News:

In case of downtime/other tech emergencies, you can relatively quickly get in touch with Asmodean Prime by email.

Main Menu

Historical Jesus

Started by Matthew, May 30, 2010, 10:45:13 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions

Sophus

#15
May 31, 2010, 05:25:40 AM
Quote from: "Squid"If I remember correctly, the specific entry most point to in Josephus is considered to be a later interpolation.
Ah well... there ya have it. Thanks Squid. The one thing that made me think it may have been real is it described Jesus as being so damned ugly.
‎"Christian doesn't necessarily just mean good. It just means better." - John Oliver

Tanker

#16
May 31, 2010, 07:07:14 AM
For a start I would like any and I mean ANY independant coroberation that Jesus actually existed from a source outside of the Bible. Shouldn't there be at least a casual mention of Jesus by the Romans in or around his own lifetime. Or the Jews for that matter.Considering all the trouble he caused them. If all the amazing things he supposedly did are true somebody would have mentioned them. Noone who could write ever met him? Or mabye told thier personal observations to someone who could write any time around when Christ was supposed to have lived? The first time someone tried collecting stories of Jesus was about 100 years after his death most of which were verbal recitations finally copied down...4 full generations after his death. Thats like us collecting WW1 storries by talking to grandchildren or great grand children of WW1 vets. 2nd 3rd 10th hand accounts can hardly be considered reliable when it's been proven first hand accounts are very rarely acurate. Let alone the fact that the NT was put together 300 to 400 years after Jesus's death. During which different books and storries were picked and chosen the edited to more closly match.

I have trouble believing Jesus existed at all let alone any claims made about his divinity. I certainly have trouble believing the NT as a document let alone an acurate historical documant.
"I'd rather die the go to heaven" - William Murderface Murderface  Murderface-

I've been in fox holes, I'm still an atheist -Me-

God is a cake, and we all know what the cake is.

(my spelling, grammer, and punctuation suck, I know, but regardless of how much I read they haven't improved much since grade school. It's actually a bit of a family joke.

Tank

#17
May 31, 2010, 01:37:01 PM
:pop: Just reading for interest. Not particularly knowledgeable in this area.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Gawen

#18
May 31, 2010, 02:23:39 PM Last Edit: May 31, 2010, 03:33:44 PM by Gawen
Post removed by author. Moderator, please remove the rest for consistency.
The essence of the mind is not in what it thinks, but how it thinks. Faith is the surrender of our mind; of reason and our skepticism to put all our trust or faith in someone or something that has no good evidence of itself. That is a sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith is not.
"When you fall, I will be there" - Floor

McQ

#19
May 31, 2010, 02:29:20 PM
Quote from: "Gawen"
Quote from: "Matthew"What do you think can be known about Jesus - who he was, what he did, what he taught and what he claimed about himself?  
God himself impregnated a virgin so that he could be born a ManGod. This was necessary, apparently, because only his own ManGod blood could appease himself and deliver humans, who he created, and who he knew would muck things up by eating the fruit, from his own righteous anger.  Later, god, in a garden, prayed to himself to "take this cup" away from himself, though he knew that he had planned the coming events from the beginning and knew that not even he could save himself, even though he was god and omnipotent, omniscient, etc. Accepting this, he said, in effect, "Not my will, but my will."

God then sacrificed himself to himself to save us from himself (or had himself sacrificed; not much of a distinction between the two, really). Before dying, he asked himself why he had forsaken himself. Now, being dead, he then raised himself (no mean feat) from the dead less than 40 hours later, though he had said he'd be dead for three days and three nights, which he could do because he was still alive, and later he pulled himself up into heaven where he apparently already was, and where he is described as now sitting at the right hand of himself.


Let's keep the sarcasm out of this please. See my post earlier in this thread asking for civility. Your entire post is detrimental to good discussion.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Gawen

#20
May 31, 2010, 03:08:56 PM
Quote from: "McQ"Let's keep the sarcasm out of this please. See my post earlier in this thread asking for civility. Your entire post is detrimental to good discussion.
Sarcasm? In MY post? I hardly think so. It is Christian doctrine through and through seen from a different perspective.

