How do we KNOW that it was JESUS???

All cultures seek continuation, truth has nothing to do with it, it's a con job that would have made Jesus puke. Christianity only helps people according to the values that it itself dictates. Overall, such ideas have brought humanity to the brink of total destruction.
 
spidergoat said:
All cultures seek continuation, truth has nothing to do with it, it's a con job that would have made Jesus puke.
Click to expand...

Jesus knew that this would happen. I don't know if it's bad though.
 
*************
M*W: I've read each of the posts in reply to yours, and the members of this forum have provided you with clear, consistent and truthful answers. Why do you continue to post about your belief in the mythologies of Jesus and Christianity? You already know that we don't agree with your beliefs. There is nothing you can say or do to convince us that you are right in your beliefs and we are wrong in ours. Most of us, I believe, have already traveled in your religious shoes, and when they got all worn and useless, we discarded them forever. None of us want back those worn out 'old shoes'. Now, we're wearing our self-designed new shoes that fit us well and are more comfortable for our chosen lifestyles.

Further, if your intentions are to try and convert us, it just won't work. Preaching is not allowed on this forum, and that's really all you've been doing. You continue to post neither novel nor evidentiary findings although you have been given every opportunity to do so. Even atheists would welcome factual, independently authenticated data with cited references. However, you have been unable to provide such.
*************
In comment, you said:

"There is much evidence for the Life of Christ, and so recent in relative historical time was his life that no serious historian doubts his existance, it would be like doubting the existance of the Roman Emperor Augustus."
*************
M*W: There is "much evidence for the life of Christ," just as there is "much evidence" for Zeus, Hera, and the gaggle of gods on Mount Olympus. Let me make that clear, there is much 'literary' evidence that gods existed, but that doesn't make them real!

You believe that "no serious historians" doubt Jesus' existence. Please provide us with the names of these "serious historians," as well as referencing their journal publications. Perhaps we can then have a "serious" discussion.
*************
You also stated:

"Jesus declared that he was the INCARNATION of GOD."
*************
M*W: "Serious historians" know that the 'words' of Jesus simply don't exist. Those 'words' attributed to what Jesus was to have spoken were actually the 'words' of Paul. However, recent biblical research is concluding that Paul, too, was a mythological character. It remains to be confirmed just who, if it wasn't Paul, was responsible for creating the Jesus myth. Some biblical and archeological research has just been completed and published indicating that the mythologies of Jesus and Christianity were, in fact, a major Machiavellian production by the Roman Empirates. It's called the Flavian Hypothesis:

http://www.webspawner.com/users/fl...ovides a novel and logically evident meaning.
 
Medicine Woman said:
M*W: There is "much evidence for the life of Christ," just as there is "much evidence" for Zeus, Hera, and the gaggle of gods on Mount Olympus. Let me make that clear, there is much 'literary' evidence that gods existed, but that doesn't make them real!
Click to expand...

Sure they are real! Have you still not understood that "gods" are representations of things, to explain nature and our inmost self. For example, we know that lightning comes when negative and positive powers go together. But such things were hard to understand for simple, primitive humans, so they invented their own way to explain things: gods. Of course, there is not much difference if you say that the main God (Thor) casts the bolts or if you say that they are born from the union of negative and positive powers.

Then there were also wise people (like moses and jesus) who knew that there were no "gods". But because people couldn't grasp their true teachings, they had to talk about gods, and make interresting stories to explain for the people. Like the garden of eden. It is allegorical, but it explains a real thing: The awakening of our consciousness and awareness self, bodily desires (the snake) and so on

So.. gods are real, they are just not what you think they are.

M*W: "Serious historians" know that the 'words' of Jesus simply don't exist. Those 'words' attributed to what Jesus was to have spoken were actually the 'words' of Paul.
Click to expand...

Why did they create the myth of Christianity? They must have had a good purpose, since it is a long story and has really had a great impact on our world.

But I think people no longer believe in these old "myths" because they're so proud of themselves and their "great knowledge". The same way as those who follow a specific religion don't believe in other religions. Atheists can also be fanatic. It starts to look more and more like a "religion".

Pitiful humans. You always think you're right.
 
