Jesus - Elvis Presley: A tenuous link?

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

When reading Thomas' post on the historical proof of Jesus, another question occurred to me.

If Jesus had not been killed so early in his ministry, would Christianity have ever existed as a seperate religion.

If I may, I would like to compare Jesus to Elvis Presley. A great man, the best anyone had ever known at what he did. His public life cut tragicly short at the peak of his fame. If Elvis had survived to this day, or perhaps simply died of old age at the natural end of his career, would he have achieved the Legend status he has today?

I suspect that if Elvis had not died at his peak, I would probably not know who he was, just as I have no knowledge of a whole host of 1950's rock and roll stars.

Similarly, I suspect that if Jesus had not died at his peak, I would have never heard of him, just as I have never heard of the many other ancient Jewish teachers who claimed to be the Messiah.I think he would be remembered only to the Jews as a wise Rabbi from ancient times, and perhaps a lesser prophet.

Opinions?

[brucegdc]

Well, since the primary event in Christianity is the Resurrection, I'd have to agree - the message of Jesus is in that event - not the birth, and less so in the teachings, which were basically a return to standards of practice of Judaism.

[Thomas]

Well, as you invited opinion, here goes...

Before, though, a correction:
If Jesus had not been killed so early in his ministry, would Christianity have ever existed as a seperate religion.
The death of Jesus was the end and accomplishment of his earthly ministry.[/i]

If I may, I would like to compare Jesus to Elvis Presley.

Have we in the west lost all sense of proportion? Or perhaps I have, and this thread is a joke?

If you are seriously seeking an answer, I suggest you compare like to like, Elvis to his like, those who have died, and those who live on, and there you will find an answer.

NOTE: If anyone wishes to suggest that both were 'popular entertainers' then I reserve the right to be unrestrainedly abusive, but only as a necessary measure to make a point which somehow seems elusive.

Not a tenuous link then, but a specious argument.

So we have Elvis (burger-induced death on the john); Hendrix (drowned in his own drug-induced vomit) Joplin (ditto, alcohol), Moon (drugs again, drowned in a swimming pool, rather than vomit)...

Then we have Jagger (still alive); McCartney (ditto) Bowie (ditto)...

Then we have those who survived into later years, and were then 'cut short' – the only exception I can think of is Lennon (shot for being old), but we have Entwhistle (a coke-induced heart attack whilst enjoying the comforts of a brace of hookers) and those of his ilk.

And then we have those who lived fast, died young, and are largely unremarked.

So we have:
young, dead and famous,
young, dead and not famous,
old, dead and famous,
old, dead and not famous,
old and still alive.

THAT is where you need to look for the answer. And I would suggest that it has something to do with romance and sentimentalism - there are many who view Presley as a burnt-out wreck who displayed nothing but contempt for his audience and despoiled his memory - whilst there are many who regard Jagger or McCartney or Bowie as legends, with no less status for not being dead.

For the same reason I do not hold Elvis or any other self-induced death by wanton overindulgence in the same class as say, John Lennon or Kirsty McCall, of whom one can rightly say were 'tragically cut short'.

But sentimetalism is a powerful thing.

A couple of weeks ago I saw Shane MacGowan give an impromptu performance in a pub in London, which was greeted with howls of applause.

At the time I said "I have never seen anything look so dead, and yet still be moving." The man's skin colour was grey.

He sang very, very badly. Now he might well have been applauded for simply having the ability to stand up relatively straight, and sing out of tune, after having consumed a considerable amount of alcohol. But then I grew up with a musician father who played in an Irish group on the pub circuit, and Saturday nights I could show you those who drank more, and stood straighter, and sang better.

But then, they could not write like MacGowan.

A musician friend with us was likewise horrified, not at MacGowan, but at the covey of hangers-on who supplied him drink, drugs, etc., (and bathed in the attention of the public throughout a 40-minute disappearance by MacGowan to the toilet, from which he had to be rescued by the bar staff) and all the while taking every penny his royalties brought him. No doubt they will lament his passing the loudest, and yet did not a thing to stop the thing which, after all, we call 'the gravy train'.

But then, that's what it's all about, isn't it.

Thomas

[Thomas]

If you want a serious look at any tenuous link, I suggest 'self-loathing'.

Many, although not all, rock stars who died, and many who live on, display signs of self-loathing which is displayed in a general nihilism, a contempt for the audience and suicidal tendencies which eventually bear fruit.

A classic symptom is the band break up, which is invariably put down to hatred of other members of the band, the audience who will accept any crap dished out to them, management, money ... what started as a 'good thing' went bad.

