Monday, October 29, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 81

Continued from the previous post –

The claims of Jesus Christ force us to choose. As Lewis stated, we cannot put Jesus in the category of being just a great religious leader or good moral teacher. This former skeptic challenges us to make up our own minds about Jesus, stating,
You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.”
In Mere Christianity, Lewis explores the options regarding the identity of Jesus, concluding that he is exactly who he claimed to be. His careful examination of the life and words of Jesus led this great literary genius to renounce his former atheism and become a committed Christian.
The greatest question in human history is, “Who is the real Jesus Christ?” Bono, Lewis, and countless others have concluded that God visited our planet in human form. But if that is true, then we would expect him to be alive today. And that is exactly what his followers believe.
The eyewitnesses to Jesus Christ actually spoke and acted like they believed he physically rose from the dead after his crucifixion. If they were wrong then Christianity has been founded upon a lie. But if they were right, such a miracle would substantiate all Jesus said about God, himself, and us.
But must we take the resurrection of Jesus Christ by faith alone, or is there solid historical evidence? Several skeptics began investigations into the historical record to prove the resurrection account false. What did they discover? However, we know that Jesus was never killed on the cross. The Roman soldiers removed him from the cross and his companions carefully put him in a closed compartment looking like a tomb, for the protection from Jew priests who wanted to kill him. There is a very reliable information that Jesus was never killed, he was removed from the cross with help from the Roman soldiers and given treatment for the wounds he had due to nails those were put in his body. This became possible because the crusification was done at the behest of Roman General on day prior to Saturday, which is religious holiday of Jews. So they knew that on that day no priest would venture to visit that site. After he was safely transferred from that place with help of his companions to some unknown place, he happened to revisit Jerusalem to meet his followers. At that time Roman, generals spread the rumor that Jesus has resurrected from his tomb and that in his physical form from heaven. This worked well as in those days such things were believed by people. Roman general helped him because they knew that Jesus was innocent.

Continues in next post –

You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Monday, October 1, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 80

Continued from the previous post –

Lewis considered this option carefully. He deduced that if Jesus’ claims weren’t true, then he must have been insane. Lewis reasons that someone who claimed to be God would not be a great moral teacher. “He would either be a lunatic—on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else he would be the Devil of Hell.” Such comments only show that European scholars have their own idiosyncrasy and anything against that is to be treated as wrong, foolish, or anything but sane. However, from Hindu approach Jesus was very true in his saying that he is god. Because in Hindu ideology we believe that, we have three basic instincts within us everybody. They are divine, beast and devilish. That means a person has all the basic instincts within him. Now the choice is of that person. What instinct that fellow wants to encourage within him in what situation is the option open to that person whatever man or women. From what Jesus claims it is very clear that hew wanted to encourage the divine instinct within him and so his claim that he is god is absolutely justified.
Most who have studied Jesus’ life and words acknowledge him as extremely rational. Although his own life was filled with immorality and personal skepticism, the renowned French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–78) acknowledged Jesus’ superior character and presence of mind, stating, “When Plato describes his imaginary righteous man…he describes exactly the character of Christ. …If the life and death of Socrates are those of a philosopher, the life and death of Jesus Christ are those of a God.”
Bono concludes that a “nutcase” was the last thing one could label Jesus.
So what you’re left with is either Christ was who He said He was—or a complete nutcase. I mean, we’re talking nutcase on the level of Charles Manson….I’m not joking here. The idea that the entire course of civilization for over half of the globe could have its fate changed and turned upside down by a nutcase, for me that’s far-fetched….”
So, was Jesus a liar or a lunatic, or was he the Son of God? Could Jefferson have been right by labeling Jesus “only a good moral teacher” while denying his deity? Interestingly, the audience who heard Jesus—both believers and enemies—never regarded him as a mere moral teacher. Jesus produced three primary effects in the people who met him: hatred, terror, or adoration. Those with divinity within them had adoration for Jesus, those who were at beast instinct had fear of him and those who had devilish instinct active hated him.