Yorda: Sure they are real! Have you still not understood that "gods" are representations of things, to explain nature and our inmost self.
*************
M*W: Yorda, I wasn't going to bother answering your post, but just to let you know, I am well aware of how the concept of "gods" has arisen from ancient humans. If I don't make myself clear, which I believe I do, you need not bother responding. There is obviously a language barrier going on.
*************
Yorda: Then there were also wise people (like moses and jesus) who knew that there were no "gods". But because people couldn't grasp their true teachings, they had to talk about gods, and make interresting stories to explain for the people. Like the garden of eden. It is allegorical, but it explains a real thing: The awakening of our consciousness and awareness self, bodily desires (the snake) and so on

So.. gods are real, they are just not what you think they are.
*************
M*W: Have you read anything by Joseph Campbell?

The Mythic Image
The Masks of God
The Historical Atlas of World Mythology
The Power of Myth
The Hero With A Thousand Faces

The "gods" are mental images we create in our minds, so, no they are not "real" in the sense you are using, but they seem to be "real" in the minds of the believers.
*************
Yorda: Why did they create the myth of Christianity? They must have had a good purpose, since it is a long story and has really had a great impact on our world.
*************
M*W: I just posted a lengthy response to Lapdog where I explained how the "myth of Christianity" was created. Please refer to it. I'm not going to repeat it here.

Yorda, you are truly naive. Just because something is a "long story" doesn't make it real, and the "impact" Christianity has had on the world is definitely NOT a positive one!
*************
Yorda: But I think people no longer believe in these old "myths" because they're so proud of themselves and their "great knowledge". The same way as those who follow a specific religion don't believe in other religions. Atheists can also be fanatic. It starts to look more and more like a "religion".

Pitiful humans. You always think you're right.
*************
M*W: You are right. People are more intelligent, and they are realizing that these "old myths" are just that, "old myths." You imply that having "great knowledge" is a bad thing. What, are you stupid? Atheism is not nor will ever be a religion. You need to do some reading about atheism, but I don't think you have the intelligence to understand what you are reading.

Why would you use the term "pitiful humans?" Are you a baboon? Just because you're too stupid to understand our thirst for knowledge doesn't make your belief system "right!" As long as you are not that familiar with English language usage, it would probably be a good idea not to argue with those of us who do. You continue to embarass yourself.
 
Joseph Campell: Jungian New Age trash.
I read it, at first agreed with it, then realized it was trash.
 
Lawdog,

Re the “Titulus Crucis” 14C dating.

Have you actually read the text?

It appears to say -

"14C Dating of the 'Titulus Crucis,'" Radiocarbon [journal] v.44 n.3 (2002 [received 2003]) 685-9. … radiocarbon dating of the walnut wood relic in Rome, thought by some to be the tablet from the cross of Jesus Christ: it has a 2-sigma date range of 980 to 1146 AD.

That makes it medieval and not from the time of the alleged Christ.

The Shroud was also dated at medieval times.

Perhaps you could paste your version of the text.
 
M*W: Yorda, you are truly naive. Just because something is a "long story" doesn't make it real,
*************
Yorda: M*W, you are truly naive. It is a long story, and that makes it "real". But you didn't understand what I meant by "real".
*************
M*W: You imply that having "great knowledge" is a bad thing.
*************
Yorda: No, I mean that you only think you have great knowledge. If you really had great knowledge, you wouldn't need to "discuss".
*************
M*W: What, are you stupid? Atheism is not nor will ever be a religion.
*************
Yorda: Well, it's very similar at least. You sound like a pretty fanatic atheist to me :rolleyes:
*************
M*W: You need to do some reading about atheism, but I don't think you have the intelligence to understand what you are reading.
*************
Yorda: You need to do some reading about atheism, but I don't think you have the intelligence to understand what you are reading.
*************
M*W: Why would you use the term "pitiful humans?"
*************
Yorda: It was kind of joke.
*************
M*W: Just because you're too stupid to understand our thirst for knowledge doesn't make your belief system "right!"
*************
Yorda: It DOES make it right. It doesn't matter how stupid I am, my belief system will still always be right for me.
*************
M*W: You continue to embarass yourself.
*************
Yorda: Why should I care? This is an anonymous forum.
 
Lawdog said:
He was a heretic according to the Jews, indeed, but he was executed for sedition by the Romans. Why seek the death of a harmless insane man, a dreamer who thought he was God? Its not like he was going around preaching the overthrow of the state, the synagog, or the Romans.

