Re to: Is Jesus Really Holy???

The following response was a lengthy one given by a reviewer who was considerate and enthusiastic enough to respond at length to my thesis, for which I am endlessly grateful. Real opinions are what I want to hear from the people who read my work, and I have gotten some great ones. However this one sums up a broad part of the common oppositions to my views on religion- namely the Catholic/Christian one which I am more familiar with. Here...

"Is Jesus Really Holy???" 

...is the original draft I wrote on the topic. Below, I posted the response in it's exactness (is that a real word, lol) to be fair to my reviewer, whom I did not name, in that his exact replies and opinions are represented. This is done in the spirit of increasing a sense of discussion among reviewers and myself. Below is my response...The black is excerpts from my thesis, and the blue is his comments.


My Reviewer

I do believe Jesus was a man. To deny the presence of someone so famous in history is not wise. why? To belive he exsisted, then you must believe that what people say about him is true. Even if only 10% of what is said is beliveable, that validates his exsistance and what he did.

In my opinion, this makes him even greater because he did not KNOW he was going to heaven. He did not believe he was the son of a God. He was not a being apart from mankind, but he was a mortal man as unknowing of his fate as the rest of us and he gave his life preaching for an ideal he cherished. this did not make sense at first as you were talking about WW then changed back to Jesus. As I stated, you are showing that you really do belive what was said about him. What in anything you have read ever mentioned the fact he didn't know he was going to heaven or belive he was the son of God? Hmmm. If you are refering to anything written about him, then you must take the Bible as reference material as that is the most prolific and accurate account of his life. No other historical book,with any accoutability, tells more about him and his life, what he said, did and didn't do.
WW, King Arthur, Robin Hood, while all wonderful legends, which one do we really believe exsisted? All legends have a facimile of truth, but the embellishments are far more interesting. They are changed and made up depending on the storyteller. Who has ever embellished anything about God/Jesus in such a way that has not been ridiculed i.e Dan Brown. While his theory and story was fun to read and I loved it. I did not take it as having any truth about it.

Clever men realized if they could rule a mans mind, they could rule men with even greater efficiency than a king. Not only do you subjugate, you create willing, fervent believers. how true, However what you said just pointed the difference between what a pure man would do and what a mortal man, without some kind of purification, would do. Does the name Jim Jones ring a bell? how about Waco, Tx, Warren Jeffs? Each thought himself God or close to it. Curious that you have the same ideas they had. All reaching for more enlightenment...

Priests become a powerful class unto themselves- speaking right against the teachings of Jesus. how you zoom in on the Catholic religion who has been the epitome of ruthless use of power in all history. They misrepersented Jesus and everything he stands for. Still to this day they claim you must repent to a priest, when Jesus himself said, "I AM the intersessor to God,, I alone can ask for your sins to be forgiven beause I alone paid the price for them." You must then see that in every religion there is good and bad representatives. We will never be PURE in the sense that you define purity. But a child who has not been exposed to predjudice will not see color or handicap as a hinderence; their motives are free. That we should be that "free."

The basic thing that we forget is that there were no castes in Jesus’s philosophy. Jesus preached equality. Jesus believed that everything exists equally against one another. Even god. God was no lesser or greater than any one of us. He was us, and we are him. When you look to your neighbor, you look to god. When you see the good and the bad, you see god in both for he is everything. When you understand this, you understand god and then, you are able to see the true state of creation around you. You become enlightened and the way to heaven, theoretically, becomes a bit clearer. The only Church that jeuss worshipped in was the human mind and heart. It God's sight we are only "equal" if that is the word you want to use. as a friend is equal to another. God wants us to be his friend. He gives man the clues, resources and opportunity to do so. Once you have taken that step, you see things differently. You are "enlightenened" as you call it. However your definition and mine are different. The fact that He is omipresent, omnipotent, means he has "power" we do not. He created us differently than he did the angels that have no free will. The FREE WILL that you have is what makes us so special to Him.

Thus when I see people today worship Jesus, I wonder do they worship the “man” and his ideals, or do they worship the “idol” and the ideals of those who made it. I wonder if people see a difference. People say god intervenes in their lives. I say you live your life as your life is lived. It is completely up to you to make of your life what you will and to rely on god intervening on your behalf is a waste of the life he gave you. I, in no way, mean to insult anyone. I honestly believe life is a wilderness god meant for a person to map out himself. To explore- for good or ill.
How your theoretical ignorance is showing. It is sad to see someone who spends this much time and energy to denounce something that is so inately indistructiable. It is as if you went into a hurricane and shook your fist and said " There is no wind. It does not exsist!" You are leaning into it to keep from falling, your hair is blowing and rain is hitting you like bullets, yet you say there is no wind because you can't see it and it didn't come to your parties no matter how many times you sent it an invitation.