Continues in the next post –
Continues in the next post –
You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Sunday, September 2, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 79

Continued from previous post –

Western Scholars continue to think in the manner not suitable for the issue of Jesus. They do not know other options of this subject. They presume that human being is like any other animals. Whereas Hindu way of thinking does not accept that a human being is merely an animal. Let us see what other points are put up by other western scholars.

Could Jesus Have Been Self-Deceived?

Western Scholars continue to think in the manner not suitable for the issue of Jesus. They do not know other options of this subject. They presume that human being is like any other animals. Whereas Hindu way of thinking does not accept that, a human being is merely an animal. Let us see what other points are put up by other scholars.
Albert Schweitzer, who was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1952 for his humanitarian efforts, had his own views about Jesus. Schweitzer concluded that insanity was behind Jesus’ claim to be God. In other words, Jesus was wrong about his claims but did not intentionally lie. According to this theory, Jesus was deluded into actually believing he was the Messiah. Persons who are awarded with prestigious awards such as Nobel Prize are not exception to this observation. They go to the extents that Jesus could have been an insane person. He forgets that Jesus was not talking like an insane person. He was making speeches those made much sense to lay men of his time. His talk appealed to them and therefore, he was getting such a big response and that made the priest of Jew religion became worried so mush so that they planned to crucify him with help of then rulers of the land the Romans. Nobody want to kill a madman. Mad person can never talk in consistent manner the way Jesus was delivering his speeches to common people. by condemning him as a possible lunatic this Nobel Prize winner has shown his immaturity and nothing else. They suggest an idea of Jesus self deceiving. What he would get by that? We see many upstarts posing as God men claiming to be God never roam the way Jesus was without any personal interest. Why he would talk and say that he is God when he has no intention to make any advantage out of that claim?

Continues in the next post –
You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Saturday, August 11, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 78

Continued from previous post –
Western scholars continue to assert that historians believe Jesus lied. However, scholars have scrutinized Jesus’ words and life to see if there is any evidence of a defect in his moral character. In fact, even the most ardent skeptics are stunned by Jesus’ moral and ethical purity. This is an additional proof that Jesus was murdered or there was an attempt to kill him to appease Jew priests. There influence in the Roman government was high, they did not want to disturb them, and at the same time, they did not want to kill Jesus.
According to historian Philip Schaff, there is no evidence, either in church history or in secular history that Jesus lied about anything. Schaff argued, “How, in the name of logic, common sense, and experience, could a deceitful, selfish, depraved man have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to end, the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality?” This explains that it was a conspiracy by Jewish priest to condemn him in the eyes of gentry.
To go with the option of liar seems to swim upstream against everything Jesus taught, lived, and died for. To most scholars, it just does not make sense. Yet, to deny Jesus’ claims, one must come up with some explanation. And if Jesus’ claims are not true, and he wasn’t lying, the only option remaining is that he must have been self-deceived.
Continues in next post –
You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 77

Continued from previous post –

New Testament scholar, J. I. Packer, points out that this title asserts Jesus’ personal deity.
So if Jesus was above lying for personal benefit, perhaps his radical claims were falsified in order to leave a legacy. But the prospect of being beaten to a pulp and nailed to a cross would quickly dampen the enthusiasm of most would-be superstars.
Here is another haunting fact. If Jesus were to have simply dropped the claim of being God’s Son, he never would have been condemned. It was his claim to be God and his unwillingness to recant of it that got him crucified. However, there are other views those say that crucification of Jesus was not merely because he claimed to be Son of God but the ever increasing popularity he was gaining amongst common masses. Priest community was afraid that if Jesus continues to get such overwhelming support he might commence his own cult similar to his predecessor, John the Baptist. Therefore, to consider that if Jesus had accepted that he was not Son of God, priests of Jew community would allow him to continue his activities in that nation is not correct. They wanted to get rid of him anyway.
If enhancing his credibility and historical reputation was what motivated Jesus to lie, one must explain how a carpenter’s son from a poor Judean village could ever anticipate the events that would catapult his name to worldwide prominence. How would he know his message would survive? Jesus’ disciples had fled and Peter had denied him. That could not be exactly the formula for launching a religious legacy.

