Was Jesus an Introvert

[Garyincinci]

Me and my GF where watching Jesus Christ Superstar last night and got on the topic of whether Jesus was an introvert or extrovert.

I argue extrovert based on the fact that most introverts aren't the type to be able to gather thousands of listeners and preach. Or to touch individuals one on one. I'd also gather he's an NF as they tend to be very good at teaching a responsible and ethical message, more geared towards religion / theology than free thought.

She argues he was Introverted based on the fact that he often took time "alone". Such as spending time alone in the Desert, or the Gardens.

It's my personal belief that he was nothing more than a glorified David Koresh who after losing control of the whole "christ" thing found that his only way out of the hole he dug was his own execution and martyrdom. If he even existed at all and was not simply the creation of John, Mathew, Luke and Mark.

[jyakulis]

I read on some site he was an INFP. IF he even existed. That bible is a little too far fetched for me.

[booyalab]

I read on some site he was an INFP. IF he even existed. That bible is a little too far fetched for me.

There's historical evidence he existed and he's referenced in the two other main world religions. The question lies in whether he was who he said he was. Besides, you can't provide evidence he didn't exist. (or that anyone didn't, for that matter) It's 'far fetched' upon what basis? You can't just randomly throw out opinions like that in this forum without some indication that you've thought about it for more than 2 seconds.

[booyalab]

As for the actual thread topic, I think he was probably an ambivert.

[jyakulis]

There's historical evidence he existed and he's referenced in the two other main world religions. The question lies in whether he was who he said he was. Besides, you can't provide evidence he didn't exist. (or that anyone didn't, for that matter) It's 'far fetched' upon what basis? You can't just randomly throw out opinions like that in this forum without some indication that you've thought about it for more than 2 seconds.

If he wasn't who he said he was, then how is it that he existed. He then would have lived a life of complete fallacy. The character of Jesus is the story that historians wrote. If none of it's true then is he still Jesus? But I guess that would mean character makes up the person, which doesn't completely make sense.

[booyalab]

If he wasn't who he said he was, then how is it that he existed. He then would have lived a life of complete fallacy. The character of Jesus is the story that historians wrote. If none of it's true then is he still Jesus? But I guess that would mean character makes up the person, which doesn't completely make sense.

no it doesn't make sense. Jesus was either the son of God or a raving lunatic, but he had to be himself.

[jyakulis]

no it doesn't make sense. Jesus was either the son of God or a raving lunatic, but he had to be himself.

So, then I guess your saying he's the son of god based on historical evidence. I'm basing this on the fact that a raving lunatic couldn't walk on water or turn 5 fish into 500. But I could be wrong is there actual historical documentation besides what's written in the bible.

[jyakulis]

Knowledge lol. I went to catholic school for 11 years. But then maybe I didn't gain any knowledge from it.

[booyalab]

So, then I guess your saying he's the son of god based on historical evidence. I'm basing this on the fact that a raving lunatic couldn't walk on water or turn 5 fish into 500. But I could be wrong is there actual historical documentation besides what's written in the bible.
NO I'M NOT. You're completely twisting what I'm saying. The PERSONIFICATION of Jesus has supporting evidence (moreso than Julius Caesar, I'm told, but we still believe he existed) For sake of argument and regardless of what I believe about whether he was the son of God, many people have had stories made up about their lives to illustrate what they believed, like George Washington and the cherry tree.

Yes there is evidence of "a" Jesus besides what is written in the Bible. I'd have to go find it.
There's the gnostic Bibles for one. At the time of Christianity in that region, gnosticism was the main 'competitor' (to risk trivializing the respective beliefs), and his existance was part of that philosophy- but they believed much different things about him than the Christians.

If the focal point of a religion didn't exist (edit: when the religion's a baby and empirical evidence if any is relatively plentiful), dont you think the competition to it would be stressing that he DIDN'T exist as their belief system?

[jyakulis]

NO I'M NOT. You're completely twisting what I'm saying. The PERSONIFICATION of Jesus has supporting evidence (moreso than Julius Caesar, I'm told, but we still believe he existed) For sake of argument and regardless of what I believe about whether he was the son of God, many people have had stories made up about their lives to illustrate what they believed, like George Washington and the cherry tree.

