Page 1 of 1 1
Topic Options
#11015 - 08/25/08 06:00 PM The Irony of the Anti-Christ
Succubus666 Offline
member


Registered: 10/17/07
Posts: 161
Over the last several years I’ve been reading a lot of books which touch on the subjects of various systems of belief that have come to be throughout the course of human history, and the rationale (or lack thereof) behind each. One thing I cannot get over the irony of is the various interpretations of who or what Christ really was (if in fact he truly existed as a person and the entire Christian religion wasn’t founded purely on a combination of fictional accounts). From a logical point of view, if he really existed, chances are he was a person with a charismatic personality that spoke his mind. He probably spoke of things metaphorically, and his words were translated into something more literal. The bible may originally have been created in the native tongue of that time out of good intention, but was eventually twisted and corrupted over the years to serve the needs of those in positions of power.

The irony I’ve found is that in the time and manner in which Christ existed, he was considered by the majority to be the adversary. He was the sinner and the evil doer that was punished for speaking his mind and not conforming to the norm of society. Those in power got pissed off when he started telling the general public that they didn’t need the hierarchy, and whatever spirituality or truth they were seeking could be found within themselves. Some people call him a Jew, others believe strongly that he was a Gnostic (meaning “seeker of truth”). Whatever title you want to give to what he preached, he was in fact the so-called “Anti-Christ” of his own time, metaphorically speaking, since that term didn’t actually come to pass until organized religion created the story of some superior savior of the world.

One has to keep in mind that there is the literal Jesus Christ who was just some guy that lived two thousand years ago, and likely had something more intelligent to say when compared to what the dogma of that time was telling people. Maybe he even ate too much peyote and started to have grandeur hallucinations, who the hell knows. And then there is the Jesus Christ of today’s religion - Christianity, which literally means “follower of Christ.” It goes without saying that he was not a Christian, that term was only coined when a religion was built around the idea of who he was. Today Christ is nothing more than a symbol, just like the Devil is nothing more than a symbol, as is Santa Claus, and so forth.

When someone in our modern society uses the term “Anti-Christ” what they are actually taking a stance against is the fictional Christ of the bible, the so-called son of god that has come to represent every bit of dogma Judeo-Christianity has invented throughout the years. Any reasonable and intelligent person would be considered an Anti-Christ if they were to examine the ignorance and hypocrisy of the storybook bible and view Christ as its reigning symbol. However, if you were to take the term down to it’s most literal meaning and look at Christ as the rebel and adversary of his time, essentially just some guy telling people to think for themselves, then you have an entirely different meaning. In the end, the term “Anti-Christ” is just as much an oxymoron as Christianity itself.

Top
#11038 - 08/26/08 06:43 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: Succubus666]
HellBound Offline
stranger


Registered: 08/23/08
Posts: 11
Well, I guess it depends what your sources are. Because in the bible, Jesus is obviouslly a person spreading Dogma and lies.

On the other hand, if Jesus really excisted, and I say IF, then he would have been an adversary. But no more then any random person trying to bring a new religion into a country with an already widely accepted religion.

And about what you said about every reasonable person being an anti-christ when questioning the 'word of god'... Well duh.

I think every christian in this time is an 'anti christ', because none of them practice what Jesus (or whomever wrote the bible) intended. They all practice some kind off watered down christianity, that totally ignores the bible (ofcourse they all deny this).

The only people practicing original christianity is the christian right. And we all know what assholes they are. Which says alot about the original concept of christianity.

Sorry about the spelling btw. I'm to damn lazy to be bothered wit spell-checkers.

Top
#11089 - 08/28/08 06:05 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: HellBound]
napalm Offline
Banned
pledge


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 61
If you havent read the bible this wouldnt make alot of sense.They call it contradictions,but did you notice how there were two distinct seperate personalities.Two brothers,not actually brothers but,the one was like if you believe and worship me, the kingdom of heaven is yours for the taking.The other is like the kingdom of heaven is not within a house of wood or stone,its within you.Only observing Im exempt.
Top
#11090 - 08/28/08 06:06 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: HellBound]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1646
Loc: Orlando, FL
I would say that fundamentalists (the "Christian right") are the only ones being true to the letter of the bible. If the definition of a Christian is someone who tries to devote themselves entirely to the "word of God" as they see it, then yes, they are the only "true Christians."