Continues in the next post –

You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Monday, July 2, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 76

Continued from previous post –

The question we must deal with is what could possibly motivate Jesus to live his entire life as a lie? Or did he really lived as that? He taught that God was opposed to lying and hypocrisy, so he would not have been doing it to please his Father. He certainly did not lie for his followers’ benefit, since all but one was martyred rather than renouncing his Lordship. John the Baptist was his predecessor who was similarly chastised by Jew Priesthood for the same reason. Jew priesthood was haunted by the presumption of their own making that these two are their competitor in the business of religion. Even though, the situation was not that. Neither John the Baptist nor Jesus were interested in establishing any new religion but they only wanted to enlighten common masses of that region, they were working for all people and not only for Jews. Mostly they were working for Areamian people who were living in the same region. Therefore, we are left with only two other reasonable explanations, each of which is problematic.
Many people have lied for personal gain. In fact, the motivation of most lies is some perceived benefit to oneself. What could Jesus have hoped to gain from lying about his identity? Power would be the most obvious answer. If people believed he was God, he would have tremendous power. (That is why many ancient leaders, such as the Caesars, claimed divine origin.)
The rub with this explanation is that Jesus shunned all attempts to move him in the direction of seated power, instead chastising those who abused such power and lived their lives pursuing it. He also chose to reach out to the outcasts (prostitutes and lepers), those without power, creating a network of people whose influence was less than zero. In a way that could only be described as bizarre, all that Jesus did and said moved diametrically in the other direction from power.
It would seem that if power was Jesus’ motivation, he would have avoided the cross at all costs. Yet, on several occasions, he told his disciples that the cross was his destiny and mission. How would dying on a Roman cross bring one power?
Death, of course, brings all things into proper focus. And while many martyrs have died for a cause they believed in, few have been willing to die for a known lie. Certainly all hopes for Jesus’ own personal gain would have ended on the cross.
Yet, to his last breath, he would not relinquish his claim of being the unique Son of God.

Continues in the next post –

You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते 

Monday, June 11, 2018

Origin of Roman Catholic Church – 75

Continued from previous post –
In his quest for truth, Lewis knew that he could not have it both ways with the identity of Jesus. Either Jesus was who he claimed to be—God in the flesh—or his claims were false. And if they were false, Jesus could not be a great moral teacher. Either he would be lying intentionally or he would be a lunatic with a God complex. Conversely, we should note that people who are trying to apprehend him are not competent to understand him. This approach is more suitable because to understand such great souls is not the work of ordinary people who may be thinking that they are competent to understand Jesus. According to Hindu belief, every body is god from within and the only difference is that ordinary person is not aware that he/she is god from within. All Hindu philosophy is aimed at this one approach. Therefore, by Hindu approach this claim of Jesus that he is god is perfectly acceptable. However, by European mind critics this approach is not accepted since there teaching is different. They do not understand the idea that we humans are gods from within.
Even Jesus’ harshest critics rarely have called him a liar. That label certainly doesn’t fit with Jesus’ high moral and ethical teaching. But if Jesus isn’t who he claimed to be, we must consider the option that he was intentionally misleading everyone.
One of the best-known and most influential political works of all time was written by Niccolò Machiavelli in 1532. In his classic, The Prince, Machiavelli exalts power, success, image, and efficiency above loyalty, faith, and honesty. According to Machiavelli, lying is okay if it accomplishes a political end.
Could Jesus Christ have built his entire ministry upon a lie just to gain power, fame, or success? In fact, the Jewish opponents of Jesus were constantly trying to expose him as a fraud and liar. They would barrage him with questions in attempts to trip him up and make him contradict himself. Yet Jesus responded with remarkable consistency.
Continues in the next post –

You may contact me on my Email ID given below,
You are invited to visit my other blogs
Ashok Kothare, http://ashokkotharesblog.blogspot.com/ for stories
I reckon, http://kotharesviews.blogspot.com/ for philosophy
You may visit blog, Freedom of Expression,
Freedom of Expression, http://kothare-thinks.blogspot.in/

Marathi blog, http://kothare-marathi.blogspot.in/ मला असे वाटते