Why does Atheist Richard Dawkins sound religious? After all he agrees with most religions on Jesus?

If Jesus is the only way, why do so many think he was just a good man?

Check out the following list…

1) Islam……
Holds Jesus to be a prophet, or messenger of God, along with Muhammad, Moses, Abraham, Noah, and others.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

2) Jewish…….
American rabbi and author Milton Steinberg (1903 – 1949) wrote that Jews saw the historical Jesus as a “noble and loving Jewish teacher."
Source: M. Steinberg, 1975 Basic Judaism pp. 106-107, New York: Harcourt, Brace Jovanovich

3) Baha’i……
Founded in 19th-century Persia, considers Jesus, along with Muhammad, the Buddha, Krishna, and Zoroaster, and other messengers of the great religions of the world to be Manifestations of God (or prophets), with both human and divine stations.
Source: Stockman, Robert (1992). "Jesus Christ in the Baha'i Writings". Bahá'í Studies Review

4) Krishna......
-The International Society for Krishna Consciousness considers Jesus to be a shaktyavesha, the beloved son of Krishna who came down to Earth to preach God consciousness.
-Contemporary Sant Mat movements regard Jesus as a Satguru.
-Ramakrishna believed that Jesus was an Incarnation of God Swami Vivekananda has praised Jesus and cited him as a source of strength and the epitome of perfection.
-Paramahansa Yogananda taught that Jesus was the reincarnation of Elisha.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

5) Buddists……
Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama regard Jesus as a ‘bodhisattva’ who dedicated his life to the welfare of human beings.
Source: Beverley, James A. "Jesus Christ also lived previous lives", he said. "So, you see, he reached a high state, either as a Bodhisattva, or an enlightened person, through Buddhist practice or something like that".

6) Sikh......
See Jesus as a wonderful parallel with the person of Nanak, the first Sikh Guru....as with Allah and the Buddha.
Source: www.bbc.co.uk...

7) Manichaeism......
Accepted Jesus as a prophet, along with Gautama Buddha and Zoroaster.
Source: Bevan, A. A. (1930). "Manichaeism". Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, Volume VIII Ed. James Hastings. Londo

8) New Agers......
Generally teach that Christhood is something that all may attain. Alice A. Bailey, who, invented the term ‘New Age’, refers to him as ‘Master Jesus’ and believe he had previous incarnations.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

9) Jesus Seminars......
Portrays him as an itinerant Hellenistic Jewish sage who did not die as a substitute for sinners nor rise from the dead, but preached a "social gospel" of goodness.
Source: en.wikipedia.org...

10) Deists......
Thomas Jefferson, Founding Fathers of the United States, created the Jefferson Bible entitled "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth" that included only Jesus' ethical teachings because he did not believe in his divinity
Source: en.wikipedia.org...



EVEN today’s famous atheists Richard Dawkins recognizes, “What was interesting and remarkable about Jesus was not the obvious fact that he believed in the God of his Jewish religion, but that he rebelled against many aspects of Yahweh's vengeful nastiness. At least in the teachings that are attributed to him, he publicly advocated niceness and was one of the first to do so!”

Yet the comments stated above, although they agree…defies intellectual logic in my mind…

A short illustration…Remember Back to the Future and the DeLorean (sp?) Imagine if you were Michael J Fox and someone asked you to go to five (only 5) different time zones/geographical areas and meet one person in each time zone/area and ask them, "please write a book about God, I'll be back in 5 years to collect it."

Five years later you went and picked up the five books. Logically speaking what are the chances those five books would agree? What are the chances those five books would build upon one another? What are the chances you could make any semblance out of them...to live by or the like? Snowballs in your know where, right?

Different people! Different cultures! Difference Time frames! Different Premises! Different World view! etc...

Logically speaking you would have five unconnected books with five different perspectives, right?

Well, the Bible (torah, prophets, gospels, epistles, revelation) are not 5 books by five authors, but 66 books by 40 authors...who did not know one another, did not live in the same town, did not live in the same time line...authors were of every occupation and financial status........yet......the Bible is a one-themed, continuing story.

Doesn't prove it God's Word yet though...just something that might warrant another look.

Point 2 ---- Here's an undisputable fact (I believe at least after examining) Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be God, his followers claimed He claimed to be God...and...non Christian journalist (such as Josephus) claimed He claimed he was God. Doesn't appear here to be different agendas going on. He said it, His followers said He said it, third parties said He said it and even his enemies said He said it (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc)

SO...with all that said...we have only two LOGICAL outcomes. No religious double-talk here) Either you BELIEVE or you REJECT. Really no other options right? If you believe, then to you HE IS LORD. If you REJECT there are really only two options for you.