To kill one that is innocent of wrongdoing was a great horror in those days. So why did they do it?
Click to expand...
The Romans did not want anyone to incite the Jews to rebel. Now it seems that you have forgotten who had the final say in his execution? The Jews were given the choice and who was it they picked? Hmmm? Do you know why Lawdog? Because he was going around preaching against the rule of the Romans and the rules of the Synagog.

And Lawdog, do you actually think that the Romans cared if he was innocent? Do you honestly believe that they looked at wrongful death of the people they ruled over, with horror?

The existance of relics as well, such as the Shroud of Turin, physical evidenvce of his life on earth.
Click to expand...
Ermmm Lawdog, the Shroud of Turin has been proven to be a fake.

3) a relic like thev shroud is valid evidence, especially a wide collection of genuine relics kept from that era which have been validated by archeologists, such as we have.

HERE IS THE Scientific Study OF THE SIGN PUT Over JESUS When he was crucified.

39d06370.jpg
Click to expand...
You really should read up on things before posting Lawdog so as to not look like a fool. The URL you put forth is for a site selling the report of the findings. The findings did however state that the Titulus Crucis it has a 2-sigma date range of 980 to 1146 AD. If you want to actually read a report of the findings on the Titulus Crucis, I'd suggest this instead:

Dating of the Titulus Crucis

Scroll down to page 4 for the conclusion and the actual findings of the radiocarbon age of the piece of walnut which you so gleefully claimed 'was' placed above Jesus when he was crucified.
 
2) Josephus' statement has been shown to be genuine by competant authority
Click to expand...

There is absolutely no point arguing over the authenticity of the brief text in Josephus works. Josephus was born in 37ad, which is after the time jesus had died. Anything he might or might not have said would be second hand information. Basically jesus would have gone the way of the dodo before this guy was even an active sperm. Anything he has to say on the matter is pretty worthless.

Atheists say that the Bible is a myth, but why would someone write so much and claim that it is true if it wasn't?
Click to expand...

Many things could be 'true' to a degree without being actually 'true'. Take for instance the ten plagues. The second plague, (the water turning red), most likely did occur and would have undoubtedly have been a case of pfisteria. Nobody in those times would have been able to diagnose pfisteria though and so gave the only explanation they could. That doesn't make it actually true, but does mean the story is true in part.

Then we need to look at chinese whispers and it's effect on people. We already know that a lot of the early parts of the OT are based upon earlier stories, and it is credible to state that the majority of the jesus story is based upon earlier myths. We know there was no Noah, and yet that does not specifically negate a flood occurence.. We all know floods happen.

So these people witnessed a flood and some guy with a pet goat survived it on a boat. Not only would that story be vastly exaggerated as is the case with storytelling, but that story would also suffer a lot of changes as time goes by. There is no reason to believe that the jesus story is original, or indeed credible given the amount of contradictory claims and statements given throughout the NT.

Of course to the people doing the writing at that time it would certainly seem credible enough. The fact is that if they were working on a handed down story they would have no way to verify any of the details - but merely worked by what other people told them. If some lunatic told them they saw a flying goat there is no reason to not beleive it, and no way to show it as false.
 
Ok, perhaps I should not have trusted scientists, who almost all believe in the folly of Evolution, to come up with an accurate date. truly that was foolish, i give you that. Nevertheless, if it were up to them Im sure that they would find every relic a medieval forgery and only pagan things to have existed from the Roman times, thats assinine.

What the scientists cannot explain to papyrologists and philologists is how its possible the titulus, if its susposedly medieval forgery like they say the shroud is,could possibly be designed with accurate Roman alphabetic characters from the exact time period of Pontius Pilate. Given the knowledge of Roman papyrology in medieval times, that would be impossible. The radio carbon dating is therefore inaccurate, as its wide reputation usually mantains.
 
Last edited:
Where is the hard, physical proof and evidence that evolution does not exist?
Where is the evidence that your god exists?
Where is it? Where?
Show me total, complete, hard evidence that your "god" exists, and I will go along with your cult of christ thingy. A book written by drunks and shepards isn't proof. Photographs, skin samples, blood samples, those are proof.
If you cannot present these, then, my dear little lapdog, you have no rational reason for your omnipotent omnijerk to exist.
:p
 
Lawdog,

Putting things in perspective.

The Josephus vague contentious paragraph, even if true, would be very indirect. The wood relic again if it had been true is indirect and tenuous. The shroud is perhaps more interesting but again if it had been true is indirect.

