Pro Resolution



The historical Jesus Christ was a doomsday cult leader. In other words, he taught that a destructive global calamity is imminently within his own generation.



Clarification



This resolution is NOT an attempt to faithfully interpret the New Testament, though the writings of the New Testament may be used for evidence. The debate is about the probable historical Jesus, not necessarily the Jesus of religious or Biblical faith.



Definitions

"Jesus Christ" is a historical human being of the same rough profile of the central character of Jesus in the Christian gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

A “generation” is a group of people of roughly the same age and living at the same time, and it is used to signify a length of time bounded by the births and deaths of the group of people, as opposed to a longer length of time covering centuries.

A “doomsday cult” is a small group of people who are strongly devoted to the perceived will of a human leader and believes that the world will soon face a destructive global calamity. The term is primarily intended to be descriptive, not pejorative. A “doomsday cult leader” is a leader of a doomsday cult, and such a model of Jesus is otherwise known among critical New Testament scholars as, “apocalyptic prophet.”

“Destructive global calamity” is a set of events that entail death and destruction all over the world and strongly affecting everyone living, through many such events as wars, political upheavals and natural disasters. Opposing Contender



A contender may be anyone who does not believe that the historical Jesus was a doomsday cult leader, including but not limited to someone who believes or suspects that Jesus was merely a myth, that Jesus was the son of God or messiah, or that Jesus was a mere human but commendable moral teacher, rabbi, social activist or philosopher.



Personal note



This is my first debate on Debate.org, but I consider myself an experienced veteran of debate elsewhere on the Internet. I hope it will be an uplifting and educational experience for all participants and observers, not merely a religious battle of words. The historical Jesus Christ was a doomsday cult leader. In other words, he taught that a destructive global calamity is imminently within his own generation.This resolution is NOT an attempt to faithfully interpret the New Testament, though the writings of the New Testament may be used for evidence. The debate is about the probable historical Jesus, not necessarily the Jesus of religious or Biblical faith.A contender may be anyone who does not believe that the historical Jesus was a doomsday cult leader, including but not limited to someone who believes or suspects that Jesus was merely a myth, that Jesus was the son of God or messiah, or that Jesus was a mere human but commendable moral teacher, rabbi, social activist or philosopher.This is my first debate on Debate.org, but I consider myself an experienced veteran of debate elsewhere on the Internet. I hope it will be an uplifting and educational experience for all participants and observers, not merely a religious battle of words. Report this Argument Con Thank you for this interesting topic, ApostateAbe,



Whether or not Jesus was the messiah that he claimed to be can be questionable, but certainly Jesus should not be demonized as an apocalyptic prophet. My position is that Jesus should be, at the very least, regarded as a commendable moral teacher.



But above all, the message that Jesus preached was to teach mankind to live in peace and harmony. He preformed miracles to help those in need, and taught others to live a righteous life. Jesus taught people to be selfless and caring,



My opponent has sought to portray the central figure of Christianity in a negative light, by promoting him as a "doomsday" cult leader, who promotes "destructive and global calamity". Although portions of the Bible do prophesize of an eventual apocalypse, the majority of Jesus' teachings promote benevolence and compassion.



My opponent Cites:



"According to the Lord's word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever." -Thessalonians 4:15-17



Also,



"And he said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the kingdom of God after it has come with power."" - Mark 9:1



I'd like to point out that the apocalyptic messages issued in Mark 9:1 and Thessalonians 4:15-17 etc. are to serve only as incentives for dutiful Christians to live a rich and fulfilling life.



Further referencing the Bible,



"He who is kind to the poor lends to the LORD, and he will reward him for what he has done." - Proverbs 19:17



We can see that, more importantly, Jesus encouraged others to be generous and selfless and that the Lord will reward the generous whether in life or the afterlife.



"One man gives freely, yet gains even more; another withholds unduly, but comes to poverty. A generous man will prosper; he who refreshes others will himself be refreshed." -Proverbs 11:24-25



"Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver." -2 Corinthians 9:7



"For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" -- Galatians 5:14



These are just a small handful of Jesus' teachings that promotes and spreads a message of love and compassion to the world.



"Suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope" (Romans 5:3-4)."



