|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
 Posted - 12/15/2002 : 13:09:30 [Permalink]
|
They left evidence behind that they were here. They all wrote books. They wrote to other people. People wrote to them and about them. There are public records of them. They owned things. Just like real people.
Jesus did not. Just like fictional people. But then I've said this again and again but you aren't intelligent enough to understand it.
And you aren't honest enough to even admit that there were Gnostic Gospels that contradicted your Gospels. Gnostic Gospels that have the exact same pedigree as the modern Gospels. How can you live with yourself?
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
 |
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2002 : 15:57:22 [Permalink]
|
Slater claims: quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They left evidence behind that they were here. They all wrote books. They wrote to other people. People wrote to them and about them. There are public records of them. They owned things. Just like real people.
Jesus did not. Just like fictional people. But then I've said this again and again but you aren't intelligent enough to understand it.
However, quote:
The text we have for Zoroaster is from the 9th cet. AD,he lived appox.600BCThe Life of Zarathustra
Due to the invasion of Arabs, particularly Alexander of Macedonia and the destruction of the
Iranian libraries, there are no reliable sources available to indicate the time Zarathustra lived, nor there
is any detailed information about the place where he worked. Therefore, it can be said that in the past
some researchers would believe that Zarathustra has been living about six hundred to one thousand
years before the Christ. However, today some other researchers estimate the life of Zarathustra up to
four thousand years before the birth of Christ. The birth and living place of Zarathustra is not also
certain, but some historians suppose that he has been living in one of the Khorasan cities, like
Neishapour, Harat, or Balkh. It can be deduced from Gatha, the Divine Songs of Zarathustra, written
by him that since he was persecuted by some of his contemporary theologians and religious traders, he
escaped his birthplace and appealed to one of the sovereigns of his time, called King Goshtasb. The
king was impressed by Zarathustra's teachings and followed him.
Why Zarathustra Revolted against Mithra, the Belief System of his time and Promulgated his
own Philisophy?
Considering that Darius the Great, was affiliated with Zoroastrianism, in his petrographies is
written that Zarathustra praised Ahura Mazda (God) as the creator of heaven and earth. Herodotus, the
Greek historian also testifies that the Iranian religion at that time has been monotheism and they had
been blaming idolatry. This is a good reason, why Zarathustra, revolted against Mithra, that was the
Iranian religion before him. Because, in Mithra, the oneness of God was not known to the people, plus
the fact that in Mithra, sacrificing animals and also consumption of narcotics and intoxicating beverages
(called Haoma) that desist the people from good reflection, were prevalent in Mithra and Zarathustra
was against them.(http://www.zoroaster.net/indexe.htm) ;For Budda lived appox 563BC 483BC earliest text200AD,Christmas Humphreys,Buddhism,p.155
quote:
In the Life of Apollonius 5.21, Philostratus describes a visit of
the sage and his disciple Damis to the island of Rhodes in the
winter of 68/69.
With a favorable wind Apollonius made the
passage and held the following Rhodes. As he approached the statue of the
Colossus, [his disciple] Damis asked him, if he
thought anything could be greater than that; and he
replied, 'Yes, a man who loves wisdom in a sound
and innocent spirit.' (LoA 5.21)
This story cannot be true. The giant statue of th |
To deny logic you must use it.To deny Jesus Existed you must throw away all your knowledge of the ancient world. To deny ID
you must refute all analogical reasoning. So the question is why deny? |
| Edited by - darwin alogos on 12/17/2002 20:54:18 |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 09:16:37 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Slaterquote:
originally posted by weary Computer Org
If those premises were actually true, then I don't see how a formal execution (--or even a sneaky assassination--) was possible.
It says that the Jews wanted him executed he claimed to be king so that was treason, he claimed to be God which is both blasphemy and heresy , and he caused a riot in the Temple court yard. Attacking innocent merchants with a bull whip, destruction of private and public property. And the Jews were just down right evil, hateful people. The Romans hands were tied, what could they do. According to the NT. You have to ignore a great deal of what you know about history to buy this story.
