What are you doing?
Oh, hello god ... just thinking and enjoying the
It is amazing huh?
Beyond that ... you just cannot believe so much
intricate beauty could be poured into one place!
... it is the power of devotion.
You can understand how people feel so much closer
... to god here.
You can, it has been designed with that very
purpose in mind. This one was originally built in the 14th
Century, but was largely re-built twice after two fires during the
16th and 18th centuries.
And still there is so much love lavished in every
brush stroke, each chip of stone and carving of wood?
Wouldn't you if you believed your path to
eternal life was being earned with each stroke?
Hadn't thought of it like that.
Don't suppose you did, what's on your mind?
Well ... it's just that, that you would have me
believe it was all for nothing?
This! 2000 years of worship and faith apparently
... all for nothing!
That is the impression I have!
Perhaps that is just your mind coming to an
What do you mean?
Your mind must have been asking some questions
for us to begin speaking ...
And I still have many ...
Have we not reasoned answers together?
We have, and I feel like these answers are drawing
me away from who I am!
Or towards what you really are!
But this, all this feels like me!
So when was the last time you came here?
Urmmn ... after Liverpool won the Milk Cup against
Ahh yes I remember. That prayer in the
conservatory next to the radio and that last minute goal!
You remember that ... ?
Of course, and that was how long ago?
I would guess about twenty five years.
At least ... so you probably would not claim
to be an active follower of this faith?
Well ... no. But I think about it a lot ...
... I know you do.
It's just that ... just that it's the very
foundation of our culture, the history. It is part of me and it runs
And after our first two conversations you are
now finding it hard to let go ...
Very hard. It is difficult to step away from, to
discount and then say: 'what do I believe in?'
And there are very good reasons for that my
Yes ... because you are right. It is part of
you, part of your sense of self. And this is derived from your mind's
grounding in who you are, which was largely formed during early
I remember ... every day; hymns, prayers, giving
thanks, every year; harvest festivals, Easter, nativity, Adam and Eve
... Noah, Jonah.
But as an adult it is your minds desire for
answers that drew us to these conversations ...
It was ... I have had enough of the uncertainty,
the moral guilt.
So my friend ... does this mind of yours now
think it likely man was created by a supernatural being or through
millions of years of evolution?
Does your mind now consider the stories of the
Old Testament to be the literal word of a supernatural god tracing
the fortunes of his chosen people?
Or the written history and myths of a peoples
that had no concept of how the world around them functioned, a hard
world they explained by attributing it all to a supernatural god?
... a hard world attributed to a supernatural god.
Right ... but?
But ... where does that leave Christianity?
Where do you think?
Well this is my problem ... it is why I came here
in the first place. If the Jewish god of the old testament is
explained as a myth, how can Jesus be the son of god?
Now isn't that the catch 22 of all time!
So what do you think?
I could discount Christianity and just move on.
But that's not your style is it my friend ...
No ... I want to know about Christianity, whether
it has validity for this hold on my sense of being.
Good ... good. So did you do as I asked last
You mean read Psalms and Isaiah?
So ... go on.
Well, I assumed you asked me to read them because
they would explain Jesus the Jewish Messiah ... !
But .. ?
I couldn't find anything in Isaiah or Psalms that
sounded like Jesus the messiah!
Couldn't you now ... !
No ... there were many references to the 'anointed
one' but none seemed to be talking about Jesus, or anyone like Jesus.
So who are they talking about?
Well the anointed one is the King of Israel, or
the messiah, is he not?
I read Matthew and Mark as well ...
They both have several passages about Jesus that
sound like Psalms and Isaiah, but those passages in Psalms and Isaiah
are not talking about the messiah ...
My oh my, you have been a busy little soul. So
what do you think of that?
What do I think? ... I want to know how Jesus'
followers come to think of him as the messiah, does Christianity have
merit of its own regardless of the Old Testament?
Very good ... and where do you propose we
start in this quest?
Well ... I talked to Father Santia.
Did you now, prey tell!
I thought what better place than a church to find
And here we are, how wonderfully naïve of
you. Did you get your answers?
That is the problem. I talked to Father Santia and
that just confused me more!
Did it, what did you ask him?
Well, first I said that I had been talking to you
and you had recommended I read Isaiah and Psalms.
