Christian Story of Jesus's Birth Is a Myth Born of Politics

It's my opinion that Jesus never existed in the flesh. The stories that surround him are just that - stories that are meant to convey a message to followers.

If you concede that "children feel deceived when they find out Santa is not real, many Christians feel deceived when they conclude that Jesus was not born of a virgin and that a star did not travel through the sky and come to rest over a particular place in Bethlehem."

Why would you persist in believing "that Jesus from Nazareth is Lord. I believe he is Son of God. I believe he is Bringer of Peace. I believe he is Savior of the World."?

Why not see myth as myth and accept it as such?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I like the fact that this article reflects critical thinking and the acknowledgement of myth and symbolism in the Bible, but is not another example of knee-jerk atheism. I was pleasantly surprised at the end.

The dominance of the religious right, reactionary Catholicism, and the in-your-face atheism movement of the past few years would have us believe that belief, spirituality and/or religion are all-or-nothing, with-us-or-against-us propositions. It's nice to hear something different once in a while.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So if I got this right the Gospel was written 50 years after the "death" of Christ and is basically myth and not historical. What is historical and can be quantified are the political and mythological beliefs from that period when they were written but there is no recorded of an actual Jesus having walked the earth.

On top of that the gospels conflict and can not be reconciled ... and yet to this day the "church" and apparently the author of this piece still praise the actual existence of the "Christ" figure and believe him to be God .... which is the strangest part about this article.

In my mind once you break down that the "virgin"birth is a political story to give more weight to their mythological beliefs then you have to look at the entire content of the "Jesus" myth and realize the whole damn thing is made up from a time when that's what these people did.

There was no virgin birth, no crucifixion and resurrection, no walking on water, no healing the sick, no nothing. The whole story while having some value in that it contains some wisdom about life is however a lie, a myth ... not fact. Jesus did not exist. Let's start there and maybe we can come out of this 2000 year old coma and begin to deal with reality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All religions contain a certain amount of myth. That dosen't diminish the inherent good of religion. Much of what you see in religions are symbolic with an intent to convey positive messages. Something that happened as far back as Christs birth will always be inaccurate. The best we can hope for is that he as in fact born!

Now, contrast that with our latest "god" Obama! We still dont know much about where he was born!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Have you ever tried to walk that walk?

I did.

I wasn't crucified, but ... I was brutally ...

Oh that's right, AlterNet's demographic doesn't want to hear about rape. It is a woman's concern.

What I learned is that christians would rather kill you than have 'Jesus' walking among them and AlterNet is cool with that.

So, I don't have a problem with their Christmas fantasy, it is their 'Christian' fantasy that burns me up.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mary, Joseph and the baby in the manger and the 3 magi show up. one of the magi smacks his head on the crossbeam and says 'Jesus Christ'! and Mary says, 'what a great name, we were going to name him Irving'...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Although no one knows for sure when the birth of Jesus took place, I believe the Bible it true. Matthew was with Jesus and when he wrote his account, he was writing to the early Jewish believers. Many knew the background of the birth of Jesus, what had happened during his lifetime. Luke, on the other hand, was writing to the Gentiles. Most Gentiles had never heard the account of any Jewish history nor anything about Jesus. The audience was totally different. Therefore, Luke went into more detail because of the Gentile audience. He was trying to explain to them about some of the Jewish history and the account and the continuation of the life of Jesus. Luke spent time with the apostle Paul. Paul heard many facts from the risen Savior and he was telling the Gentiles and the people with him about the risen savior.
My suggestion would be for people to actually read the whole New Testament from the beginning to the end like any good book. Their understanding would increase and all their questions would be answered and their doubts would fade away.
Reading it is the most important thing that anyone could ever do. Your present life and your future depends on it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is written by a retired Baptist pastor from Palmer, Alaska (right next door to Wasilla, spawning ground of Sarah Palin). The entire area is referred to as "out in the valley" by saner Alaskans in that region (near Anchorage). This is pretty bold stuff for the guy to be writing. Given the social context within which he lives, I'm not the least bit surprised by his closing statement.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The explanation by the Baptist minister is typical of badly educated Christians. Anybody who has an accurate knowledge of the Bible and early Christianity (which was actually a Jewish variation at that time) will know that the quotation about "loving the Lord" is in an early part of the 5 books of Moses and refers to the One God and not to Jesus. At that time there was in fact no need to refer to Jesus as the Lord, which only became fasionable after Paul's ministry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whereas the following is much closer to the truth

The Greatest Story Ever Sold

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As I am not a Christian, I have no problems with whatever Christians believe or reject or disbelieve in. However, as a Muslim I am forced to disagree with the author on the subject of the miraculous birth of the Prophet, Jesus, Son of Mary, which the Holy Quran confirms in no uncertain words. I humbly request and plead with the author to go find an English translation of the Quran, which is Allah's/God's revelation to His last Prophet and Messenger, Muhammad AND then read Chapters AAL EMRAN (descendents of Emran, the maternal grandfather of Mary) & MARIAM (Mary) to find out the TRUE narration of the circumstances related to the birth of Jesus, therein. This narration has not changed for upwards of 1300 years, nor can it be changed or tampered with or interpolated because the Quran is protected by its author, Allah/ God Almighty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A surprisingly good article. I came on here expecting another one of those stuck up atheist articles, but was treated instead to this quite wonderful, intelligent, educated, cogent, open-minded treatise on the birth story written by a religious person. Very cool!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

before they developed the Doctrine of Discovery when the Judeo-Christians created their own license to steal and dominate others?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That "political" part is more interesting than this article admits.

It would be unpopular with the GOP base nowadays to stress that Jesus would never have been born in Bethlehem if his (earthly) parents didn't need to go there to pay their TAXES and report to the CENSUS!

They lived in Nazareth way up north, and were required to report to the father's family hometown.

Maybe a Roman census worker was killed somewhere in the "backwoods" (scrub brush?) of Judea?... (oh sorry, that was a suicide? - he hung himself from a tree???).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Our Christmas stories are just that, as Jesus taught us look for the meaning in the stories. Our stories like most of the stories in religious texts serve one purpose. They allow children to come unto God. However there are fundamental beliefs within the stories. You insinuate that Jesus or early Christians believed Jesus was God. No stories claimed that and Jesus was pretty clear that he was the Son of God in the stories. The fundamental belief that comes out of the stories for mystics is that; as we create our Children God created Jesus. Jesus being created by God is not what made Jesus divine in nature. As we create souls in the dimension of the flush, God created a man called Jesus with the soul of God. That is the meaning of the Christmas stories as heard by the mystics. Maybe you do not believe that God has a spirit and a soul, we call this the Trinity. Maybe you do not believe that this is the image that the creators in the dimension of the flush were created in, but that is the meaning of some other stories passed on from a land that time forgot, as heard by the mystics. Everyday Christians would be wise not to worship their stories as a golden calf but to have a little faith in the meaning within.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...anybody that can stare concrete, tangible evidence in the face (for things such as the Holocaust, global warming, etc.), and say, "Those are myths", while telling you that something that is 100% unsupported by even the TINIEST shred of evidence is absolutely and completely real, and that you need to believe it is, also, or you'll be punished eternally...well, that person can only be labeled as "special".

Christians relevance in the modern world dwindles every hour of every day. I credit the rise in fundamentalism to their desperate last grasp at holding on to their cult's myths, as the world passes them by.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When the birth stories are put into their broader historic and religious context, they become masterpieces of truth-telling...

In the context of this statement, apparently truth has nothing to do with concrete reality. Apparently it relates only to belief which trumps whatever actually happened in the real world.

This observation of the importance of beliefs has real merit. Whether or not there was a real historical Jesus or perhaps just a myth, or maybe based on several real individuals and a body of folklore, what difference does it make?

The fact is that quite a few people in the last 2000 years strongly believe in the stories about him and that belief is quite real and dramatically important. It is just as real as the belief of others in Mohammad or others in the Buddha. These beliefs are an important reality, even today.