When Cream split up, Eric Clapton related how the band would travel from gig to gig in private chartered aircraft, and never exchange a word, could not bear to be in the same room, but hide in drugs/booze/whatever, then play a really bad set to the ecstatic applause of the audience ... and then go on to the next ...

In the case of Jesus, however, the difference is that it was that same self-loathing and contempt - but this time not on the part of the band, but of the audience - the authorities and the people - who were brought face to face with their own shortcomings.

It was a revolt of the worst aspect of human nature against the best.

They wanted a spectacle, didn't matter who, but the more innocent the better.

Thomas

[Awaiting_the_fifth]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Have we in the west lost all sense of proportion? Or perhaps I have, and this thread is a joke?

There certainly is a HUGE difference in proportion, but I still believe that the two are examples of the same phenomenon, namely, death in the peak of fame elevating an individual to legendary status.

Originally Posted by Thomas

The death of Jesus was the end and accomplishment of his earthly ministry.

This has still to be adequately explained to me. Why was Jesus required to die? If God wanted to forgive our sins, he surely could have done so without having his son and/or himself be killed in a horrible way.

[AletheiaRivers]

Originally Posted by Awaiting_the_fifth

There certainly is a HUGE difference in proportion, but I still believe that the two are examples of the same phenomenon, namely, death in the peak of fame elevating an individual to legendary status.

I was still pretty young when Elvis died, but I do have memories of how awful he looked before his death. I remember thinking that he was hurting his status and reputation by continuing to appear and perform. He didn't die during his prime. He died long after it.

This has still to be adequately explained to me. Why was Jesus required to die? If God wanted to forgive our sins, he surely could have done so without having his son and/or himself be killed in a horrible way.

There are many Christians who don't view Jesus death as a sacrifice of appeasement, propritiation, atonement or ransom. Eastern Orthodoxy views Jesus life and death as a "rescue mission." They tend to look at it as a rescue mission from Satan. I look at it as a rescue mission from ourselves.

Aletheia

[Bandit]

Elvis believed in the death, burial & resurrection of Jesus Christ. He believed in the entire bible. i think he kind of dabbled in some other religions as well. He recorded numerous gospel songs & albums & sang songs about heaven, God & Jesus that included the blood Of Jesus for the remission of sin.
Precious Memories
How Great Thou Art
Love never Fails
Where could I go but to the Lord
He touched me
In the Ghetto
Peace In the Valley for me

He sang about Jesus & he also read from the bible on stage. it was his gospel roots that inspired him to sing.

i suppose Hollywood & secular fame got the best of him & it was drugs that took his life. just kind of shows that fame & money does not bring real happiness & i guess he needed to find that out the hard way.

As a personal note, my Grandfathers neighbor was raised in church & school with Elvis in a pentecostal type of church. She told me some stories about their youth together. I kind of got to know about Elvis in a different way than the public would see him as an idol.
in the earlier years of Hollywood, more famous people believed in Jesus & the bible than what a lot of people probably realize.

Anyone can google it & find books & people who are still alive who knew him & see what i am saying is true.

[Thomas]

Why was Jesus required to die?
Man introduced death into the world, not God.

If God wanted to forgive our sins, he surely could have done so...
It depends upon whether you rob God(1) or humanity(2) of its dignity:

1 If man willingly and knowingly sins, and God forgives, then man will soon arrive at the position that he can do just as he likes, cos he'll always be forgiven. Not long after that he'll spit in God's face just to prove the point. God becomes like a whipped dog, that no matter how much you beat, always slinks back for more punishment, BECAUSE HE IS LOYAL TO YOU.

2 If man willingly and knowlingly sins, and God forgives, then effectively man is absolved of all responsibility for his own actions, and if he is absolved of that which is evil, he is likewise absolved of that which is good. From that moment on his life has no purpose, no meaning, no value.

So God does want to forgive our sins, but for our sakes he cannot simply ignore them.

without having his son and/or himself be killed in a horrible way.
We chose the method, not God, and we elected to kill Jesus so, not God.

The metaphysics and the symbolism are too involved to be discussed in a forum of this nature, but the principle point is that what happened on Golgotha happens every day, every waking moment ... we have a simple choice - one that He told us - either we carry the cross with him, or we're with the mob.

But it's worse than that, we are crucified, but we refuse to let go of our suffering, our blindness, our ignorance, we refuse to say "Into your hands I commend my spirit" as He did.

Rather we make a virtue of our iniquity and say, "it's OK. I can work my own salvation, thanks."

If we really believed what we profess to believe, the churches would be packed.

Thomas

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Why was Jesus required to die?
Man introduced death into the world, not God.

Only in Christian theology ...

Originally Posted by Thomas

If God wanted to forgive our sins, he surely could have done so...

Originally Posted by Thomas

It depends upon whether you rob God(1) or humanity(2) of its dignity:

1 If man willingly and knowingly sins, and God forgives, then man will soon arrive at the position that he can do just as he likes, cos he'll always be forgiven. Not long after that he'll spit in God's face just to prove the point. God becomes like a whipped dog, that no matter how much you beat, always slinks back for more punishment, BECAUSE HE IS LOYAL TO YOU.

2 If man willingly and knowlingly sins, and God forgives, then effectively man is absolved of all responsibility for his own actions, and if he is absolved of that which is evil, he is likewise absolved of that which is good. From that moment on his life has no purpose, no meaning, no value.

So God does want to forgive our sins, but for our sakes he cannot simply ignore them.

With the notion that a forgiven man will continue to sin simply because he finds that he can be forigiven (and indeed, is, even before he asks) ... I disagree. The alternative, after all, is the fear complex, which I think the church has kept in place, in order to maintain power ... yet which has reduced the inherent dignity and self-worth of many a man to practically nil. Indeed, it is man that keeps crawling back, ever whipped by his own conscience and by the berating chastisement of the clergy, yet all because he has been told that he is unworthy. God, then, remains a demon, a threat, the ultimate dispenser of doom whom and which must be propitiated ... if the man is to escape eternal torment for his mistakes.

Originally Posted by Thomas

without having his son and/or himself be killed in a horrible way.

Originally Posted by Thomas

We chose the method, not God, and we elected to kill Jesus so, not God.

Absolutely. Yet, the record has yet to be set straight, and the facts are almost never presented in this light.

Originally Posted by Thomas

The metaphysics and the symbolism are too involved to be discussed in a forum of this nature, but the principle point is that what happened on Golgotha happens every day, every waking moment ... we have a simple choice - one that He told us - either we carry the cross with him, or we're with the mob.

St. Paul: "I die daily."

Originally Posted by Thomas

Rather we make a virtue of our iniquity and say, "it's OK. I can work my own salvation, thanks."

The Buddha's last words: Be a lamp unto your feet. Work out thy own salvation ... with diligence. Yet, often the response, whining: I caaaaan't You do it foooooor me. And thus, the abnegation of responsibility. The shifting of the burden onto the shoulders of another. Yet no one else, can carry our load. No one else, can assume responsbility for our errors, and our shortcomings. In our imaginations, alone ...

Originally Posted by Thomas

If we really believed what we profess to believe, the churches would be packed.

G. K. Chesterton:

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried."

Elvis, by the way, was known to have had a copy of H.P. Blavatsky's Secret Doctrine, which he read, studied, and cherished. The same is true of Albert Einstein, who also said himself that he found certain inspiration and answers there. But then, both of these men - were rather open-minded ...

I agree that Elvis' career was on the decline long before his death, yet a legend he would have remained even if he had simply dwindled away, as many other rock stars have done. The contributions that Elvis made, practically inventing a genre single-handed (others contributed, but none quite so much as Elvis, it can easily be argued) ... could never be negated, or undone, by his drug use, or other mistakes. Just as the musical contributions and innovations of Jimi Hendrix, Jim Morrison, and others - cannot be disputed. At best, one can say, "I don't like their music." Big deal.

Without the death of Jesus of Nazareth, I think Christianity might look a bit different. I don't think the purpose of Christ's coming had much to do at all with the demonstration of life after death ... which is something we will all experience, regardless of belief, faith, or lack thereof. Christ's Mission, if we consider what He sought to emphasize, was about the Mystical Birth within the human heart, which Buddhists know well as the development, or emergence, of the Buddha nature - the cultivation of Bodhichitta. Christ taught this, and many, many more doctrines that are found in Buddhism.

He also emphasized purity - purity of life, purity of character, and a nobleness, a dignity, which would lead to greater Communion and a more intimate relationship with God. This, likewise, is not foreign to the Buddhist Dharma, as emphasized in the Noble Eightfold Path. Nevermind the differences between Nirvana and "God," similarities are also present. Those who would rather split hairs, and cling to semantics ... might occupy themselves more with the treading of that Path, and the proper embodiment of the lifestyle which Christ advocated - and then perhaps the bliss, the heavenly rapture, that comes to them, might more closely resemble the Buddha's Nirvana.

