"Christ" and "Christians"

A zombie is someone who comes alive after death. Jesus came alive after death = Zombie Jesus.

 

I'm unfamiliar with that.

 

You mean you "were" unfamiliar. Now that I have explained to you what the Poster using that phrase was inferring .. you are now familiar

 

No, I'm still unfamiliar with a person named Jesus that underwent some bokor rituals.

 

You are not stating "facts". Your claim that Wyrd knows nothing about Jesus or the Bible is false. I have read may of his posts, not that I agree with all of them, that show he has at least some knowledge of Jesus and the Bible. Neither of us knows whether or not he is a scholar.

For example - the term "Zombie Jesus" which he frequently uses, implies a knowledge that Jesus came alive after death. Further .. the way in which he used the term in response to the question "what makes someone a christian" ? Answ "Zombie Jesus" is doctrinally correct - in particular in relation to the Protestant doctrine of Sola Fide.

 

I have no idea what "bokor rituals" are.

The story of Jesus coming alive after death comes from the Bible - the part referred to as the New Testament. This is the main religious text of all Christians.

 

It's Haitian voodoo. It's were zombie folklore comes from. Seems odd you aren't familiar with what you are talking about

But not Haitian voodoo, hence the confusion you have about bokor rituals.

 

Are you a Santorini practitioner perhaps?

 

Zombies are not exclusive to Haitian voodoo .. seems the confusion is yours. Zombie Jesus rose from the dead long before Hatian voodoo was invented and Jesus was by no means the first. Resurrection myths go back much further than the Jesus myth.

It is from previous myth from which voodoo gets its material, not the reverse.

I hope this clears up any confusion you had.

 

Yes it is. The word zombie actually is from Haitian creole and it first entered the vernacular there.

Resurrection folklore is wildly different from zombie folklore

Well, yes zombie folklore was likely inspired by vampire folklore.

About some guy named Jesus in Haiti?

 

Zombies aren't actually dead, mostly dead, but not completely dead. Do you not know the science behind "zombies"?

 

Not sure about Haiti but Jesus ..pronounced Heyzeus .. is quite common in Latin America.

The folklore surrounding zombie myths - people rising from the dead - is wildly different .. this is true. The key similarity - someone dying and then coming back to life - is common to all such myths.

I am not sure what inspired Haitian religious belief but - given it is part of a "religious belief" - I would think it is more likely to have been inspired by the Jesus myth than Vampire lore.

 

Well that isn't exactly a similarity. An undead monster such as a zombie it vampire are soulless and devour people. They are essentially animated corpses. In Resurrection mythology the previously dead person is restored to their premortum selves.

Well voodoo isn't really a religious beliefs it's a spiritual practice. And killing somebody to steal their soul and control their body isn't even close to Christ. When Christ's body rose to heaven (not on Earth and did not become a mindless puppet if it's master's command) he ascended to God status.

You're picking a slightly similar detail and insisting that is key.

Christ didn't become a zombie he became God only in spirit.

 

I must admit that I am mostly ignorant of the science behind zombies - having mostly Hollywood depictions to go by

 

Yes, I am. Wyrd's statements show he has little understanding of Jesus, and his zombie term is his alone.

His opinion of Sola Fide demonstrates a shallow understanding of the vast range of Protestant denominations and their doctrines.

I do freely admit, however, I know very little about zombies. I have never even met one.

 

You seem to know alot about Zombies. Where you lack is having an understanding of colloquial language usage. The term "Zombie Jesus" simply refers to the similarity between a Zombie coming back to life after death and Jesus coming back to life after death - in a derogatory sense of course - likening Jesus to a Zombie in some Hollywood movie in an attempt to make fun of or belittle the Christian resurrection myth.

The reality is that we do not know what Christ became. The reality is that the physical resurrection story (Jesus wandering around in the flesh after death) does not seem to have come about until many decades after the death of Christ .. and the idea that Jesus was "God - God of Abraham) came about much much later .. after 200 AD and it was not until the Pagan Emperor Constantine made this doctrine in 325 AD that Christianity at large started to take this idea seriously and another 200 years to get rid of the old ideas.