I've read the Gospels many times but never remember Jesus saying that he was King of the Jews (--the Magi might have; the incompetent and cowardly King Herod did; the romans are reputed to have done so; but....--) Do u have a reference from one of the Gospels? Perhaps?? The same exact question for his "claiming to be a god".
"Innocent merchants" with a bull whip??? "Innocent"?? Unless I'm mistaken, the merchants were not only in violation of Law but were in commission of a capital offence---punnishable by execution. One suspects much crossing of palms with filthy lucre. (Payola!)
"Private property"?????? Even here in the U.S. property used in commission of a ghastly crime (--hawking crap and money-changing in the Temple grounds--) is confiscated. Too bad that, seemingly, the Temple police were "on the take".
What "public property"?? Reference (from a Gospel) if you please.
Maybe you think that "the Jews were just down right evil, hateful people", but I don't see that from the Texts that I've read about the period. Do you have a particular Gospel reference in mind?? Jesus, after all, came down to the Jews---they couldn't have been too evil.
quote:
Originally posted by Slater:quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
No. Sorry. [Very] Modern Physics says that almost anything is possible---and I, not the physicists, threw in the word "almost".
That is not true at all. It is the fact that certain things are impossible that allows you to know anything. Example: it is impossible for 2+2 not to equal 4. You won't wake up one morning and find that it equals 4.0002.
I agree.quote:
Originally posted by Slater
It is impossible that you will turn into a chicken, a Rhode Island Red, while driving to the mall to finish your Christmas shopping.
I agree with this too: I take global warming (et. al.) seriously and stopped driving over 4 years ago. Thus you are correct that it will be impossible for me to do anything while driving.quote:
Originally posted by Slater:
If there was magic, or to use the religious term for magic "miracles," it would no longer be possible to know anything.
ALL the laws of physics would be wrong. You will never find a Physicist who says that.
Sorry. My sloppiness in terminological definitions yet once again. by magic I mean:quote:
Magic is defined as being those verifiable real occurances for which science has yet to find an explanation.
While scientists may not like the word "magic", I don't think that many (if any) will quibble with my definition---just the word being defined; in particular,quote:
Originally posted by the asture and brilliant Computer Org: 
[/i] OK by me--if by "magic" you mean real magic, not clever trickery [/i]
Voila!!
|
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 09:24:59 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Slaterquote:
Originally posted by the terminologically sloppy Computer Org:[/i]
I support the proposition that Jesus was a real personage with most-all of the first-person NT stories about him being reasonably-factual and true..
And you support it with what evidence?
And what "first-person NT stories" are you talking about. There was only one Gospel that was in the first person. It is the only one that makes the claim that it was written by a witness.
Yet once again I seem to have expected one meaning to have been understood while some other meaning has been taken.
By "first person NT stories" I only meant those stories which have Jesus himself saying or doing something.
Sorry.
|
|
|
|
Computer Org
Skeptic Friend
392 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 09:39:15 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
As to the other things (walking on water; multiplying fishes; raising the dead; improving wine), they can all be successfully explained in the context of modern physics--without having to resort to the 'charged' word "miracle".
Any such naive distortion of 'modern physics' will likewise 'explain' unicorns, the Daoine Sidhe and suicidal pigs.
Sorry. You are wrong.
While [very] Modern Physics might explain unicorns and flying pigs, that would only be hypothetical unicorns and/or flying pigs. (I assume that u meant "flying" rather than the odd "suicidal".) Such things---unicorns and/or flying pigs---have never, to my knowledge, been observed.
What is a "Daoine sidhe"?? Whatever it is, the same comment applies.
[Very recent] Modern Physics supplies, at last!, a real explanation to the parable of the "Camel through the Eye of a Needle": It is very possible for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle:- The camel merely needs to evaporate into very small constitutent parts;
- each part then needs to pass throught the eye of the needle;
- then the constitutent parts merely need to reassemble themselves into a living, breathing camel.
Easy---albeit, admitedly, of extraordinarily low probability (--which is likely exactly the probability that Jesus had in mind when assessing the liklihood of a rich man getting into heaven).  Hmmmmmm.
|
Do thou amend thy face, and I'll amend my life. --Falstaff |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 10:32:54 [Permalink]
|
Dusting off the old Bible...
