Rich at the Pugnacious Irishman has finally gotten around to discuss some of my objections to the Christian mythology. He has chosen to respond on his blog to a post I wrote in November 2008 entailed, "No More, No Less". And, of course, it should go without saying that we view the issues from dramatically different perspectives!
My main objection has to do with the thesis that Jesus was supposedly both God and human. From my perspective, if Jesus was indeed the almighty himself, then this mitigates a lot of what he went through on the cross. I'm certainly not arguing that having nails hammered into a person's flesh and being strung up in the elements to die wouldn't be physically and emotionally agonizing, but if you KNOW that you will live on beyond that point, it mitigates the excruciating pain to an extent.
Just look at our own ordinary lives. Each of us has had to undergo some terrible circumstances (e.g., divorce, death of a loved one, medical procedures, being in a serious accident, basic training in boot camp, etc.). When we know that, despite our trials and tribulations, chances are we will live through it and get to go back to our routine lives, it's a lot easier to grit our teeth to endure whatever it is that we must endure.
It might hurt like hell -- physically and/or emotionally -- but we see the light at the end of the tunnel and this light allows us to bear what we must bear.
When we're unsure or we know that the chances are good that we WON'T live through the ordeal or we will live but our life will be marked by unspeakable agony, that's when the pain becomes unbearable. It's when we're almost certain that our pain and suffering will bear no fruit that we feel abject terror. And, when we know that our suffering will most likely be for naught, but we decide to go through it anyway, that takes real guts and courage.
So, from my standpoint, if Jesus KNEW there was a definite light at the end of the tunnel, as painful as his "earthly" death might be, it would be a lot easier to grit his teeth to get through it. If, on the other hand, he HOPED there was a light at the end of the tunnel, but like the rest of us he didn't know if the light actually existed or not, then his death on the cross could be viewed as heroic (well, if you buy into the story, in the first place).
When a person does something based SOLELY on faith -- which means they don't really know if it's true or not -- I have much greater respect for them. I certainly may not agree with the basis of their faith, but I can recognize their courage in acting upon it. When someone knows the outcome of a given action or situation -- particularly if it's a positive one for them -- then this tends to mitigate my admiration for them.
My main objection has to do with the thesis that Jesus was supposedly both God and human. From my perspective, if Jesus was indeed the almighty himself, then this mitigates a lot of what he went through on the cross. I'm certainly not arguing that having nails hammered into a person's flesh and being strung up in the elements to die wouldn't be physically and emotionally agonizing, but if you KNOW that you will live on beyond that point, it mitigates the excruciating pain to an extent.
Just look at our own ordinary lives. Each of us has had to undergo some terrible circumstances (e.g., divorce, death of a loved one, medical procedures, being in a serious accident, basic training in boot camp, etc.). When we know that, despite our trials and tribulations, chances are we will live through it and get to go back to our routine lives, it's a lot easier to grit our teeth to endure whatever it is that we must endure.
It might hurt like hell -- physically and/or emotionally -- but we see the light at the end of the tunnel and this light allows us to bear what we must bear.
When we're unsure or we know that the chances are good that we WON'T live through the ordeal or we will live but our life will be marked by unspeakable agony, that's when the pain becomes unbearable. It's when we're almost certain that our pain and suffering will bear no fruit that we feel abject terror. And, when we know that our suffering will most likely be for naught, but we decide to go through it anyway, that takes real guts and courage.
So, from my standpoint, if Jesus KNEW there was a definite light at the end of the tunnel, as painful as his "earthly" death might be, it would be a lot easier to grit his teeth to get through it. If, on the other hand, he HOPED there was a light at the end of the tunnel, but like the rest of us he didn't know if the light actually existed or not, then his death on the cross could be viewed as heroic (well, if you buy into the story, in the first place).
When a person does something based SOLELY on faith -- which means they don't really know if it's true or not -- I have much greater respect for them. I certainly may not agree with the basis of their faith, but I can recognize their courage in acting upon it. When someone knows the outcome of a given action or situation -- particularly if it's a positive one for them -- then this tends to mitigate my admiration for them.
Something of a neglected point about the crucifixion is that, as they went, the only thing that was REALLY out of the ordinary was that a fit man in his prime only lasted 3.5 to 4.5 hours. The average was 48, and sometimes people lasted a week.
