There has only been one Christian, and he died on the cross...

jesus was a philosopher or lover of knowledge. the truth sets us free, seek and you shall find. jesus was a healer, a physician on this basis, that the blind should see, to relieve the maniacal of their possession, that the stupefied should awaken from the perception of darkness where life is ever lit, not dead only sleeping, that the weary and oppressed should find rest. That whoever cared to should have life and have it more abundantly..

the philosophy of christ,

I am is the surname we all inherit in creation, I and my father are one.
I am equal to the least among us for as you do unto the least of these you do also unto me, and if you have believed on me you have believed in the one who sent me.
The eye is the lamp of the body, if the eye be sound the whole body will be full of light but if the light in you, the perceived truth be darkness, then how great the darkness.
The law of perception then, the measure you give is the measure you receive.
Let blamelessness speak first that we remain without blame. Without blame we can find only virtue,or the truth of things. Where are the accusers now? Blessed are those that hunger and thirst for rightness for they shall be satisfied.
Do not worry for what you may or may not become because you are natures finest array. A father does not wish hard labor on his children but that they have the happy that is dear to all, our will and our father's will is the same will. jesus desired mercy, not sacrifice.

Where do we go from here? These things shall you do and things greater than these.

Nietzsche also ran.

 

Ok---Asmodean, and Raga Mala----the fire and brimstone Jesus was maybe a little harsh and exagerated.

And some aspects of the second Jesus (as I referred to) were added later by the church, as Raga Mala points out.

THere are many examples of the two versions of Jesus I referred to, such as the Jesus portrayed in Revelations, who comes down and judges all the living for their final rewards or condemnations (as opposed to the Jesus whose actions and words were a message of non-judgemental acceptance of all, and keeping an open heart). Or the Jesus who calls his enemies, 'children of the devil' (as opposed to the Jesus who taught to love one another, including one's enemies). Or the Jesus who preaches of a God who will cast the disobediant into everlasting flames (as opposed to the Jesus who talks of God as a loving father). Or the Jesus who says that, 'Whoever blaspehemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness but is guilty of an eternal sin (as opposed to the Jesus who preaches of God's absolute forgiveness).

The Jesus who says, I am the son of God (as opposed to the Jesus who preaches of all people who make peace and love their enemies are sons of God). In John for example, you read a lot of things such as, "No one comes to the father except through Me." That is contrary to a Jesus that preaches of a loving father, and absolute forgiveness. Likewise is the famous, whosever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life----as if there is no life after death for anyone, but those who believe in him. This also implies that there was no life after death until Jesus came. But the belief in life after death has been around since way back into the paleolithic, and there is a long tradition of very intense existential experiences dealing with spirits of the land of the dead, and even the literal guiding of spirits of those who have recently passed away to the land of the dead by shamans, healers, and medicine men (this is known as psychopomp).

 

Thedope lists the teachings of the First Jesus I referred to---the Jesus that is portrayed more of in the Synoptic gospels. That is the Jesus I believe actually lived---and when he said that he is the son of god, and we all are the son of god, I see that as someone who was just a mortal like you and I------because wouldn't that be more significant to all of us----that if Jesus was just a mortal human being, and yet could radiate such unconditional love-----then why can't any of us do the same? We should in fact be able to do the same------and he actually said that we could do things even greater than he.

But surely you can see the divisive dualistic aspect of the second Jesus in the examples above. If you can only approach God through his son---that is very much group ethic thinking based on an in-group/out-group duality. It is, in my opinion, institutional manipulation---you have to be a member to play------these are some of the lies that Nietzsche speaks of.

 

I actually like the Jesus of John's gospel as well. John's is the gospel that points out the distinction between Jesus and the Christ. When Jesus says "none shall come to the father but by me" I think it is error to think this is the individual of Jesus talking (although the Church enforces this interpretation). Rather, I believe that statement is about the Christ "none shall come to the Father but by me" i.e. "but through the spirit of Christ," or "through Christ-consciousness." John's is the gospel for mystics and, if interpreted certain ways, for universalists. Although they may preserve better what Jesus actually taught, I actually think the synoptic gospels are more parochial and sectarian because they place all the emphasis on the historical individual of Jesus of Nazareth. Just my 2 cents. Notice my signature quote: "Christ is the icon of our potential to realize our own God-nature."