Consider these two passages (King James Version):
Matthew 14:5
"And although he [King Herod] wanted to put him [John the Baptist] to death, he feared the multitude, because they counted him as a prophet."
Mark 6:19-20
"Therefore Herodias held it against him and wanted to kill him, but she could not; For Herod feared John, knowing that he was a just and holy man, and he protected him. And when he heard him, he did many things, and heard him gladly."
Note the contradiction: in Matthew's account, Herod wanted to kill John, but was afraid of how the people would react; in Mark's account, Herodias (Herod's wife) wanted to kill John, but Herod himself did not want him killed. In fact, Herod enjoyed listening to John.
This does not fit the pattern of a fabricated account of fictional events. Fabricated accounts are always "too perfect", in that they lack internal contradictions. If the account was falsified, such a contradiction would never have been allowed.
These passages do, however, fit the pattern of errant or second-hand accounts of actual events. And this makes perfect sense, because, according to the Bible, Matthew and Mark heard these accounts from John's followers. They could have easily made such a mistake, or had heard the account differently.
Furthermore, why would Constantine have had four Gospels written, as well as several other books, rather than just one book?
And it is not only Christians who accept the existance of Jesus as a historical figure. Jesus' existance is central to Islam, and most Jews will even admit that Jesus was a real person (although they will say he was a false prophet or a blasphemer). |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 12:16:58 [Permalink]
|
the Magi might have; the incompetent and cowardly King Herod did; the romans are reputed to have done so; but....
Then that's more than enough to warrant an execution. If fact just King Herod alone is enough.
"Innocent merchants" with a bull whip??? "Innocent"??
That's right--innocent. The Money Changes were a necessary service industry that enabled the Temple to function. You still find Money Changers at banks, airports, American Express offices, etc. It would be a nightmare to try to travel without them.
Unless I'm mistaken, the merchants were not only in violation of Law but were in commission of a capital offence---punnishable by execution.
You are mistaken. They were honest businessmen who, by Jewish law, took an extremely small commission.
Too bad that, seemingly, the Temple police were "on the take"
The merchants on the Temple grounds were doing absolutely nothing wrong. The Jesus character attacking them is Roman anti-Semitism. God is smiting the evil Jews.
Maybe you think that "the Jews were just down right evil, hateful people", but I don't see that from the Texts that I've read about the period.
Me??!! I have no problem with the Jews, I'm not a Christian. Apparently you have rose colored reading glasses for use on the Bible. It's pure anti-Semitism.For Example lets take Acts of the Apostles it's not that long…..
Peter blames the Jews for the death of Jesus. Acts:3:14-15
Peter wrongly claims that Dt.18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all nonchristians) must be killed.
Acts:3:23 Once again, Peter accuses the Jews of murdering Jesus.
Acts:5:30 Stephen blames the Jews for persecuting the prophets and murdering Jesus.
Acts:7:51-52 After Saul "increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews," the "Jews took counsel to kill him."
Acts:9:22-23 The Jews are again blamed for the death of Jesus.
Acts:10:39 Herod beheads James the brother of John and imprisons Peter "because he saw it pleased the Jews."
Acts:12:1-3 The Jews of Antioch, after seeing Paul's success in preaching, were envious and blasphemed God. Paul then declares them to be "unworthy of everlasting life."
Acts:13:45-46 Once again "the Jews stirred up" trouble and "raised persecution against Paul and Barnabas, and expelled them out of their coasts."
Acts:13:50 "The unbelieving Jews" stir up trouble again for Paul and incite the people to try to stone him to death.
Acts:14:2-5 In Thesssalonica, "the Jews which believed not, moved with envy" stir up trouble for Paul and his friends.
Acts:17:5 The Jews hate the word of God and are always just stirring up trouble.
Acts:17:13 "And when they [the Jews of Corinth] opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he [Paul] shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads." (Have a nice day?)
Acts:18:6 "The Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat."
Acts:18:12 Poor Paul complains, once again, of being mistreated by "the Jews."
