals and sunlight. (Yes, I am aware that another natural system exists in which sunlight plays no part.)   this is the system the 'creator' built.  Why this system?  It makes no sense, for I could have crafted a much better and compassionate system.  I don't see your creator as possessing love, compassion or mercy.  The 'natural trends' that I see, are death and destruction, pain and suffering.  And that point of view makes no sense if there really is a creator.  For a being or presence to be so powerful to be able to create a universe and all it contains, to be so devoid of the basic human goodness, compassion or love is nonsensical.  There is no room for such a creator.  So, I simply see a universe that is, and the process that brought it into being, as being always there.  And that system is totally neutral.  Whatever meaning is in that universe, we, as individuals, must supply.  So, your meaning is different than mine.  So, my observations have brought me to a point that is just about opposite from yours.  And I arrived at mine through stopping, looking and listening and simply following what is and not what I wish it to be.

I appreciate your words and your attempt at a deeper understanding. Typical hippies do the same, yet tend to intentionally ignore the darker side of reality. With all due respect, I think you and the hippies miss out on the value of the less than desirable. Plant life is not without its dark side as well, however, and some is defensive like poison and thorns while some is offensive like the plethora of carnivorous plants. Did you know that flies are trapped by the sticky secretions of the tomato plant and when they die they are dropped into the soil below for nourishment? Instead of coming to the conclusion that there is no god because there is suffering, I considered that suffering could have a reason for existence. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned there, and because our most effective educator is hardship, I imagine that the role of the negative is simply that--a means to make us adapt and grow. If you can bare it, consider the unlikely tale of the garden of Eden. On the surface, it's rubbish, but we know it's been altered, which has likely convoluted the point. Still, just think about life in a place where we know nothing of discomfort and hardship. Think about how you took electricity for granted as a child until you experienced an outage. A "perfect" existence enables stupidity, laziness, and a lack of appreciation. It is arguable that overcoming chaos is the fundamental cause of our progress, and because progress is a core factor of life, one could conclude that chaos is a necessary evil rather than a force in opposition of God. Please forgive me for this, but as a seeker named Michael, I hold reverence for the stories about Michael. One in particular made me question the roles of good and evil. There's this character named Joshua who is supposedly confronted with the presence of the archangel, but he questions the motives of Michael, asking him whose side is he on. The archangel answers, "Neither, but as commander of the army of the Lord, I have come." Almost everyone blows this story off today, but what if there is a good reason for such a tale? I believe there is, and it is to highlight the CURRENT need for both good and evil. It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out. Therefore, the very father that Christ served and defended was the one who made sure he died a brutal death. That lesson is insinuated by the question, "Father, why have you forsaken me?" Why indeed.

[Baruch]

Sometimes trying to understand a story better, is a good way to understand ourselves better.  Living people are unfinished stories.  The historicity is a red herring.

[aitm]

The vastness of the universe is such that were it a human, it would consider the atom and our entire solar system to be about the same size. Our insignificance and for some a self imposed misery that demands they create a god for themselves so they can have a better standing in the vastness. This god they created, is brutish and cruel beyond understanding, so cruel that even though it could wave its hand and make humanity disappear chooses to torture the several million men women and children by drowning to death. Then this most magnificent of gods cannot quite grasp the power of his "wand" and loses battles to humans who have the audacity to have iron wheels on their chariots and then to top it off, is stymied to the point of embarrassment over a woman's menstrual cycle that he created to the point where he damns they be banished for being icky.

That is your god in a nutshell, and you call other people hippies? Your reverence for such blathering stupidity renders anything else you propose as ludicrous as your god. Try religion-r-us….they got lots of bonafide nut jobs over there. You'll fit right in.

[Baruch]

There are two kinds of people, those who divide people into two kinds of people, and those who do not ;-)

One can find solace in one's unimportance ... inferiority complex.

One can find solace in one's importance ... superiority complex.

I vote with Nietzsche ... justifiable superiority complex.  But democratic.

We are all uber-menschen, but no two are alike, like snowflakes.  Or just flakes ... your call ;-)

[jonb]

It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out.

So you are saying his message is not as strong as that of Buddha's then?

[Baruch]

A few inter-related points ...

If Socrates hadn't been martyred, his freethinking cause would have died in obscurity

If Christianity hadn't been useful to the Roman State, it would have died in obscurity

If Jews hadn't been stiff necked, we would have either been assimilated or have died in obscurity ... this is still an ongoing choice

If Buddha hadn't been useful to the Indian States, and other places farther East, it would have died in obscurity

I agree, that even a fictional Jesus, is better dead than alive ... even to pre-Constantinian Christianity.  A living Jesus would have confounded everyone with his BuJew sensibility ;-)  His bohemian similarity to Socrates was helpful to his disciple's cause ... and the stiff neck of Gentile Christianity helped it survive until it could be coopted by the Roman State.