And he said?
I have to say he looked rather taken aback when I
said how specific you were but he did say I had been directed well.
But then you said to him ....
.... then I said to him I couldn't find any
reference to the Messiah as relating to Jesus in any of the two.
To which he replied ...
... that it was plain for all to see, right there
in gods very own words.
I left out the part where you didn't actually
write the bible ...
Of course ... probably would have confused
So what else did Father Santia have to say?
Well he said that Jesus was the suffering Messiah.
And when you asked him where it said that ...
... he said Isaiah and Psalms.
So now what do you think?
That there is a lot of suffering in all the Old
Testament but nothing when predicting the future messiah that sounds
anything like Jesus!
And when you mentioned this to him ...
... he told me I was thinking too much and looking
too hard. That god's will was not to reason but to accept ...
... and that you should relinquish to the will
of god and glory in your faith, to believe and not think.
Well ... yes, that's almost exactly what he said.
How did you know ... ?
You need to ask?
Oh yeah, forgot about that!
So is not thinking, not reasoning and just
accepting all this as a truth, an option?
Not for me.
So my friend ... if we are going to understand
how a Jewish Rabbi and convicted criminal that was crucified for his
crime, somehow become the 'messiah' and linchpin for a religion that
would shape culture for nearly half the world for two thousand years
Yes .... ?
Then we need to start with something
Like ... ?
... like if you want to understand the origins
of Christianity, you better start with understanding where the word
Christ came from?
Urrmnmm ... god?
Ha ha ... funny!
What do you mean then?
The term Jesus Christ would have meant very
little to Jews in the time of and after Jesus.
Do you know why?
Urrmnn ... No. I don't get it ... you mean like
'Christ' wasn't a Jewish word?
That's exactly what I mean ...
So if Christ isn't a Jewish word, what is it?
The answer is pivotal to understanding the
propagation of the Jesus legend – 'Christ' is a Greek word.
Christos literally means 'the anointed one'.
Greek? Where does Greek come into the frame?
... let us take this step by step.
What are we doing here?
No I mean, why are we talking?
So that I can understand how Jesus came to be the
And why might that be important?
Because it will help to explain to me how Jesus
fits into what seems like a godless ancient world ...
But more importantly ... ?
Put Christianity into its proper context ...
... by understanding its history.
Cool ... so when do we start?
We have already. You know that Christianity
derives its name from a Greek word ...
... so the question is: How did the purported
Jewish messiah come to carry the Greek title 'Christ'?
And for that we need to look at what happened
immediately after the death of Jesus.
Yes! After the death of Jesus his Jewish
followers remained devoted, do you know why?
Urrmmnn Because they thought he was the messiah?
Well they would have thought he was until he
died on the cross, then that would have kinda dashed their hopes,
don't you think?
Well as Jews, yes. They thought Jesus was going to
free them from Roman rule, not die by Roman hands.
So what else about Jesus' death do you think
might have given his followers hope?
... his resurrection!
Correct. They believed he had been
resurrected! And that meant he must be ...
... the messiah because god had raised him!
So did Jesus really get resurrected then?
Don't you worry too much on the how or who
right now. We will come to that a little later. For now, let us just
assume that his followers believed he was resurrected ... Okay?
So this handful of followers believed he was
the messiah, which had been demonstrated through his suffering, death
and his subsequent resurrection.
Really? That's a hell of a leap! Resurrection to
Paying attention I see ... Jesus' followers
truly believed that he had been resurrected ...
So they started leafing through the old
testament for confirmation that he was the messiah. When they found
none they paralleled his suffering with the suffering of the old
testament and as we know there was lots of that!
So they believed he was the suffering messiah just
on that basis?
You are not thinking about this in the context
of the time!
No I guess I am not!
Claims of resurrection were fairly common and
were meant to demonstrate the messenger of god...
Or a demonstration of gods powers?
So you're saying that resurrection was a common
miracle in the time and was seen as an act of god?
Not exactly common ... but thought to happen
frequently enough that it was a known phenomenon.
... and as soon as they had the resurrection –
Jesus touched by god and references in the Jewish texts to suffering
they put two and two together and came up with the messiah!
Especially with the crucifixion suffering they
found in Psalms.