1) JC knew he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LIAR

2) JC didn't know he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LUNATIC.

That's the only three logical outcomes...LIAR, LUNATIC or LORD. There is no room for him being a good guy and all, no room for him being a prophet as every other religion on the face of the earth calls him.

Because prophets don't lie and they are not usually in psych wards.

Point 3 ---- Most direct followers were killed for believing in JC. If they had stole his body and the Romans excused, at least one of them would have squilled just before their execution right? I would have...

but NO-All these ordinary folks were willing to die for what they saw… ???

To sum up, Chronicles of Narnia author, CS Lewis said, “I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who said the sort of things Jesus said 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. 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.”


Your thoughts ATS-ers?



[edit on 15-11-2009 by OldThinker]

Religion presupposes a belief in the supernatural. Dawkins does not believe in the supernatural. Ergo, he is not religious.

Although, he agrees, in principle, with some of the ethical teachings of jesus from the bible.

Originally posted by Kaytagg
Religion presupposes a belief in the supernatural. Dawkins does not believe in the supernatural. Ergo, he is not religious.

Although, he agrees, in principle, with some of the ethical teachings of jesus from the bible.

Kaytagg, thank you so much for your input...

OT

reply to post by Kaytagg




Does it seem odd that he AGREES with most "religious" leaders about the person of Jesus, to you?

OT

Great thread OT. I have often wondered myself at some of the false accusations related to Jesus. Eleven of the twelve disciples were martyred for their belief and even Peter was nailed upside down on the cross for his belief. None of these men who walked with Jesus thought he was just a good teacher.

Even his enemies who were trying to kill him could not dispute his miracles (curing a blind man they all new since birth) yet 2000 years later a man in a lab coat tells his students he was just a good teacher?

Originally posted by Kargun
Great thread OT. I have often wondered myself at some of the false accusations related to Jesus. Eleven of the twelve disciples were martyred for their belief and even Peter was nailed upside down on the cross for his belief. None of these men who walked with Jesus thought he was just a good teacher.

Even his enemies who were trying to kill him could not dispute his miracles (curing a blind man they all new since birth) yet 2000 years later a man in a lab coat tells his students he was just a good teacher?

Kargun, thank you so much for replying...


I have not seen you before on ATS, glad ur here!

Originally posted by Kargun
......Eleven of the twelve disciples were martyred for their belief and even Peter was nailed upside down on the cross for his belief. None of these men who walked with Jesus thought he was just a good teacher. .....

Yes, that sort of throws out the 'jesus is a myth' theory...many of the historians of the day, and after...recorded the deaths of the followers of Jesus...


they were all willing to be be killed...very powerful evidence there!

I think that was a wonderful post but I'm biased.Lol

I used to think that people who didn't believe in him were a bunch of deadbeats, that were just too lazy to seek out the truth, but now I know they are spiritually dead and have no desire to wake up.

Jesus is the one!

Those who think Dawkins is preaching or 'evangelical' about Atheism refuse to actually listen to him carefully. I see no preaching whatsoever. But then again I do not have my fingers in my ears yelling NYAA!!!!NYA!!!!!!!!!!!!NYA!!!!!!

reply to post by OldThinker

66 books by 40 authors

Maybe 1 or 2 wrote their work, and others read it and made their work, then others read IT, and wrote THEIRS. AKA - they based their works on what the previous author had written while alive.

Yes, that sort of throws out the 'jesus is a myth' theory

Strices me as odd of you to conclude that Jesus existed, just because followers of him were recorded by historians (which i dont know is true) That would at best be hearsay.



The question that remains then is... why didnt historians at the time record JESUS himself? Only his followers?

There isnt any record of romans cruzifying anyone named jesus.

If a man with his fame, one who could perform miracles and was the son of a god, realy existed there would be contemporary writings about him.. but consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!


ALL the things in the bible about him were written long after his death by people who had heard stuff abot jesus from other people... hearsay in otherwords.

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts.

The key is CONTEMPORARY stuff doesnt exist.. You show me all these things written long after the alleged death of Je-Zeus.

Originally posted by OldThinker
Does it seem odd that he AGREES with most "religious" leaders about the person of Jesus, to you?

