How do we KNOW that it was JESUS???
- Thread starter Lawdog
- Start date
this thread saddens me deeply. that is not a joke, every time I think there is hope for mankind becoming enlighten in the near future, crazy mystics/Christians spew forth idiocy and call it fact.
moreover, what makes anyone think they know anything about jesus? you probably aren't even calling him by the proper name. scholars think it was probably Jeshu/Yeshu or Josiah. but as long as you are living a fantasy, you may as well make the name easy to pronounce. you people talk so mater-of-fact about jesus, with no basis whatsoever.
I heard someone talk about about bearing the child, then giving it up for adoption, instead of having an abortion. how many kids do you think have coursed their birth parents for being in a orphanage? probably most of them at some point in time. jesus says we should kill children who curse their parents. man, orphanages would be slaughter houses.
p.s. I am starting to think people should be able to be banned for being to mystic, and denying science. after all, this is SCIforums.
moreover, what makes anyone think they know anything about jesus? you probably aren't even calling him by the proper name. scholars think it was probably Jeshu/Yeshu or Josiah. but as long as you are living a fantasy, you may as well make the name easy to pronounce. you people talk so mater-of-fact about jesus, with no basis whatsoever.
I heard someone talk about about bearing the child, then giving it up for adoption, instead of having an abortion. how many kids do you think have coursed their birth parents for being in a orphanage? probably most of them at some point in time. jesus says we should kill children who curse their parents. man, orphanages would be slaughter houses.
sorry, I could not resist this latest gem I came across in the bible.Matthew 15(TNIV) said:
p.s. I am starting to think people should be able to be banned for being to mystic, and denying science. after all, this is SCIforums.
Yorda,
That makes you sound just like a scientist! Bravo!
I'm kind of interrested in physics, or at least, I have been, but then I realized that the true nature of reality is not physical, so the right science of reality can't be physics. It must be a science of consciousness. Physics only observe what is visible (created), so they can only observe effects. Physics must be extended to consciousness, to the observer, in order to understand the causes of the universe, but by doing that, it is no longer physics, but a kind of 'metaphysics'.
Quantum physics is a way towards the real science of the future. But if Quantum Mechanics were true for the atom, it should be true for the universe as a whole as well: the "outer universe", too, should be generated by the observer's mind. It is illogical to separate the observer from the observed.
The universe is inside the mind. It's a dream. It exists only because you, with your consciousness, separate it from yourself. Without separation, there is nothing. A man can't talk and be silent at the same time. Yin and Yang - Tao. Vishnu and Shiva - Brahma. Heaven and Earth - "God". Ancient scriptures tell us about the nature of reality using symbolic language and "gods" (representations of natural and psychological concepts in personal, human form)
Quantum physics is a way towards the real science of the future. But if Quantum Mechanics were true for the atom, it should be true for the universe as a whole as well: the "outer universe", too, should be generated by the observer's mind. It is illogical to separate the observer from the observed.
The universe is inside the mind. It's a dream. It exists only because you, with your consciousness, separate it from yourself. Without separation, there is nothing. A man can't talk and be silent at the same time. Yin and Yang - Tao. Vishnu and Shiva - Brahma. Heaven and Earth - "God". Ancient scriptures tell us about the nature of reality using symbolic language and "gods" (representations of natural and psychological concepts in personal, human form)
Mysticism and science are intimately connected. Since science cannot explain everything, ackowledgement of science's limitations can be termed mysticism. It just means something is a mystery, they aren't mutually exclusive.
knowing what is beyond current science is a mystery, but to be called a mystic, you would have to believe in something very much beyond current science. like UFOs, ghosts, ect. simply saying that you don't know the future of science does not make you a mystic.spidergoat said:
how do you perceive this thing that is beyond physical? you can't see it, because light is physical, you can't hear it, because sound is physical, it can't even be in your mind, because thoughts are physical things, involving electrical signals and chemical reactions. so how does something beyond your 5 senses, and beyond your mind get experienced?yorda said:
SnakeLord said:
I don't. Infact, neither the pyramids or the things at Baalbek were built by giants. The ACTUAL "sons of God" lived a very long time ago, and at the time when the pyramids were built, they were since long gone. But because of the crossbreeding, we inherited some of their characteristics, especially at the beginning. 5000 years ago, there were very few of those who still inherited their original physical size, but through their mental skills it was still easy to recognize them. Those people (like moses, gilgamesh, jesus, krishna, hermes t, buddha, jesaja etc) were the "giants" who incarnated into human bodies.
The Sphinx is the only thing left that might have been built by the ACTUAL giants (it is minimal in comparison of the Pyramids) It shows heavy signs of rain erosion. Last time it rained heavily in Sahara desert was much more than 4000 years ago, so most scientists and archeologists believe that it is much older than the pyramids. It could be 10000 years old. But even at that time, I think the ACTUAL "sons of God" were since long gone. But no one seems to know the exact date of the Sphinx.
"Lion" is the animal manifestation of the first and most important of the infinite "faces of God" (the "Zodiak")
I haven't told you enough about these things, only small parts, so all of it sounds irrational to you.
cato said:
What does "physical" mean?
Everything is inside the mind. "Matter" is a part of my mind (consciousness), just like time is. Nothing is physical. If the world really was outside my mind, my consciousness, separated from me, there would be no way for me sense it in any way. There is no out there out there. You can't be conscious of something "outside" your consciousness. There is no way for me to ever know if there is a world out there, apart from my senses (because the world is inside me), but I can always be sure that "I" exist.