But that passage in Psalms wasn't talking about
the messiah, was it?
No of course not ... and crucifixion in the
time was as common as jail sentences are today. At one stage the
Romans even ringed Jerusalem with crucifixions and ran out of wood in
Phew – kind of makes you think.
When realising Jesus the messiah though, we
also need to factor what a few Jews, in particular Jesus believed in
I don't get it, we know what they believed?
You know what you have been told they believed
but I doubt you have studied the gospels enough to know the main
theme of Jesus' message!
Urrmnn ... go on.
The Jewish nation had been faithfully
following gods law for over a thousand years but still they were
And they didn't understand why?
No they didn't. Being human of course they
began developing their theories.
Which were ... ?
A portion of Jews believed god had deserted
... which was why they were suffering?
Yes. But they truly believed their god would
one day return. In the process smiting all those oppressing the Jews!
And Jesus' followers believed that?
Well a version of this, yes. Like I say, it
was the key message that Jesus preached. In Jesus' version, there
would be an apocalyptic event wiping out all, and taking all those
that remained faithful into gods own eternal Kingdom.
What ... the end is nigh and all that?
Yes. In fact Jesus believed that god would
come and reclaim his people, within his own lifetime.
How do you know that?
Because it is written in the gospels on
Yes. You simply understand it today as eternal
life in gods kingdom after death because of course god never came to
claim his people in anyone's lifetime, so the prophecy eventually
Wow! And that's in the Bible.
In the Gospels ...
So that explains why his followers would really
buy into the resurrection!
Go on ...
Because Jesus like the Jewish nation had suffered
on the cross, god had forsaken him on the cross and then resurrected
Gathering Jesus into his eternal kingdom.
Oh my word ... so they would have totally
So ... what happened next?
What do you think happened?
I suppose they tried to spread the word of the
suffering messiah amongst the Jewish community as a whole?
And you would have thought the Jewish nation
would have accepted this with open arms?
Well yes ... based on the message Jesus preached
they had their messiah!
But the problem is of course, Jesus wasn't an
orthodox Jewish rabbi, so his teachings were at odds with the
establishment and majority of the time.
So his followers and their message of the
suffering messiah was universally rejected.
Of course ... like I said he was not in any
way representative of what the Jews were expecting as a messiah ...
... only he was the messiah to a handful of Jews
that interpreted his death and perceived resurrection as a fulfilling
of Jesus' own preachings!
Exactly ... contrary to popular belief this
was not a world where this one event took everyone by storm. There
were groups of people everywhere coming up with theories and
solutions to the ongoing suffering, many claimed to be the messiah.
And Jesus was one of them ...
So how come the message of Jesus become
universally accepted then?
What do you think these devoted followers did?
Tried to find someone that would believe them?
They sure did. They migrated, spreading out
while passing on the story of Jesus.
So who did these Jesus followers convert then?
Well, who do you think might have listened and
found the stories of Jesus compelling?
Like I say, not in the main, no.
So who ... ?
Do you know what a Pagan was in the time of
Urrmnn ... a heathen?
Oh how history favours those that write it.
The word pagan, despite the modern derogatory forms, used to simply
mean someone that wasn't Christian.
I never knew that!
It is actually a turn on the Jewish word:
'Gentile' which simply means not Jewish.
So a pagan was simply someone that wasn't
Jewish or Christian. Pretty much everyone was pagan and that would
include the Romans.
So you're saying the beliefs of early Christians
were rejected by Jews so the followers spread out and started to
convert gentiles ...
... to be more specific, Pagans.
And why do you think Pagans would have
converted more readily than Jews?
I suppose they didn't have a defined concept of
the messiah, so the story of Jesus the suffering messiah would have
seemed perfectly plausible?
And the key to believing the whole messiah
... was the expected apocalyptic return of god and
the resurrection of Jesus demonstrating eternal life. People
You bet they did, especially the eternal life
bit - who wants to die!
No one I suppose.
So how do you think the stories of Jesus
spread as far as they did?
Well I imagine some people would have written them
down and others would have passed them on through word of mouth?
Do you know how many people were literate in
Urmn – not many?
Probably one in ten, more likely closer to one
So when was the printing press invented?
16th century ...