We can see that, although Jesus warns the sinful people that their judgment will come, Jesus also gives hope to the people who are already suffering. It is my speculation, that Jesus' main motive was to make the rich people more generous in so that they can distribute their wealth to the poor. He also taught the poor to work together and have hope for the future.



Most of Jesus' negative messages can be directly related to the rich, powerful, and sinful men of his day,

But Jesus message of love and compassion is also aimed at giving hope to the poor, and teaching them to live amongst one another cheerfully and respectfully. Call me a radicalist, but Jesus could be considered to be the first

Marxist in the history of the world! Examine,



Messages aimed to promote the working class:



Lk. 3:14 - " Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely--be content with your pay."



"Not that I was ever in need, for I have learned how to be content with whatever I have." -Phil. 4:11



Sound a little like

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" –Karl Marx



Also, apocalyptic messages aimed to criticize and warn, the ancient Bourgeoisie:



"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many grieves." -Tim 6:10



"In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping." -Peter 2:3



In the end Jesus sacrificed his life to atone for the sins of man. These are the facts which I will further prove to you in the following rounds, and the majority of Jesus' teachings and actions are simply out of compassion and goodness of mankind.



This ends my first post,

I will proceed with my argument in this form during my 2nd post, I will also include rebuttals to points my opponent has made.



I will prove that

1) Jesus was commendable moral teacher, he may not have been divine, but his intention was for the good of mankind, and that Jesus made sacrifices for the goodness of mankind.

2) The effect of Jesus OVERALL message has had a more positive than negative impact on the history of the world.

3) The apocalypse may or may not occur. In fact, the apocalypse is nothing more than a metaphor used by Jesus to symbolize some sort of retribution that those who are not righteous, in order to set forth a sense of divine justice.



The last post will be used for conclusions, and I hope that no new points or evidence should be brought up.



Good luck, ApostateAbe Report this Argument

Pro Introduction



I would like to thank my partner in this debate (I prefer "partner" to "opponent") for his valuable and steady-tempered thoughts on this contentious subject. It has already been a learning experience for me. I will present my arguments, and, given space limitations, I will make counterpoints to many of the above arguments at a later point.



Apocalyptic prophecies



The three earliest gospels, also known as the "synoptic gospels" of Mark, Matthew and Luke, each contain roughly the same set of apocalyptic prophecies, each with a certain deadline. The deadline was the death of the last of Jesus' immediate listeners.



In Mark 8, the prophecies are as follows:

If any want to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it

Those who are ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of them the Son of Man will also be ashamed when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels The deadline for these two prophecies is given as, "Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power" (Mark 9:1, see also Matthew 16:28 and Luke 9:27).



Mark 13 contains much fuller detail of the end of the world. In Mark 13, the prophecies are as follows: Many will come in my name and say, "I am he!" and they will lead many astray.

For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom

earthquakes

famines

you will be beaten in synagogues

brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child

children will rise against parents and have them put to death

those in Judea must flee to the mountains

Woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing infants in those days

suffering, such as has not been from the beginning of the creation that God created until now, no, and never will be

False messiahs and false prophets will appear and produce signs and omens, to lead astray, if possible, the elect.

the powers in the heavens will be shaken

the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power The deadline for all of these prophecies is given as, "Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place" (Mark 13:30, see also Matthew 24:34 and Luke 21:32).



When reviewing this set of prophecies, it is important to note, despite what many people (not just my debate partner) are inclined to believe, that theses prophecies do NOT "serve only as incentives for dutiful Christians to live a rich and fulfilling life." Neither are these prophecies are metaphorical. On the contrary, Jesus was very specific about the horrible calamities that would soon engulf the world, and Jesus commanded his disciples to leave their homes, families and livelihoods, for the sake of following him and saving others, and they did, as I explain below.



Imminent deadline



The same imminent deadline is expressed in two different ways: (1) the death of all of "those standing here," and (2) "this generation" passes away. This pair of expressions was first recorded in the gospel of Mark, and it is repeated in both Matthew and Luke.



The gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke were apparently written before the deadline, but we have evidence of embarrassment in Christian writings composed after the deadline passed. The two key passages are John 21:20-23 and 2 Peter 3:3-9.



