Jesus did not create religion, he created the basis of the Christian religion. His followers set up things in order to appease and pray to him, but he did not. Organized Christianity was not founded by Jesus. Jesus was a messenger telling people the story. Did he worship himself? He did kind of paradoxally, so it does not really count; plus he was a human when he taught it. Plus, at the time of his preaching, the Bible was not complete, so he was not even teaching the rest of the Bible but mainly variations on the ideas of Judeism.
I did not say that the Bible was a human construct, but the religion that uses it as its basis is a human construct because it involves human interpretation. Also, I might add, that the religion only became complete when Jesus returned to the right hand of god. Then it was a religion based on the belief that he did all of those things. The books of Genesis and the Old Testament were the words of god prior to Jesus' existence. Well, even though Jesus and God, as you believe, are the same, I doubt that baby Jesus could do all the things god could; human impairment. Also, if you had leperacy, you would walk up to anyone telling you it was going to be alright. Finally, the New Testament contains a lot of letters that Jesus did not write himself, but his disciples did, so unless his disciples are perfect, the dictation could have been a human interpretation as well.
I could also say this I guess: There is a reason going to church is not a commandment.
True debating, in my opinion, is not a bombardment contest, but a gradual intellectual progression.
I believe that different viewpoints make conflict and thus make themselves more concrete. For example, the different Christian groups, they all claim differences on certain things, and to separate themselves they have more examples of concrete beliefs. Thus, more groups equals more concrete beliefs. One Christian group would not have all these concrete beliefs which are also variations in interpretation. The only thing they have in common is that they derive their interpretations from the same source.
Then a different relgious group comes out, for example radical Islam. All Christians feel threatened because the radical Islamists derive their beliefs from something else. This is the source of unity for the Christians. However, they feel that they have to combine into a single entity to show that they are firmly against radical Islam; they do not necessarily do it, but it is a fear impulse: strength in numbers. Why could they not just have a unified support without becoming a single entity? Radical Islam is divided as well. Those who fight are weak in their argument.
If one thing does not work then something else should be put in? Just because you feel something has a problem does not mean that a small change might not fix it. Maybe the whole problem is organized religion. I say we abolish that. It breeds hate and bigotry. People should practice their beliefs without the control and harsh direction of others. Now that is a radical and new change.
you people can say the davinci code is fiction all you want, and it is, but that doesn't change the fact that he based the book on "real" facts. he presents everything in that book as a fact. to him, the only reason it's fiction is because the people that do things in it aren't real and the events that they do never happened. but i don't think about it very much. he's just one of the millions out there that don't believe in God.