Let's cut through the chase: Jesus didn't exist.

[Iasion]

Greetings,

Crtics claim that Josephus was forged. That, however is a silly argument.First of all, there is no proof that such insertions into the text were ever made. They may be authentic.

"Proof" is for moon-shiners and mathematicians.

There is plenty of evidence that the T.F. is forged :

* Josephus was a JEW, NOT a Christian - yet the T.F. is obviously written by a Christian (it calls Jesus the Messiah), thus this passage could not have been written by Josephus.

* One of the themes of Josephus is that Israel was lead astray by false messiahs - his book mentions many of them (several called "Jesus" too). Josephus could not possibly have called Jesus the Messiah when one of his book's themes is how there was NO real Messiah.

* The passage interrupts the flow of the work, and does not belong where it fitted - this shows it has been INSERTED.

* We know that Josephus did NOT have this passage in late 2nd century - Origen specifically notes that Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah; also numerous other writers review Josephus in the early centuries and do NOT mention the T.F.

The Testimonium is found in every copy of Jesusphus in existence.

Is there some reason you cannot get names correct?

All our copies are from a MILLENIUM later - this proves NOTHING about the early copies.

Second, Josephus mentions many other biblically relevant occurrences that are not in dispute.

None that have anything to do with proving Jesus existed.

This adds validity to the claim that Josephus knew about Jesus and wrote about Him since he also wrote about other New Testament things.

False.
Josephus shows NO KNOWLEDGE of NT writings at all - in fact, some scholars argue G.Luke is dependent on Josephus.

Third, this reference to Jesus is found in all surviving manuscripts.

All our copies are from a MILLENIUM later - this proves NOTHING about the early copies.

Fourth, Quoted in full by Eusebius(Chruch historian), c. 324 CE.

Eusebius the Master Forger?
Eusebius the Liar?
Haha

What about Origen in 2nd century who explicitly said that Josephus did NOT call Jesus the Messiah - clear evidence it was added between Origen and Eusebius (or by Eusebius himself.)

Fith, the Vocabulary and style are generally consistent with that of Josephus.

So?

sixth, A more accepted reference to Jesus in Book 20 indicates that he must have been described earlier in the Antiquities, logically at the discussion of Pilate. So, the burden of proof is on the person who denies this refrence.

What?
The 2nd mention is also most likely an interpolation.

As for Taticus, he affirms what is written in the Gospels.

False.
He repeats later Christian beliefs - even getting Pilate's title WRONG - showing it is a late comment, not based on anything early.

Sorry im a bit confused.

Well,
there is one thing we agree on


Iasion

 

[Mythbuster]

Thanks Iasion, i agree with you 100%. My brain didn't go well yesterday.

 

[Iasion]

Greetings,

The documents about Jesu swere written much closer to Jesus than the documents of Alex the Great, and many others.

You have ASSUMED Jesus existed,
the very thing you are trying to prove.

If Jesus did not exist,
his myths could have been developing for many years before they came to prominence.

Anyway - myths can develop in ONE DAY (e.g. at the death of Augustus.)

Yet, scholars regard them as crediable.

Because Alexander's story is historically credible - Jesus' is not. We also have contemporary and archeological evidence for Alexander - NOTHING for Jesus or the Gospel events.

Those who wrote the documents knew that if they were inaccurate, plenty of people would have pointed it out.

Why would they?
Did anyone debunk Heaven's Gate ?
Did anyone debunk Harry Potter?
No.
Therefore, according to YOUR argument, they must be TRUE !

What about the GOLDEN ASS of APULEIS - a document from the same period as the Gospels.
No-one debunked that work - therefore according to your argument, he really DID turn into an Ass.

The fact is - the period was known for all sorts of bizarre religious sects and beliefs - the vast majority were IGNORED - which does NOT make them true at all.

It is complete nonsense to suggest that a religious work is true, just because no one debunked it.

Anyway -
some time afterwards - the Gospels WERE DEBUNKED as FICTION, by :
* Celsus
* Porphyry
* Julian
So,
therefore, you must agree they were fiction.