Yes there is evidence of "a" Jesus besides what is written in the Bible. I'd have to go find it.
There's the gnostic Bibles for one. At the time of Christianity in that region, gnosticism was the main 'competitor' (to risk trivializing the respective beliefs), and his existance was part of that philosophy- but they believed much different things about him than the Christians.

If the focal point of a religion didn't exist (edit: when the religion's a baby and empirical evidence if any is relatively plentiful), dont you think the competition to it would be stressing that he DIDN'T exist as their belief system?

Well then touche I guess. All I'm trying to say is history does not equal fiction. History is factual. Though many different interpretations of it exist, it still contains actual events. Irregardless I did believe in his existance anyway I was just being a jackass. I'll choose my words more carefully I spose. :runs into a hole and cries:

[booyalab]

Well then touche I guess. All I'm trying to say is history does not equal fiction. History is factual. Though many different interpretations of it exist, it still contains actual events. Irregardless I did believe in his existance anyway I was just being a jackass. I'll choose my words more carefully I spose. :runs into a hole and cries:

lmao you wimp, ;) I forgive you....THIS TIME

[jyakulis]

lmao you wimp, ;) I forgive you....THIS TIME

"Even strong men cry"
Jeff Lebowski

[booyalab]

"we must laugh at man to avoid crying for him."
Napoleon Bonaparte

[jyakulis]

She argues he was Introverted based on the fact that he often took time "alone". Such as spending time alone in the Desert, or the Gardens.


The desert. Ohh yeah the story where he battled temptations by the devil. Riiiight. I would say introvert based on the fact he had a close knit group of apostles that later spread his word.

[booyalab]

He's an ambivert because he would spend time alone like an introvert, but like an extravert he would approach random people in the street, liked socializing with mortals (ok maybe a little tongue in cheek), and sometimes had really emotional outbursts at his principles being violated- with the pharisees, at the temple, etc.

[Garyincinci]

In regards to whether jesus was son of god or a raving lunatic, I think Judas is the best indication of which. Judas saw that what Christ was doing was getting out of hand. They started out with Jesus saying we're all the son of god and treating them all as equals, and as their numbers increased to 12, and more and more people where calling Jesus son of god, his delusions started kicking in. Judas betrayed christ for whatever reasons. The bible can not accurately reflect the reasons Judas betrayed christ for the simple fact that there is no Book of Judas...all we have are Mark, Luke, John and Mathew's version and it would be from their perspective.

Another question would be what was Judas? Introverted Definately I think. NT probably. J or P though I'm not sure...I'd guess INTJ I think. His science was the Science of Theology.

[Garyincinci]

And I like the idea of Christ being an Ambivert, I'll have to kick that around a bit.

[booyalab]

In regards to whether jesus was son of god or a raving lunatic, I think Judas is the best indication of which. Judas saw that what Christ was doing was getting out of hand. They started out with Jesus saying we're all the son of god and treating them all as equals, and as their numbers increased to 12, and more and more people where calling Jesus son of god, his delusions started kicking in. Judas betrayed christ for whatever reasons. The bible can not accurately reflect the reasons Judas betrayed christ for the simple fact that there is no Book of Judas...all we have are Mark, Luke, John and Mathew's version and it would be from their perspective.

Another question would be what was Judas? Introverted Definately I think. NT probably. J or P though I'm not sure...I'd guess INTJ I think. His science was the Science of Theology.

the fact that Judas doesn't have a gospel doesn't prove much. Not all of the others have gospels either.

Edit: I don't know exactly what you're implying, (though it seems that you're saying someone would only betray him if he wasn't the son of God) if you are implying that, it's still self-fulfilling of the prophecy that he would be sacrificed...and we're back at square one.

