LIM CHEE MIN’S MYTH ON CHRISTIANITY

On the night of his arrest, Jesus was said to have gone outside to the Garden of Gethsemane to prostrate on the ground to pray to God (“My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me” — Matthew 26:38). Jesus was also said to have cried out ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?’ while on the cross. If Jesus is the Lord or God in disguise or the Son of God (which also makes him God), why would he need to pray to God and demonstrate desperation?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarauidn

hey pete, pharisees are not christians. cakap tak serupa bikin does not refer to christians but to the religious authorities and religious police of the day – a bit like jakim and jais in a way – that is, the pharisees. the pharisees loved to display their piety in public and many thought of themselves as superior to others on the basis of their ritual piety. Jesus called them hypocrites for being outwardly pious but inwardly lacking in any spirituality or mercy or humility so they eventually crucified him. christians who received the baptism of the holy spirit did not really exist until after Jesus’s death and resurrection. the religious authorities of the day – that is, the pharisees persecuted and killed many christians. the weird and bizzarre misunderstandings and myths about christians and their beliefs as expressed in this article is frankly mind-boggling. But I am glad you wrote it as such misconceptions and misunderstandings should be brought up for civil, free and open discussion whenever possible otherwise they will never be corrected.

Lim Chee Min · Commented on Karamjit Gill, Muslims are just being good Christians

**************************************************

Lim, you said, “Christians who received the baptism of the Holy Spirit did not really exist until after Jesus’s death and resurrection.”

I am not sure whether you mean Christians did not exist until after the death and resurrection of Jesus or whether baptism was not practiced until after the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Anyway, in Matthew 3:13-17, it says as follows:

13. Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14. But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15. And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16. And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
17. And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Jesus was baptised by John the Baptist and the majority of scholars agree that Jesus was a follower of John. They also agree that many followers of John later became followers of Jesus. Mark, Luke and John also imply the same thing although there are some contradictions and inaccuracies in the story when you start comparing all four Gospels.

Now, John was a Jew, as was Jesus and all their followers (John’s and Jesus’). So there is no reference whatsoever to Christians, who did not yet exist at that time. So your comment that ‘Pharisees’ was not referring to Christians is correct because there were no Christians then.

Hence the entire event and references in the Gospels are talking about Jews, not Christians. Jesus was a Jew, as was his ‘guru’, John, and so were James and Peter who continued with the teachings of Jesus after his death. And the church of Jesus was only concerned about Jews and not Gentiles. In fact, there is a reference in the Gospels where Jesus turned a woman away because she was not a Jew. This is mentioned in Matthew 15:21-28.

21. Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon.
22. A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to Him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.”
23. Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to Him and urged Him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.”
24. He answered, “I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel.”
25. The woman came and knelt before Him. “Lord, help me!” she said.
26. He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.”
27. “Yes, Lord,” she said, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.”
28. Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

It was not until Saul a.k.a. Paul that the teachings of Jesus were spread to non-Jews. And this was the main conflict between Paul and the rest of the Jesus Movement such as Peter and James. And that resulted in Paul getting ‘ousted’ from the Movement — so he migrated to Rome to continue to preach his ‘new’ teachings to non-Jews.

When you say that what Jesus said does not refer to Christians that is not correct. You are correct in that it does not refer to Christians in the context that there was no such thing as Christians. But to say that Jesus was condemning the Jews and not the Christians is not accurate. Jesus was condemning his own kind, the Jews, because he, too, was a Jew.

My understanding of the whole event is that Jesus was not introducing a new religion called Christianity. He wanted the Jews to return to the correct teachings of Judaism (I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel). And this is what Peter and James also wanted to do. It was Paul who created this new religion called Christianity. And that was why Peter and James were against Paul.

For example, the Trinity was not the teachings of Jesus but came about more than 300 years later during the time of Constantine. And this is the foundation of the Roman Church, which many ‘Christians’ at that time did not accept. But then those who opposed the doctrine of the Trinity were put to death — so the dissidents were eventually wiped out while the Roman Church survived and flourished under the patronage of Constantine and those who came after him.

On the night of his arrest, Jesus was said to have gone outside to the Garden of Gethsemane to prostrate on the ground to pray to God (“My soul is deeply grieved, to the point of death; remain here and keep watch with Me” — Matthew 26:38). Jesus was also said to have cried out ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?’ while on the cross. If Jesus is the Lord or God in disguise or the Son of God (which also makes him God), why would he need to pray to God and demonstrate desperation?

The Trinity turns Jesus into a God. But Jesus never claimed that. In fact, Jesus was baptised by John and became his follower and not the other way around. No doubt the Resurrection is explained as Jesus dying for our sins. If that is true then Jesus should have known this and he would not have shown signs of desperation by crying out ‘Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?’

We are told that when Jesus was arrested all his disciples ran away to safety and even denied that they were with Jesus. But then the Gospels relate in great detail what happened during the Crucifixion as if the ‘eyewitnesses’ were all there. If no one was around then who were these eyewitnesses?

So, Lim, let us agree to disagree. You can believe what you want to believe. I will analyse what I think is the correct story. Flavius Josephus, in his book Antiquities of the Jews, refers to John, as do the four Gospels. And John is central to the story while Jesus is mentioned as John’s follower, contrary to what the Gospels say.

An academic study of that period must include all the historical reports and not just the Gospels, which understandably would be biased. And other than Josephus, none of the other so many historians mentioned Jesus. It is as if he never existed.

If Jesus was a great leader of his time, as was John, and since whenever Jesus travelled from place to place a ‘multitude’ followed him around, then he would have been significant enough to be mentioned by all these historians. But he was not.

You cannot have had such a great event like that not being mentioned by all those historians when they reported in great detail even lesser and not so significant events of that time. It is like history reporting that 100 people protested the toll on New Year’s Eve but not reporting that 250,000 people came out to protest during the Bersih demonstration. And we are talking about many historians of that period, mind you, not just one.