Tuesday, March 19, AD 2024 3:42am

Shocking New Discovery About Christ!

 

From those brilliantly twisted folks at The Lutheran Satire.  As CS Lewis said:

 

You will find that a good many Christian political writers think that Christianity began going wrong in departing from the doctrine of its founder at a very early stage. Now this idea must be used by us to encourage once again the conception of a “historical Jesus” to be found by clearing away later “accretions and perversions,” and then to be contrasted with the whole Christian tradition. In the last generation we promoted the construction of such a “historical Jesus” on liberal and humanitarian lines. We are now putting forward a new “historical Jesus” on Marxian, catastrophic and revolutionary lines. The advantages of these constructions, which we intend to change every thirty years or so, are manifold. In the first place they all tend to direct man’s devotion to something which does not exist. Because each “historical Jesus” is unhistorical, the documents say what they say and they cannot be added to. Each new “historical Jesus” has to be got out of them by suppression at one point and exaggeration at another point. And by that sort of guessing (brilliant is the adjective we teach humans to apply to it) on which no one would risk ten shillings in ordinary life, but which is enough to produce a crop of new Napoleons, new Shakespeares, and new Swifts in every publisher’s autumn list. . . . The “historical Jesus,” then, however dangerous he may seem to be to us at some particular point, is always to be encouraged.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Wednesday, July 29, AD 2015 5:25am

Consider, compare and contrast the “evolving” (0 tempores, o mores!) Jesus with Mohammed and his recalcitrant followers’ unchanging faith.
.
One contrast is that Mohammad’s fell revelations have no witness. He said it, and it is objective truth.
.
By contrast, hundreds witnessed Christ’s crucifixion and death. Christ gloriously rose from the tomb on the third day and for forty days appeared to HIs Mother and disciples. Christ ascended into Heaven after forty days and in the presence of Mary and HIs disciples. Later, the Holy Spirit descended on Mary and the Apostles.
.
Finally, the credentialed cretins can’t monkey with the “historic” Muhammad. Because .. . KABOOM.

Don L
Wednesday, July 29, AD 2015 6:59am

“…We are now putting forward a new “historical Jesus” on Marxian, catastrophic and revolutionary lines….”

I wonder if this historic Jesus might be that fellow with Jesuit frock and an Uzi fighting for the “preferential option for the poor” down in Nicaragua a few years back?

Philip
Philip
Wednesday, July 29, AD 2015 7:26am

Thanks for the laugh’s.

It’s about time for Tom Hanks to star as the lead in the new screenplay; “Jesus the Environmentalists.”
Not only is it true that Jesus was married, but he founded Green Peace.

Dan Brown made his thirty silver pieces. Why not others? There seems to be no problem with recycling garbage to make a buck.
Until the last breath is taken, I suppose.

Joachim Abel
Joachim Abel
Wednesday, July 29, AD 2015 8:53am

In keeping with the satircal line, the only piece of evidence that Jesus might have been married is that he did not fight against his execution.

Michael Dowd
Michael Dowd
Thursday, July 30, AD 2015 4:29am

Thanks for the levity Don, And this is how we should view much of the stuff coming out of the Vatican nowadays where we come to find out that Jesus is not who He said He was but rather more like President Obama. Who would have known? What a wonderful teacher we have in Pope Francis!?

Mary De Voe
Friday, July 31, AD 2015 7:50am

As the Son of God, Christ was a brother to all persons. For Christ to marry a woman, Christ would have committed spiritual incest but marrying His spiritual sister. Christ did all that He did for His Father in heaven. Christ’s Father in heaven is an infinite God. Finite persons cannot complete Christ’s mission of salvation for us.

Mary De Voe
Friday, July 31, AD 2015 7:55am

Philip: In Dan Brown’s Da Vinci Code, Brown gives us his opinion on the opinion of Da Vinci of The Last Supper, which Brown calls the truth. Yes, for Da Vinci and Brown and may be Tom Hanks but for Catholics it is still hearsay, two opinions against the truth. Now, more opinions, but the perjury was that Brown called the Da Vinci Code God’s honest truth.

Philip
Philip
Friday, July 31, AD 2015 8:01am

Thanks Mary.
I appreciate the clear explanation.
Peace.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top