[WanderingWonderer]

So you are saying his message is not as strong as that of Buddha's then?

That's a fine point. Siddhartha is believed to have lived a long life, but the culture he existed in was dramatically different. India promoted spiritual discovery and meditation in his time while Christ's middle east was oppressive and information was hoarded by the elite class. It's believed that young Christ was well traveled, and may have studied in places like India and Tibet, which could have offered him the enlightenment he was unlikely to receive at home, and more so, his perspective would be harder to receive at home, requiring tactics that were unnecessary for the Buddha.

[WanderingWonderer]

A few inter-related points ...

If Socrates hadn't been martyred, his freethinking cause would have died in obscurity

If Christianity hadn't been useful to the Roman State, it would have died in obscurity

If Jews hadn't been stiff necked, we would have either been assimilated or have died in obscurity ... this is still an ongoing choice

If Buddha hadn't been useful to the Indian States, and other places farther East, it would have died in obscurity

I agree, that even a fictional Jesus, is better dead than alive ... even to pre-Constantinian Christianity.  A living Jesus would have confounded everyone with his BuJew sensibility ;-)  His bohemian similarity to Socrates was helpful to his disciple's cause ... and the stiff neck of Gentile Christianity helped it survive until it could be coopted by the Roman State.

I would argue that the Roman state was in a tight spot because of Christ. They had to find a way to incorporate him in or they risked a declination of control. Pilate was merciless, but we're led to believe that he gave Christ a way out and it was ultimately the fault of the Jews that he died rather than the governmental body he threatened. This is clearly propaganda.

[Mike Cl]

WW---I appreciate your words and your attempt at a deeper understanding. Typical hippies do the same, yet tend to intentionally ignore the darker side of reality. With all due respect, I think you and the hippies miss out on the value of the less than desirable. Plant life is not without its dark side as well, however, and some is defensive like poison and thorns while some is offensive like the plethora of carnivorous plants. Did you know that flies are trapped by the sticky secretions of the tomato plant and when they die they are dropped into the soil below for nourishment? Instead of coming to the conclusion that there is no god because there is suffering, I considered that suffering could have a reason for existence. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned there, and because our most effective educator is hardship, I imagine that the role of the negative is simply that--a means to make us adapt and grow.

Mike--I don't know where hippes come in here.  But I appreciate your attempt at a deeper understanding as well.  I am well aware of the 'darker' side of plants.  But I only scratched the surface on the death and destruction your creator has created.  What of the misformed babies that are born--without all sorts of body parts or parts of their brains or altered chemistry.  Is that for learning a lesson?  What lesson?  How about disformed puppies (and all other creatures), are they to learn a lesson too?  Your creator seems so shallow that that is all it can think of for learning lessons.  And what purpose are these lessons?  consider that all creatures are born imperfect--why is that?  Does each one mean a different lesson?  That simply does not make any sense.

WW--If you can bare it, consider the unlikely tale of the garden of Eden. On the surface, it's rubbish, but we know it's been altered, which has likely convoluted the point. Still, just think about life in a place where we know nothing of discomfort and hardship. Think about how you took electricity for granted as a child until you experienced an outage. A "perfect" existence enables stupidity, laziness, and a lack of appreciation. It is arguable that overcoming chaos is the fundamental cause of our progress, and because progress is a core factor of life, one could conclude that chaos is a necessary evil rather than a force in opposition of God.

Mike--Adam and Eve are rubbish--of course it is; it's fiction you realize.  And it is a fictional place that a sadistic creator created.  A perfect existence does not enable anything but perfection.  That has never existed and never will.  But your creator could have created it from the get go.  Your creator could have created humans who knew what perfection was and how to attain it.  Instead, your creator created death, destruction, suffering;why?  To teach humans lessons?  What lessons?  It seems more likely your creator simply likes to look in on his creations to see how they cope--or don't cope.  It is a sociopath.  As for chaos, it is indeed, part of life and the universe.  But the chaos of the universe is neutral--the universe cares not a whit about you or I--or of anything else.  Yes, overcoming problems is what propels us forward as individual and as a species.  Chaos is not evil--it just is. 

WW-- Please forgive me for this, but as a seeker named Michael, I hold reverence for the stories about Michael. One in particular made me question the roles of good and evil. There's this character named Joshua who is supposedly confronted with the presence of the archangel, but he questions the motives of Michael, asking him whose side is he on. The archangel answers, "Neither, but as commander of the army of the Lord, I have come." Almost everyone blows this story off today, but what if there is a good reason for such a tale? I believe there is, and it is to highlight the CURRENT need for both good and evil. It is arguable that if the Christ archetype was never martyred, his message would have faded away, and we all know legends have to burn out. Therefore, the very father that Christ served and defended was the one who made sure he died a brutal death. That lesson is insinuated by the question, "Father, why have you forsaken me?" Why indeed.

