|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
 Posted - 03/11/2002 : 09:11:34 [Permalink]
|
 To PHD, I'm glad your at least reading the post.No I don't receive any monitary compensation for this but the reviews I get from friends that read this is reward enough.As far as spending so much time on the NT being written before 325 it seems I have to because most of the feedback from youall when I attempt anything along the lines youv'e mentioned is"well youv'e got to answer Slaters'view"or"I'm not an expert on this subject BUT SLATER"ect....Don't worry PHD I think I've done almost as much damage to the 325 fallacy asI need to and will be moving on.
|
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2002 : 09:20:05 [Permalink]
|
Moving on? Could you just give us a single shred of evidence Jesus ever lived before you go?
Darwin, you should check out a thread here on classic Creationist strategies. You have used almost all of them in a very short time.
1. You mistakenly think disproving one theory bolsters your own. Sorry but your theory needs to be proved on its own.
2. You dredge up scientific or other information going back over a hundred years, not because it is relevant but because it's all you can find that in any way helps you.
3. You drown us in quotes rather than share with us any thoughts of your own.
Don't go breaking your hand patting yourself on the back just yet 
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
DVF
Skeptic Friend
USA
96 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2002 : 09:35:27 [Permalink]
|
I don't see any double standard in play here.
In the case of Appolonius, Slater has put forth what he holds as evidence and you say you don't dispute it. So we have evidence and it's validity is not being questioned, which isn't to say it can't be. I don't know the first thing about Appolonius, I'm only commenting on what's been presented to me in this thread.
In the case of Jesus the evidence presented has been disputed, and has been found lacking.
I'm just an observer on this topic, I have no desire to go researching dates of texts. Giving both Darwin and Slater the benefit of the doubt and assuming no fabrication on anyone's part, I'd have to say that Slater has made a good presentation of his case. He has defended his statements with reason and evidence.
Darwin's evidence has been challenged and no reasonable attempt has been made to answer that challenge. Instead there have been long series of quotes from the opinions of other people who were working themselves with outdated information and methods.
"Know what, if you were in a building, and it was on fire, I'd rescue you."
- My Son 3/5/2002 |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 03/11/2002 : 11:06:27 [Permalink]
|
[b]Apparently I didn't make my self clear enough, although I said it twice:[/b]
And you've been answered both times. This time I'll put it in simpler terms, sorry if it seems that I'm "talking down" to you, but I don't know what else to do.
[b]"I have no problem with Apollonius being "an historical personage";[/b]
And yet you don't understand why he qualifies as one. It is simply because he, like every other person-especially celebrities--left a trail behind of his interactions with other people and theirs to him that DATE FROM HIS LIFETIME.
[b]"Like I said I don't dispute Apol's existence or his miracles,[/b]
Please reread my piece from 3/05 on Occam's razor and miracles.
Then take note that in his [I]Life of Apollonius[/I] Flavius Philostratus goes to great lengths to state that the "wonders" attributed to Apollonius were "not brought about by magic, but by his intense scrutiny and discernment of the natural world."
[b]but I am curious as to why you find his historic existence acceptable".[/b]
Because people saw him and wrote about it, they wrote to him, he wrote to them, he owned things (see photo above of one of his personal possessions) there are government records of him.
Exactly like you, exactly like me--only being a celebrity, even more so.
[b]The reason I said those comments was because I see a strange double standard being used by you.[/b]
It's a single standard that you seem incapable of understanding.
[b]First, as you so rightly point out that even if we didn't have any original documents from a historic personage we are still in good shape if we can piece together what others wrote about him/her …I mentioned that very same principle back on page 4 or 5 of this post concerning the existence of the NT from the extensive quotes of it from the early 2nd century Church Fathers,heretics(ie Marcion AD 140),and even skeptics: Celus and Prohyry!All this before 325AD.Gotta go breaks over.[/b]
This is where I start to wonder if you can possibly be this brain washed or if you are just dim.