Which means that any written word, on the rare
occasions people actually could write them down, was spread by?
Jees! You don't think of these things? I suppose
they must have copied each one by hand.
Yes ... right up to the invention of the
printing press one thousand five hundred years later!
So then, how do you think the Jesus stories
primarily spread during the 100 years following his death?
Word of mouth, oral traditions?
You bet they did. Initially propagated by his
followers to anyone that would listen.
Who were Pagans.
Correct. Converts would be wives, businessman
or traders visiting a town. They would hear the stories and then
return to their home villages and relay these to their wives,
families, and friends. Who would then pass them onto their husbands,
who would then pass them onto fellow travellers.
Oh my word!
And what do we know about stories told through
That they change!
They certainly do.
Now then ... pay attention as this is the
This isn't already interesting?
I mean really interesting!
... yes god?
During the 100 years after Jesus died we
gradually start to see a number of Christian writings.
Such as the Gospels ...
Nope ... the gospels were actually some of the
later writings as people already had the word of mouth stories, the
earliest writings were interpretations of Jesus' message ...
Such as Paul?
Yes, probably about twenty years after the
death of Jesus. The gospels followed some time later but within the
So why didn't they start by writing down the
They didn't need to, it wasn't until different
interpretations of the Jesus message started to appear that people
started writing about Jesus to substantiate what they believed!
Oh wow ..
And getting to the point ... what language
were the early Christian writings written in?
I am assuming the point to this must be that they
were written in Greek?
Do you know why Greek?
Urrmmn ... they were written in Greece?
I wasn't joking!
I know, now pay attention. The reason these
early writings were in Greek goes back to the 4th Century
BC and Alexander the Great.
Yes. Alexander was a legendary Greek king that
conquered much of Asia. As a result we subsequently had centuries of
Greek settlement and cultural influence over a very wide area around
So you're saying that many Pagans would have been
Exactly. Christian followers appeared over a
wide area by the nature of the message ...
... oral traditions passed on through traders and
And these same Greek speaking pagans would
have been early converts, and of course when they did write their
Jesus stories they did so in Greek!
The book of the Jewish messiah written in Greek?
It just doesn't sound right, how can you be so sure it wasn't
originally written by Jews?
Because the language used to write the gospels
was unequivocally Greek!
Well that's like Father Santia telling me Jesus
was unequivocally the messiah. How do you actually know?
You can tell the difference between English
and German can't you?
Yes, of course!
So ... Greek!
But how do you know what you're reading isn't
Aramaic translated into Greek!
Because written vocabulary was a lot less
expansive then than it is now. Greek translated from Aramaic would
simply read different than a document originally written in Greek,
which is what we have with the texts, specifically the Gospels.
... but that is not the only evidence!
It is not?
The gospels are the only books in the New
testament that actually discuss the life and preaching of Jesus ...
Yes ... and the gospels describe a Jewish
As you would expect ... Jesus being Jewish.
But you ask any Jew about the traditions and
Jewish life described in the gospels and they would point out a whole
bunch of errors.
Yes ... if the gospels were written by Jews or
even via Jewish eye witnesses you would expect the detail of Jewish
customs to be correct!
But they are not, because they were not written by
And then of course we have textual analysis
Yes. If I gave you a book written by Stephen
King how would you tell me when it was written?
Because it says so on the inside?
Mmnnn smart arse! What else would tell you
when it was written?
Urrmnn ... references in the text to society,
history and events?
Excellent ... and?
And what was culturally acceptable, within the
framework of the story?
Good man .. and?
... I don't know, what?
The writing style!
Oh ... !
If I was to hand you a book by Charles Dickens
you could glean a great deal of information about the time, the
culture and social nuances, yes?
Yes, that's for sure.
So then ... over time societies evolve as do
the tools of culture such as writing and its constructs. We compare
Dickens with ...
... late twentieth century authors and a whole lot
Absolutely. The world the characters live in
is different. Society, customs, references to past events and then we
have the writing style. Sentence structure, paragraphs.
All that and they can tell who and when?
Well not just with two books, but by cross
referencing all the materials we have between the two times you can
build up a fairly accurate timeline.
... so you're point is?
The point is that modern scholars use these
techniques to determine where and when the texts of the New Testament
... and the language used in books such as the
gospels places them as Greek.