Acts:20:19 The Jews, once again, incite the people to kill poor old Paul
Acts:21:27, 31 The Jews form a grand conspiracy to kill Paul. They vow not to eat until the job is done.
Acts:23:12-15 Claudius saves Paul from being killed by the Jews.
Acts:23:27 Those pesky Jews caught Paul and and tried to kill him.
But he got away. Darn! Acts:26:21
quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Magic is defined as being those verifiable real occurances for which science has yet to find an explanation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
While scientists may not like the word "magic", I don't think that many (if any) will quibble with my definition
WHAT!!!!???? What century are you living in? You actually believe in magic…or are you just pulling old Doctor Slater's leg?
mag'icn. 1. The pretended art of producing effects or controlling events by charms, spells, and rituals supposed to govern certain natural or supernatural forces; sorcery; witchcraft.
2. any mysterious, seemingly inexplicable or extraordinary power or influence; as, the magic of love.
3. the art of producing baffling effects or illusions by sleight of hand, concealed apparatus, etc.
By "first person NT stories" I only meant those stories which have Jesus himself saying or doing something.
Please address my question. Why do you consider the Gospels you have to be fact and not the Gnostic Gospels? What do you judge them by?
Infamous This does not fit the pattern of a fabricated account of fictional events. Fabricated accounts are always "too perfect", in that they lack internal contradictions. If the account was falsified, such a contradiction would never have been allowed.
You write like you think the gospels were all there was. What about the many volumes of the Bible that were edited out in 325CE? What about the "Gospel of Paul," the Gospel of Bartholomew," the "Gospel of Judas Iscariot," the "Gospel of the Egyptians," the " Recollections of Peter," the "Oracles of Christ," the "Sophia of Jesus Christ," the "Gospel of Mary Magdalene," the "Gospel of Thomas," and the "Acts of John?" Does tossing these Bibles in the circular file mean the remaining Gospels are true or false? Were these "fabricated accounts" and the ones that Constantine picked not? What guide lines were used to decide?
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 12:31:08 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
Fabricated accounts are always "too perfect", in that they lack internal contradictions. If the account was falsified, such a contradiction would never have been allowed.
That's a baseless assumption. Have you never read or seen a piece of fictiuon that suffered from internal contradictions?
Fabrications, interpolation, gloss, harmonizations, at different times by different people dealing with different source manuscripts of different quality can easily lead to variants. I believe that you'll find that the parable of the prodigal son has a different ending in the Codex Sinaiticus, while the admonition "he that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone." is absent from both the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 12:51:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
quote:
Originally posted by ReasonableDoubt
quote:
Originally posted by Computer Org
As to the other things (walking on water; multiplying fishes; raising the dead; improving wine), they can all be successfully explained in the context of modern physics--without having to resort to the 'charged' word "miracle".
Any such naive distortion of 'modern physics' will likewise 'explain' unicorns, the Daoine Sidhe and suicidal pigs.
Sorry. You are wrong. While [very] Modern Physics might explain unicorns and flying pigs, that would only be hypothetical unicorns and/or flying pigs. (I assume that u meant "flying" rather than the odd "suicidal".) Such things---unicorns and/or flying pigs---have never, to my knowledge, been observed. What is a "Daoine sidhe"?? Whatever it is, the same comment applies.
Similarly, such things -- the virgin birth, the resurrection, and suicidal pigs (see Matthew 8:24) -- have never been observed. Whether or not they were fabricated or imagined is another thing entirely. So we find your "hypothetical" Jesus appropriately classified with the equally "hypothetical" unicorn, and suicidal pigs. That is hardly a compelling argument for historicity. The NT does not even rise to the level of decent fiction, unlike the Daoine Sidhe - if the Daoine Sidhe be, indeed, fiction. |
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 13:57:20 [Permalink]
|
Slater:
In your last post, it sounded as if you were implying that the Gospels were in existance before Constantine. Was that your intention?
I've seen fiction that contained internal contradiction, yes. Deliberately fabricated accounts with the same type of contradiction, no.