The people I am talking about are commenting on Apollonius' writing at the time he wrote it. Others have letters that they have written to him. Government records are written concerning him and his doings.
All are perfectly normal interactions with a real human.
Jesus, on the other hand, has none of this. He didn't write to anyone, no one wrote to him. He didn't own anything. (There is a TV ad where the LDS actually brags about this). The government has no record of him. None of his followers wrote anything down about his miraculous doings.
Suspension of the laws of nature, blotting out the sun and raising the dead all go without comment from contemporaries.
Even using your more than sympathetic dates no one mentions him for two or three generations.
Not a trace of him from his own time. That's just not possible.
And he isn't supposed to be some dime-a-dozen Philosopher like Apollonius. This is supposed to be GOD ALMIGHTY himself. And who, disguised as mild mannered carpenter, Jesus of Nazareth, wages his constant battle for truth, justice, and the American way.
Look! Up in the sky, it's…nobody. It's fiction. Superman came to Jerusalem and nobody noticed? Couldn't have happened.
When you eventually do get stories of him none of them even match. Most of them get thrown away (at Nicaea) and the few that are kept closely resemble another story, a know fiction, that was hundreds of years old when this one was supposed to have happened.
None of this indicates a historic person. They are all attributes of a fictional character.
It's like comparing Teddy Roosevelt with Tarzan of the Apes. They both left behind wonderful stories but only one left behind evidence that he was really here. Fictional people find it impossible to leave evidence behind which is why you won't find Greystoke Manor but you will find the White House.
[b]Secondly, I was supprised that with all your "speculation" about Eusebius fabricating at the NT "Powerful Roman Emperor's" request [/b]
You read these pages and the words become twisted in your head.
No one ever said that Eusebius fabricated the NT. In fact he was on the Arian side at Nicaea and was banished for it for two years. He was lucky to have escaped with his life.
What he was in charge of doing was "correcting" church history. A practice that the Roman Catholic church carried on for almost four hundred years. That's why they are presently quietly engaged in undoing this practice. And that's why the "history" of the church before Constantine isn't reliable, or for the most part believable.
[b](without one iota of documentation)[/b]
There's no documentation because you are accusing me of saying something which I did not say.
[b]with Apollonius you have the author not only writing his acts at the request of the wife of the Emperor(Julia Domma),but getting paid to produce a "pagan christ" and no outrage from Doc. Slater(?).[/b]
No outrage what so ever. Julia was a follower, a Christian (as in Krishna). There is no outrage because this is not the first time anyone has heard of him. Just as I would have no outrage over Random House commissioning a book about Roosevelt and presenting it as fact. But I would if they published a "nonfiction" work on the life of nineteenth century American President O'Toole.
By your way of thinking a book written in 2002 about President O'Toole and his ability to walk on the ceiling of the oval room in 1847 is all the proof you need that he existed.
[b]P.S.Just what portions of the book of Hebrews did Apollonius help write?[/b]
The Epistles to the Hebrews that Christian scholars attribute to Paul's "assistant" Apollous.
[b] I've read the book many times and found any references to Paul talking to any 'birds'.[/b]
Birds?! What birds? Are you hearing little birds tweeting around your head in cartoon fashion?
May I suggest that you stop rereading that crap and go out and buy a book on natural history, physics, astronomy or comparative mythology?
-------
It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment.
----Eusebius of Nicomedia,
[i]The Preparation of the Gospel[/i] |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2002 : 00:30:19 [Permalink]
|
 [b][b]The reason I said those comments was because I see a strange double standard being used by you.[/b]
It's a single standard that you seem incapable of understanding.
[b]First, as you so rightly point out that even if we didn't have any original documents from a historic personage we are still in good shape if we can piece together what others wrote about him/her …I mentioned that very same principle back on page 4 or 5 of this post concerning the existence of the NT from the extensive quotes of it from the early 2nd century Church Fathers,heretics(ie Marcion AD 140),and even skeptics: Celus and Prohyry!All this before 325AD.Gotta go breaks over.[/b]
This is where I start to wonder if you can possibly be this brain washed or if you are just dim.