[Garyincinci]

I'm not implying anything. I'm simply stating that the bible does not give any evidence as to why Judas betray's christ. The only evidence given is from the reports of 4 3rd person perspectives. A 3rd person perspective can answer when, how, what and where, but there is no possible way for it to comprehend the why of the 1st person perspective. Judas doesn't have a book because Judas killed himself. History is written by the survivors, not the losers of war or those that die in the process of life. As such most of history can only answer the who what when and where, and only those 1st person perspectives that we occasionaly come accross in anthropology can help us to understand the why. Just a point...Have you ever noticed that every war that a country enters, his enemy is thought to be a raving lunatic with immoral and unethical beliefs....and the opposing side often believes the same to be true of their enemy. Who is right? It doesn't matter, whoever wins will determine who is right and will ultimately write the history. As a result the majority of history is one sided.

Christianity survived for whatever reason and as a result christians view all other religions as wrong. Islam hold's true to the same belief...they are right, everyone else is an infidel. I predict that eventually there will be a global war between Islam and Christianity. The winner of that war will determine either one side or the other right, or it will cause such massive death that people will awake to the truth that neither side can possibily comprehend god and awaken to agnosticism / atheism.

[booyalab]

Christians view other religions as wrong because other religions and Christianity cannot exist simultaneously, unlike ,say, any two given Eastern religions. Also, there is no necessary philosophical consequence of realizing we can't comprehend God. Only an idiot, regardless of spiritual belief, would think they can fully comprehend something by definition greater and more complex than themselves.

[CreativeChaos]

Wow! I like this question!

Personally, I don't think there is anyway to know. I say the man actually existed. He is referenced in two places in Roman writings at the time.

As far as being ambivert. I'll have this to say. I've always thought of the "myth" of him as being an archtypical INFP. My father is an INFP and is a Methodist Minister. He became a Methodist Minister because of his strong convictions. He has always been VERY extraverted outside the home. He speaks and acts like an Extravert, going and shaking hands with everyone and asking them how they are and so on. Inside the home he was himself and very quiet and studious. He has a large library with mostly Christian kinds of books and documents.

You do not have to be an ambivert to Extravert when you feel it is necessary. No one would have expected my father to. And for someone to get so caught up in religion and trying to help make the world a kinder place "Love your neighbor as yourself" and all of the other do-gooder stuff sounds really INFP to me.

I'm not bragging. It doesn't really matter to me. I'm Atheist.

[mgb]

Maybe Judas was like the Jason Bourne of the Romans. Then he was executed and made to look like he took his own life. heh heh

As for Jesus, I think he was probably more like David Koresh and that he did exist. Personality wise, I think he meant well (maybe not exactly like David Koresh) and I think he was probably an extrovert. They need some time alone too once in a while.

The time was ripe for a messiah is Jerusalem, there were lots before him and lots after. None of them really took off like Jesus though. (Something about Constantine).

[mgb]

Wow! I like this question!

Personally, I don't think there is anyway to know. I say the man actually existed. He is referenced in two places in Roman writings at the time.

As far as being ambivert. I'll have this to say. I've always thought of the "myth" of him as being an archtypical INFP. My father is an INFP and is a Methodist Minister. He became a Methodist Minister because of his strong convictions. He has always been VERY extraverted outside the home. He speaks and acts like an Extravert, going and shaking hands with everyone and asking them how they are and so on. Inside the home he was himself and very quiet and studious. He has a large library with mostly Christian kinds of books and documents.

You do not have to be an ambivert to Extravert when you feel it is necessary. No one would have expected my father to. And for someone to get so caught up in religion and trying to help make the world a kinder place "Love your neighbor as yourself" and all of the other do-gooder stuff sounds really INFP to me.

I'm not bragging. It doesn't really matter to me. I'm Atheist.


I always liked the version of Jesus's story that Kevin Smith told in Dogma.

[joft]

Prove to me that "ambiverts" exists and I'll prove to you that God exists.

Jesus, as far as what we are told about him, I would say was certainly an introvert. Don't confuse introversion and extroversion with being capable or even prone to being around other people. I'm a pretty strong introvert, and I don't panic when I'm in a crowd, and I think a lot of introverts could say the same.

Remember as far as what we know about him his "public" life was only a few years long, beginning on or around the age of 30. His outward demeanor during that time was almost always apparently calm and meek. When confronted, he almost always answered in subtle and quiet ways.