OT

No.

The basic teachings of jesus tend towards humanitarianism and respect for one another.

There's not a lot to get up in arms about with there, really. These are concepts that are quite universal, and found to one degree or another in all of the religions you mention, and they are also longstanding elements of atheist philosophy.

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Disclosure of interest: I am an agnostic.

So far as I am concerned, Dawkins is religious. He professes the atheist faith. In fact, he evangelizes the atheist faith.

With all respect to the earlier poster, in my view, the crucial feature of religion is not a belief in the supernatural, but a claim of knowledge about the supernatural. Dawkins claims that he knows whether or not God exists. He's in.

As to the question of Jesus, there is a lot to admire about him apart from addressing the issues of whether he thought he was God, whether he was right about that, and whether he said that he was different from you and me. These problems are usually bound up in what Jesus meant by such phrases as Son of God and Kingdom of the Father.

The diversity of views about Jesus, ably summarized in the OP, may well reflect different ideas about the meaning of those terms. Further, when expressing any view about Jesus, a living person can expect to confront material based upon revelations about Jesus received after he departed from the Earth. It is not obvious that someone who admired the Gospel of John would necessarily be impressed with the Epistles of Paul.

C.S. Lewis was a Christian apologist. That is, he was in the same line of work as Dawkins is now, but represented a different brand of supernatural knowledge. It is unsurprising, then, that Lewis would be impatient with those who agreed with him only part way. But an Oxford Don ought to know better than to call any opponent's honestly held view "foolish." In that, he and Dawkins are just alike.

May I suggest a great book that will answer all these questions for you. It's called The God Delusion by errr Richard Dawkins. If you've never read it, I highly recommend it.

Do you believe jesus was born to a virgin?
Do you believe jesus was born again after 3 days after being killed?
Do you believe he could walk on water? turn water to wine?

Dawkins is a scientist and science would suggest all these things are impossible. Yet many people believe them to be true, just a small part of the dillusion.

I'm gonna throw in with Dawkins.

"The true scientist, however passionately he may “believe”, in evolution for example, knows exactly what would change his mind: evidence! The fundamentalist knows that nothing will

[edit on 16-11-2009 by woodwardjnr]

Originally posted by OldThinker
Because prophets don't lie and they are not usually in psych wards.

Mohammed was a prophet and was neither a liar nor a lunatic, by your very argument. Yet, he preached a different way to God.

I don't think you can choose to apply an argument selectively to one person.

Logically, this statement is flawed. There must be a third option. An incorrect belief does not make you a lunatic. Otherwise at least half of the world must be lunatics.

If Jesus believed he was God (or a part of God, since he split God into three parts), he is no more a lunatic than a Buddhist that believes we are all God (or a part of God, split into a million parts, making up the population.)

Jesus was not a lunatic, and he was not a liar.
Mohammed was not a lunatic, and he was not a liar.

How can you say that Jesus is right and Mohammed is wrong, when they're in the same boat?

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Dawkins is a scientist and science would suggest all these things are impossible. Yet many people believe them to be true, just a small part of the dillusion.

Science is also a religion, which believes any "fact" which suits our theories.

At the start of the century, science taught that genetic features were contained in proteins (they did not know about DNA.)

They believed it as strongly as a Christian believes in Jesus.

But the scientists were wrong.

What gives you the right to say that science is any more true, or any less a belief than any other religion?

i never really understood the question at first, but i kind of do now.

my theory - basicly, he loves to use the word athiest for his anti religion. his anti religion is actualy more fanaticly religious towards itself than most religions, athiests are also much more preachy.

not only that, he, like most of us on ats were brought up wether we like it or not to respect christian beliefs. and its most likely that he is actualy religious but he doesnt like the fact he is actualy religious.

its blatent he is a man of stong beliefs, wether he likes to admit it or not .. if he was truely a man of no religion (much like myself) then why does he feel the need to use that nasty word athiest to describe his non beliefs?? and why does he feel the need to preach on about his anti religion and try and change peoples beliefs to be the same as his.....in short, dawkins atheisim is a CULT and nothing more... i am a man of no beliefs but im not arrogant enough to point blank refuse everything and label myself with that tacky word athiest? if you dont believe in something why give that non belief a name unless you want people to believe that too!

eight bits - i just noticed your reply now! basicly the same thoughts on dawkins as me! (love the name btw) - dont you just have self hating religious fanatics?!