The same can be said about political beliefs. Often times the truth seems to matter little; it is beliefs that are all-important. Many people seem to discount the notion of a concrete reality. Too many in my opinion, but that's just my personal belief.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another attempt to make myths and outright lies and superstition acceptable to the faithful, ignorant, and the easily mislead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Astronomy" magazine is probably one of the most widely circulated astronomy magazines. You can imagine my surprise when I received my latest issue, and its lead article was "What Was the Star of Bethlehem?" What followed was a very detailed and exhaustive investigation on what possible planetary alignments might have occured around 3 B.C, what possible comets, possible supernova, etc., etc.

As I read it, I started thinking "this is ridiculous for a science magazine!".

Celestial events and wonders in the sky back then were claimed for every pharoah, Emperor, King or other important personage when they were born. In fact, it was politically dangerous to not claim auspcious signs in the heavens for any great person being born.

Check out the dvd "The God Who Wasn't There" where some prominent historians and biblical scholars completely debunk the story of Jesus.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

of Tarsus, aka Paul. He chose a safely dead philosopher/rebel (to the consternation of his actual followers - one of whom he admitted having actually murdered - by riling up a mob to a frenzy and having him stoned.)

It (Paulianity) sowed dissension amongst the Jews (fundamentalist rebels vs accommodationist priesthood/hierarchy) and demonized them sufficiently (among conquered "gentile" nations) to justify the virtual Roman genocide of the Jews.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow, the things you learn on Alternet....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The story of Jesus is based on the story of Mithras, the Persian sun god. Mithras was the son of a god too, and was born of a "young maiden" whose name also begins with the letter M (Maya). He could perform miracles and was killed by jealous adversaries. He was put into a dark cave for three days before he rose again, which equates to the winter solstice sun going retrograde and then returning to its original course. That day is December 25th and Mithras is worshipped on a Sunday. The two religions were conjoined when the Emperor Constantine wanted to make his empire easier to rule.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It doesn't matter that Jesus was born in Bethlehem but Jesus was never born period. Why else would all four gospel accounts be so dramatically different? Also why do the four gospels all have white male sounding names? That makes no sense for four men from the Middle East who are supposedly of Hebrew descent. The Bible is hogwash and Christianity is just a political tool of manipulation. It is the opiate of the American masses. Obviously most of us prefer lies to the truth for dealing with reality. How very sad because that same mentality is what destroyed the country especially with 9/11. It is obvious as hell that Israel's Mossad did it with help from Cheney and Rumsfeld.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus was like J.R. Ewing. Yes, there really was a Dallas, but he didn't live in it, he was made up for an audience and planted in that location to make it seem real.

The reason Jesus was made up was that the Romans finally did the unthinkable and not only invaded and defeated Israel in the final battle of Jove vs. Jehovah but captured Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple of Jehovah, ending the Jewish religion forever, since without the temple and priesthood there can be no sacrifices of animals to pay for sins, hence all Jews will forever die in their sins, ask any Jewish comedian about it.

The Jehovah cult that ran Judaism via the sacred writings now called the Bible operated on the guiding principle that Jehovah knows the future in advance, and indeed makes everything happen according to a plan, hence if the pagan Romans destroyed the Temple it must have been because Jehovah wanted them to, as a punishment for being bad. But what could the Jews have done so bad that he literally divorced them and kicked them out of the house? Answer: they must have killed his prophet, and not just any prophet, but his only begotten Son, born of a virgin and so extra special, miracles and everything, that killing him would have been grounds for permanent divorce from his "bride" da Jews.

Voila! The Gospels appeared around the time of the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. Of course, when Jehovah sends a prophet to warn them to get right with him and they reject him, he always gives them 40 years to repent first, so that's why Jesus must have been killed around 30 C.E., simple arithmetic. Not there really had to be a living Jesus back then. The fact of the destruction of the Big T was absolute proof in itself, and the details of Jesus' life are mere fine print. Of course, in taking Jerusalem the Romans killed over a million Jews and enslaved the remaining 100K, so there were no witnesses left anyway, but that's no problem with the mysterious Jehovah cult. They just got out their Jewish Ouija Boards, took dictation, and voila, Jehovah told them all about Jesus and his life way back when, and in four flavors like The Who's Quadrophenia. Not that the mysterious Gospel writers were there themselves, but Jehovah was, and they were just taking dictation. Did they even use their real names on the author line? No, it was "according" to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, their names for the Ouija Boards, it was so honest :) Chances are the Gospels were manufactured in one of the remaining Jewish havens like Alexandria or Babylon, who knows, they covered their tracks.

Yes, even the mystery man Saul alias Paul was fiction, as were all the disciples, apostles, leaping lame men, Lazarus, Mary Magdalene, the works. I smell an Emmy coming.

Check out my cool site examining the Bible and Bible-thumping cults especially the Jehovah's Witlesses at http://jehovahswitless.weebly.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sure 98% of the people don't actually believe in the fairytale version that miraculously occurs on one of the most important pagan holidays of the year! Isn't that why the Jehovah's Witnesses refuse to celebrate Christmas?

As to the whacked-out nut job 2%, they are the same ones who believe in "creation science" and there's no reasoning with the indoctrinated.

The evangelical atheists can jump up and down as much as they like on this one but there's no denying that if you live in the northern hemisphere, the days are getting longer again!

And that's a good reason to celebrate ;.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article never addresses what Jesus H. Christ's middle name is. It's not Irving.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Christians argue they are no longer under Mosaic Law, because Paul referred to his background as a former Pharisee and previous adherence to Mosaic Law as "so much garbage."

Nothing in the synoptic gospels suggests a break with Judaism. Jesus was called "Rabbi," meaning "Master" or "Teacher," 42 times in the gospels. Jesus' ministry was a rabbinic one. He went to the synagogue (Matthew 12:9), taught in the synagogues (Matthew 4:23, 13:54; Mark 1:39), expressed concern for Jairus, "one of the rulers of the synagogue" (Mark 5:36) and it "was his custom" to go to the synagogue (Luke 4:16).

Jesus himself said, "Do not suppose I have come to abolish the Law and the prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill...till heaven and earth pass away, not one jot or tittle pass from the Law till all is fulfilled. Whoever, therefore, breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven...unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)

Jesus also upheld the Torah in Luke 16:17: "And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid."

Nor do these words refer merely to the Ten Commandments. Jesus meant the entire Torah: 613 commandments. When a man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, Jesus replied, "You know the commandments." He quoted not just the Ten Commandments, but a commandment from Leviticus 19:13 as well: "Do not defraud." (Mark 10:17-22)

Jesus' disciples were once accused by the scribes and Pharisees of violating rabbinical tradition (Matthew 15:1-2; Mark 7:5), but not biblical law. Jesus never says anywhere in the entire New Testament that the Law is abolished; this was Paul's theology.

Sometimes Christians cite Matthew 7:12, where Jesus says "Do unto others..." and this "covers" the Law and the prophets. But Jesus was merely repeating in the positive what Rabbi Hillel taught a generation earlier. No one took Hillel's words to mean the Law had been abolished--why should we assume this of Jesus?

If Jesus really came to abolish the Law and the prophets, Simon (Peter) would not have resisted a divine command to kill and eat both "clean" and "unclean" animals (Acts 10), nor would there have been a debate in the early church as to what extent the gentiles were to observe Mosaic Law (Acts 15). When Paul visited the church at Jerusalem, James and the elders told him all its members were "zealous for the Law," and they were worried because they heard rumors Paul was preaching against Mosaic Law (Acts 21). None of these events would have happened had Jesus really come to abolish the Law and the prophets.

Paul says if anyone has confidence in the Law, "I am ahead of him."

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said he did not come to abolish the Law and the prophets? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who said whoever sets aside even the least of the Law's demands shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:17-19)?

Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus, who taught that following the commandments of God is the only way to eternal life (Mark 10:17-22)? Would that mean Paul places himself ahead of Jesus who said that it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the smallest portion of the Law to become invalid (Luke 16:17)?