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by mgbradsh:
I always liked the version of Jesus's story that Kevin Smith told in Dogma.

I'm not aware of this reference. But have you see "The Passion" by Mel Gibson. I heard it was very violent. I hesitated for a long time before going to see it. Yiiiiikkkkeeeeesssss! I have NEVER seen the amount of torture being so graphically depicted!! I'm glad I saw it, but I don't think I can get myself to see it again for quite some time.

[INTrPosr]

As for the actual thread topic, I think he was probably an ambivert.
Thank you booylab. Most people think that I make up that word when I use it. Does anyone think that some types are more apt to be ambiverted? I would say that any introverted type with strong Fe (INFJ or ISFJ), or an extravert with strong Fi could be that way.

[booyalab]

Thank you booylab. Most people think that I make up that word when I use it. Does anyone think that some types are more apt to be ambiverted? I would say that any introverted type with strong Fe (INFJ or ISFJ), or an extravert with strong Fi could be that way.

I agree with that. Extroverted NFs will have that abstract view of self that will cause them to reflect and introspect more than sensing Fs, and Introverted NFs will probably want to supplement and enhance their intuition by socializing to learn more about people and relationships.

[INTrPosr]

I read somewhere that he was INFJ, which actually would make sense. People with dominant Ni naturally see things from a different internal perspective.

[EdwinJefferson]

I read somewhere that he was INFJ, which actually would make sense. People with dominant Ni naturally see things from a different internal perspective.

I'm sometimes called an INFJ (even though I get so many different results from tests) and I would say if Jesus has the same personality as me, he'd probably have decided to use his powers for evil rather than good, but then felt guilty about it so apologised and tried to do some good things.

My opinion is, if he was the son of God.. then he probably wasn't an exact fit for any personality type since God is everything and everywhere.. meaning Jesus could have been anything, depending on mood and morals.

[QrioCT]

i read somewhere that some dude thought he was an INFJ. sounds right to me, but there is no way we can really know.

by the way, there are a lot of historical evidence other than the bible that said jesus existed. that doesnt mean he was who he claimed he was, but just that he existed. i can say i am some kind of a goddess, but that wouldnt mean i dont exist. it just means that the population of the mental hospital would increase a bit.
however, i believe that jesus had something special to him, if it is true that he existed(which has evidence). normal people don't usually get that famous by the reason that people claim they are the son of god. he must've been either son of god, or at least some kind of a freak...or somewhere in between if he existed.

by the way, im an agnostic so im not sure about all of this.

[INTrPosr]

My opinion is, if he was the son of God.. then he probably wasn't an exact fit for any personality type since God is everything and everywhere.. meaning Jesus could have been anything, depending on mood and morals.But isn't "the son of god" relative? I have heard many call themselves the child of God.

[EdwinJefferson]

But isn't "the son of god" relative? I have heard many call themselves the child of God.

I'm not at all religious. I am just saying that he was supposed to be special and unique, if he could perform miracles, surely he could do more things.

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by QrioCT:
normal people don't usually get that famous by the reason that people claim they are the son of god. he must've been either son of god, or at least some kind of a freak...or somewhere in between if he existed.

I've heard this either or statement before. Either he was crazy or he was the Son of God. This is an argument Christians use. As I've said before my father was a Methodist Minister. I used to be a Charasmatic Christian but am now Atheist. I could discuss religion till hell freezes over.

It's not logical. People aren't either/or. He could have really believed he was the Son of God, for whatever reason, and been perfectly sane. My brother is schizophrenic, I see a lot of mentally ill people, and there is no way a mentally ill person can get a large following. He could have been along the lines of Mr. Jones in the Jone's Town Massacure. (But in a nice way) I don't think this guy, Mr. Jones, was crazy, just mislead. There are a lot of crazy cults out there. Christianity started out as a Jewish cult (by the definition of cult). It was a small group of people within the Jewish community. It didn't really grow until Paul of Taursus converted and spread it among the Greeks. Then the teachings got a "Greekified" as a result. Then when Constantine, the Roman Emporer, converted, it twisted some more into Roman Culture.