[edit on 16-11-2009 by boaby_phet]

How can an atheist be religious, I see this claim splattered all over ATS. Just because we do not believe in a super natural diety and prefer to view our world through rigorous scientific reasearch to come to our conclusions about the world. Striving for proof and universal truths rather than from a book written over 2000 years ago, with many interpretations.

I can not believe Jesus walked on water and was born to a virgin. it has never happend since in 2000 years.

atheists are also prepared to have their beliefs changed. for example if a new theory on evolution comes along, that has been rigoursly tested and can be scientifically verified we would accept the new theory.

Originally posted by Myrtales Instinct
.....but now I know they are spiritually dead and have no desire to wake up.

Lot of truth there MI...

Appreciate the post!

Originally posted by vox2442
.....

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

OK, then I'll repeat the OP with some bold..."A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg--or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool 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.

Further statements you should not IGNORE...

Christ claimed to live a sinless life
Jesus could look at a crowd of people angry at his claims to share God's nature and ask, "Which of you can point to anything wrong in my life?" Even more amazing is that none of them could give a reply! No human being has ever lived a sinless life, except for Jesus Christ.

John 8:28-29 "So Jesus said, 'When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know who I am and that I do nothing on my own but speak just what the Father has taught me. The one who sent me is with me; he has not left me alone, for I always do what pleases him.'"

John 8:46-47 "Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don't you believe me? He who belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."



Jesus Christ claimed to be the ONLY way to God
Not one of several ways, but the one and only way. Not to teach the way, but to be the way to God. Nobody has ever made claims like that before and backed them, but Jesus did through his love, balanced life, and miracles.

John 14:6 "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father but by me."

Matthew 11:27 "All things have been committed to me by my Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him."

Note: No other world religious leader, such as Buddha, Confucius, or Mohammed ever made this claim.


Christ claimed to have shared the glory of God in Heaven
Jesus claimed to have pre-existed the people he spoke with. The apostle John--who shared bread with Jesus--wrote that Jesus was with God in the very beginning, and that "all things came into being through him, and without him not one thing came into being." (John 1:1-5)

John 17:5 "And now, Father, glorify me in your presence with the glory I had with you before the world began."



Jesus Christ claimed to be able to forgive sins
One of the reasons that the Jewish leaders were so angry with Jesus was his continual practice of forgiving people's sins. The religious leaders understood clearly that since sins were rebellion against God Himself, only God could forgive sins.

Luke 5:20-21 "When Jesus saw their faith, he said, 'Friend, your sins are forgiven.' The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, 'Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?'"(emphasis: web author)

Luke 7:48-49 "Then Jesus said to her, 'Your sins are forgiven.' The other guests began to say among themselves, 'Who is this who even forgives sins?'"



Christ claimed to be a Heavenly king
Luke 22:69 "But from now on, the Son of Man will be seated at the right hand of the mighty God."

Luke 23:1-3 "Then the whole assembly rose and led him off to Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, 'We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Christ, a king.' So Pilate asked Jesus, 'Are you the king of the Jews?' 'Yes, it is as you say,' Jesus replied."

John 18:36-37 "Jesus said, 'My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place.' 'You are a king, then!' said Pilate. Jesus answered, 'You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.'"


Christ claimed to be able to give everlasting life
Jesus didn't just tell people how they could find everlasting life, or deepen their own life experience. He actually claimed to give life himself.

John 6:40 "For my Father's will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day."

John 6:47 "I tell you the truth, he who believes has everlasting life."

John 10:28-30 "I give [my followers] eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one."

John 11:25 "Jesus said to her, 'I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in me will live, even though he dies; and whoever lives and believes in me will never die...'"

Jesus claimed that he would die and come back to life
John 10:17 "Just as the Father knows me and I know the Father--and I lay down my life for the sheep. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life--only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father."

John 12:32-33 "'But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself.' He said this to show the kind of death he was going to die."

John 16:16 "In a little while you will see me no more, and then after a little while you will see me."

Luke 18:31-33 "Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, 'We are going up into Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.'"

link: www.whoisjesus-really.com...

What I am getting at is simple....it is illogical to call JC good, and NOT God

Originally posted by Saurus
....How can you say that Jesus is right and Mohammed is wrong, when they're in the same boat?

Saurus, thank you friend for your thoughts...

In respect to this question, it is really easy...

Listen to their "own" words about themselves. See JC's word a few posts up, ok?

And a lil thing called an empty tomb, right?

OT