Paul claimed the Law was "so much garbage," but it should be obvious JESUS DIDN'T THINK THE LAW WAS "GARBAGE"!

Christians believe in Paul, not Jesus. Bertrand Russell called Paul the "inventor" of Christianity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

See, they find comfort in their delusion that all people of faith have a historical construct that is entirely impossible, and simply choose to believe it as empirical fact. Now you've got them all confused, and that's not good. Atheists have a mental condition which requires them to live in a world of doctrinal certitude-- ambiguity, nuance, the value and impact of symbolic language and stories-- they can't handle it. Too complex. They can't touch it or fuck it, so they have to find some way to make it go away. That's easy when they ridicule fundamentalists who, as you point out, are equally confused. Not so much when someone asserts their faith in the context of an essay on how the Christmas story is a true myth which instructs us on what our faith is based on-- the assertion that God has inserted himself into our world and that we respond to God to our own personal joy and commitment.

As in, "Yes, Virginia, there is a Jesus." Oh, and hey-- how about a shout out to the other divine truths-- the Buddha, the prophets, the Vedas, and all the others of which I am too ignorant to reference properly but, even as a Christian, revere for their devotion to the God of Compassion.

Merry Christmas!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Onward Christian Soldiers Marching as to War and BOMBS AWAY in lands faraway! Go for it you Christians!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... and the religionists won!

Not one, single, solitary clerk wished me "Happy Holidays" this year. But neither did they wish me a Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Ramadan or Saturnalia.

Rather than forcing the stores to wish you Merry Christmas by your idiotic boycotts and letter-writing campaigns; you've scared them out of wishing anyone anything.

Congratulations! You've succeeded in squeezing just a little more joy out of the world.

FUCK YOU, ASSHOLES!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus: an imaginary friend for adults.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sorry but the author of this fairy tales needs a time-out for a history lesson or two.
I don't mind that religion is full of stories -they seem necessary to appeal to the masses, but please when labeling a story about Christmas facts don't rehash the same old stuff and try to pass it off as fact.

The first century Christians - these were a lose amalgam of believers (Jewish first) in a possible or hoped for messiah to deal with the turbulent times under harsh rule of the Romans, there were many who earned the title of teacher of righteousness or messiah.
However, by the time of Constantine we see dramatic changes in the Empire. He needs a gimmick to keep the people in line and to keep his job as emperor. So in time we have the Council of Nica whose only job was to tie together so many random stories about many messiahs and then to bring all of that under one religion that would support Constantine and future rulers of the Roman Empire. So we have stories that are all based on other pre-existing stories.

Don't you ever read actual history? Sure this is a quickie run down of what happened and in no way is meant to demean those who wish to believe in what ever god or gods help get them through life, but if your going to address facts then do that, not more weaving of fairy tales. I wonder if this author even knows how many gods have the exact same birth story, or where the story of Mary comes from, read the history first and then realize the all of the bible has a purpose a political purpose. Religion is first and foremost a political tool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

by the stories of the Nativity so common today.

In none of his gospels, does he mention such things as:

born of a virgin
born in a manger
the Three Wise Men
The Star of Bethlemhem
The Massacre of the Innocents
An angel appearing to shepherds


What Paul really says about Jesus is:

That he preached

That he was crucified

That he rose into heaven

And all of this Paul places in a mythical realm.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In order to understand christianity I think we should study zoroastrian and christianity and mithra and christianity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Romans did not prosecute Christians for their religion. The Romans, until Constantine III, who did implement prosecution of religions, non- Christian religions, didn't care what religion you were as long as you swore secular fealty to Rome. This the Christians refused to do, holding that nobody, including the Emperor, came before their mythical god. This Christian secular view, directly counter to what Jesus taught-- "render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's" is what got them into trouble.
'
One of the keys to the success of Rome in conquering the world was Rome's 'do whatever you want' attitude toward religion and the ability of the Romans pantheistic religion to absorb every other religion in the Empire. There was one simple requirement-- believe whatever you want, but pledge secular allegiance to Rome.

The BBC's classic "I, Claudius" has an accurate, even if fictional, account of Rome's approach to religion. The Emperor's chief of staff comes in, waves a letter, and says to Claudius, "The Briton's want to make you god. I told them you accepted."
The last line of the epic, after the death of Claudius, is a voice over, "Dream no more Tiberius Claudius Drusis Nero Caesar, Emperor of Rome, God of the Britons".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes most logic driven people realize the "virgin birth" is utter Bs. That being said its really unimportant. Dogging and disproving do nothing to focus on the positives of what "jesus" had to say. Even if he did not exist....the miracle of the fishes while yes impossible is one of the most fantastic and simplified calls for participatory democratic socialism if i have ever heard one. Its beautifully written, the message is eloquent, and golden(meaning this story will never loose relevance to humanity). There are other messages as well that we can take from this man or "idea" of a man and implement in our daily lives to no harm....but much improvement to humanity.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The middle of winter has long been a time of celebration around the world. Centuries before the arrival of the man called Jesus, early Europeans celebrated light and birth in the darkest days of winter. Many peoples rejoiced during the winter solstice, when the worst of the winter was behind them and they could look forward to longer days and extended hours of sunlight.

In Scandinavia, the Norse celebrated Yule from December 21, the winter solstice, through January. In recognition of the return of the sun, fathers and sons would bring home large logs, which they would set on fire. The people would feast until the log burned out, which could take as many as 12 days. The Norse believed that each spark from the fire represented a new pig or calf that would be born during the coming year.

The end of December was a perfect time for celebration in most areas of Europe. At that time of year, most cattle were slaughtered so they would not have to be fed during the winter. For many, it was the only time of year when they had a supply of fresh meat. In addition, most wine and beer made during the year was finally fermented and ready for drinking.

In Germany, people honored the pagan god Oden during the mid-winter holiday. Germans were terrified of Oden, as they believed he made nocturnal flights through the sky to observe his people, and then decide who would prosper or perish. Because of his presence, many people chose to stay inside

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In ancient Europe, this night of darkness grew from the myths of the Norse goddess Freya who sat at her spinning wheel weaving the fates, and the celebration was called Yule, from the Norse word Jul, meaning wheel. The Christmas wreath, a symbol adapted from Freya's "Wheel of Fate", reminds us of the cycle of the seasons and the continuity of life.

In Northern Europe, the year's longest night is called "Mother Night" for it was in darkness the goddess Freya labored to bring the Light to birth once more. The Young Sun, Baldur, who controlled the sun and rain and brings fruitfulness to the fields, was born. Her blessing is invoked for all birthing women, and a white candle that last burned on the solstice is kept as a charm to provide a safe delivery.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Thank you Alternet for posting this concise biblical criticism that smashes the idea of Christianity as some historical absolute. I saw a program on cable in the last couple of days which gave indication of Jesus, his experience as carpenter and landless agricultural laborer, has him in parables identifying with the oppressed in his day, and the thread has been picked up by blacks struggling for civil rights, quakers during Abolition days, followers of Dorothy Day and the Berrigan Brothers, Cornel West and others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

published in 1793 dissects with precision (and demolishes) both the Old and New Testament.

I recently read it, at age 62, and "wish to God" that I had read it when I was 15. If you're serious about learning the absurdity of biblical stories, start here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

get a clue

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"I should like to hear some soldiers singing a sentimental Christmas song about a mutilated Afghan girl who will never see her parents again after her village was bombed"

Craig Murray December 23, 2009

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wait ... birth stories the author concedes are myths become "masterpieces of truth-telling?" How, exactly? After all, a lie begets a lie.
And if the stories are a construct of the political needs of early Christians, then it's safe to say from its beginnings the religion - like every other - has been co-opted and perverted to serve other purposes.
I have little doubt there is a higher power. I've felt certain blessings in my life that are too profound to be chalked up to luck. At least, I like to think so. And I believe Christ the person likely existed, and I know the teachings attributed to him are honorable and largely worthy of following.
But how is one to separate the truth from the fiction? That is where faith comes in. And it's a purely subjective process, which then leads to many truths, or versions of the one -- either way, it's watered down to some extent.
It seems to me that an all-powerful God needs no embellishments - and no man - to get its message across.