BTW, the "Gospel of Mary" was created for an X-Files episode. It's not a real document. |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 14:06:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
BTW, the "Gospel of Mary" was created for an X-Files episode. It's not a real document.
Ummmm, you ought to do some checking on that. A quick Google search provides ample results.
Your assertion that fabricated stories are more perfect is bizarre. You mean the news on TV should be less accurate than say, a historical drama? I find that a tough one to chew on.
@tomic |
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
Sportsbettingacumen.com: The science of sports betting |
|
|
|
ConsequentAtheist
SFN Regular
641 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 14:39:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
I've seen fiction that contained internal contradiction, yes. Deliberately fabricated accounts with the same type of contradiction, no.
With how many deliberately fabricated accounts are you familiar?
quote:
Originally posted by Infamous
BTW, the "Gospel of Mary" was created for an X-Files episode. It's not a real document.
It is understandably difficult to distinguish the real from the fictional. See Early Christian Writings: The Gospel of Mary.
|
For the philosophical naturalist, the rejection of supernaturalism is a case of "death by a thousand cuts." -- Barbara Forrest, Ph.D. |
| Edited by - ConsequentAtheist on 12/16/2002 14:46:45 |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 17:25:36 [Permalink]
|
In your last post, it sounded as if you were implying that the Gospels were in existance before Constantine. Was that your intention?
No it was not my intention. Rereading my last few pieces I don't see where you are getting that from.
Not that it really matters that much. If the gospels had been around from the second century or if they only date from the fourth, Constantine still directed what you today call the NT and discarded the rest in 325 CE.
I've seen fiction that contained internal contradiction, yes. Deliberately fabricated accounts with the same type of contradiction, no.
Then you have never picked up one of these SciFi paperbacks that is written by a half dozen authors all writing about King Arthur, or Disc World, or Star Wars Jedi's or some such nonsense. They work from guidelines that set the rules of the "world" their stories happen in…past that anything goes. The NT closely resembles one of these collections in form, style and mistakes.
BTW, the "Gospel of Mary" was created for an X-Files episode. It's not a real document
The "Gospel of Mary" was discovered in the nineteenth century, I believe in Egypt, it is a codex made from papyrus and is dated to the mid-fourth century. It is very real indeed. In 1896 it was acquired by the Berlin Museum. The writers at Fox fictionalized and made supernatural an actual book. Oddly enough it does say some of the strange things it did on the X-Files. In the show it was supposed to rock the foundation of Christianity. In real life no one cared.
|
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2002 : 21:18:05 [Permalink]
|
DA if you can show that Zarathustra and the Buddha were fictional you will have shown that Zarathustra and the Buddha are fictional. We will be happy to change our minds if you present a decent case.
However this will change nothing about Jesus. You have to present evidence that Jesus was historic if you want people to think that Jesus was historic. We will be happy to change our opinions if you can make a good case for that too.
So far the case you have made has people laughing at you. |
-------
I learned something ... I learned that Jehovah's Witnesses do not celebrate Halloween. I guess they don't like strangers going up to their door and annoying them.
-Bruce Clark
There's No Toilet Paper...on the Road Less Traveled |
|
|
|
Infamous
Skeptic Friend
85 Posts |
Posted - 12/17/2002 : 09:19:27 [Permalink]
|
Written by Lucian of Samosata in the 2nd Century A.D.:
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day, the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account...You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods, alike, regarding them merely as common property."
This is a reference to the existance of Christians before Constantine.
Quoted by Origen in the 3rd Century A.D. (Originally written by Celsus in the 2nd Century A.D.):
"Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god."
This is another reference to Jesus dating from before Constantine.
Written by Mara Bar-Serapion of Syria, between 70 A.D. and 200 A.D.:
"What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. ...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."
Since no REAL Jewish king was overthrown by his people in that time period, it is logical to conclude that Bar-Sarapion was not referring to an actual king, but to Jesus, "king of the Jews". So yet again, this is a reference to Jesus before Constantine.
And the Encyclopedia Brittanica sums up the history of the "Did Jesus Really Exist" argument very nicely:
"...in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries." |
| Edited by - Infamous on 12/17/2002 09:23:53 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