I believe this will be my last post at this site.

Good day, Sir.
The essence of the mind is not in what it thinks, but how it thinks. Faith is the surrender of our mind; of reason and our skepticism to put all our trust or faith in someone or something that has no good evidence of itself. That is a sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith is not.
"When you fall, I will be there" - Floor

McQ

#21
May 31, 2010, 03:14:03 PM
Quote from: "Gawen"
Quote from: "McQ"Let's keep the sarcasm out of this please. See my post earlier in this thread asking for civility. Your entire post is detrimental to good discussion.
Sarcasm? In MY post? I hardly think so. It is Christian doctrine through and through seen from a different perspective.

I believe this will be my last post at this site.

Good day, Sir.

You know you were being sarcastic. I've asked twice in this thread for civil discussion. You are free to post or not, and you are very welcome as a member of the forum. I am asking that you follow forum rules and the directives of the moderators for civil discussion. No need to get upset when a moderator asks you to play nice.

The OP wasn't asking for a recap of christian beliefs, by the way, which is what you sarcastically posted. He is already aware of what he believes. He asked about how well we can know the historical jesus. Feel free to post to your heart's content about that. I'm sure you have a good knowledge of christianity, as you've demonstrated. I've just asked you to keep it nice.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Tank

#22
May 31, 2010, 03:14:55 PM
Quote from: "Gawen"
Quote from: "McQ"Let's keep the sarcasm out of this please. See my post earlier in this thread asking for civility. Your entire post is detrimental to good discussion.
Sarcasm? In MY post? I hardly think so. It is Christian doctrine through and through seen from a different perspective.

I believe this will be my last post at this site.

Good day, Sir.
Now don't go getting all unnecessary about it, please. You have a lot to offer this forum, your deconstruction of AA was beautiful to behold, he deserved his arse reaming and you did it perfectly. Matthew on the other hand is a genuine guy and really does not need the sort of post you dished out there. He has been polite and considerate and deserves the same as response. It would be a shame to see you leave just because somebody points out that in this case your response was a little too rough, in this thread for this member.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

McQ

#23
May 31, 2010, 03:18:04 PM
Quote from: "Tank"
Quote from: "Gawen"
Quote from: "McQ"Let's keep the sarcasm out of this please. See my post earlier in this thread asking for civility. Your entire post is detrimental to good discussion.
Sarcasm? In MY post? I hardly think so. It is Christian doctrine through and through seen from a different perspective.

I believe this will be my last post at this site.

Good day, Sir.
Now don't go getting all unnecessary about it, please. You have a lot to offer this forum, your deconstruction of AA was beautiful to behold, he deserved his arse reaming and you did it perfectly. Matthew on the other hand is a genuine guy and really does not need the sort of post you dished out there. He has been polite and considerate and deserves the same as response. It would be a shame to see you leave just because somebody points out that in this case your response was a little too rough, in this thread for this member.

Thanks for putting it so well, Tank. You said it much better than me.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Gawen

#24
May 31, 2010, 03:21:47 PM
Quote from: "McQ"You know you were being sarcastic. I've asked twice in this thread for civil discussion. You are free to post or not, and you are very welcome as a member of the forum. I am asking that you follow forum rules and the directives of the moderators for civil discussion. No need to get upset when a moderator asks you to play nice.
I defer judgment to Whitney.

QuoteThe OP wasn't asking for a recap of christian beliefs, by the way, which is what you sarcastically posted. He is already aware of what he believes. He asked about how well we can know the historical jesus. Feel free to post to your heart's content about that. I'm sure you have a good knowledge of christianity, as you've demonstrated. I've just asked you to keep it nice.
If you read what I posted...sarcasm or not aside...do you not think the author of the OP cannot see how the supernatural side of what I posted is not conducive to an historical figure...which was my intent?
The essence of the mind is not in what it thinks, but how it thinks. Faith is the surrender of our mind; of reason and our skepticism to put all our trust or faith in someone or something that has no good evidence of itself. That is a sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith is not.
"When you fall, I will be there" - Floor

Gawen

#25
May 31, 2010, 03:22:33 PM Last Edit: May 31, 2010, 03:30:21 PM by Gawen
Ok....hold on a sec...


had to think. Had to reread my post. I sincerely think that my post was not sarcastic. I just don't see the sarcasm. My post was what many Christians believe...all wrapped up in a couple paragraphs. The sheer ludicrousness of it may make it seem sarcastic. I saw no insult to AA within my post. I think I played fair. I think I played nice.