Happy holidays - or lack thereof - to all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nobody will ever know the facts of Jesus's life, if indeed he lived at all. But the bottom line for me is that the early Christian religion quoted him as saying some very progressive and socialist things -- i.e. rich men should give their belongings to the poor -- that have been conveniently ignored by the church and its followers ever since. Why don't Christians follow the words of Christ?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the Baptist author is hopelessly begging believers to believe while propertly detailing the contradictions and irrationalities of Luke and Matthew hand me down stories. No one allegedly present in an alleged Bethlehem stable started a religion that night. Nor did a relatively few more people present for 3 alleged years of "ministry" and "miracles" leading up to an alleged survival of a tortured death and burial "behind a stone" start religions those 3 years. The author freely admits the Matthew and Luke stories were invented many decades after any possible facts. Instead, it is most likely that these gibberish writings were copy cat religions picked up by more and more people resistant to Roman military rule. There is much scholarship to suggest that the xian myth is modeled on Roman Soldiers popular Mithraic Cults. It was not until over 200 years after these alleged "events" before the Roman Head of State saw fit to start the official religion of Christianity. The very word Christos means cross. And the changing a symbol of terror and oppression into a symbol of idiotic hope is exactly what the crucifix was designed to do. As for the baby god stupidity, that was dusted off for the crusades 1000 years after the alleged facts of Matthew and Luke. Aramaic, Greek and Latin writings of the first 300 hundred years of pre-Roman Catholic "history" were scattered and somewhat cross referenced into a "bible" in Germany during the 1400's along with a "calendar" setting up a fictional time line in Rome in the same era. The King James Bible is contemporary with Shakespeare in language and implication, hardly no hint of "history" from 2000 or 3000 years ago as there was no "Exodus" and no Egyptian mass enslavement of Jews. No single shred of evidence exists for that silly lie either. Egyptian records are well preserved despite pyramid grave robbers. No single Hebrew word exists in all of Egyptian antiquities. So much for the Jewish and Christian Religions origination in reality. Other writers here on this AlterNet comment thread simply say it correctly, there was no Jesus born to celebrate, it is just a symbolic metaphor more accurately representing the winter solstice and the lengthening of days as the longest night coincides Dec 18 to 22 each year on our current hodgepodge of a calendar history. 843-926-1750 Dial An Atheist Larry Carter Center

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

...and so is the rest of the content of the bible. It's ridiculous to even seriously discuss this. The Christian bible is exactly as credible as the Greek, or the Norse, myths and legends. Saying God and Jesus are real, but Zeus and Heracles aren't, is demented.

Christianity was, among other things, a useful tool for the consolidation of empires. The rulers of the Romans, and the Byzantines, and the Russians, and the Polish/Lithuanians, and the Bulgars, and the English, adopted forms of Christianity to homogenize their multi-national, multi-cultural, polytheistic empires.
(The Turks and the Mongols and others did the same with Islam.)

Another obvious purpose of the Christian religion is to keep the peasants docile. Stay pious, know your place, be meek, turn the other cheek, suffer in silence, and then in the afterlife you'll get your reward. Bend over and take it up the ass and say nothing - sometimes literally, in view of the recent Irish Catholic scandals. Obey the Lord, and his earthly agent - the lord. It's an insultingly simple racket, when you see through it.

The Christian religion isn't much different from all other religions - it contains the same basic morals - be nice to your neighbors, etc. The various equinoxes are as important for Christianity as for any pagan religion. Anything we can't explain - divine will. And if you're scared of death - we got some kind of afterlife. Same thing everywhere.

It's pathetic that religion remains so important in this world of rocketships and cell phones and the internet. Shows you how, despite all our technology, we're still just a bunch of semi-clever monkeys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

“Christians Duped By The Unholiest Hoax in All History"

Benj. H. Freedman, Historian Researcher Scholar

Christians believing that Jesus Christ was ‘ King of the Jews, ’ this reference was first made in English translations of the Old and New Testaments, centuries before the 19th A.D. century to palm them off on the Christian world as having a kinship with Jesus Christ. This alleged kinship comes from the myth of their common ancestry with the so-called Jews of the Holy Land in the Old Testament history, a fiction based on fable.

Unsuspecting Christians are subjected to this barrage from sources they have little reason to suspect. Incontestable facts supply the unchallengeable proof of the historic accuracy throughout the world today of eastern European origin are unquestionably the historic descendants of the Khazars, a pagan Turco Finn ancient Mongoloid nation deep in the heart of Asia, according to history, who battled their way in bloody wars about the 1st century B.C. into eastern Europe where they set up their Khazar kingdom.

The historic existence of the Khazar kingdom and their rise and fall, the permanent disappearance of the Khazar kingdom as a nation from the map of Europe, and how King Bulan and the Khazar nation in 720 A.D. became so-called ‘ Jews ’ by conversion, were concealed from U.S.A.

In an original 1903 edition of the Jewish Encyclopedia in New York’s Public Library, and in the Library of Congress, Volume IV, pages 1 to 5 inclusive, appears a most comprehensive history of the Khazars. Also in the New York Public Library are 327 books by the world ’ s greatest historians and other sources of reference, in addition to the Jewish Encyclopedia, dealing with Khazar history, and written between the 3rd A.D. and 20th centuries by contemporaries of the Khazars and by modern historians on that subject.

Jesus was a ‘ Judean, ’ not a Jew.
During His lifetime, no persons were described as Jews anywhere. That fact is supported by theology, history and science. When Jesus was in Judea, it was not the “ homeland ” of the ancestors of those who today style themselves Jews.Their ancestors never set a foot in Judea.They existed at that time in Asia, their homeland, and were known as Khazars. In neither of the manuscripts of the original Old or New Testament was Jesus described or referred to as a Jew. The religious sects in Judea, in the time of Jesus, to which self-styled people today refer to as Jews, were known as Pharisees. Judaism today and Pharisaism in the time of Jesus are the same.

Jesus abhorred and denounced “ Pharisaism; ” hence the words, “ Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, Hypocrites, Ye Serpents, Ye Generation of Vipers. ”

http://www.isra elect.com/reference/WillieMartin/JesusWasNotAJew.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus Christ was most likely born in September, approximately six months after Passover.Because in the story of the bible, the shepherds tending their sheep in the fields on that night is unlikely to have happened during a cold Judean winter.

So this holiday is actually Pagan

In ancient Babylon, the feast of the Son of Isis (Goddess of Nature) was celebrated on December 25. Winter Solstice was celebrated many years before the birth of Christ. The Romans called their winter holiday Saturnalia, honoring Saturn, the God of Agriculture.

The pagans of northern Europe celebrated the their own winter solstice, known as Yule. Yule was symbolic of the pagan Sun God, Mithras, being born, and was observed on the shortest day of the year. As the Sun God grew and matured, the days became longer and warmer.

Huge Yule logs were burned in honor of the sun. The word Yule itself means wheel, the wheel being a pagan symbol for the sun. Mistletoe was considered a sacred plant and the custom of kissing under the mistletoe began as a fertility ritual.Hollyberries were thought to be a food of the gods.

The tree is the one symbol that unites almost all the northern European winter solstices. Live evergreen trees were often brought into homes during the harsh winters as a reminder to inhabitants that soon their crops would grow again. Evergreen boughs were sometimes carried as totems of good luck and were often present at weddings, representing fertility. The Druids used the tree as a religious symbol, holding their sacred ceremonies while surrounding and worshipping huge trees.

Easter is also a Pagan holiday

http://www.essortme nt.com/all/christmaspagan_rece.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

so fantasy becomes reality wow I don't know what to say to that. You can believe anything you want I think I'll retain my right to question everything.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The most important part of the nativity myth, namely Yeshua's parthenogenic origin, is NEVER mentioned by Saul/Paul in any of his letters that formed the foundation of the Hellenized Jesus movement. At.All. Not.Mentioned.

You would think that Saul/Paul, who was arguably a contemporary of Yeshua (don't say "Jesus never existed" because saying that about in the context of ancient Judean society is like saying "John Smith never existed" in ours; Yeshua was a ubiquitous name) would've used every argument in his arsenal, including virgin birth to further his claim.

While the author is correct as to the ages of the synoptic gospels, he fails to note that the Pauline letters are much closer in time to the existence of the man the Romans executed. As such, any reference to a virgin birth would be more to be expected from a factual reportage standpoint in Saul/Paul's letters than in the later gospels, assuming of course, that the virgin birth was a REAL thing, and not a myth-building tool of the gospel writers.

As such, it's easy to see that what is represented as the miraculous birth of a "Savior" is, as the author argues, a function of the attempt to grow "the greatest story ever told."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

.

#@!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I truly love many of alternet.org's articles; however, the articles on Jesus and religion are pretty shallow and written from writers not qualified to add any depth to the subject matters.

1. There are definitely two people who know if Jesus was born of a virgin or not: Joseph and Mary. It's pretty crazy for anyone of us (2,000 years later) to claim to know that He was not born of a virgin!

2. Like most christian writing "experts", this one gives does not show us any knowledge of Aramaic, Hebrew, or Greek languages, nor any knowledge of the cultural background of that time period.

3. Contrary to modern beliefs, there is not one single OT or NT manuscript/translation written in English; therefore, attempting to explain or comment on everything in the Bible with the "light" of the English language is asking a "blind" man to lead us!

4. Even in English the same words have entirely different meanings, depending on the context. For example, a "bank" means different things to a table pool player, a teller, and someone fishing on a hillside in the country. Likewise, terms such as "star" and "without sin" have different meanings.

5. As for the four different gospels, I thank God for them because I have four different insights into a most truly remarkable man! Please ask a modern policeman for four "eyewitness" reports on the very same accident. Of course there there will be four different versions, all with unique viewpoints and different details. Mark was an action man, impressed by the actions He saw Jesus perform. Mark was not worried about what John, Luke, or Matthew wrote, because he saw Jesus and his actions for himself. John was impressed by the deep-reaching love that Jesus had for all of God's children, so naturally he was not concerned about what anyone else wrote.

6. Speaking of deep love and concern for all other humans, the early disciples were just like their Teacher! The great (non-christian) historian Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55 to 120) and other Romans wrote about the followers of Jesus. Tacitus said that the these christians would go without food 4 or 5 days so that another human could eat! He also stated that the Christians not only made sacrifies to feed their own, but "fed ours (Romans) as well!" Now that's pretty remarkable---disgusting followers of Jesus doing the governments job! This is what modern lawyers call a preponderance of evidence of the deep-reaching love of Jesus and those who truly followed Him.

7. Instead of trying to understand and comprehend "Jesus" by trying to simultaneously figure out all the details of the four different gospels, we should take our time and just read one of them at a time to "see" what each of the disciples "saw".

8. Email me at writer-for-yeshua@att.net for more insights and a fuller and deeper view of the remarkable man, Jesus of Nazareth!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Jesus taught his disciples to pray for the coming of God's kingdom (Matthew 6:9-10), the kingdom of peace, in which the entire world is restored to a vegetarian paradise (Genesis 1:29; Isaiah 11:6-9). Recalling Psalm 37:11, he blessed the meek, saying they would inherit the earth. (Matthew 5:5) The kingdom of God belongs to the gentle and kind (Matthew 5:7-9) Christians are to "Be merciful, just as your Father is also merciful." (Luke 6:36) Those who take up the sword must perish by the sword. (Matthew 26:52)

Jesus repeatedly spoke of God's tender care for the nonhuman creation (Matthew 6:26-30, 10:29-31; Luke 12:6-7, 24-28). Paul, on the other hand, asked scornfully in I Corinthians 9: "Does God take care for oxen?"

From history, we learn that the earliest Christians were vegetarians as well as pacifists. For example, Clemens Prudentius, the first Christian hymn writer, in one of his hymns, exhorts his fellow Christians not to pollute their hands and hearts by the slaughter of innocent cows and sheep, and points to the variety of nourishing and pleasant foods obtainable without blood-shedding.

It's quite possible historically that Christianity began as a vegetarian religion, but was corrupted over the centuries. Secular scholar Keith Akers writes in Broken Thread:

"The 'orthodox' response to vegetarianism has been somewhat contradictory...The objection to meat consumption has been taken as evidence of heresy when Christians have been faced with outsiders; however, vegetarianism met with a kinder reception among the monastic communities...Vegetarianism does attain a certain status even in orthodox circles.

"Indeed, a list of known vegetarians among the church leaders reads very much like a Who's Who in the early church. Peter is described as a vegetarian in the Recognitions and Homilies. Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius, said that James (the brother of Jesus) was a vegetarian and was raised as a vegetarian. Clement of Alexandria thought that Matthew was a vegetarian...

"According to Eusebius, the apostles--all the apostles, and not just James--abstained from both meat and wine, thus making them vegetarians and teetotalers, just like James. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, and Tertullian were all probably vegetarians, based on their writings...they themselves are evidently vegetarian and can be counted on to say a few kind words about vegetarianism. On the other hand, there are practically no references to any Christians eating fish or meat before the council of Nicaea.

"The rule of Benedict forbade eating any four-legged animals, unless one was sick. Columbanus allowed vegetables, lentil porridge, flour, and bread only, at all times, even for the sick. A fifth-century Irish rule forbids meat, fish, cheese, and butter at all times, though the sick, elderly, travel-weary, or even monks on holidays may eat cheese or butter, but no one may ever eat meat.

"The Carthusians were especially strict about vegetarianism. The origin of their order is related by the story of St. Bruno and his companions, who on the Sunday before Lent are sitting before some meat and are debating whether they should eat meat at all.

"During the debate, numerous examples of vegetarians among their monastic predecessors are mentioned--the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Macharius, and Arsenius, are all cited as vegetarian examples. After much discussion, they fall asleep--and remain asleep for 45 days, waking up when Archbishop Hugh shows up on Wednesday of Holy Week! When they wake up, the meat miraculously turns to ashes, and they fall on their knees and determine never to eat meat again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Keith Akers continues:

"It is true that the church rejected the requirement for vegetarianism, following the dicta of Paul. However, it is interesting under these circumstances that there are so many vegetarians. In fact, outside of the references to Jesus eating fish in the New Testament, there re hardly any references to any early Christians eating meat.

"Thus vegetarianism was practiced by the apostles, by James the brother of Jesus, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Basil, Gregory of Nanziance, John Chrysostom, Tertullian, Bonaventure, Arnobius, Cassian, Jerome, the Desert Fathers, Paul (the Hermit), Antony, Hilarion, Machrius, Columbanus, and Aresenius--but not by Jesus himself!

"It is as if everyone in the early church understood the message except the messenger. This is extremely implausible. The much more likely explanation is that the original tradition was vegetarian, but that under the pressure of expediency and the popularity of Paul's writings in the second century, the tradition was first dropped as a requirement and finally dropped even as a desideratum."

In the (updated) 1986 edition of A Vegetarian Sourcebook, Keith Akers similarly observes: "But many others, both orthodox and heterodox, testified to the vegetarian origins of Christianity. Both Athanasius and his opponent Arius were strict vegetarians. Many early church fathers were vegetarian, including Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Heironymus, Boniface, and John Chrysostom.

"Many of the monasteries both in ancient times and at the present day practiced vegetarianism...The requirement to be vegetarian has been diluted considerably since the earliest days, but the practice of vegetarianism was continued by many saints, monks, and laymen. Vegetarianism is at the heart of Christianity."

History shows that Christianity, like Buddhism, began as a pacifist religion, and was pacifist until the time of Constantine, when it became a state religion. Before Constantine, Christians who took up arms were excommunicated. After Constantine, Christians who laid down their arms were excommunicated!

