Who Was Jesus, truly?

[Asteriskos]

Here's some results of research I did a while back and decided to put up for discussion Below:

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I may add that this is "stenographic" in it's brevity compared to what's "out there"?

Post automatically merged: Jul 29, 2025

Basically a failed religious leader who got himself executed, which forced his devotees to invent a complex theology (son of God, self-sacrifice to propitiate his father, redemption from sin, etc.) to justify being deserted by him. Over time, this cobbled-together explanation produced articles of faith for Christians who still stubbornly fail to realize their absurdity because they're so intoxicated with the faux exalted emotions the Jesus legend evokes in them, moving them to write long gushy posts about the supposed sublime qualities of the poor wretched guy. People believe in a Jesus of their own making. The Old Testament God being such a irascible murderous jerk, it was somehow unavoidable that the Christ figure supposedly filled with love and compassion for us humans should become so popular.

According to Gershom Scholem, the core doctrine of Judaism is that you should love God and that you should fear God, resulting in an emotional ambivalence that isn't exactly good for mental health. Christianity made it a tad easier on its believers by creating God the Son to love and God the Father to fear (with the Holy Spirit as the silent partner of the so-called 'Holy Trinity' to take the edge off this dichotomy), basically still a good cop, bad cop show but now involving two different personas. Jesus' alleged story then went viral because it allowed the faithful to project all their yearnings for love, peace and harmony in him, making Christianity the success it became. That's the way I see it.

You have a knack for directness that never ceases to amaze me! Stop by the pub, beers on me!

Post automatically merged: Jul 30, 2025

Perhaps no one would even know about the Roman Church and how Jesus fits in there if not for Constantine and the Council of Nicaea ca 325 A.D. Basically, the emperor said something to the effect of: No One leaves the room until this pleases me, Presto the "Roman Church"!
Facts are Facts, huh?

 

[HoldAll]

You have a knack for directness that never ceases to amaze me! Stop by the pub, beers on me!

What really opened my eyes was Gershom Scholem's "Sabbatai Sevi: The Mystical Messiah". Same as Jesus, Sabbatai Sevi was only one of a long

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the most controversial one who deeply divided Jews in the 17th century, and whose scandal reverberates in Judaism to this day. He seems to have been bipolar with manic delusions of grandeur which led him to antinomian behaviour and depressive phases where he would lock himself in his room and refuse to see anyone. He would have remained a lone maverick if he hadn't been 'discovered' by Nathan of Gaza who became his chief propagandist, proclaimed him the messiah and made him famous throughout Mediterranean Jewry.

In one of his manic phases, Sevi travelled to Istanbul to convert the Sultan and wrest from him control of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultan, however, was unimpressed and gave him a choice - either death or conversion. In those days, Jews were expected rather to become martyrs than betray their faith but Sevi turned muslim instead which didn't much faze his admirers.

Nathan then invented a complicated explanation out of Lurianic Kabbalah according to which Sevi had apostatized on purpose to go to hell, gather up the lost sparks of God's holiness from among the qliphot or some such nonsense which struck me as extremely bizarre. Scholem then mentioned in a sentence or two that something similar had happened to Jesus who was similarly glorified after his death and even made into a god. It got me thinking, and I suddenly viewed this all resurrection and apotheosis business as even more ridiculously contrived as Nathan of Gaza's rationalisation of Sevi's apostasy. Jesus the mortal man said some wise things that were rightly fit to be written down but it seems that his fans were unable to accept his death, felt deserted and consequently came up with all that convoluted supernatural fairy tale about his subsequent deification.

Scholem's remark was offhand and in no way polemical but lead to this epiphany of mine concerning this ludicrous Christian "Jesus is the anointed messiah and the son of God!" sham.

 

[KjEno186]

My reading on Gnosticism this last year led me to read Jesus and the Lost Goddess by Tim Freke & Peter Gandy.

In the first chapter they say:

This is a book about a remarkable group of men and women who, some 2,000 years ago, were touched by the Mystery [of Life] and dared to plumb its depths. Revolutionary free-thinkers who synthesized the available wisdom of the world and articulated perennial truths in dynamic, innovative ways. Creative visionaries who encoded their teachings in extraordinary myths. Explorers of Consciousness whose mystical philosophy promised 'Gnosis' — experiential Knowledge of Truth. These forgotten spiritual pioneers could not have conceived of the unparalleled impact they would have on the history of humanity. Who were they? They called themselves 'Christians'.

It was these radical individualists who inadvertently created the most authoritarian religion in history. Their questioning mysticism was distorted, almost beyond recognition, into the dogmatic creed of what they called an 'imitation church'. When this impoverished form of Christianity was adopted as the official religion of the brutal Roman Empire, the original Christians were violently suppressed, their scriptures burned and their memory all but erased. The Roman Church fabricated its own account of the origins of Christianity, still believed today, which dismisses the first Christians as a minor cult of obscure heretics. But it was these brilliant mythographers who authored a story which continues to dominate the spiritual imagination of the Western world. From the archaic allegory of a dying and resurrecting Son of God they fashioned a new and vibrant myth which has captured the hearts and minds of millions: the fable of a Jewish peasant who saved the world: the story of Jesus the Christ.

They make the claim that these early Gnostics told "the story of Jesus' lover, the lost and redeemed Daughter of the Goddess." They called her Sophia.