Seriously...

Sarcasm is in the world. It's a form of communication. It has its uses and is not always detrimental to a conversation or a debate.

I will give more thought to this.

And, I AM sorry I skewed this thread. McQ, please feel free to remove this trainwreck to an appropriate forum if you feel it is warranted or could use further discussion.
The essence of the mind is not in what it thinks, but how it thinks. Faith is the surrender of our mind; of reason and our skepticism to put all our trust or faith in someone or something that has no good evidence of itself. That is a sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith is not.
"When you fall, I will be there" - Floor

McQ

#26
May 31, 2010, 03:24:09 PM
Quote from: "Gawen"
Quote from: "McQ"You know you were being sarcastic. I've asked twice in this thread for civil discussion. You are free to post or not, and you are very welcome as a member of the forum. I am asking that you follow forum rules and the directives of the moderators for civil discussion. No need to get upset when a moderator asks you to play nice.
I defer judgment to Whitney.

QuoteThe OP wasn't asking for a recap of christian beliefs, by the way, which is what you sarcastically posted. He is already aware of what he believes. He asked about how well we can know the historical jesus. Feel free to post to your heart's content about that. I'm sure you have a good knowledge of christianity, as you've demonstrated. I've just asked you to keep it nice.
If you read what I posted...sarcasm or not aside...do you not think the author of the OP cannot see how the supernatural side of what I posted is not conducive to an historical figure...which was my intent?

If I make a post in my capacity as moderator in this forum, you'll defer judgment to me, thank you. Don't make a mountain out of a molehill.
Elvis didn't do no drugs!
--Penn Jillette

Tank

#27
May 31, 2010, 03:32:39 PM
Let's not make this a pissing contest please. Gawen is an experience forum user, just not this forum, he may need a little time to adjust to the flavour of this place, just as I have. He is after all 'one of the good guys'.
If religions were TV channels atheism is turning the TV off.
"Religion is a culture of faith; science is a culture of doubt." ― Richard P. Feynman
'It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die. That is true, it's called Life.' - Terry Pratchett
Remember, your inability to grasp science is not a valid argument against it.

Whitney

#28
May 31, 2010, 03:49:29 PM
I don't see what the big deal is...just acknowledge McQ's concerns (you can even note that you happen to disagree) and that you will try to avoid it in the future.  Pretty simple, nothing to get upset about.

KDbeads

#29
May 31, 2010, 04:27:35 PM
For the OP/Matthew:
Hubby and I have had extensive conversations about why Jesus was not mentioned in any other historical document and we have come to a conclusion, for us at least.  We don't have lit to back it up but it might be something to think about.
During the 'time of christ'  there was a good deal of political BS going on in the Roman territories, this was documented.  Groups of people were pushing back at their rule, causing problems, in general being a pain in the ass.  What we think is that 'Jesus' was a compilation of all these little groups rolled into one as the oral history was passed down.  Jesus was a common name in the area at the time if I'm not mistaken.  As this oral history was passed down, different elements were added, the miracles, the teachings, etc. and finally it was written down and taken for the truth instead of evolved oral tradition.

Another thing tho think about, the Jews... they kept excellent records yet they mention NOTHING about Jesus.  Also they convened his trial on passover according to the bible, not thinking that was even an option to those of the Jewish faith then, they wouldn't have even thought about dealing with him until after passover as it was a sacred event for them.

Again these are just ideas that we have come to on our own.
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. - Douglas Adams
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4
User actions