The Second Epistle of Peter was composed not by the disciple Peter but by a man writing in the middle of the second century CE, and by that time the apocalyptic deadline of Jesus could not be merely dismissed as a rumor, as in the gospel of John. Scoffers of Christianity were assailing them for the failed deadline of the apocalyptic prophecies, and doubts could be seen from within the church. So, the author of 2 Peter has an apologetic defense different from the author of the gospel of John: he claims that there is no slowness with God, even if the fulfillment of the promise seems slow to mere mortals.



Further cult characteristics



If you take the gospel accounts at face value, even regardless of whether or not you accept the theology or miracle stories, then a doomsday cult leader is the character profile that you find in Jesus. But, the Biblical evidence goes further. In addition to the doomsday prophecies and leading a small cult, according to the synoptic gospels, Jesus:

strongly encouraged complete devotion to his self (Matthew 16:16-17).

encouraged hatred of one's family (Luke 14:26) and complete separation from one's family (Matthew 19:29).

made enemies of the religious and political authorities (Matthew 21:23-27).

commanded the members to devote all of their time and their lives to his own leadership (Luke 9:61-62). These characteristics of Jesus are very narrowly and strongly expected of a leader of a "dangerous cult," not the Son of God, not a philosopher, and not a mere myth. A checklist of characteristics of a "dangerous cult" has been published by the cult studies journal. Each of those four characteristics are containted within that checklist (see



Though the synoptic gospels are among the earliest evidence for Jesus, they are still only beliefs, not necessarily historically-accurate accounts. So, what are the best explanations for these beliefs?



Sociological pattern of doomsday cults



There is a known personality profile of those who lead religious movements and tell others that the end of the world is directly at hand: doomsday cult leaders. History and the modern day are littered with those people, and they very much tend to be actual people, not mere myths.



If you interpret the gospels at face value, then Jesus was a doomsday cult leader, even if such a phrase carries a derogatory connotation. If you interpret the gospels at face value, then Jesus led a cult and predicted the doomsday. This is a very plausible model of Jesus, given that we have many human characters in history who fit the same profile.



Strong cults do not always predict the doomsday, but doomsday prophecies are almost exclusively the mark of a cult--they motivate adherents to go to extremes to evangelize, work for the cult and recruit, because they believe that the fate of the whole world is at stake in what they do. Many such cult leaders develop into myths, including myths with miracles. A particularly close comparison to this model of the historical Jesus is Haile Selassie of Rastafarianism.



Recently, an article was written that explored the analogous myths of Haile Selassie, the figurehead of Rastafarianism. It was published in 2009 in the journal Think of The Royal Institute of Philosophy, titled, "Against Mythicism: A Case for the Plausibility of a Historical Jesus" by Edmund Standing. Though the historical Haile Selassie was a third-world dictator as authoritarian, violent, ambitious and amoral as any, the cult that was founded on his character portrayed him as a divine wise generous messianic enactor of miracles. The vestiges of the historical Jesus found in the New Testament portray little that is different.