In the last chapter the authors begin by saying:

Religion is the Devil's greatest achievement. In the guise of religion he has pulled off his most audacious coup. He has flagrantly masqueraded as God. He has had us bow down and worship him. He has had us commit every type of evil in the name of holiness. He has passed off his bigotry as God's opinions. He has had us segregate humanity into the 'ins' and the 'outs', believers and nonbelievers, the saved and the damned. He has convinced us that God likes us but not them. And convinced them that God likes them but not us. And then, in a stroke of dark brilliance, he warns his faithful flock of sheep: 'Be sure you do not pay heed to anyone but me, for the Devil is a wily wolf and he will surely trick you.'
The original Christians exposed the Devil-in-disguise when, as part of their general critique of moribund Jewish Literalism, they portrayed Jehovah as the arrogant Demiurge. Not that the Devil was overly perturbed. He just did what he always does — he put into effect a takeover operation of the new spiritual tradition these radicals had founded, turning Christianity into the most authoritarian and barbaric religion of all time.
How does the Devil do it? It's a confidence trick. In a world seething with insecurity he offers certainty. He convinces his disciples that they (and they alone) know how it is. Blinded by opinion, they no longer see the reality of the Mystery. They commit the only true blasphemy by conflating the relative with the Absolute. Inflated with feelings of specialness, they willingly enlist into the Devil's elite corps of martyrs and murderers, ready to die and kill for concepts and catchphrases. All for a promised pay day cunningly put off until the afterlife. [...] When we talk of the 'Devil' we are, of course, not expecting to be taken literally.

The authors admit that their book is biased and subjective towards their own beliefs, and I cannot say I blame them for it. The major religions are also biased, and whether they'll admit it or not, so are most scholarly researchers. No conclusion is ever reached without a premise, and no premise based on a starting point of ignorance can escape error. A flawed premise may very well lead to a flawed conclusion. That is one reason we have lists of logical fallacies to guide us. That doesn't mean truth is unattainable, but human nature is constantly at war with itself in the search for answers.

 

[Asteriskos]

What really opened my eyes was Gershom Scholem's "Sabbatai Sevi: The Mystical Messiah". Same as Jesus, Sabbatai Sevi was only one of a long

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and the most controversial one who deeply divided Jews in the 17th century, and whose scandal reverberates in Judaism to this day. He seems to have been bipolar with manic delusions of grandeur which led him to antinomian behaviour and depressive phases where he would lock himself in his room and refuse to see anyone. He would have remained a lone maverick if he hadn't been 'discovered' by Nathan of Gaza who became his chief propagandist, proclaimed him the messiah and made him famous throughout Mediterranean Jewry.

In one of his manic phases, Sevi travelled to Istanbul to convert the Sultan and wrest from him control of the Ottoman Empire. The Sultan, however, was unimpressed and gave him a choice - either death or conversion. In those days, Jews were expected rather to become martyrs than betray their faith but Sevi turned muslim instead which didn't much faze his admirers.

Nathan then invented a complicated explanation out of Lurianic Kabbalah according to which Sevi had apostatized on purpose to go to hell, gather up the lost sparks of God's holiness from among the qliphot or some such nonsense which struck me as extremely bizarre. Scholem then mentioned in a sentence or two that something similar had happened to Jesus who was similarly glorified after his death and even made into a god. It got me thinking, and I suddenly viewed this all resurrection and apotheosis business as even more ridiculously contrived as Nathan of Gaza's rationalisation of Sevi's apostasy. Jesus the mortal man said some wise things that were rightly fit to be written down but it seems that his fans were unable to accept his death, felt deserted and consequently came up with all that convoluted supernatural fairy tale about his subsequent deification.

Scholem's remark was offhand and in no way polemical but lead to this epiphany of mine concerning this ludicrous Christian "Jesus is the anointed messiah and the son of God!" sham.

When one (of us) observes the three abrahamic branches of the tree from the outside how shall we reconcile the Differences, and further more Why would we Want to? Paganism, also fragmented in myriad ways, yet more realistic? I believe it was Ray Sherwin (a Magician if ever there was one) that once said the Only True Religion is the "OLD RELIGION"! Personally, I believe that the Individuality animating my Personality is the goal to be attained for Me!

 

[Morell]

When one (of us) observes the three abrahamic branches of the tree from the outside how shall we reconcile the Differences, and further more Why would we Want to? Paganism, also fragmented in myriad ways, yet more realistic? I believe it was Ray Sherwin (a Magician if ever there was one) that once said the Only True Religion is the "OLD RELIGION"! Personally, I believe that the Individuality animating my Personality is the goal to be attained for Me!

As Norse pagan myself I found a lot of trash I wish didn't exist. Pagans are of different religion that Abrahamics, but they remain practically the same kind of humans. They are damn same as Abrahamics.

In Norse paganism there is a conflict between strict reconstructionist and modernists. Another is between Asatru, who demonize Loki and Lokeans who are therefore bullied by them. I hope it won't escalate to murders... at least not while I'm alive. And of course there are extremists groups that are Norse pagan, white supremacists.

They are still humans.

 

[Asteriskos]

As Norse pagan myself I found a lot of trash I wish didn't exist. Pagans are of different religion that Abrahamics, but they remain practically the same kind of humans. They are damn same as Abrahamics.

In Norse paganism there is a conflict between strict reconstructionist and modernists. Another is between Asatru, who demonize Loki and Lokeans who are therefore bullied by them. I hope it won't escalate to murders... at least not while I'm alive. And of course there are extremists groups that are Norse pagan, white supremacists.

They are still humans.

I have, and do still know some Asatru, and Vanatru too! I'm of Anglo-Saxon descent. There isn't much they don't share with me! My craft is a Lot more Anglo-Saxon than Celt, but I've been known to borrow a few Celtic things here and there. I have never accepted membership in a Hearth or Kindred though offered both. the Crooked Path calls to me Mightily and I have pruned and tended to it for so long that I'm it and It's Me!
I bleed Magic when cut, as another member here once told me that his native area of the world does also!