ReplyDeleteHmm. I've never heard that one before. It's very interesting, nonetheless. I wonder what accounts for this discrepancy?
ReplyDeleteNietzsche defined faith as "not wanting to know" - willed ignorance, in a word. I don't think it requires courage to have faith - I think it requires courage to abandon faith. Reason, according to Spinoza and all Rationalists, is the only true path to God, God being that which must be, that that has always been and will always be - the one, the universe, the Tao.
ReplyDelete‘Round the rugged rocks, the ragged rascal ran…
ReplyDeleteThe best part of “Jesus was fully human and fully God” is the Christians’ ability to pick and choose whichever they want to emphasize to resolve the problem. A God “growing in wisdom”—oh that was the human part. A human knowing what others were thinking—that was the God Part. They use the phrase “100% God; 100% Man” but then act as if Jesus was some sort of switch—turning one “100%” on or the other. If Jesus was 100% God, he couldn’t learn something he already knew. Unless he turned off the God bit, making him no longer 100% God! (And where is the “on/off” switch? On the God-side or the human side?)
The issue of a 100% God/100% Human suffering is puzzling, and to fully flesh it out would require far more than a comment on a blog. A few things to additionally think about. Even assuming the Christian make-up of Jesus; this leaves us with a number of troubling aspects.
For example, Jesus existed pre-incarnate. He was God—part of the committee deciding what to infuse into Mary. Remember, Jesus’ DNA was either part-God OR was specifically chosen by God. Jesus pre-chose whether Jesus would receive right-handed DNA. Jesus pre-chose whether Jesus would receive heterosexuality DNA. Jesus pre-chose whether Jesus would have DNA with sickle-cell anemia. Jesus pre-chose whether Jesus would have DNA with a propensity for alcoholism, cancer, heart disease, Lou Gehrig’s disease, natural ability for softball, musical ability, intelligence, language aptitude, visual as compared to oral learning, etc., etc. etc.
Imagine that! Jesus was the first individual EVER who could pick and choose his own DNA propensities!
Now…you’re Jesus pre-incarnate…and you are busying choosing eye color, hair loss--that sort of thing…and you come across pain threshold DNA. Hmmmm….you know you are going to be beaten…whipped…and that crucifixion thing….[shudder]…Do you give yourself a nudge? A bit more pain tolerance? Perhaps a propensity to heal a little quicker?
What DNA did Jesus give himself to suffer more or less?
And speaking of healing...the stories claim Jesus healed. Blind, lame, deaf. Even dead. When being beaten, could he have given himself a shot of Jesus-juice to lessen the pain? A bit of healing for oneself? “Physician, heal thyself” was already on his mind!
Did Jesus provide himself some healing-power?
Further, we now know of nerve endings. So, presumably, did God. Including God-Jesus. Did he cut-off the signal from the nerves to the brains? Sorta self-anesthetize?
How much did Jesus REALLY physically suffer? We can’t know. ‘Cause as the Christians love to point out, we can’t fully know God.
Of course, they point out the greatest suffering was being separated from God. Wait a minute, Jesus WAS God! How could he separate from himself? This appears to be incongruous, but is relegated back to the ol’ bin of “We can’t understand God.” Well, if WE (skeptics) can’t understand how God acts, specifically how he separates from himself, how can YOU (Christians) claim to be privy as to how God acts, specifically how he suffers when he separates from himself?
It always boils down to this. Christians claim God did something. And when we start to investigate it, they cry out, “you can’t understand God,” never realizing this completely undercuts the first claim of God doing something. Because if we cannot develop a method of determining what God does, all it consists of are baseless claims.
DagoodS: You bring in a good point with the fully Jesus, fully God argument. At the same time, I think a lot of devoted Christians would say that while there are indeed plenty of mysteries surrounding the God/Jesus/Holy Spirit trinity that necessitate acceptance by faith, there are just as aspects of the universe that are equally unknowable and still accepted as truth.
ReplyDeleteWhile the argument could be made that science and Humanism will eventually reveal all in time, we nevertheless find ourselves now in a state where humanity must accept some things on faith--whether that be faith placed in a Creator God or faith in reason.