---
It is believed that our universe exists in Vishnu's (a God in Hinduism) dream, and will end when Vishnu awakes from this dream.
Just as the bodies we possess and the people we meet in our dreams, have no physical reality, but are just manifestations of our dreaming power, so are our current bodies and the people we meet in this world manifestations of Vishnu's dreaming power.
Our personal consciousness keeps us in this world. That's why religions tell us that we should forget our persons and do good to others. I think Vishnu might be a representation of consciousness.
Last edited:
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. In fact, there is barely the same amount of evidence for Augustus. Christ left a world-changing religion which we are still debating. what did Augustus leave? who debates Augustus?
Jesus declared that he was the INCARNATION of GOD. Concerning this there are three possibilities:
Such a statement would be evidence that he was insane, or else a liar, or indeed that he was God.
If he was insane, why did so many follow him? Why was He taken seriously by the Pharasees and Romans, indeed, to such an extent that they crucified him?
If he was a liar, what advantage in risking death would promoting the such a grand deception have? He knew that they would execute anyone who said such things. It was well known that the Jewish punishment for such a heresy was death.
could he be both a liar and insane?
the trial and execution shows that he must be either/or:.
It is doubtable that a man can be both crazy and truly guilty of lying, for if his statements were found to be false, they would be attributed to his madness, and so any punishment of his would be ameliorated (not given the fullest punishment)
BUT CHRIST WAS PUNISHED WITH A MOST IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, the ultimate punishment which can be given!
so they did not consider him crazy.
If he was a liar with a suicidal tendency, this would be a mental disorder, which would make him crazy. But we have ruled that out already. The trial would have brought such madness out. Nor do any of his teachings suggest that killing is something he would approve of, or lying.
This leaves us with only one choice:
DEUS MAIESTATIS OMNIPOTENS
Jesus declared that he was the INCARNATION of GOD. Concerning this there are three possibilities:
Such a statement would be evidence that he was insane, or else a liar, or indeed that he was God.
If he was insane, why did so many follow him? Why was He taken seriously by the Pharasees and Romans, indeed, to such an extent that they crucified him?
If he was a liar, what advantage in risking death would promoting the such a grand deception have? He knew that they would execute anyone who said such things. It was well known that the Jewish punishment for such a heresy was death.
could he be both a liar and insane?
the trial and execution shows that he must be either/or:.
It is doubtable that a man can be both crazy and truly guilty of lying, for if his statements were found to be false, they would be attributed to his madness, and so any punishment of his would be ameliorated (not given the fullest punishment)
BUT CHRIST WAS PUNISHED WITH A MOST IGNOMINIOUS DEATH, the ultimate punishment which can be given!
so they did not consider him crazy.
If he was a liar with a suicidal tendency, this would be a mental disorder, which would make him crazy. But we have ruled that out already. The trial would have brought such madness out. Nor do any of his teachings suggest that killing is something he would approve of, or lying.
This leaves us with only one choice:
DEUS MAIESTATIS OMNIPOTENS
Lawdog,
An appeal to the idea that because so many people believe it then it must be true is as I have taught you already a classic logical fallacy. Truth is not determined by a majority vote.
The case for the historicity of the aleged Jesus is not concluded. This in turn casts serious doubt on any veracity of the entire religion known as Christianity.
Simply repeating your same assertions without responding to appropriate challenges is disingenuous of you.
No there isn’t as we have discussed elsewhere already. And when challenged you were completely unable to provide any evidence that he ever existed.
An appeal to the idea that because so many people believe it then it must be true is as I have taught you already a classic logical fallacy. Truth is not determined by a majority vote.
The case for the historicity of the aleged Jesus is not concluded. This in turn casts serious doubt on any veracity of the entire religion known as Christianity.
Simply repeating your same assertions without responding to appropriate challenges is disingenuous of you.
:bugeye:Lawdog said:
You've gotta be fuckin' kidding me. Augustus was the first Roman Emperor, he started the most powerful fucking empire in Europe until the Third Reich. What the hell did he leave? Here's what he left: Rome, bitch, the Empire that your little martyr oh so foolishly defied.
lawdog, your post is so full of holes I could strain my vegetables with it.
ok, here goes (I hate being part of the logic police, I wish we could just ban these people)
*(assuming jesus existed) *
ok, here goes (I hate being part of the logic police, I wish we could just ban these people)
I would just like to add one thing onto harpsburg's post. just because someone lived, does not mean they were the sun of god. evidence of his miracles would have to be shown.
*(assuming jesus existed) *
because people are weak minded, and looking for quick-fix solutions to their problems.
were is the pharisees now? gone. thats what they feared. if people thought jesus was the sun of god, he would automatically have more power then them. furthermore, the romans didn't think he was a threat. they almost let him go. and crucification was not that extraordinary of a thing in those days. when Spartacus' rebellion was stopped about 6,000 people were crucified.
it would be folly to guess at the motivation of someone who (if he existed) existed 2000 years ago. however, there could be many reasons. for example, maybe he wanted to gain power to fight the romans, or take down the pharisees, or make a living as a conman instead of cutting stone (or whatever he did).
no it doesn't.
mentally disturbed people have been given death penalties for all but the last couple of centuries (in civilized places). what makes you think they would even catch it? or even care?
no "we" haven't.
do you really think their justice system was that good? mentally ill people have passed through our justice system to their death, and I am sure ours is much better then theirs was.
that you do not have the mental capacity to know that you cannot logically argue for the divinity of jesus, or that the bible is the word of god.
Last edited: