The legendary and long-dead Jesus is commonly known as "our savior" along with such catchy titles as the "messiah", the "redeemer", etc. Just what, exactly, is he supposed to be saving us for? Or from? And when is this much anticipated salvation going to occur?

Some answers and rebuttals:

Jesus is not my savior, nor is anyone else. I am my own savior through my naturally evolved conscience.

Apparently, Jesus is not a savior according to judaism, islam, buddhism, etc., so what's to become of those other "theologically unenlightened" lost souls? Funny, those others don't seem much concerned with the christian notion of salvation.

Allegedly, all righteous men, apparently meaning only christians, will (someday) rise from the dead at the "second coming of christ" to have their putrid remains (or the dust thereof) saved and delivered unto "heaven". Or will our inanimate "souls" be saved at death and delivered to "heaven" as our essence rots away in the grave which, as a matter of verifiable fact, it does for all self-described christians (and, alas, everyone else)?

Are we supposed to "pray" for salvation now? And just what are we pleading to be saved from? Hell? Ourselves? Agnosticism? Atheism? Death? Re-incarnation into another faith (obviously THE cardinal sin in christian-economic terms)?

I would think that the christian promise of the "second coming" and salvation of the soul would make mankind anxious for death. In fact, if christian theology is to be believed, why can't humanity skip the details and go directly from birth to death? This seems a much more efficient way to receive "salvation" in its christian form. Furthermore, how can there be a "second coming" when so many of us (and the numbers are growing) have concluded that there never was a "first coming"?

Please, all you professed "Jesus freaks", keep your confusing and incomprehensible theories about salvation to yourselves. We are saved and salved by our consciences, not by a fairy tale. Mankind was pretty messed up 2000 years before "christ", it was pretty messed up when he was around and we're just as messed up now...2000 years later and a mere fifty-plus years from two of the most notorious acts of genocide in the history of our species.*

It seems, at least to most of mankind, that a prophet/cult represented as "Jesus", undoubtedly conceived and birthed in the usual manner, did exist and this prophet/cult developed and implemented a vastly better P.R. machine than any other of the prophets and teachers, fakes and preachers of the time. As to his being the "son of god"; the historical and mortal being or figure we know as Jesus was not the "son of god", merely a preacher and philosopher of Jewish descent who, through devoted and voluble (and, interestingly enough, according to the playwright of "Corpus Christi", possibly gay) followers, happened to leave enough of an impression, written and otherwise, that other misguided nomads stumbled across these regurgitated jewish homilies and turned them into the "scriptures". Jesus was, in his day, and in terms of today's cultures, the Bill Gates of prophets. He was NO GOD, but he was ruthless and perspicacious enough to gather a loyal and dedicated staff who helped him develop and guide and perpetuate one of the most effective bullshit dispensers of the age. (Is Mohammed the Henry Ford of islam?) In a thousand years, maybe, if our species is still around, mankind may worship Mr. Gates (with the attendant computer keyboard as the icon replacing the cross) in the same way that a much less informed humanity now worships "god" and "christ", etc.

(I'd be interested to see the reaction of the "faithful" if irrefutable proof were found that Jesus really was gay!!)

Another thought with at least as much merit as what mankind has done with this pagan-based morality play: there are those with enough wisdom to question the common legends attributed to "christ", who've theorized that the "scriptures" are nothing more than an encoded secret recipe for the preparation of mushrooms in ritualistic, mind altering ceremonies long since drowned in the mists of time and the mysticism of christianity.

I am amused to note that christianity's favorite icon (especially for the catholic sect) is a figure often graphically representing crime and punishment, the torture and execution of a mortal man. I don't know of any other religion worshipping a symbol of violent execution. Should we, then, be surprised that mankind, especially those who believe in the myth of "christ", seems over the generations to become more and more inclined to embrace violence as an integral part of socio-economic conflict? In keeping with the alleged modernization of this religious fantasy, why not display a representation of the hangman's noose or the electric chair over your alters and on your walls or around your necks? Or, to become ultra-chic, a hypodermic needle? I wonder how many citizens of the world wear the crucifix while demanding an end to capital punishment? Further, am I the only one who's noticed this philosophical contradiction? I'm not an especially fastidious or pacifistic person, nor am I in favor of the elimination of the death penalty, but I just don't understand this fascination with worshipping the icon representing a man supposedly tried and convicted of sedition, suffering, bleeding to death, shitting and pissing his robes (although, the study of the ancient practice of crucifixion reveals that the victims were naked; and wouldn't THAT look cool on a sunday school wall??!!) as he hangs there with a silly-assed bush on his head. Or, even more melodramatically, pictures of this guy's heart in the midst of spontaneous combustion, often with a sword through it for good measure.

(I'd also be interested in the reaction of the "faithful" if a petrified turd were discovered which was proven to be excreted by "christ" as he hung on his cross. Such a marvelous discovery would give a whole new meaning and legitimacy to the phrase "holy shit!"...not to mention its potential in the naming of churches)

If Jesus died for your sins, then apparently, he lived in vain.

Page written by: Eric D. Tallberg

October, 1998