Yup, language and writing style!
Okay ... so when were the gospels written?
Mark is judged to be the first Gospel written
sometime between 65-70 AD
70 years after Jesus died?
No ... ! AD means 'In the year of the lord' It
supposedly dates from the birth of Jesus, but is almost certainly
wrong. Jesus was probably born in 4BC!
... that's funny.
It is. So he would have died about 30AD.
Which makes Mark written at least thirty five
years after the death of Jesus?
That's a long time for stories to be passed
via word of mouth don't you think?
Sure is. When was Matthew written then?
Matthew and Luke were probably written at the
same time as each other, albeit separately, which was likely about
Fifty years after Jesus died and twenty after
And John probably about 95AD.
And what should seem obvious to you now you
What, now I know the gospels were written in Greek
between thirty and seventy years after Jesus died?
Yes .... ?
Urrmnn ... that, well ... I guess it would have
been unlikely that they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke or John.
Well apart from the fact that they would have been
old for that time, even by the time Mark was written, they were
Jewish. Which means gospels would have been written in their first
And these were written in Greek!
You say so ...
I do say so ... and I think you're right there
Almost. ... so what if Mark dictated his gospel
to a Greek speaker.
Possible I suppose. But if these gospels were
written by who they say they were, you think that they would use
their name as some indication of authenticity ... wouldn't you?
I suppose ...
Mark was Peter's secretary but never states he
wrote the Gospel via the testament of the first hand witness Peter.
While Matthew never declares himself an eyewitness and talks about
Matthew in the third person, always as if he is describing another
... because Matthew was another person because he
never wrote the gospel?
Correct. Nor would you expect Matthew, who was
with Jesus for most of his preaching days, to require copying a
gospel allegedly written by Mark to detail the preaching of Jesus?
Matthew copied Mark?
Yup and Luke ... !
Matthew copied Luke as well ?
No! Luke and Matthew were both written
independently but copied chunks right out of Mark and probably one
other source nobody has ever found!
So what do we call the gospels now then?
Nobody knows who wrote them, so there is
really no point in calling them anything other than Matthew, Mark,
Luke or John, is there!
I guess not. So is all this, the gospels, the New
Testament a lie?
No, no my friend ... The books that comprise
the new testament, just like the old testament were written by people
that really believed.
... so whoever wrote Matthew and Luke would have
done so with the utter conviction that their belief was total and
Yes .. and as I said to affirm what they
believed about Jesus, confirming him as the suffering messiah ...
... which takes us right back to the beginning -
Isaiah and Psalms.
Exactly ... justifying Jesus as the messiah
has always been the biggest problem for Christianity. Absolutely
nobody other than Christians have ever thought he was the messiah.
So early Christian authors set about confirming
Jesus the messiah in their own writings!
And how do you think they did that?
Like those that preceded them I guess they spent
endless hours leafing through the Old Testament for evidence that
Jesus was the messiah?
When they found none, but totally convinced that
he was the messiah they started looking for parallels ... such as the
crucifixion in Psalms.
Excellent! And then they started pulling
prophecies for the messiah from the Old Testament and layered them
into their own gospels.
Yes ... and they used the David prophecies
David being the last person Judaism collectively
acknowledged as the messiah?
Absolutely. Who ever wrote the Matthew gospel
didn't waste any time either. Starting the gospel by actually tracing
Jesus' genealogy back to David through Joseph ...
Crikey ... that must have been a long list.
Wasn't David supposed to have lived about 1000 years earlier?
Yes he was. Can you imagine tracing your
family line back 1000 years today, with modern records?
No ... mum tried. I think she got back about six
generations – just over 200 years.
Matthew tells us there are fourteen
generations in the 1000 years of lineage since David, the number
fourteen being another David prophecy. In the process he actually
only lists thirteen.
I didn't even notice ...
... probably because like most people you
didn't read it properly.
Well I ....
Don't worry it's what you have been
conditioned to do. It is what Father Santia there is employed to do
You mean tell me what to think so I don't need to.
What I don't understand is, why would they trace
Joseph's lineage back to David if Jesus wasn't actually his son?
It kinda makes the whole genealogy redundant
So what do you think Matthews point was?