But this idea is ridiculous. Christ himself taught that the spirit of the law is superior to the letter of the law- meaning that we should not take everything literally and search our hearts for what we believe is right. Following anything with such rabid dogmatism is foolish and dangerous.

Gnostics, Romans, Neoplatonists, and other sects of the ancient world looked at Christianity as a philosophy from which much truth could be found. They weren't so much concerned about whether or not Christ really rose from the dead or silly mythological details like that- they cared about the message behind it.

I can't say I agree with everything Christ taught- such as altruism for altruism's sake- but it's much more favorable to the blind dogmatism that most religions seem to fall into.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#11091 - 08/28/08 06:23 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: The Zebu]
napalm Offline
Banned
pledge


Registered: 08/21/08
Posts: 61
Maybe awile ago I could have read the Bible front to back.
But there so much shit in it that needs interpreting that it makes me dizzy.Ever wonder if some of those parables were just written like that to try to explain the things that would come to past in a context that the not so advanced would undersand.................................only the satanist would have the balls to ponder these ideas.
Insomnia's the best cure for lack of creativity. And I rad that there was another or the only one that could perform miracles,raise the dead,and walk through walls,his name wasn't Jesus but he supposedly rose from the dead.I just saw a documentary on it last night. but I forget his name,whats his name again,anyone.


Edited by napalm (08/28/08 06:31 PM)

Top
#12002 - 09/29/08 08:27 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: napalm]
Succubus666 Offline
member


Registered: 10/17/07
Posts: 161
I’m surprised that people have yet to fashion a formal religion around the workings of Criss Angel (at least no one has done so that I’ve heard of to date). Finally, we have a modern man that can walk on water, turn one liquid substance into another, levitate, vanish into thin air, descend a building supposedly unassisted, transform into another being, read minds and so forth. Of course everyone knows and readily admits that it is an illusion or gimmick. He and David Blaine and other magicians like them have proven that such things can be accomplished. But if you were to suggest to any follower of a Jesus-worshipping faith that such a thing would be possible, they wouldn’t consider it for a moment and you would be branded as blasphemous (not that it’s a bad thing).
Top
#12079 - 10/01/08 05:13 AM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: Succubus666]
ZephyrGirl Offline
R.I.P.
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 706
Loc: Adelaide Australia
Funny that you should bring him up. A friend of my ex husbands is of Greek orthodox religion and he beleives that Chris Angels tricks are real and that he uses black magick. ROTFLMAO!!!

I mean really! So instead of beleiving he's the new Jesus, his is the devil as such.

Imagine if Jesus came back in this day and age? He'd never be beleived by the religious zealots, they would call him Satan and be done with it!

Zeph


Edited by ZephyrGirl (10/01/08 05:14 AM)
Edit Reason: Fixing some spelling errors
_________________________
Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass -
It's about learning to dance in the rain.


Top
#12083 - 10/01/08 07:05 AM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: ZephyrGirl]
Dimitri Offline
stalker


Registered: 07/13/08
Posts: 3138
 Originally Posted By: Zephyrgirl
Imagine if Jesus came back in this day and age? He'd never be beleived by the religious zealots, they would call him Satan and be done with it!

I believe from second 1 when he says he is Jesus he will be called satan and that the churchleaders will have him killed by assasins...
_________________________
Ut vivat, crescat et floreat

Top
#12108 - 10/01/08 06:26 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: ZephyrGirl]
ta2zz Offline
veteran member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 1552
Loc: Connecticut

 Originally Posted By: ZephyrGirl
Funny that you should bring him up. A friend of my ex husbands is of Greek orthodox religion and he beleives that Chris Angels tricks are real and that he uses black magick. ROTFLMAO!!!

Youtube is like the new Google... Most anything you want to learn about or see how it is done can be found on the tubes...

Chris Angle's ( pun intended ;\) ) tricks are simply angles and elaborate stage shows with special effects added after filming...