The net result is that if Jesus had existed and was indeed the most important event in the history of mankind then wouldn't there be something more permanent and verifiable than these paltry vague indirect questionable artifacts? The lack of any meaningful evidence makes for great difficulty regarding the credibility of Christian claims.

In those ancient times without TV and radio, and where the vast majority were illiterate, the most common form of entertainment was the storytellers. Their imaginative creative tales were the equivalent of major box office hits of today. They had no care for truth or accuracy; even today modern journalists rarely care too much about accuracy. Also the entire world population 2000 years ago was only a few million. But travel over long distances was a hardship and rarely undertaken so tales would take a long time to spread and would be adapted and changed at each telling. This was the environment that gave birth to many myths, but a story that told of the overthrow of the Roman oppressors like a new king would have been very popular and likely to have been mistaken as a news report rather than a fairy story.

The first such story of Jesus came from Mark, the simpler of the gospels. Mathew and Luke took the Mark story and added embellishments and new variations. None of these gospels quite agree with each other – but then the myth makers weren’t reporting real events – they were just story tellers. John was a different variation on the same theme.

There should be little doubt that Christianity is entirely mythological.
 
SnakeLord said:
We already know that a lot of the early parts of the OT are based upon earlier stories, and it is credible to state that the majority of the jesus story is based upon earlier myths.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that? Only because they are similar? Of course they are similar since they talk about the same thing. The stories about a Christ are not "based" on earlier stories. They are based on the same event, the same concept, the same truth.

The Christ represents the true self (logos) within us. At the same time, while the Christ is allegorical, Christ has also been born on earth, in a human body. Many cultures have written about the Christ, because he has come to many places on earth.

This "son of God" is an earthly representation of the "heavenly lamb". Because, just as the divine Self of the world sacrifices itself and takes upon himself the 3-dimensional material world and suffers an eternal crucifixion on the two girders of space and time, so must the "son of God" express his divine "Self" fully in a human body and resist the revenge of the spirit of matter (satan), and because of ignorant humans, he has to die.

A human who lives in inner darkness is like a stable, where different animals - animal desires - live. In this stable, a divine child is born: "Self awareness". There are two kinds of people, who recognize the child and bow before him: simple people, completely uncivilized people without education, like shepherds for example, who yet don't know the doubts of the mind. Then there are those who already have a long way behind them, who no longer need to be proud of their knowledge or debate it.

We know there was no Noah, and yet that does not specifically negate a flood occurence.. We all know floods happen.
Click to expand...

At the time when the flood was about to occur, the "sons of God" built ships all over the world. Noah and Gilgamesh were just two of the many sons of God. Although they were not THE sons of God (the "giants"), but they had inherited their wisdom and love. The ones who built the pyramids weren't "giants" either. The real giants (both physically and spiritually/mentally) died out a very long time ago.
 
Lawdog,

Ok, perhaps I should not have trusted scientists, who almost all believe in the folly of Evolution, to come up with an accurate date. truly that was foolish, i give you that.
Click to expand...
So let’s get this straight. If they had given the date you wanted to hear then you would now be quoting the immense authority of science as being on your side, but now you discover they don’t agree with you then they are liars and cheats?

Perhaps someone else can help me here, I’m sure there is a name for that time of paranoia; the phrase escapes me for the moment.

What the scientists cannot explain to papyrologists and philologists is how its possible the titulus, if its susposedly medieval forgery like they say the shroud is,could possibly be designed with accurate Roman alphabetic characters from the exact time period of Pontius Pilate. Given the knowledge of Roman papyrology in medieval times, that would be impossible. The radio carbon dating is therefore inaccurate, as its wide reputation usually mantains.
Click to expand...
Forgery and trickery, like prostitution, are among the oldest arts in the history of mankind. All the time there are gullible people there will be tricksters to exploit them. Go watch a magic show in Vegas, (Siegfried and Roy were superb) – scientists are baffled by some of those tricks as well.

The net is that because something cannot be explained doesn’t mean that it is evidence for something else of your personal choice.
 
i have demonstrated its historic authenticity. You dont accept that because you dont want to, not because you are thinking with objectively, but like the others, you seem to hide your prejudice beneath the cloak of rationalism garbed as science.


Even if I were to show you the execution order written in Pilate's own hand, you would say itsa medieval forgery or concoct some other excuse.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top