All the controversy around "The Passion" has gotten me thinking. The crucifixion of Jesus can't be the basis of Christianity. If Jesus was the son of God and was sent to Earth to spread the word of God (Christianity), then he would obviously not have been able to preach about his crucifixion and his sacrifice, because it hadn't happened yet. The true basis of Christianity is the actual teachings of Jesus.

quote:Originally posted by FreeMind:

then he would obviously not have been able to preach about his crucifixion and his sacrifice, because it hadn't happened yet.

But he did talk about it before it happened. I am an atheist and even I know that.

Being the avatar of sublime and atemporal presence lets you see something like that coming.

quote:Originally posted by Easy Going:

But he did talk about it before it happened. I am an atheist and even I know that.

Yeah plus he was supposedly resurrected.

So maybe then He wrote of His Crucifixion.

I think the resurrection is more important than the crucifixion, but you can't have the latter without the former.

quote:Originally posted by FreeMind:

All the controversy around "The Passion" has gotten me thinking. The crucifixion of Jesus can't be the basis of Christianity. If Jesus was the son of God and was sent to Earth to spread the word of God (Christianity), then he would obviously not have been able to preach about his crucifixion and his sacrifice, because it hadn't happened yet. The true basis of Christianity is the actual teachings of Jesus.

Jesus was sent down to teach but mainly to die so that man could be reconciled with the Christian god. The job of spreading that news was given to his disciples. That message alone(that Jesus died so man could be saved) is probably more important then any other Christian teaching. Think about the number of times that John 3:16 has been brought up by Christians.