Had Jesus lived to be 80, things might have been different, but this was surely unlikely given the political climate of the day, and also given the disdain which his own people had for the revolutionary ideas he was preaching (especially the Sanhedrin, for whom Jesus was a great upset, a disruption, and a threat to the established order & authority). I consider it a great misfortune, and sadly - part of the heavy karma which Jesus still labors tirelessly to mitigate ... that so much emphasis was placed on the crucifixion. The emphasis should have been upon his life, his works, and above all, His Message. Yet, how much easier to glorify and deify, to worship and adore ... than to emulate, which, after all - is the higest form of flattery ... and what the Master sought of us.

sighhhh ...

Love & Light,

andrew

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Rather we make a virtue of our iniquity and say, "it's OK. I can work my own salvation, thanks."

Originally Posted by taijasi

The Buddha's last words: Be a lamp unto your feet. Work out thy own salvation ... with diligence.

Originally Posted by Philippians 2:12-13

12 Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; 13 for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

*{I would recommend reading the whole chapter}*

Originally Posted by taijasi

Had Jesus lived to be 80, things might have been different, but this was surely unlikely given the political climate of the day, and also given the disdain which his own people had for the revolutionary ideas he was preaching (especially the Sanhedrin, for whom Jesus was a great upset, a disruption, and a threat to the established order & authority). I consider it a great misfortune, and sadly - part of the heavy karma which Jesus still labors tirelessly to mitigate ... that so much emphasis was placed on the crucifixion. The emphasis should have been upon his life, his works, and above all, His Message. Yet, how much easier to glorify and deify, to worship and adore ... than to emulate, which, after all - is the higest form of flattery ... and what the Master sought of us.

Part of his message was his death. It makes us look at ourselves, and realize that we need to make the effort to look into our own hearts and realize that we cause much of the suffering on earth. Instead, we avoid it, because we don't want to look there, and know ourselves. It is much more comfortable to place the blame for our own faults on someone else, just like we did to Jesus. It is part of "working out our own salvation," as quoted by both Buddah and Paul. More can be found on this post.

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Part of his message was his death. It makes us look at ourselves, and realize that we need to make the effort to look into our own hearts and realize that we cause much of the suffering on earth. Instead, we avoid it, because we don't want to look there, and know ourselves.

Agreed, that we can choose to regard the death of Jesus, or rather, his willingness to utterly renounce the interests of the personality ... as a great example. And part of the role of the Messiah, it seems to me, is definitely to show us what we are all here to attain. I do not suggest that we are to work out our Salvation without God, or that this is remotely possible. Without every having even heard of Jesus of Nazareth? Absolutely.

But this is way off topic ... and I think the question remains, was it the death of Jesus of Nazareth - which makes Christianity what it is today(?). And in many ways, I think yes - but for the wrong reasons. The one you mention, Seattlegal, seems to be one of the right ones.

andrew

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by taijasi

But this is way off topic ... and I think the question remains, was it the death of Jesus of Nazareth - which makes Christianity what it is today(?). And in many ways, I think yes - but for the wrong reasons. The one you mention, Seattlegal, seems to be one of the right ones.

His death serves as a warning to us, the warning of which is necessary under the law {Ezekiel 3:16-21}, and under the wisdom traditions {Colossians 1:24-29}. {Please notice how well these all fit together with 1Corinthians 1}

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

His death serves as a warning to us, the warning of which is necessary under the law {Ezekiel 3:16-21}, and under the wisdom traditions {Colossians 1:24-29}. {Please notice how well these all fit together with 1Corinthians 1}

I understand the warning to be - that mob rules is a dangerous philosophy, even if things have little changed in 2100 years. I have read the passages you mention ... but I fail to see your point. Please explain in simple words, for the slow-witted among us. (me!)

thanks,

andrew

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by taijasi

I understand the warning to be - that mob rules is a dangerous philosophy, even if things have little changed in 2100 years. I have read the passages you mention ... but I fail to see your point. Please explain in simple words, for the slow-witted among us. (me!)

thanks,

andrew

without the blood of Jesus Christ, NO MAN could have eternal life.

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by Bandit

without the blood of Jesus Christ, NO MAN could have eternal life.

Fair enough. But I'll stick to my statement above ^^^. "I do not suggest that we are to work out our Salvation without God, or that this is remotely possible. Without ever having even heard of Jesus of Nazareth? Absolutely." Or, another alternative, more in keeping with the topic of this thread - had Jesus not died a violent death, I think Salvation would be every bit as possible ... for Christians & non-Christians alike. But soteriology - would be quite different.

andrew