Because every beginning must have a precedent, and every end has a future. The very concept of a “beginning” or “end” is self- defeating. Monumentally so.
How sad for you. To beleve that everything must have a beginning and an end. You limit yourself to the possibilites, you try to explain the unexplainable. You look at the worst examples and use them as your standard. What if you really searched out the Truth to "Disprove the exsistance of God." So many have tried and when they have done all the research they come to the conclution, that he does exsist,. They may not be able to explain it all. Books have been written on this subject so often that you have not put forth any new concept, idea, or explanation. You are one of the many poor souls who some day will come to face what they refused to believe and kneel before him dumb. Sort of like going to your home after the hurricane and find it completely distroyed. You have the proof that there is a wind and it can distroy what is not built on the ROCK!

This was very interesting to read. It is like listening to a child explain how we get milk. "WE drive to the store and buy it!" well, we know that is partially true, but it isn't the whole story. You believe there is a Jesus, you just don't know the whole story.
The rating is strictly for Effort, not for anything you said. This is not a debate, strictly a personal review of the material and how it was presented and my opinion only.

My Response
Here, the black is me, and the blue is excerpts from his review...

What’s up, BLANK. Thanks for taking the time to read my work and I highly appreciate the comments. I think there might have been some things I may have not made clearer in my writing for you.

why? To belive he exsisted, then you must believe that what people say about him is true. Even if only 10% of what is said is beliveable, that validates his exsistance and what he did.

I was trying to express my opinions against exactly this kind of thought. There is a difference between believing Jesus, the “Man” existed, and Jesus, the “Son of a God”. I believe Jesus existed as an ordinary man whose life had become fictionalized by people over the years. I cannot believe that simply because he exists means everything said about him was true. That would be like me saying simply because they found Socrates to be a real person, he could read minds and control the fabric of space and time like the legends say. My intention was to convey the fact that while I believe he exists, I cannot prove he never did what was said of him. I only offer an explanation of what I believe to be more likely the truth.


What in anything you have read ever mentioned the fact he didn't know he was going to heaven or belive he was the son of God? Hmmm. If you are refering to anything written about him, then you must take the Bible as reference material as that is the most prolific and accurate account of his life.

This is a great point you bring up here. This is my exact argument. People believe the Bible to be truth, but there is proof documenting how the bible was changed over and over again by various Pope’s and Kings to reflect the changes in political, social, and theological views of the time. I cannot say the Bible isn’t truth, but whatever it started as, I doubt it reflects the same truth today. The Bible has been used as a tool since its creation. I believe it holds little merit today, if ever. It is exactly like the Dan Brown book- only it was written by priests long ago and preserved by followers. The same way the texts of Buddha, Allah, and hundreds of Greek, Roman, and Egyptian Gods were preserved. In the next five hundred years, I wonder if this religion will even exist and another made to replace it- with another bible made. Maybe five different religions with five different bibles. How many different Bibles are there in the world? How do you know yours, if any, is the true one? Hopefully you can answer my question on why no dinosaurs are mentioned in the book of genesis. This would be a good step in proving the Bible a text of prolific and accurate truth.

However what you said just pointed the difference between what a pure man would do and what a mortal man, without some kind of purification, would do. Does the name Jim Jones ring a bell? how about Waco, Tx, Warren Jeffs? Each thought himself God or close to it. Curious that you have the same ideas they had. All reaching for more enlightenment...

Exactly my point. I believe Jesus was NOT a pure man, but a man with flaws just like any one of us. However he wasn't twisted like the people you named. However, what about the leaders of the present day churches? They are mortals too. I cannot say they are pretending to talk to god because I have no proof. But do you think if Jesus or God exists, they approve of the estates, the stocks, the voluminous wealth, the irredeamable history, and the modern scandals (to name a few) that run rampant through the present day Church. Didn't Jesus preach against wealth, corruption, decadence...My opinion; There’s comes time when a house becomes so rotten, you just have to knock the whole thing down.

how you zoom in on the Catholic religion who has been the epitome of ruthless use of power in all history.