~T~

Was Christ a roaming street magician?
_________________________
We are the music makers, And we are the dreamers of dreams. ~Arthur William Edgar O'Shaughnessy

Top
#12146 - 10/02/08 05:46 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: ta2zz]
coelentrate Offline
member


Registered: 07/07/08
Posts: 164
Loc: Dundee, Scotland
an eccentric person being later deified is nothing new.

Jesus is one not-so-special example of many.

Top
#12207 - 10/04/08 08:51 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: coelentrate]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1646
Loc: Orlando, FL
Exactly. Another irony would be that if somehow Jesus were to return to Earth, today's Christians would most likely brand him as the anti-christ.

They're too busy fussing over paranoid prophecies to notice the real meaning behind anything, anyway.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#15515 - 12/05/08 07:01 AM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: The Zebu]
Anthony West Offline
stranger


Registered: 12/03/08
Posts: 43
Loc: Germany
Jesus was a historical figure that, more than likely, existed. Whether he performed miracles and such is a mystery that will only be really known by the people who witnessed it, or made the stories up.

I personally see Jesus as a brilliant historical figure with excellent Charisma and managed to rally countless people behind him on his quest to...whatever he was trying to achieve. He was the son of a false virgin and a carpenter. I leave him and his legacy at that.

I define an "antichrist" as simply anyone who against the teachings of Jesus. For example, I can be defined as an Antichrist on the basis that I do not agree with each and every teaching of Jesus. Although I feel he had valid points, I feel that, overall, he wasn't quite my kind of teacher.

According to historians, the bible was not written as it happened; the followers of Jesus and others told and re-told the stories through the generations. The oldest exerpts from the bible, scratch that, any written documentation bearing resemblence to the modern bible, was written several hundred years after the death of Jesus himself. In addition, the Christain religion was changed an uncountable amount of times by the Mid-evil Chatholic Church, so no one will really know what Jesus meant in his teachings.
_________________________
There can be but little liberty on earth while men worship a tyrant in heaven
-Robert Green Ingersoll

Top
#15523 - 12/05/08 11:26 AM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: Anthony West]
Meq Offline
Banned
active member


Registered: 08/28/07
Posts: 861
 Originally Posted By: Anthony West
Jesus was a historical figure that, more than likely, existed.

Which Jesus? Jesus was as common a name as Tom, Dick and Harry.
Do you mean Jesus of Nazareth?

Sorry, there's no evidence of a city called Nazareth existing during the purported time of Jesus.

And as for 'Christ' (the Greek translation of the Hebrew 'Messiah'), there were loads of madmen calling themselves that. Usually Hellenized Jews under the influence of Greek philosophy. The teachings of 'Jesus' in the Gospels have a distinct classical Stoic, Cynic and Platonist influence (to anyone familiar with ancient philosophy), as well as influences from the Mystery cults. Nothing special in terms of the Zeitgeist of the time, and certainly not a fax from heaven.

The historical existence of Jesus has been brought into question by various scholars. Take a look at the movie "The God Who Wasn't There" for starters.

What's most interesting is that the earliest Christian documents - the authentic letters of Paul (formerly Saul of Tarsus) - make no reference to Jesus having lived on Earth. He is viewed as a purely spiritual being, not a human who recently lived.
It's only by putting them AFTER the gospel accounts (written later) that the impression is given that they are talking about the same dude.

The Gospel account of Mark contain so many parallels to pagan mythology that it is dubious they are talking about a human being who recently lived, and more likely that pagan myth is being adapted to fit a Jewish context.
The other gospel accounts were adapted from this later.

It takes the (forged!) later epistles to clarify that Jesus is flesh and blood, and that it is HERESY to deny that (a heresy later known as Gnosticism).

As for checking the historical records of the time - no can do. The Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70CE, destroying the Jewish genealogical records. Hence, there is little record of that time in history.

I personally am skeptical of Jesus having been a real person. That doesn't mean I dogmatically affirm he definitely didn't exist. That would be just another blind leap of faith.
I see it as unlikely in the light of evidence (and all the proven-to-be-forged documents e.g. Josephus which attempt to substantiate his existence), but I'd change my mind if substantial evidence to the contrary were established.
To me, the myth and legend surrounding Jesus are more interesting anyway.
If there was a real man under the story, we know nothing about him.


