Jesus Christ; super star

LETTER OF THOMAS JEFFERSON TO WILLIAM SHORT, APRIL 13, 1820

"But while this Syllabus is meant to place the character of Jesus in it's true and high light, as no imposter himself but a great Reformer of the Hebrew code of religion, it is not to be understood that I am with him in all his doctrines. I am a Materialist, he takes the side of spiritualism; he preaches the efficacy of repentance toward forgiveness of sin. I require a counterpoise of good works to redeem it &c. &c. It is the innocence of his character, the purity & sublimity of his moral precepts, the eloquence of his inculcations, the beauty of the apologias in which he conveys them, that I so much admire; sometimes indeed needing indulgence to Eastern hyperbolism. My eulogies too may be founded on a postulate which all may not be ready to grant. Among the sayings & discourses imputed to him by his biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality, and of the most lovely benevolence: and others again of so much ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism, and imposture, as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have proceeded from the same being. I seperate therefore the gold from the dross; restore to him the former & leave the latter to the stupidity of some, and roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and firm corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus. These palpable interpolations and falsifications of his doctrines led me to try to sift them apart. I found the work obvious and easy, and that his part composed the most beautiful morsel of morality which has been given to us by man. The Syllabus is therefore of his doctrines, not all of mine. I read them as I do those of other antient and modern moralists, with a mixture of approbation and disent."

why is it so unbelievable that Jesus was right?... how is it such a mystery that much of the christian Bible is well-intentioned errors?... even Thomas Jefferson understood that religion was important, possibly the MOST important thing to the health of people and society as a whole, but it was only to be understood through calm and logical reasoning...

the laity could only handle the most obvious and benign passages in their religious infancy... the fullness of the "word" is complex and difficult to master... the majority of Christians do not understand that they are simply a sect of Judaism... Jesus was a Rabbi who taught the Torah... it is his clear understanding of the meaning of the Jewish law that made him the savior of the people who follow him... when Jesus speaks in the "New Testament", he is only teaching from the "Old Testament"... it does not supersede the writings which came before... it is only guide to the "word" of God...

take, for instance, the "Gospels"... the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John all tell reasonably the same tale of the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth... but on a simple reading of them, it becomes evident that these four books were written by four people who either never witnessed the events, or have bizarrely different recollections of the events... even the language used is so different as to change the story on its most basic level...

for example, Matthew, Mark and Luke all quote Jesus as referring to the "Son of Man" (presumably about himself)... John, however, insists on quoting him as "Son of God" (most definitely about himself)... but any good reading of the Torah (or Old Testament, if you wish) finds that applying the term Son of God to one's self would be heresy/blasphemy/downright-evil... Jesus, a rabbi and devout Jew, knows this... so, what did Jesus really say?...

consider the lynch-pin story of the Jesus story; his arrest and sentencing... when Jesus went before the Sanhedrin, each book has an important detail told differently... the chief priest asks point-blank if Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God... Matthew's Jesus replies, "You say it is so"... Mark's Jesus replies a definite, "I am"... Luke's Jesus plays coy; "If I tell you, you wouldn't believe" which could be taken either way (if he says yes, they disbelieve; no, they still disbelieve)... John's Jesus, though he claims title of Son of God throughout John's book, when asked says, "You say I am King [of the Jews]"...

if the four Gospels cannot tell the most important story the same, what makes anyone believe that the rest of the Bible is at all accurate?...

i know this may seem counter-intuitive, but the inaccuracies are proof of the validity of the story... maybe the details are wrong, but the story is true... was there a person known as Jesus who was convicted by the Sanhedrin of blaphemy?... of course... this can be verified even through non-biblical sources, but let's stay with the Bible... did this Jesus person have a following to whom he taught?... yes... did he teach from the Torah?... yes... did he teach his congregation through parable?... obviously...

and did those who wrote it down ever get it wrong?... let he who is without sin, cast the first stone...