The people I am talking about are commenting on Apollonius' writing at the time he wrote it. Others have letters that they have written to him. Government records are written concerning him and his doings.
All are perfectly normal interactions with a real human.
[/b]Did you happen to check and see what the C-14 dating was on all of Apllonius "evidence" you mentioned?We wouldn't want to use "old fashioned"methods(that are still being used by some of the most prestigious universities in the world).
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2002 : 01:03:20 [Permalink]
|
You just don't get it do you DA? There's a huge difference between records of a real person like Apollonius and some stories attributed to some Jesus guy that in their first form had someone else playing the lead.
It's a fact many things associated with Jesus came from far older myths.
If someone burned every copy of a Stephen King novel(oh god how I wish) we would still be pretty certain that someone named Stephen King lived and wrote novels. There are reviews, interviews, photos, excerpts, TV movies and so on. The key here is that people don't suddenly start writing about him well over a hundred years past his death.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2002 : 13:37:32 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You just don't get it do you DA? There's a huge difference between records of a real person like Apollonius and some stories attributed to some Jesus guy that in their first form had someone else playing the lead.
It's a fact many things associated with Jesus came from far older myths.
If someone burned every copy of a Stephen King novel(oh god how I wish) we would still be pretty certain that someone named Stephen King lived and wrote novels. There are reviews, interviews, photos, excerpts, TV movies and so on. The key here is that people don't suddenly start writing about him well over a hundred years past his death.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
No my friend you just don't get it.You don't start a historical inquiry with the preconceived notions,ie"Its a fact that many things associated with Jesus came from far older myths",Just how do we "know" this?From Slater's crystal ball?Do you have in your possesion some "Secret Church" document on the "Real Life of JC"?AS far as the NT it has more corroborating evidence that it is written by eyewitnesses than Apollonius.One for starters is Jn.19:13 John makes reference to the "place" where Pilate brought Jesus trying to release him called "The Pavement,but in Hebrew Gabbatha"for years NT critics said this was obviously "made up" a "myth" but lo and behold if archeologist don't dig up a place called "The Pavement" in Jerusalem .Now the Romans totaly destroyed The City in AD 70 which corrobrates John's claim to be an eyewitness.I have to go but I'm still amazed at how you so called "skeptics" swallow Slater's dribble without a question.Such as,Doc just what "church documents" do you have which say that Eusibeus rewrote Church history?And if so why didn't he do a better job?Couldn't he have placed Jesus name in Ceasar's Offical records and had some Roman solders account of his miarcles,Pliny the Sr. recording the total eclipese for 3hrs wouldn't have been such a bad idea either?
 P.S.I just finnished watching S.King's HEARTS IN ATLANTIS,and I'm very glad no one burned it thank you.
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2002 : 13:57:52 [Permalink]
|
If you have been reading all of this thread you will see that much of the Jesus myth comes from far earlier stories, many of which relate to Mithra. The sermon on the mount is identical to Mithra's only Mithra did it centuries earlier. Ditto for the image we use for Jesus, his mother Mary, the virgin birth. I could go on and on but it's obvious that you won't even listen and will just nitpick on tiny details thinking it does anything for your belief.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Slater
SFN Regular
USA
1668 Posts |
Posted - 03/12/2002 : 16:35:48 [Permalink]
|
You don't start a historical inquiry with the preconceived notions,ie"Its a fact that many things associated with Jesus came from far older myths",Just how do we "know" this?
Actually I started this historical inquiry as an under graduate many decades ago with the preconceived notion that Jesus was a historical figure.
I clung to that preconception desperately…but not closed mindedly. Reading the myths I couldn't deny that they were the same story.
From Slater's crystal ball?