LOL...of course I must zoom in. It’s all too true that if I were to list all the corrupt religions in the world, I would list all of them and I would have way too much to write. You made an excellent point though. There is good and bad in everything, but who controls the majority vote in these things? What if the very foundations of a structure are- from the start- immoral? Jesus was against Churches...he preached to the heart and mind- what should be the true houses of god.

However your definition and mine are different. The fact that He is omipresent, omnipotent, means he has "power" we do not. He created us differently than he did the angels that have no free will. The FREE WILL that you have is what makes us so special to Him.

I think here, I was not clear enough. When I say God is in everything, I mean God is everything. What I meant by that is, there is no "God" by way of a living, conscious, individual being. There is no omnipresent ruler. No conscious authority on right and wrong. If God created everything, why create wrong and then be against it. You will probably bring up Satan being the originator of evil. Who created Satan? Why give a man evil tendencies and then shun him for it. Why give him the impulse unlawful to his own ideology. Why let a being run loose upon the world tempting people and then condemn them for being tempted? You say the angels, of all beings, do not have free will. Beings whose goodness, strength, and compassion supposedly exceeds our own exponentially. Why wouldn’t a compassionate, loving god such beings free will? Are you saying they are his slaves? And he didn't give us free will, according to yur bible. We took it when we ate from the Tree of Life, and then we were PUNISHED for it by being banished from the Garden and made to endure the pain of life. Such is not the work of a perfect being. Does a perfect being make the grand and blatant imperfection we see today? You see, these are the contradictions that make me not believe in God. I have not seen God, and he has not come to clarify any of my beliefs. People tell me that he does not answer those who do not believe, but that doesn’t sound like the compassionate, understanding one people say. If he was, he would sit down with me and talk to me about the things I don’t understand like my father would. My belief is there is no God. I use "God" as a metaphor for "nature"

How your theoretical ignorance is showing. It is sad to see someone who spends this much time and energy to denounce something that is so inately indistructiable. It is as if you went into a hurricane and shook your fist and said " There is no wind. It does not exsist!" You are leaning into it to keep from falling, your hair is blowing and rain is hitting you like bullets, yet you say there is no wind because you can't see it and it didn't come to your parties no matter how many times you sent it an invitation.

This is how my arguments with religious people usually end up. This passage that you have wrote above amounts to nothing but a poetic insult to what I have stated in my article. Me "being in a hurricane, leaning in the wind, rain hitting my face..." suggests that you are telling me there is an overwhelming amount of physical evidence to the existence of God, or that Jesus was the "Son of God" and not just an exceptional man. If you can name these three irrefutable pieces of evidence, then I will admit I am wrong. Else wise, you can hardly call me ignorant for believing my beliefs.

How sad for you. To beleve that everything must have a beginning and an end. You limit yourself to the possibilites, you try to explain the unexplainable. You look at the worst examples and use them as your standard. What if you really searched out the Truth to "Disprove the exsistance of God." So many have tried and when they have done all the research they come to the conclution, that he does exsist,. They may not be able to explain it all. Books have been written on this subject so often that you have not put forth any new concept, idea, or explanation. You are one of the many poor souls who some day will come to face what they refused to believe and kneel before him dumb. Sort of like going to your home after the hurricane and find it completely distroyed. You have the proof that there is a wind and it can distroy what is not built on the ROCK!
This was very interesting to read. It is like listening to a child explain how we get milk. "WE drive to the store and buy it!" well, we know that is partially true, but it isn't the whole story. You believe there is a Jesus, you just don't know the whole story.

Again, all this is an opinion, and a somewhat arrogant one in that you claim to know the truth that others are too foolish?...too blind?...too incompetent to see? These are insults you are writing down here, comparing me to a child. The fact that there is no definitive proof is my point from the very beginning. My whole account of Jesus as an exceptional man of his time IS my effort to prove that there is truth in what I believe to be a grandly distorted tale. The fact that this is not a new idea is sorely obvious. But I am not a poor soul. I have merely, in this whole article, given only my beliefs as to what may be the real story. I do not claim it as truth, enforce it as truth, or insult those who don't agree with me. Believe me, I look for proof everyday. Who wouldn't in such times. But I choose not to blindly follow people in a belief I have not seen a truth in.

The rating is strictly for Effort, not for anything you said. This is not a debate, strictly a personal review of the material and how it was presented and my opinion only.

Opinions are ever respected and I again thank you for taking the time to reply at length. My reply is not a debate but an attempt to clarify my views and the way you interpreted them to be. Again, thanks for your reply. It’s rare to get such an enthusiastic review.