Moving on,
Jesus allegedly lived up to the 30s.
The Temple and all its records was destroyed in 70AD, then Jerusalem was completely demolished in 130AD and the Jews scattered (those that still lived) and Judea erased from the map.

THAT's when the Gospels first began to be noticed - mid 2nd century.

That's about a CENTURY after the alleged events, with every GONE, and Jerusalem DESTROYED.

Explain who you think was left to point out it was fiction?

But, we have absolutely no ancient documents contemporary with the first century that contest the New Testament texts. So no, they did not record false history.

What nonsense.
There is NO EVIDENCE to support the NT stories.
There is considerable evidence that the Gospels got many things wrong (e.g. the date of Jesus' birth, the errors of geography etc.)

For instance - the massacre of the innocents - we DO have records of that period and people - and this massacre is NOT recorded.

It never happened.
The Gospels are myths.


Iasion

 

[qwerty mob]

@Iasion: Interesting posts. Thanks!

 

[charles cure]

i never thought you and i would share civil words with eachother...
cause for a party?

crack out the champagne, we can be friends after all! rock n roll.

 

[Silas]

Iasion, welcome to the debate. Just a note, really, it's just that it's not really necessary to SHOUT every third word or so. Made it hard to read your posts as a cohesive argument.

 

[charles cure]

Crtics claim that Josephus was forged. That, however is a silly argument.First of all, there is no proof that such insertions into the text were ever made. They may be authentic.

the proof of insertion in the text are threefold.
1. it is not at all consistent with the style of josephus.

2.the disputed mention of jesus in the "antiquities of the jews" talks about jesus in pretty glowing terms, which at one point prompted historians to wonder why Josephus was not actually converted to christianity if he thought so much of Jesus.

3.in addition to this, the christian historian Oringen at one point did a comprehensive commentary on Josephus's works and does not seem to notice any mention of jesus whatsoever, however, christian historians writing around a century later make note of it. this seems to indicate support for the comments about Jesus being a later insertion.

 

[Iasion]

Greetings,

Iasion, welcome to the debate. Just a note, really, it's just that it's not really necessary to SHOUT every third word or so. Made it hard to read your posts as a cohesive argument.

Thanks,
don't like my use of capitals for emphasis?
I'll try and use bold in future so it's not so hard for you to read my posts.

Iasion

 

[Ophiolite]

Stalking, Jan, would be if I went into all the threads you frequent and posted this:

Observe, with interest A Darn Jane's debating style:

Refuse to answer any question directly.
Refuse to study the evidence, whilst implying the evidence has been studied.
Characterise the evidence as opinion.
Deny everything.
Answer questions with another question.

The technique is effective on two levels.
a) It frustrates those presenting a counter argument, as they are unable to penetrate her obfuscation and misdirection. [Not that they need to.]
b) It allows A Darn Jane to comfortably maintain her own delusions. [Although even the casual observer can see, not the holes in her logic, but the entire absence of logic.]

In general though, A Darn Jane's views do provide an interesting illustration of the evolutionary limitations of intelligence.

 

[geistkiesel]

*************
M*W: But how can it be proven that his followers were there? I believe they're all made-up characters representing the 12 signs of the zodiac.

Medicine Woman,
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John contain the story of J. The M, M,L and J all describe the participants: when they supposedly whacked J.

The Roman Soldiers, Joseph of Arimathiea, some women and Peter Simon the dude who had carried J's cross, and gave him some drugs soaked in a sponge when J indicated he was 'giving uup the ghost.'

Matthew 27:55 - 56:
Moreover many women viewing from a distance,Mary Magdelen, Mary the mother of James, and Joses,and the mother of the sons of Zebedee.

Mark,15:40-41
There were women viewing from a distance - Mary Magdelen, Mary the mother of James, Joses and Solome, and many other women.

Luke: 23:48-50.
Crowds were beating their breasts, also women who had followed him from Gallilee.

John 21:25
Mother and sister of his mother, Mary the wife of Clopas and Mary Magdalen and the desciple who he, J , loved (probably Lazarus, and most likely his brother in law, a very wealthy bro, who acted out being 'raised from the dead' with J who needed a few righteous miracles to pad his popularity and reknown. (Lazarus had two sisters, Mary and Martha, Mary [Magdalen] probably his married squeeeze (the marriage at Cannan), she was the one who anointed J and wiped the oil with her hair. The desciples were miffed that J loved Mary more than them as J kissed MAry on the mouth.)