To simply create another link to David, even if it
was through Joseph.
Like I said, the gospels were written to
affirm Jesus' message and that he was the messiah, Matthew and Luke
more so than the others set out to do this.
What else is there then?
Literally too many to cover in the time we
have, so we can look at some of those in the nativity story if you
So we also have Jesus being born in Bethlehem,
the guiding star, the massacring of all children ...
The star of Bethlehem wasn't real?
You mean a roving star in the sky that
directed the wise men directly to the crib of Jesus?
Mmnnn ... I guess that does sound unlikely?
Can you tell me how many written sources of
the time detail the star and the journey of the wise men, considering
a roving star must have been fairly widely recorded?
At least the four gospels I would guess?
Guess again ... Matthew is the only writing in
ancient history that describes the wise men or the star ...
And of the many studies of the stars we have
from the time, there are none that detail anything like the star of
Bethlehem, not even a convenient comet.
Is the star significant then?
Of course ... the star is another David
prophecy from the Old Testament.
And further evidence Luke and Matthew were written
independently, otherwise you would think they might have confirmed
You would have thought ...
I suppose the massacring of children is mythical
as well - a link to Moses and an echo of other legends like Jason
and the Argonauts.
Keep going ...
So ... even Jesus being born in Bethlehem is up
Jesus' birth is only detailed in two of the
gospels, Luke and Matthew. The others start with him as an adult.
Jesus being born in Bethlehem is about the only thing Luke and
Matthew agree on towards the beginning of their gospels.
And they had Jesus born in Bethlehem because it
was the city of David?
You can say that again. So where was Jesus really
Where do you think?
I don't know!
So what was Jesus's last name?
Funny!! He wasn't just called Jesus before
someone thought up Christ was he!
Oh ... Nazareth. Jesus of Nazareth.
Right ... so there is your answer.
What ... ?
Jesus was very probably born in Nazareth, that
would be why he was called Jesus of Nazareth and not Jesus of
Oh ... hadn't thought of it like that!
So how do you feel about the Jesus legend now
A little confused ... ?
It's not surprising ... but you have enough
detail now with which to begin reasoning your own conclusions?
I think so ..
You only think ... !
It's a lot to take in!
So what was the message of Jesus?
That god had forsaken the Jewish people but would
be back avenging, only those that submitted to the will of god would
survive in gods eternal kingdom!
Excellent ... and when his followers thought
he had been resurrected?
They truly believed he must be the messiah and
began spreading the word.
But their word was largely rejected ... ?
... because most Jews didn't see the messiah as
someone that would suffer or die on the cross.
Jews were looking for a David or Moses like
character, so ... ?
So the followers of Jesus spread out, migrated and
found believers in Pagans who found the stories easier to believe ...
... because the had no real concept for who
the messiah was supposed to be, so accepted it as the truth.
And the stories travelled ...
... via word of mouth, changing in the
process, which meant after some thirty to fifty years there were many
different interpretations ...
So the early Christians started writing down their
version of Jesus' life and preachings ...
... to affirm?
Their particular belief and an opportunity to
confirm him as the messiah, by weaving lots of back references to the
Old Testament messiah.
But in the process ...
.. because they were written independently, at
different times these confirmations as Jesus the messiah are
Often telling the same story differently, or
not at all ...
... or detailing reasons for messiah events that
we now know they just made up.
Not as a conspiracy ...
... but out of utter faith for something they
totally believed in!
There you go, not that confusing huh?
So basically the New Testament gospels have
evolved just like any other story man has to tell. It is just that
for two thousand years people have been believing this as a truth!
As the word of god, in fact. Can you imagine a
god would get something so muddled ... ?
... no ... only humans.
So you can see the whole bible now for what it
really is ...
... mankind trying to explain that which they did
Right ... which makes it a remarkable snapshot
of the minds and people in their time ...
But I suppose stunning that people still think
these as valid explanations for life and god, to actually be gods
very word ...
When they were written by people who knew very
little about the world around them ...
But apparently had a hotline to a god ...
... who since seems to have vacated premises
I am exhausted ...
Really ... I'm just getting warmed up. But you
are right ...
Right ... ?
We do need to finish up.
But ... ?