What we have today in the Bible is what was written about Jesus some fifty years later. All of the Gospels are dated as being written around 50 to 100 A.D. Even if it were written right after Jesus died, these are second hand accounts. The writters of the Gospels interpreted what they saw of Jesus through second hand eyes.

My theory is that it is other people, not Jesus, who wished he were the Messiah! The Jews were really repressed by the Romans at that time. They were desperately looking for some release. When Jesus was crucified, then they started asking, Why? Why would God allow this man to be crucified? And then started coming up with the Son of God, Lamb of God, he died for our sins philosophy. If you read the book called "When Prophecy Fails" you'll understand that when people devote their lives and leave their homes for a cause and that cause fails, they can't just let it go. They've invested too much into it. Then they "Spiritualize" it. They explain it in "other world" terms.

Blah!!! I'll stop. I could write a dissertation on the subject. Pooh! Hope you've read this far, it comes from really factual stuff. I've read and pondered this for years.

[jyakulis]

Didn't he screw mary magdeline? Or is that all just speculation?

Oh I threw that out there for the argument he wasn't the son of God. If anyone wonders about the randomness...

[EdwinJefferson]

Didn't he screw mary magdeline? Or is that all just speculation?

speculation

[QrioCT]

that's a speculation, but doesnt mean its wrong.

by the way CC, yeah. it doesnt mean he was one or the other, but i was just making the point that he had to be kind of special/unusual. if jews wanted him to be the messaiah(blah i cant spell), why *him*? how did he get such a great crowd following him? actually, he couldve been just some skilled politician but at least he was special in some way.

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by jyakulis:
Didn't he screw mary magdeline? Or is that all just speculation?

Ha! Funny! You know there are a group of people who claim to be of his lineage? I forget the specifics. But they have this "proof" that he married Mary Magdeline (married Mary Magdeleine, Wow! what a phrase!) and had children and they are the descendents of that. And I knew none of you would read through my long dissertation. Felt good to get it out of my system though. Hee!

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by QrioCT:
by the way CC, yeah. it doesnt mean he was one or the other, but i was just making the point that he had to be kind of special/unusual. if jews wanted him to be the messaiah(blah i cant spell), why *him*? how did he get such a great crowd following him? actually, he couldve been just some skilled politician but at least he was special in some way.

Woops! A real reader slipped in while I was writing! *CC swallow words* Wow! Congrats! Yeah! I agree! To get such a devoted following he had to have been very special. His message was very special. I have a book called "The Birth of Christianity" that is a dissertation ;) on the early Christian movement. Even before Pauls conversion, people were dying and being killed for being Christian. They were persecuted, and Paul was one of the persecutors. So something had to be really special there for these people to risk death and torture!!!! And the Romans are known for there public feeding of Christians to the Lions and so forth.

[booyalab]

Didn't he screw mary magdeline? Or is that all just speculation?

Oh I threw that out there for the argument he wasn't the son of God. If anyone wonders about the randomness...

thats the gnostic beliefs, i dont even know if its worth posting on this thread anymore, i dont feel like giving theology/history lessons

[Edmond Zedo]

Sure it is. For instance, "God damn! Jesus was a black man."

[jyakulis]

thats the gnostic beliefs, i dont even know if its worth posting on this thread anymore, i dont feel like giving theology/history lessons

YOUR MOM

[Edmond Zedo]

Ha! Funny! You know there are a group of people who claim to be of his lineage?
I'm obviously one of those people, and I don't see what the big deal about Heysoos was anyway. Our whole family is amazing.

If thinking one is a god makes one insane, does believing he is a god make you insane as well? There goes 9/10 of the world.

[booyalab]

It's not logical. People aren't either/or. He could have really believed he was the Son of God, for whatever reason, and been perfectly sane.
"for whatever reason"? great argument. If anyone's life revolves around a misconception of their core being, that qualifies them as insane. You obviously don't hang around the mentally ill THAT much if you believe otherwise. If you want to pick and choose among the texts corresponding to his teachings to come to your conclusion that he was just a nice man, that's another story- one that is based on absurdly selective,unfounded assumptions of historical documentation.