It was on 42nd Street and 5th Avenue in Manhattan. A huge crystal ball with two giant stone lions sitting outside. It goes by the secret magic name of "The New York Public Library."
Do you have in your possesion some "Secret Church" document on the "Real Life of JC"?
I see that you are getting desperate, you're on the ropes.
Nope, I've got the same "Life of JC" that you do…the one that matches the life of Mithra.
AS far as the NT it has more corroborating evidence that it is written by eyewitnesses than Apollonius.
Only one Gnostic gospel claimed to have been written by an eye witness. Christians all declare it to be heresy.
One for starters is Jn.19:13 John makes reference to the "place" where Pilate brought Jesus trying to release him called "The Pavement,but in Hebrew Gabbatha"for years NT critics said this was obviously "made up" a "myth" but lo and behold if archeologist don't dig up a place called "The Pavement" in Jerusalem
And who was it who owned the city of Jerusalem at the time? Was it the Jews? Why no, it was the Romans. They owned it for hundreds of years. And you find it miraculous that a Roman should know the name of a place in a Roman City?
I have to go but I'm still amazed at how you so called "skeptics" swallow Slater's dribble without a question.
They have not "swallowed" anything. I have present facts, you have presented opinion.
Such as,Doc just what "church documents" do you have which say that Eusibeus rewrote Church history?
See my signature at the end of this blurb. And stop calling me Doc.
And if so why didn't he do a better job? Couldn't he have placed Jesus name in Ceasar's Offical records and had some Roman solders account of his miarcles, Pliny the Sr. recording the total eclipese for 3hrs wouldn't have been such a bad idea either?
How good a job did he have to do when for over the next thousand years you would be burned alive for even questioning anything about it?
I tell you from 395 CE to the early seventeen hundreds you would have never heard a peep out of me about it. I would have been down on my knees praising away for all I was worth.
'Sure the sun goes around the flat Earth.' 'Yes the sky is as hard as a polished bronze mirror.' ' That sugar-free cookie really is the body of Jesus Christ.' 'Don't burn me, ahmen.' I wouldn't believe it. But I would humor the dangerous Christian madmen.
If you don't want to do the research yourself fine. Don't read the myths. Believe this Xian nonsense if you like. But stop demanding that other people remain ignorant.
The world has passed you by. If you aren't going to catch up then wave to us.
-------
It will sometimes be necessary to use falsehood for the benefit of those who need such a mode of treatment.
----Eusebius of Nicomedia,
[i]The Preparation of the Gospel[/i] |
|
|
|
darwin alogos
SFN Regular
USA
532 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 00:31:53 [Permalink]
|
 @tomic If you have been reading all of this thread you will see that much of the Jesus myth comes from far earlier stories, many of which relate to Mithra. The sermon on the mount is identical to Mithra's only Mithra did it centuries earlier. Ditto for the image we use for Jesus, his mother Mary, the virgin birth. I've done quite a bit of reading Mithra and I haven't seen one reference to the "Sermon on the Mount" quote:
Owing to the cult's secrecy, we possess almost no literary evidence about the beliefs of Mithraism. The few texts that do refer to the cult come not from Mithraic devotees themselves, but rather from outsiders such as early Church fathers, who mentioned Mithraism in order to attack it, and Platonic philosophers, who attempted to find support in Mithraic symbolism for their own philosophical ideas. However, although our literary sources for the Mithraic mysteries are extremely sparse, an abundance of material evidence for the cult exists in the many Mithraic temples and artifacts that archaeologists have found scattered throughout the Roman empire, from England in the north and west to Palestine in the south and east. The temples, called mithraea by scholars, were usually built underground in imitation of caves. These subterranean temples were filled with an extremely elaborate iconography: carved reliefs, statues, and paintings, depicting a variety of enigmatic figures and scenes. This iconography is our primary source of knowledge about Mithraic beliefs, but because we do not have any written accounts of its meaning the ideas that it expresses have proven extraordinarily difficult to decipher.