Conclusion



The reputed "golden rule of interpretation" is: "If the plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense or it will result in nonsense" (Robert M. West, How to Study the Bible). There can be exceptions to this rule, but exceptions should carry a strong burden of proof. Anyone can find any number of ways to dodge the meaning of the words of the historical Jesus, but, when one and only one explanation has seemingly far-superior explanatory power, explanatory scope, plausibility, consistency with accepted beliefs and deficiency of ad hoc suppositions (C. Behan McCullagh, Justifying Historical Descriptions), then I think that is the explanation that we should accept. I would like to thank my partner in this debate (I prefer "partner" to "opponent") for his valuable and steady-tempered thoughts on this contentious subject. It has already been a learning experience for me. I will present my arguments, and, given space limitations, I will make counterpoints to many of the above arguments at a later point.The three earliest gospels, also known as the "synoptic gospels" of Mark, Matthew and Luke, each contain roughly the same set of apocalyptic prophecies, each with a certain deadline. The deadline was the death of the last of Jesus' immediate listeners.In Mark 8, the prophecies are as follows:The deadline for these two prophecies is given as, "Truly I tell you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see that the kingdom of God has come with power" (Mark 9:1, see also Matthew 16:28 and Luke 9:27).Mark 13 contains much fuller detail of the end of the world. In Mark 13, the prophecies are as follows:The deadline for all of these prophecies is given as, "Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place" (Mark 13:30, see also Matthew 24:34 and Luke 21:32).When reviewing this set of prophecies, it is important to note, despite what many people (not just my debate partner) are inclined to believe, that theses prophecies do NOT "serve only as incentives for dutiful Christians to live a rich and fulfilling life." Neither are these prophecies are metaphorical. On the contrary, Jesus was very specific about the horrible calamities that would soon engulf the world, and Jesus commanded his disciples to leave their homes, families and livelihoods, for the sake of following him and saving others, and they did, as I explain below.The same imminent deadline is expressed in two different ways: (1) the death of all of "those standing here," and (2) "this generation" passes away. This pair of expressions was first recorded in the gospel of Mark, and it is repeated in both Matthew and Luke.The gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke were apparently written before the deadline, but we have evidence of embarrassment in Christian writings composed after the deadline passed. The two key passages are John 21:20-23 and 2 Peter 3:3-9.The Second Epistle of Peter was composed not by the disciple Peter but by a man writing in the middle of the second century CE, and by that time the apocalyptic deadline of Jesus could not be merely dismissed as a rumor, as in the gospel of John. Scoffers of Christianity were assailing them for the failed deadline of the apocalyptic prophecies, and doubts could be seen from within the church. So, the author of 2 Peter has an apologetic defense different from the author of the gospel of John: he claims that there is no slowness with God, even if the fulfillment of the promise seems slow to mere mortals.If you take the gospel accounts at face value, even regardless of whether or not you accept the theology or miracle stories, then a doomsday cult leader is the character profile that you find in Jesus. But, the Biblical evidence goes further. In addition to the doomsday prophecies and leading a small cult, according to the synoptic gospels, Jesus:These characteristics of Jesus are very narrowly and strongly expected of a leader of a "dangerous cult," not the Son of God, not a philosopher, and not a mere myth. A checklist of characteristics of a "dangerous cult" has been published by the cult studies journal. Each of those four characteristics are containted within that checklist (see http://www.csj.org... ).Though the synoptic gospels are among the earliest evidence for Jesus, they are still only beliefs, not necessarily historically-accurate accounts. So, what are the best explanations for these beliefs?There is a known personality profile of those who lead religious movements and tell others that the end of the world is directly at hand: doomsday cult leaders. History and the modern day are littered with those people, and they very much tend to be actual people, not mere myths.If you interpret the gospels at face value, then Jesus was a doomsday cult leader, even if such a phrase carries a derogatory connotation. If you interpret the gospels at face value, then Jesus led a cult and predicted the doomsday. This is a very plausible model of Jesus, given that we have many human characters in history who fit the same profile.Strong cults do not always predict the doomsday, but doomsday prophecies are almost exclusively the mark of a cult--they motivate adherents to go to extremes to evangelize, work for the cult and recruit, because they believe that the fate of the whole world is at stake in what they do. Many such cult leaders develop into myths, including myths with miracles. A particularly close comparison to this model of the historical Jesus is Haile Selassie of Rastafarianism.Recently, an article was written that explored the analogous myths of Haile Selassie, the figurehead of Rastafarianism. It was published in 2009 in the journal Think of The Royal Institute of Philosophy, titled, "Against Mythicism: A Case for the Plausibility of a Historical Jesus" by Edmund Standing. Though the historical Haile Selassie was a third-world dictator as authoritarian, violent, ambitious and amoral as any, the cult that was founded on his character portrayed him as a divine wise generous messianic enactor of miracles. The vestiges of the historical Jesus found in the New Testament portray little that is different.The reputed "golden rule of interpretation" is: "If the plain sense makes good sense, seek no other sense or it will result in nonsense" (Robert M. West, How to Study the Bible). There can be exceptions to this rule, but exceptions should carry a strong burden of proof. Anyone can find any number of ways to dodge the meaning of the words of the historical Jesus, but, when one and only one explanation has seemingly far-superior explanatory power, explanatory scope, plausibility, consistency with accepted beliefs and deficiency of ad hoc suppositions (C. Behan McCullagh, Justifying Historical Descriptions), then I think that is the explanation that we should accept. Report this Argument Con sing_along forfeited this round.