Edited by Mequa (12/05/08 11:37 AM)
Edit Reason: Some additions

Top
#15528 - 12/05/08 12:31 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: Meq]
6Satan6Archist6 Offline
stalker


Registered: 10/16/08
Posts: 2509
There might have been someone walking around back then calling themself Jesus Christ. This person may have been crucified, as many people were back then. But he was not born of a virgin, he could not walk on water, he did not rise from the dead, and he most certainly is not my savior.

It seems funny to me that this guy could do all the amazing "parlour tricks", yet he couldn't stop himself from getting nailed to some wood. You can damn well bet if I had all the powers we are told Jesus did and someone tried to arrest, torture and eventually crucify me, it wouldn't happen.
_________________________
No gods. No masters.

Top
#15545 - 12/05/08 04:23 PM Re: The Irony of the Anti-Christ [Re: Meq]
Anthony West Offline
stranger


Registered: 12/03/08
Posts: 43
Loc: Germany
 Originally Posted By: Mequa
 Originally Posted By: Anthony West
Jesus was a historical figure that, more than likely, existed.

Which Jesus? Jesus was as common a name as Tom, Dick and Harry.
Do you mean Jesus of Nazareth?

Sorry, there's no evidence of a city called Nazareth existing during the purported time of Jesus.

And as for 'Christ' (the Greek translation of the Hebrew 'Messiah'), there were loads of madmen calling themselves that. Usually Hellenized Jews under the influence of Greek philosophy. The teachings of 'Jesus' in the Gospels have a distinct classical Stoic, Cynic and Platonist influence (to anyone familiar with ancient philosophy), as well as influences from the Mystery cults. Nothing special in terms of the Zeitgeist of the time, and certainly not a fax from heaven.

The historical existence of Jesus has been brought into question by various scholars. Take a look at the movie "The God Who Wasn't There" for starters.

What's most interesting is that the earliest Christian documents - the authentic letters of Paul (formerly Saul of Tarsus) - make no reference to Jesus having lived on Earth. He is viewed as a purely spiritual being, not a human who recently lived.
It's only by putting them AFTER the gospel accounts (written later) that the impression is given that they are talking about the same dude.

The Gospel account of Mark contain so many parallels to pagan mythology that it is dubious they are talking about a human being who recently lived, and more likely that pagan myth is being adapted to fit a Jewish context.
The other gospel accounts were adapted from this later.

It takes the (forged!) later epistles to clarify that Jesus is flesh and blood, and that it is HERESY to deny that (a heresy later known as Gnosticism).

As for checking the historical records of the time - no can do. The Romans destroyed Jerusalem in 70CE, destroying the Jewish genealogical records. Hence, there is little record of that time in history.

I personally am skeptical of Jesus having been a real person. That doesn't mean I dogmatically affirm he definitely didn't exist. That would be just another blind leap of faith.
I see it as unlikely in the light of evidence (and all the proven-to-be-forged documents e.g. Josephus which attempt to substantiate his existence), but I'd change my mind if substantial evidence to the contrary were established.
To me, the myth and legend surrounding Jesus are more interesting anyway.
If there was a real man under the story, we know nothing about him.


I looked over this and found it very interesting.

Without intending to challenge your authority on saying this, mind giving me a few sources so I can further research it? It sounds absolutely fascinating, and religious figures, history, and so on, catch my eye and demand my attention.

I still prefer my theory, Jesus was most likely real, but his stories might have been completely different than is recorded in bibles and textbooks.

Overall, I view Jesus of Nazareth to be a "great" teacher. Not necessarily a good one, but, without a doubt, a great man.

Who knows what happened back then? Jesus of Nazareth might have just been some drunk who made up stories that he published and others took literally. I guess we'll never truly know what happened unless we figure out a way to go back and find out for ourselves.

(Oh yes, and thankyou for the information/history lesson, Mequa. If you do decide to send me some sources to expand my understanding of the matter, simply pm me or whatever them. Again, thanks.)
_________________________
There can be but little liberty on earth while men worship a tyrant in heaven
-Robert Green Ingersoll

Top
Page 1 of 1 1


Moderator:  TV is God, fakepropht, SkaffenAmtiskaw, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.034 seconds of which 0.007 seconds were spent on 28 queries. Zlib compression disabled.