My brother is schizophrenic, I see a lot of mentally ill people, and there is no way a mentally ill person can get a large following.
But obviously, if he wasn't who he said he was, his followers had to be just a little insane themselves (and therefore could be believed to follow an insane person) because.....


What we have today in the Bible is what was written about Jesus some fifty years later. All of the Gospels are dated as being written around 50 to 100 A.D. Even if it were written right after Jesus died, these are second hand accounts. The writters of the Gospels interpreted what they saw of Jesus through second hand eyes.

My theory is that it is other people, not Jesus, who wished he were the Messiah!

right...the insane ones.

[mgb]

In a River Runs Through It, wasn't it the Methodists that were "Baptist who can read"?
That always cracks me up.

Don't we all think we are the messiah once in a while??

[QrioCT]

define insanity.

and nope, im not the messiah :D

[Pierce]

As son of God, he was ambi-everything. As myth, it makes no difference. As deluded carpenter's son, who cares? (unless you think you might be one too.)

For a thoughtful and modern questioning view of Jesus' life and claims from a journalist's point of view, read Phillip Yancey's, THE JESUS I NEVER KNEW.

[QrioCT]

As son of God, he was ambi-everything. As myth, it makes no difference. As deluded carpenter's son, who cares? (unless you think you might be one too.)


the problem is that we dont know which.

[Garyincinci]

I stopped believing in Santa Claus at 5, I stopped believing in the easter Bunny at 6. And while I milked the Tooth Fairy thing for as long as I could get cash, I stopped believing around the same time as the easter bunny. I stopped believing in Jesus at 16 and God at 30.

[Pierce]

I stopped believing in Santa Claus at 5, I stopped believing in the easter Bunny at 6. And while I milked the Tooth Fairy thing for as long as I could get cash, I stopped believing around the same time as the easter bunny. I stopped believing in Jesus at 16 and God at 30.

I think I followed a similar time line with Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. But, I started believing in Jesus and God at 19 and with each year, I become more convinced.

[CoHo]

My brother is schizophrenic, I see a lot of mentally ill people, and there is no way a mentally ill person can get a large following.

Some people think Hitler had signs of schizophrenia, he got a pretty big following

[CreativeChaos]

Blah!!! I've been in so many religious discussions like this, I kinda tire of arguing. INFPs don't like to argue anyway. I guess I shoulda kept my nose out at let this be an INTP discussion. Sorry guys!

I'm Atheist, by the way. I think I said that. So I don't really give a hoot myself. I just find it interesting discussion, but not worth getting into a hot debate over. I think I mentioned the Jones town massacure as a present day example of what can happen to people when it comes to beliefs? When you get into the "belief" realm, sane people can do insane things. The people at the Jones town massacure were not insane. But they did an insane thing.

And there is a fine line between what we call "insane" and true mental illness. But if one is truly schizophrenic, you usually can determine that they are ill, because they get totally nuts. Like thinking the guy on the television is talking to them. Believeing they are engaged in warfare and have a wife, but in a another realm. That's when they get put into mental hospitals, and those places are really depressing. You can't see your loved one, and they keep them behind locked doors. Believe me I've seen my brother with this and it is tragic. Not pretty.

I got into this because of the mention that he might be INFP. That's all.

Don't mind me, turn this into an INTP thaang. Love your witty humor and sarcastic comments. :D

Edit: After reading through this thread again (I think it's interesting) I realized my above comment "Love your witty humor and sarcastic comments, could be taken in a negative way. I was serious! "Jesus was a Black Man!" "Did he screw Mary Magdalene?" I love this stuff. We INFPs can get too serious, anyway actually. Some comic releif is an excellent thing. :D

[Eileen]

Well--I believe that Jesus must have had pretty developed extraverted feeling, so probably not INFP, whose dominant function is introverted feeling... Maybe ENFJ, as ENFJs tend to have a weirdly manifesting extraversion anyway. Of course, he very well might have had rather developed Fi (that process evaluates importance and priorities) also, so hey. Maybe INFP after all. *shrug*

Of course, it depends on what Jesus you're talking about... a philosopher? a healer? a teacher? a revolutionary? Jesus was clearly a people person, but introverts can be people-people too.

:)

[Garyincinci]

and there is no way a mentally ill person can get a large following. Delusional does not make one mentally ill. Every human on the face of the planet is delusional...some more so than others...some to the point of gullibility where they take everything as gospel. An extremely intelligent person, with a strong religious background, could very well interpret many of the things in their life as being "messages from god" and belieiving them. This doesn't necessarily make him insane...simply delusioned.

[ApeTheDog]

Jesus was a chilavert. He almost never left his own world, but when he did go out he always scored the goal.

[Miss Anthropic]

I read it all and I'm staying the hell out of it!

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by Miss Anthropic:
I read it all and I'm staying the hell out of it!

:rofl:

Excellent! WARS are started by such things!

[Miss Anthropic]

:rofl:

Excellent! WARS are started by such things!
Most of them in fact. By men. Ooops, I could be starting another war!

[Eileen]

Christianity survived for whatever reason and as a result christians view all other religions as wrong. Islam hold's true to the same belief...they are right, everyone else is an infidel. I predict that eventually there will be a global war between Islam and Christianity. The winner of that war will determine either one side or the other right, or it will cause such massive death that people will awake to the truth that neither side can possibily comprehend god and awaken to agnosticism / atheism.

I understand why people leave religion--they are repelled by the I'm-right-you're-wrong-my-way-or-the-highway attitudes, and they get fed up. The trouble is, most people end up inheriting that attitude anyway and applying it to whatever belief, disbelief, faith, or doubt they settle into. Many Christians and Muslims hope that others awaken to their respective faiths; many athiests and agnostics hope that Christians and Muslims (and other religious people) will awaken to theirs. I see very little difference at base; it's the attitude that is the problem, not religion itself.

[CoHo]

The winner of that war will determine either one side or the other right, or it will cause such massive death that people will awake to the truth that neither side can possibily comprehend god and awaken to agnosticism / atheism.

Nah, the winner of that would go on to tackle the reigning heavyweight Judaism. Christianity will win in the 9th round but accusations of cheating will abound.

Eventually Christianity will be beaten by the Hinduism faith in a straight from the ghetto underdog story. Hinduism would hold the belt for at least five years winning a long string of pay-per-view matches (Buddhism, Shinto, Confucianism) that never leave the 2nd round.

Eventually it will sell out and do Tombstone Pizza advertisements, also a grill will be named after it.

[Garyincinci]

Many Christians and Muslims hope that others awaken to their respective faiths; many athiests and agnostics hope that Christians and Muslims (and other religious people) will awaken to theirs. I see very little difference at base; it's the attitude that is the problem, not religion itself. I would imagine that is the reason that christ caught on. The peopled wanted and needed something or someone to believe in. The mind is wicked evil that way. It believes what it wants to believe because it has to belief it or accept an unwanted truth. I'm not saying religious people are delusional, but I felt that I was always delusional about religion.

[CreativeChaos]

Originally posted by Eileen the INFJ:
Many Christians and Muslims hope that others awaken to their respective faiths; many athiests and agnostics hope that Christians and Muslims (and other religious people) will awaken to theirs. I see very little difference at base; it's the attitude that is the problem, not religion itself.

I think this is absolutly correct Eileen. Tolerance, and realization that you don't really "know" these etheral things, you "beleive" them.

[wezl]

Me and my GF where watching Jesus Christ Superstar last night and got on the topic of whether Jesus was an introvert or extrovert..

My theory is that Jesus was two people, who pretended to be one. Thats how "he" pulled off the Easter thing. Probable one was an E (public speaker) and one was I (philosophic thinker).

[Kouldhpoeppre]

My theory is that Jesus was two people, who pretended to be one. Thats how "he" pulled off the Easter thing. Probable one was an E (public speaker) and one was I (philosophic thinker).

A theory is a reasonable conclusion based on evidence. Have you tested historical evidence for this claim? Have you any sources?
Keep in mind that Jesus had many followers. Surely they must have been able to distinguish the difference between two people.