Paul did not know anything about stories of Jesus appearing in the flesh after death - he likened the appearances of Jesus after his death to his vision ... not that dissimilar someone, or a group, seeing the appearance of Mary in the clouds. Paul's writings are the earliest record we have.

The earliest Gospel - Mark ~65 AD knows nothing of any of these stories of Jesus appearing in the flesh after death. Mark ends with an empty tomb and the reader is left to wonder what happened to Jesus.

The Gospel of Matt uses Mark as a source document. The author adds a lineage back to David (through Joseph - which is strange because this contradicts the immaculate conception idea) and adds a virgin birth story. In Mark Jesus is deified at his baptism.

The author of Matt uses all of Mark except a few passages that he finds derogatory to Jesus and/or the disciples (artistic license aka pious fraud - back in the day this type of thing was viewed as perfectly justified if it helped to save a few souls - it was common as weeds in a pot farm)

Matt is dated 80-100 AD and its origins are obscure. Whether the resurrection stories in Matt were originally there or added after the fact is not known. It seems unlikely that these stories were part of these writings if an earlier date is accepted. The reason for this is that "Pope" Clement ~95-100 AD does not know anything about any physical resurrection stories. If a later date is accepted it is possible that Matt was not yet written during the time of Clement.

Since Paul was did not know Jesus - records almost nothing on his life - and was not part of the Church of Jerusalem it is possible that he was not aware of the stories. This is tough however given he was around for some 30 years after the death of Jesus and did have association with the disciples but perhaps they kept the details a secret. This seems rather unlikely given Paul does know about various appearances of Jesus however .. still quite possible.

What is more difficult is that the author of Mark - reputed to be a disciple/interpreter of Peter - not knowing the most important part of the story .. the "smoking gun" - proof of the promise of resurrection.

That Clement - some 30 years later knows nothing of the physical resurrection - being the Pope an all - and all of the disciples are dead .. well .. that is really damning. Then for these stories to mysteriously appear 70-100 years after Christs death an era where pious fraud is the rule rather than the exception... yeah .. don't think so.

 

Little understanding is different than "no understanding" but hey, most Christians do not have much understanding about the teachings of Jesus either. If they did the world would be a better place.

The idea of Sola Fide "Salvation by faith alone" = Just believe that Jesus was God, came down to earth, died, and was later resurrected is central to the Protestant Salvation formulation. This is also found in Catholicism and Orthodox but it is not "faith alone" .. works are also required but this is combined with the idea we are saved as a function of Grace and not strictly because of works. It gets complicated.

Regardless - all the above does not coincide with the Jesus of Mark and Matt. It is an attempt to fuse Pauline scripture with the Gospel of Mark and Luke - and a poor attempt at that. The author of John is attempting to do the same.

For the Jesus of Mark/Matt - Salvation is a function of works - following the teachings of Jesus rather than belief that Jesus was God or belief in the resurrection. It is about the belief that Jesus is speaking the word of God. This was incorporated in the Logos concept found in John - a word that is intentionally and habitually mistranslated in modern Bibles as "The Word" due to anti Trinitarian implications.

 

Voodoo is fascinating.

No I addressed colloquial usage. Zombie means colloquially an animated corpse that hungers for human flesh or brains.

It's a very poor attempt. You should be able to do better.

Tl;dr

Immaterial to the discussion anyway.

 

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/zombie-jesus

 

You can find them at polling booths, they vote a straight "D" ballot.

 

I get that it's supposed to be poking fun at Christianity, but it's not very funny. Calling Christians a cannibal cult based on consuming the body of Christ, or a vampire Cult for drinking the blood of Christ, now that's funny.

The meme is just simply a dud.

 

Jesus said that people had to eat his flesh and drink his blood if they wanted eternal life. That guy was nuts. Since he's been long dead it seems that no one will be getting any eternal life.

 

Well you can find a zombie Jesus meme to your liking if you keep looking.

 

Come on Jake, you surely know that the sole reason for Christianity is the belief in zombie Jesus. Without Jesus being a zombie there is no reason to be a Christian.

 

Christianity is a death cult but no one wants to die. Jesus insists on it. He demands that a certain number of believers must be killed before he returns. The reason it has been over 2,000 years is that no one really believes in him. It is just a sham religion that no one believes in but a lot of people give lip service to.