This wasn't the usual executionm location as the tomb that had been newly cut in the rocks was nearby at Joseph of Arimethiea's garden (Gestheseme(sic)).

J lasted approximately 9 hours where the average expected for a man his age and health averaged 2-3 days.Joseph requested the body from Pilate which was granted -Pilate was probably bribed.

Geistkiesel​

 

[c7ityi_]

M*W: But how can it be proven that his followers were there? I believe they're all made-up characters representing the 12 signs of the zodiac.

They most likely represent them, but that doesn't mean he didn't have 12 human followers too, and it definitely doesn't mean Christianity is wrong, it only means YOUR naive view was wrong. Later you'll discover the mysteries of the Zodiac, the mysteries of yourself, and you will understand what it all means.

 

[Lori_7]

*************
M*W: Let's get right down to it. Jesus didn't exist, and there is no proof that confirms he existed. Why is it that people continue to believe he is their dying demigod savior? When will they ever learn that there is no Jesus. No savior. No heaven. No hell. No religion? When will you people realize you are living a big fat lie?

He actually still exists...I know Him personally, and that's all the proof that I need.

Why do you care? Seriously, what is your big hairy deal about Jesus? You don't want to know Him? Fine...done. Now let it go, and move the fuck on already. Why do you have to be on some antichrist campaign all the time? You know, I'm sure you hate it when Christians try to shove their agenda down your throat. And logically, you would think that would keep you from trying to do the same thing with your own agenda. But alas, not so much.

 

[geeser]

if I said I knew the easter bunny/santa/a unicorn personally, you say I was mad, and theres the problem too many people in power around the world have personal relationships with the easter bunny/god/jesus this is very dangerous for the world as a whole and should be changed, but it has to be baby steps, until common sense prevails.
but unfortunately some people are too far gone.

 

[Lori_7]

I didn't say the flippin' easter bunny. I said Jesus. And think what you want...whatever appeases your ego. Just don't try to tell me what I know, because I know Jesus.

 

[iam]

A concept can be real, it can take on a life of its own...but only in terms of and as a concept. A concept tested against a given reality may prove to be nonexistant. the easter bunny does exist but only in the vaccuum of our consciousness/imagination unintruded by three-dimensional space or reality. We are all creators to some extent. Did Jesus exist in 3-D? Who knows. Does Jesus' lifeforce/energy exist now? Did his lifeforce return to earth's magnetic field? No one can answer that. Does he exist for you? Probably only in your mind.

 

[draqon]

Let's cut through the chase: This thread didn't exist.

 

[ghost7584]

*************
M*W: Let's get right down to it. Jesus didn't exist, and there is no proof that confirms he existed. Why is it that people continue to believe he is their dying demigod savior? When will they ever learn that there is no Jesus. No savior. No heaven. No hell. No religion? When will you people realize you are living a big fat lie?

Jesus as an historical figure in history definitely did exist. The first century Jewish historian, Josephus, wrote of Jesus. Jesus, who is called Christ, is a real person in history.

http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm

 

[superluminal]

No he didn't.

 

[TheVisitor]

*************
M*W: there is no Jesus. No savior. No heaven. No hell. No religion? When will you people realize you are living a big fat lie?

This sounds like an old Dan Fogelberg song.
As for your quotes above,.....you couldn't be more wrong.
It made Fogelberg famous, it was his first hit song.....
Maybe he sold out for the money.
Did you know in the New Testament, they were commanded to burn the books of the black arts,
You once taught from the bible, but what happened..?

Jesus once walked right through a crowd and no one saw him.
He and the Word of God are the same, if He doesn't want you to see it,
You won't.....
Something is clouding your mind, try to think back to where you got off the trail...,and ask Him to show you the truth.

 

[draqon]

There is no " Let's cut through the chase: Jesus didn't exist." thread. No Medicine Woman who supposevly created this thread. There are no user replies. There is something else here.