I'm not saying we should lay down our arms (the Bhagavad-gita, after all, was spoken on a battlefield!), but that it's not hard to imagine Christianity similarly beginning as a vegetarian religion, and being corrupted over the centuries...beginning, perhaps, with the apostle Paul?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

According to Marcello Cravelli (The Life of Jesus, 1966) the second century church father Origen attempted to validate the facts of the life of Jesus and came up with nothing -- despite consulting the same historical sources who are now said to offer indirect proof of the existence of Jesus.
The earliest teachings of Christianism were the so-called "Sayings Gospels," which contained no biographical material at all for the person Jesus, purported to be the person who had taught the sayings.
"Jesus" is a fictional person created by a messianic cult that developed from that of John the Baptist after they were deprived of their leader. It is just possible, however, that the leader of that Hellenized Judaic teaching sect was a person named Jesus, who was the son of Joseph, a carpenter, and Miriam, who had a brother named James, and who was killed in a skirmish with Roman soldiers when they were found at Gethsamene violating curfew.
There is no evidence at all, however, that the character depicted by the Gospel story who taught, performed miracles, was crucified and rose from the dead ever happened.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"As a Christian, I embrace the belief that a loving God is active in the affairs of the world. I believe that Jesus from Nazareth is Lord. I believe he is Son of God. I believe he is Bringer of Peace. I believe he is Savior of the World."

Yes, and I must suppose you believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy as well. There is no evidence whatsoever that an historical Jesus ever existed. The account in Josephus? Unreliable. The canonicals? So contradictory it is obvious they were made up, if not whole cloth then in part. Miracles are nothing on earth but events with scientific explanations and examples of post hoc reasoning at that. Wise up, reverend.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The thing is, when I see her maybe once or twice a year, I get on like a house on fire with my wife's best friend - who she has known since school...

She asks such original questions, that are highly intelligent...

At many levels over many years I feel she has made some disastrous mistakes in her own personal life, largely due to her obsessions with regards to exploring her spiritual existence.

I have seriously embarrassed her with regards to her belief in Astrology in front of "friends" she was trying to impress...

Sometimes from her perspective she has serious reasons to completely hate me, but she always sends me the most beautiful birthday cards...

So I thought after asking my wife...thinking it still just about possible

Can I send her a Christmas Present to Her - from Me (we've already exchanged loads of Christmas Presents last week - but I had contributed nothing towards them except the money to pay for them)

So I go looking at the usual places that deliver DVD's with ultra-fast delivery...

And its not even on sale - except by a few third party companies based in the USA - and direct from the originators...

Now sure I can download the entire thing for free - and I have already watched it myself several times...

But why exactly is it not on General Release as a DVD such that anyone can buy iy easily...

This is what I want my friend to see...

Well at first just the Religious bits - because the rest of the stuff is extremely hard to take for such a Lovely Lancashire Teacher

Zeitgeist, The Movie
- FINAL EDITION -

I want it on PAL

No One is selling it

TERMS: THIS MOVIE IS FULLY COPYRIGHT.
WE OFFER THIS DVD AT A NON-PROFIT
RATE SO WE CAN SPREAD ITS MESSAGE.
WE ALSO ALLOW AND ENCOURAGE IT TO BE DUPLICATED
AND GIVEN AWAY FOR FREE. NON-PROFIT SCREENINGS ARE
ALSO ALLOWED, REQUIRING NO PERMISSION FROM US.
(1) HOWEVER, IT IS NOT FOR THIRD PARTY RESALE IN ANY WAY WITHOUT APPROVAL.
(2) NO WEBSITE / ORGANIZATION IS AUTHORIZED TO DUPLICATE IT AND SELL IT.
(3) NO WEBSITE / ORGANIZATION CAN PURCHASE IT FROM US AND SELL AT A HIGHER RATE.
(4) THE DVD ALSO CANNOT BE "OFFERED FOR FREE" ALONG WITH ANOTHER 'PAID FOR' ITEM
OR 'PAID SHIPPING'. THOSE WHO DISRESPECT THESE WORKS BY RESELLING
OR DUPLICATING AND SELLING WILL BE SHUT DOWN.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Period.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, I wonder just where you got your version of this wonderfully fictional story. These stories, you say, were written 40 to 50 years after the birth of Jesus, which makes me infer that you've swallowed hook, line, and sinker of the orthodox view. Yet there are unorthodox arguments to the effect that Jesus was a fictitious character, invented hundreds of years after his so-called birth, and that all of the stories and characters you find in the "Bible," are as fictitious as Harry Potter.

Sorry, but I think your view is crap. A piece of crap about a piece of crap.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Desperately trying to reach the journalist linked with this blog. Dial-up, registration difficult. Supernationalism, mythic justifications. Nation of Israel? Anyone help contact him?

Einstein aid that immigrants to Israel must get along with Palestinians. He was ignored when he complained about recognizing "Israel."

Jesus is written to have said, "I came not to bring peace..." The temple-sect's Moschiach would come as head of an Empire bringing pease, Pax-Romana
The temple-sect tried it again lately with the Empire of the day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This author is just making up a story of his own. There is no evidence that anything he claims in this article is actually true regarding the authors or their intentions in either Matthew or Luke. As he says, the authors remain unknown and as such, their true intentions, by any and all honest 'scholarship', remain unknown as well. Who is this author and what evidence does he have that he can somehow know the hearts and "speak for" the long since deceased of history past?

He invents a fictious reason for the authors supposedly inventing fiction and then pretends that his version is true, while their version is not. He is also very wrong about the timeframe between the death of Jesus and when stories were first written down. A fragment of John, universally agreed by historians to not be the first "gospel", carbon dates from 55 AD, only 15-25 years after the death of Jesus, depending on how old he was when murdered. Since this fragment is a copy and not the original, then the gospels date prior to this and may well have been written just a few or even one year after the death of Jesus.

It is not fair to state this article represents poor scholarship, as it in fact doesn't represent any scholarship at all but rather, it's just another invention to make liberal atheists happy, who are fairly well-versed in the invention department already and arguably need no help from someone fancing himself to be a "Rev".

WHO WOULD JESUS BOMB?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to see someone with the pretentious title of "Reverend" questioning one of the most enduring myths of Christians; now if we could only get him to admit that all of religion is pure bullshit instead of this selective criticism, he might be doing the world a favor.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This article is ALMOST as inflmatory as the average 9/11 article that AlterNet throws up periodically in order to gin up traffic. It's pathetic, really.

Here's a challenge to the AlterNet editor(s): see if you can figure out a way to get an article written that conflates the birth/non-birth of Jesus/Non-Jesus with the intentional/unintentional demolition of Bulding 7.

When you've done that, you'll have the equivalent of what Steve Goodman, in "You Never Even Call Me By My Name" called "The PERFECT Country and Western Song."

"Well, I was drunk, the day
Jesus was borned. And I went
To pick him up on 9/11.

But before I could get
to the manger in my pick-up truck,
Building 7 committed suicide
and it's all a repeat of the
Mithras cult anywaaaaay!

An' I'll believe George Bush
Took down the buildings
As long as you'll let me.
An' I'll believe Jesus was born
of a virgin even though it's impossible . . .

Nah, never mind. It doesn't scan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Seeing things before your eyes?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There is too much historical evidence verifying the existence and and death of Jesus called Christ for anyone knowledgeable to believe that Jesus didn't exist -- the Old Testament foretold Christ. Jesus, Yeshua Emmanuel Hamashia, is the foretold Christ, who is, was and always will be.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

for people in the US to allow others freedom of religion? Isn't it in the bill of rights? What gives anyone the right to tell anyone else how to believe and what to believe? I think I get less bullshit from people when I say I believe in Santa Claus, then when it comes to my religious beliefs. And we wonder why our government is in shambles and corrupt? If we all read the bill of rights and followed what it says. We left everyone to their own opinions on religion instead of trying prove yourselves right, maybe we could bring back our nation to what it was before. Not perfect but our leaders were leaders, our congress less corrupt because lobbyist didn't run rough shod over all. Can't we all agree to disagree where religion is concerned and concentrate more on what needs done at home? Our people fed, in homes, with jobs that pay the bills, our children educated, and health care for every citizen as a right, these are important. NOW! Calling people idiots and condemning their beliefs is childish at best, rude and uncalled for under any condition. Alternet, Please grow up and stop invigorating the froth of this religious debate, we need to focus on our nations problems, everyone can do a little bit to improve conditions out here. And that is what Jesus would have done!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hate to say it, but- Typical.