There is one last thing that we need to look
at right now.
... I suppose you're now going to explain why
Christianity still appeals to so many.
Well ... I think we should look at one
Which is ?
Ignoring everything we know about the
migration of Jesus stories away from ancient Palestine, the origins
of Christianity, the suffering messiah, oral traditions, the
contradictory gospels and layering of messiah links ...
... there is still the question of the
See ... you're not asleep yet!
Not yet ...
The resurrection is the cornerstone of the
whole Jesus legend. Without it he would have died the failed messiah
at best, and take it from me there were lots or those in and around
the time of Jesus!
So could Jesus have been resurrected?
Do you believe the Jewish god existed?
No. I am pretty sure on that front ...
... would be kind of hard then for Jesus to
get resurrected don't you think?
But, just say for instance he does ...
That the Jewish god exists?
So why would Jesus be resurrected by the
Apart from being Jewish there was nothing in the
stories of Jesus to indicate he was the messiah?
Right ... being just another man, probably
charismatic and with devoted followers but he wasn't the Jewish
And I think we have covered the messiah angle
We have. So why would the Jewish god resurrect
If the Jewish god existed he would have no better
reason to resurrect Jesus than anyone else!
So my friend, who do you think resurrected
Well ... what if he didn't actually die and just
woke up later?
That might have been difficult if you believe
the passion stories, he took quite a beating, which culminated in a
spear through the ribcage!
But say for instance he never died, what
problems do you think that gives Christians.
Ummn no resurrection, no demonstration of the
eternal kingdom, no suffering messiah ...
So what do you think really happened?
Ummn ... I don't know?
Think about it!
Assuming of course there was a god willing to
resurrect Jesus the very act of the resurrection would have to be a
Right ... and what would that make the god
that did this?
God by his nature would have to be a supernatural
He would ... miracles by their very nature are
events that can only be undertaken by supernatural beings.
Which I guess is different from the miraculous?
... such as a man surviving in the crumbled
remnants of a building for three days after an earthquake. Which
would be ...
... within the capabilities of human endurance but
not at the want of a supernatural being! Miraculous but not a
Right ... !
So ... ?
So do people claim miracles actually happen?
Yes ... all the time!
But when the facts are investigated ...
... they are proven to be bogus or at best
So the resurrection!
Yes ... ?
Miracle ... ?
It would have to be, being brought back from the
dead by a supernatural god!
And do miracles occur.
Not once in all recorded time, where man can apply
reason to the events!
So the only time we do actually have miracles ...
... is when man had no information about the
world about them, no information with which to reason, so anything
they didn't understand was a miracle ...
... or an act of god.
So Jesus resurrected?
No ... either a mis-understanding or another
fabricated story by someone that believed so hard, they wanted Jesus
to be the messiah.
And without a resurrection where does that
A collection of myths that have been born out of
peoples need to believe something other than mainstream Judaism.
Very ... but even now this, still I find it hard
to let go.
It will be difficult ...
So much faith over so many hundreds of years. All
for nothing! It just doesn't seem feasible, it feels too real not be
I suppose if you want it to be real it can be
... Father Santia will welcome you with upturned palms.
I know ... I don't want to make it real, it's just
It's just that if so many people have
worshipped for so long, how could it not be true!
That's exactly what I feel!
Then it is for you to decide. If you feel that
the ancient Jewish god of the Old Testament actually existed, and for
some reason not mentioned once in any of his Old Testament
scriptures, designated Jesus the Messiah ...
Then ... ?
Then you have come to the right place and have
no more need for me.
Oh but I do ... there are so many more questions!
Then you better have a think about where your
mind and sense for reason will take you!
Okay ... I will. Can I ask one more quick
Sure, why not.
Now that you have almost convinced me of a truth
around man's desire for faith through constructed religions ...
... go on!
Where does that leave you god?
Ah ha! ... what a difference three blinks of
times eye will make!
What do you mean ... !
Take a long hard look at yourself my friend
... a long hard look.
I am ...
Then don't stop looking.
I don't understand, is that it, what does it mean?
For now .... you need time to think this all
through, we will talk again.
Then we will look at finding the truth of
'god' and through this you will discover where your belief must lay.
Now come, we should leave this place.
Submission: 5 July 2007