Mike--I hope you do realize that the Arch Angel Michael, Joshua, and Christ are all fiction.  They are tales (whether you call them legends, myth, or allegory) crafted for a purpose.  What you term good and evil is not god made but man made.  What is good and evil is totally in the eye of the beholder.  The 'Christ archetype' was martyred--and he was martyred in dozens and dozens of different names and cultures.  The christian tale is not unique.  So, you are moved by the fictional Father killing his fictional self or son, and he did so in a brutal fictional way?  Wow!   You quote--"Father, why have you forsaken me?"  So you have your fictional god asking why it is forsaking itself?  Schizoid, I'd say.  Why, indeed!!

Maybe you can take a hippie to lunch some day and ask what he/she thinks.  And listen.  Provided there are hippies around.

[Mike Cl]

The common actions, traits, and teachings of the alleged prophets, messiahs, avatars, gurus, yogis, shamans, and saints represents an archetype that changed humanity in some way for the better. They represented humility, equality, generosity, and wisdom.

Alas, no matter how good they were, they would still die, and their followers would quickly go astray and create religions. We have gained a lot of ground, though, and I think it's wise to recognize that.

To return to the original post.  I will discuss Jesus, since I am most familiar with that fictional tale.  I would suggest that Jesus can be made to 'teach' opposite points.  For example:

Does Jesus teach peace?
Yes.
Blessed are the peacemakers. Matthew 5:9
One of them ... drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear. Then said Jesus ... Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. Matthew 26:51-52
Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men. Luke 2:14
Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. John 14:27
These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. John 16:33
The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ. Acts 10:36
No.
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. Matthew 10:34
Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. Luke 12:51
He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36
And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

So, the answer to the question I guess is yes--and no.  Depends upon what you want to believe in.

Consider this about Jesus, as well.

What did Jesus teach about the Old Testament?
by Ryan Turner
Many people today do not believe in the authority of the Old Testament as Scripture. However, Jesus had some quite different things to say regarding the Old Testament. Here is a brief list of some of what Jesus taught about the Old Testament:
1.Source of Authority
1.When confronted by Satan, Jesus appealed to the Old Testament as a source of authority by stating, "It is written," (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10).
2.Imperishability
1."For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished," (NASB, Matt. 5:18).
1.Unbreakability
1."The Scripture cannot be broken," (NASB, Jn. 10:35).
1.Source of Doctrinal Authority
1.Jesus appealed to Scripture when correcting false doctrine stating, "You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures nor the power of God," (NASB, Matt. 22:29).
1.Truthfulness
1."Your word is truth," (NASB, Jn. 17:17).
1.Historical Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed the historical existence of Jonah (Matt. 12:40), Noah (Matt. 24:37-38), and Adam and Eve (Matt. 19:4-6).
1.Scientific Reliability
1.Jesus affirmed that God created the world (Mk. 13:19, cf. Matt. 19:4).
1.Old Testament Canonicity1
1.Jesus made reference to the Law and Prophets as a unit, "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill," (Matt. 5:17).
2.Jesus explained the Scriptures, "Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures," (NASB, Luke 24:27).
3.Jesus referred to the entire Canon by mentioning all the prophets from Abel (from Genesis, the first book and first martyr) to Zechariah (Chronicles, the last book, and the last martyr) (Matt. 23:35).2
What does this mean?
Since Jesus is God in flesh, performed a life of miraculous healings, died on the cross, and was miraculously resurrected three days later, what He taught on issues of doctrine are vastly important. Since He was God in flesh, whatever He taught is true. This means that we can trust the accuracy of the Old Testament Scriptures on issues of history, science, and moral instruction.

The Old Testament is a collection of fictional stories detailing a horrid, evil god, with horrid evil, commandments to follow.  And Jesus thinks that's really great.  Jesus thinks the OT is accurate in the areas of history, science and morality.  That Jesus is an idiot and willfully stupid.  He can be your avatar if you'd like--I want nothing to do with him or his fictions.

[WanderingWonderer]

You have a lot of animosity toward a god you don't believe in, don't you? Deformities are mutations, and I'm sure that as an atheist, you're well-versed in evolution science and the need for mutations.  Also, you curiously expect me to have every answer for you. What exactly do you think I am? Now, since you've picked my words apart so well and I'm using this rather simple app, I'll have to end here and go back to your post before preceding.