Here we have a learned Reverend, no less, one who is able to examine and accept the political causes of the Christ story all Christians are sold, and who then says, in typical blind-belief fashion, that he nevertheless believes the sacred titles that that same political narrative has bestowed on his supposed Savior. He slips that in smoothly, and then uses his penultimate paragraph to tell us that none of what he said even matters -- the "religious context" turns all of those political lies into "masterpieces of truth-telling" that "witness" the "joyfull life."

Why all of the quotation marks? Because his words only make sense when they don't make sense. "Witness" does no such thing, and the "joyfull life" should be read as the "fantasy-supported life." And no amount of beautiful story-telling can turn a political myth into a "masterpiece" of truth, unless the meanings of either 'masterpiece,' or 'truth,' are no longer what reasonable people accept them to be. As with all religionists, the Rev has entertained us with a narrative (in this case a narrative of the senseless modern route to belief), and then asserted that in spite of everything he just said, he still believes things that directly contradict (his own) presented proof of their falsity.

I mean, gimme a break! He points out that all of those titles, Lord, Son of God, Savior of the World, Bringer of Peace, etc. were used by the Roman Emperors at the time, to "deify" their regimes and persons, and that the new Christianity directly borrowed those same terms to apply to their own Lord, etc... So why on earth does he then go back and say that, despite the political (not mythic or sacred) origins of those titles applying to Jesus, he still believes they are correct?

What? This is a mental convolution equivalent to saying that sure, there are laser reflectors and heaps of earth rubbish left on the moon, where Apollo is said to have landed, but despite the fact that it would have been much more effort to fake those sites and launches than it was to actually go there, we still believe they were faked.

It is exactly equivalent, short only one factor -- one day we can actually go to the moon, and take our cameras with us, to prove that there are footprints and tire tracks across the regolith. But religious fantasies are safely far past any proof. And seemingly also use the rare sporadic emergence of sense, as supporting evidence of their nonsense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As I read many of the comments on this essay, i was surprised how little people know about archaelogical findings that prove so much of the Bible is true. Many items have been found in the past years and it is too bad our mainstream television and magazines tell the people nothing about them. Apparently they do not want the populous to know. I wonder why. Josephus, the historian, of the years past, mentioned Jesus, his birth and other comments. Apparently many of the people responding do not know much about history either. It is amazing how people jump in and voice so-called facts but seldom do any research to find out facts. it is easy to tout opinions without any backup. It is sad that our generation of uninformed people do not desire to know anything excet their own little narrow world of self-interest and fun. This pertains to other aspects of life including politics, education, etc. We are too willing to accept uninformed people and follow them along, without questionint them, like the blind guides that they are. Too many follow the Pied Piper and do not ask why or where they are going.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For the author's information (and apparently that of most Alternet readers), the Roman emperor Augustus's "real" name was Octavian. Augustus was the name he took after he became emperor. They were one person, not two. Sheesh!

IMO, as an agnostic, there is no proof that any religion is true. There may be a god who set things in motion, but if so, he, she, or it doesn't appear to get involved in our lives in any tangible way. Belief is not knowledge. We can believe whatever we like, but proof is far beyond our puny capacity. And yet people kill each other over their respective versions of god every day. Ridiculous!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

with most religions. If it did, they would not exist, but I don't think most Americans are intelligent and/or educated enough to use reason in their belief systems. In fact, most of them don't even have a belief system of their own-they believe what they were indoctrinated in as children. We are truly a stupid citizenry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

MBT Anti Shoes have been known as the world's smallest gym. Since they increase muscle activity, strengthening and toning of the leg, buttock, stomach and back muscles takes place during everyday activities like walking and standing.
Since celebrities like Cher, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Heidi Klum have reportedly added Anti Shoes to their shoe collection,MBT Shoes have received a lot of press . Their unique design has supposedly help wearer's tone up, lose weight, and even smooth cellulite, and it has garnered the brand a lot of attention as well.
Shop your MBT Anti Shoes on Showcu of Mbt Shoes Sale.We are the stockist of Cheap Anti Shoes.Our Anti Gravity Shoes Sale in huge stock.You can enjoy Free Shipping on our MBT Anti UK and MBT US.Buy Now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It appears that only humans, among all animals, are aware throughout their lives of reasoning that they are finite. Elephants and their burial grounds at the end might be an exception among others.

The consideration, while we are happy and healthy, is one we avoid facing. Beyond the avoidance are the imaginings down through the ages of history, before science came of age and dared to challenge those imaginings, that there could hopefully be more to life than what we observe and experience.

Those imaginative, ancient stories are the stuff of mythology. There is no conclusive evidence beyond the fear and hope of human beings that those pre-scientific, imaginative stories have any substance in fact. You know, a Super Man God who made it all, keeps it running, and has a kingdom in or above the sky where we can migrate--on certain conditions--after we cease to live on planet earth like all plants and other animals, like all living things.

Kings and queens and royal blood, "blue blood," came from the same kinds of imaginings and the opportunities of power to enforce their ideas, their will. And there have been Hitlers and Stalins and some U.S. presidents and vice president (presidents of vice) who have behaved in the same fashion.

The latest notion to be paired with the religious stories of belief and faith, religious mythology beyond even the Norse tales so popularly used by Richard Wagner in his operas, is the idea that humans are hard-wired for religion, There is absolutely no evidence for that, no DNA.

The only thing that comes close is the human "fight or flight" instinct. Apply that to mythology, apply it to religion, and we see the earnestness of people of belief or faith, and that brings in the component of the evil of forcing one's religious ideas on others to acquire a greater sense of security in numbers. It's that kind of a fight, that kind of hard-wiring of fear, that we employ as long as possible so we must not fly away from the false security it seems to provide.

The more reasonable solution, I "believe," in which I have "faith," is the motto of Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong:

"Live fully! Love wastefully! And become all that you can be!"

In other words, make the most of every day we have, "...while we live."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nothing like another Jesus story to stir up controversy.

One thing is overlooked in this Jesus story, and it is, that, most people from the first century A.D. to the present have never read the New Testament. Not until the printing press was invented in the 1,400's were the Bible, or, any books for that matter, printed and available for everyone to read.

Why do we place so much importance on the accuracy of the New Testament. Even today, most people don't read it, much less really "know" or understand it.

If this book were essential for our salvation, don't you think that a loving God would have made it more available to everyone and, easy to understand?

I think all these arguments about scripture are pointless and non-productive. And, in the end, who can say with any degree of certainty that your opinion is the "right" one? We are all guessing, even the clergy. Don't let anyone put a guilt trip on you for not agreeing with them. They are each just as fallible as the next would-be "scholar".

I personally think that the reason Christianity has scriptures of their own is that they need something to legitimize the slaughter of millions of people in the name of "their" God. I mean the Muslims have their book; the Hindus have their book; the Buddhists have theirs; and let's not forget about the Jews (we call their book the "Old" Testament). With all these "holy books" we still hate each other, kill each other, and fight war after war to preserve the "faith of our fathers'".

With all this confusion about who is "right" I think it would be a good time for God to come to earth to settle these matters once and for all and bring real peace and safety to everyone. Don't you think? Hey, wait a minute; maybe, that's what God is trying to do; get us to the point where we begin to destroy each other and wipe us off the face of the earth.

Who is for a nuclear WW III? You don't have to answer right away. I'll wait.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I thought it necessary to re-submit my post because of all the cheap, repetitive, phony, posts that were surrounding my first post.

So, here it is:

Nothing like another Jesus story to stir up controversy.

One thing is overlooked in this Jesus story, and it is, that, most people from the first century A.D. to the present have never read the New Testament. Not until the printing press was invented in the 1,400's were the Bible, or, any books for that matter, printed and available for everyone to read.

Why do we place so much importance on the accuracy of the New Testament. Even today, most people don't read it, much less really "know" or understand it.

If this book were essential for our salvation, don't you think that a loving God would have made it more available to everyone and, easy to understand?

I think all these arguments about scripture are pointless and non-productive. And, in the end, who can say with any degree of certainty that your opinion is the "right" one? We are all guessing, even the clergy. Don't let anyone put a guilt trip on you for not agreeing with them. They are each just as fallible as the next would-be "scholar".

I personally think that the reason Christianity has scriptures of their own is that they need something to legitimize the slaughter of millions of people in the name of "their" God. I mean the Muslims have their book; the Hindus have their book; the Buddhists have theirs; and let's not forget about the Jews (we call their book the "Old" Testament). With all these "holy books" we still hate each other, kill each other, and fight war after war to preserve the "faith of our fathers'".

With all this confusion about who is "right" I think it would be a good time for God to come to earth to settle these matters once and for all and bring real peace and safety to everyone. Don't you think? Hey, wait a minute; maybe, that's what God is trying to do; get us to the point where we begin to destroy each other and wipe us off the face of the earth.

Who is for a nuclear WW III? You don't have to answer right away. I'll wait.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

şömine

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

can fulfill so many predictions. I suggest reading a bit more.

Josh McDowell & Lee Strobel have a lot of information that will shed much needed light on the subject of fulfilled prophecy. Lee set out to prove that Jesus & the Bible were myths. He, for some reason, changed his mind. :-)

If early Christians lied about Jesus' birth, they would be bearing false witness. To fictionalize His birth story for any reason would be a huge NO NO to orthodox Jews who did their best to follow Moses' Law. Remember, they knew that they should not lie.The writers of the New Test. actually claimed to be eye witnesses to what they wrote. Another NO NO for orthodox Jews if Jesus was a myth they made up.

Let's see, also these writers of the NT would be foolish to propagate the Gospel of Jesus Christ if it were not true. They put their lives, their families lives & all they owned on the line to spread His word. If He were a myth they would have to know it. I have great difficulty believing these people would risk so much for a lie when they already had Judaism as their religion & were perfectly happy with it. Why switch a perfectly to them good religion for a myth they made up that could get them painfully DEAD?? Makes no sense.

You folks can believe whatcha want. I know Jesus is real. When I prayed to ask Him to forgive my sin & come into my heart, He did.
I was changed. Not perfected, but changed in a way I cannot prove to you. You have to ask Him your self. He put the witness of His reality into me. If nothing had happened when I prayed I would have been happy to go back to my former religion, sex, drugs & rock 'n roll. Before this experience I was proselytized by a Buddhist who, after his talk, asked me & a friend of mine pray to some one. I do not remember who it was, but nothing happened in me then. So I went back to my former religion...

Jesus is quoted by John in chapter 3 of his gospel. Is this why Jesus gets such bad publicity?

16 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. 19 And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. 20 For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. 21 But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God."

What you choose to believe must last you a very long time. I think it wise to be sure it's the truth.

Me? I would rather live as if there is a God & find I am wrong than live as if there none & find out I was wrong.

SamFox

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We make a big mistake when we import our own nature and consciousness to the tellers (not writers) of the Gospel stories. If you want to appreciate in detail the flaw in that assumption, read Owen Barfield's Saving the Appearances: a study in Idolatry. The Four Gospels are the same Mystery truth seen from four quite different perspectives. Each perspective seeks to unveil a special set of nuances for one of the most profound events in human evolution - the Incarnation as a human being of the Creator. Our beliefs and opinions have little to do with whether there is a reality there. If we want to actually KNOW the reality, we have practice the Teachings of Christ. Those are the method by which one becomes capable of direct personal experience of the Christian Mysteries. Outside of that inner work, no KNOWLEDGE (gnosis) is possible. See The Way of the Fool: the conscious development of our human character and the future of Christianity, both to be born out of the natural union of Faith and Gnosis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It doesn't concern that Word was hatched in Town but Son was never intelligent period. Why added would all tetrad folk accounts be so dramatically contrastive? Also why do the quaternary gospels all person pedagogue manly sounding obloquy? That makes no discernment for tetrad men from the Intermediate Easternmost who are supposedly of Canaanitic slope. The Bible is hogwash and Faith is right a governmental tool of touch. It is the painkiller of the English mass. Manifestly most of us elevate lies to the feminist for handling with realness. How really sad because that aforesaid outlook is what blighted the state especially with 9/11. It is open as
========================================
albert pinto
flights to Melbourne

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

UGG Boots
UGG Bailey Button 5803 Boots
UGG Classic Cardy 5819 Boots
UGG Classic Short 5825 Boots
UGG Classic Tall 5815 Boots
Classic Tall Patent Paisley 5852 Boots
ghd
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
UGG Classic Boots
ugg shoes boots
Ugg Sundance Limited Edition 30th Anniversary
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners
ghd mk4 styler
ghd
ghd mk4 straighteners...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Here are a few other myths to be getting on with.

The oil companies are very good at drilling oil, refining and distributing it.

Governments are very good at providing the necessary protection in the shape of a military force costing untold billions of dollars.

The banks are very good at managing the revenues that are generated, and passing it on to all the people who benefit but who don’t actually pay for any of it.

The CIA and other intelligence agencies are very good at creating the psychological environment to achieve the greatest degree of support and lack of opposition to all this happening.

This is made possible by getting large numbers of people to believe in impossible things such as a human foetus growing from an unmolested ovary; the same person coming back to life again after he’s been officially pronounced dead, and all the other illusions that religious belief foists on us.

The Universe apparently sprung into existence some 13,000,000,000 years ago, yet the creationists would have us believe that homo sapiens started about 6,000 years ago with the sudden appearance of two fully grown adults able to talk and reason instantly

In England, anyone contemplating robbing another’s house will be comforted by the knowledge that should they be apprehended by the occupants, they will only be subject to reasonable force.

However, if he were to go to Iraq, he could happily break down the door, ransack the house and rape and murder the occupants, and possibly get a medal for doing so.

To take the life of another is, I understand, quite difficult to do. Since the primary reason for the existence of the military machine is to do just that, then, in order to make this task easier and even enjoyable, it makes sense to fill the minds of the individual soldiers with as much mindless illusion as possible. Belief in God and the birth of baby Jesus are examples of how this is achievable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Blu-ray Maker | Blu-ray Converter

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

в настоящее время все страны разделились, как минимум, на пять групп в днепровско-донецкой впадине есть южный прогиб и южный борт который примыкает к нему значительно выросла доля камчатской области - с 6,5% в 1991 г климат в чехии влажный континентальный с коротким жарким летом и холодной зимой если до 1989 г. сокращение численности городского населения в отдельных регионах российской федерации было редкостью, а в период между переписями 1979 трубопроводный транспорт, в отличие от выше описанных универсальных видов транспорта, пока остается узкоспециализированным, предназначенным для перека культура ставропольского края этническая культура ставрополья имеет свои ярко выраженные особенности другой немаловажной проблемой является поддержание экономической безопасности государства и его интересов на должном уровне статистика абортов всегда была под запретом *примечание. в числителе — для пониженного, в знаменателе — для благоприятного варианта развития экономики seropol5

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Welcome to the fashion handbags house.We are pleased to offer you feminine Fendi Handbags,do you like it?Don't worry,there are other brands handbags,such as Lancel Handbags,which are my favourite,so I especially recommend them to you.And how about Coach Handbags?We are very familiar with this brand hadnabgs.Maybe you seldom heard the Yves Saint Laurent Handbags that are very perfect.I also like the red Burberry Handbags.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]