Now according to Atomic and Slater I present "no facts just opinions" so lets see if thier 'bite' is as big as thier 'bark' what "written sources"do they present as facts to backup thier opinions
|
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 01:11:37 [Permalink]
|
Written "sources" posted without credit to the author? What kind of source is this?
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
ronnywhite
SFN Regular
501 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 03:18:00 [Permalink]
|
Not to disrupt the flow, discount your efforts in discussing the intricacies of the (non?)evidence concerning the dates, etc. or to sound cavalier, yet unless one believes, or is at least open minded to the possibility that any of the paranormal, or supernatural events described in the NT actually took place (involving Jesus, if he existed, or others) the question of whether JC lived seems strictly academic, although it's interesting reading your debate and it was a good question to post. If there are skeptics who are knowledgeable and open minded along these lines (I'm not-) I'd be curious as to which paranormal events (if any) seem to be most strongly substantiated, if only by historical consistency/anecdote (since videocams and hard drives weren't around when all of the interesting stuff that [supposedly] makes JC worth mentioning at all was going on.) Else, of course, we are discussing a book at least predominately of fantasy… or a novel of sorts, to begin with. Which is OK, and I've never read such scrutinous debate paid to a character in another novel. I know, that's the whole point- exactly who or what are we talking about… we're talking about a fictional character, whether a person had that name or not. If I wrote a book describing someone I know as performing superhuman feats, it would be a work of fiction about a fictional character, and a normal, metabolizing body by that name (or lack of) would be irrelevant. An aside.
Ron White |
|
|
|
Lars_H
SFN Regular
Germany
630 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 04:41:24 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Not to disrupt the flow, discount your efforts in discussing the intricacies of the (non?)evidence concerning the dates, etc. or to sound cavalier, yet unless one believes, or is at least open minded to the possibility that any of the paranormal, or supernatural events described in the NT actually took place (involving Jesus, if he existed, or others) the question of whether JC lived seems strictly academic, although it's interesting reading your debate and it was a good question to post.
Not really. There are many christians who belive that Jesus was a person that lived 2000 years ago, but don't take all of the stuff described in the NT literal. Not evryone is a funadmentalist who belives that every word in the bible is 100% true and comes directly from god.
Many non-christians also think that Jesus was a historical character on whom the NT's stories are based. You don't have to belive in water over water to be of the opinion that Jesus existed.
quote:
If there are skeptics who are knowledgeable and open minded along these lines (I'm not-) I'd be curious as to which paranormal events (if any) seem to be most strongly substantiated, if only by historical consistency/anecdote (since videocams and hard drives weren't around when all of the interesting stuff that [supposedly] makes JC worth mentioning at all was going on.)
That is one of the major problems.
Not only have no mention outside the bible that any of the miracles happened. We don't even have any good evidence that any of the non miracoluos stuff happend.
The worst part is that all the stuff about Jesus, the miracles he performed and his teachings have already been used by other religions long before Christianity.
quote:
Else, of course, we are discussing a book at least predominately of fantasy… or a novel of sorts, to begin with. Which is OK, and I've never read such scrutinous debate paid to a character in another novel.
You have never read such scrutinous debate paid to a fictional charcter? This here is nothing compared to discussion I have seen about stuff like Luke Skywalker's sexual orientaion. ( Debates about the origins of Star-Wars normally are much mor fun then this though)
The differences being of coures that there have been very few killings in the name of Han Solo compared to the amount of stuff done in the name of Jesus Christ.
quote:
I know, that's the whole point- exactly who or what are we talking about… we're talking about a fictional character, whether a person had that name or not.
Actually Slater goes a bit further by claiming that it was not just a fictinal tale that was taken as literal by accident, but a deliberate scam ment to be taken serious.
quote:
If I wrote a book describing someone I know as performing superhuman feats, it would be a work of fiction about a fictional character, and a normal, metabolizing body by that name (or lack of) would be irrelevant. An aside.
Ron White
Have you walked through your local bookshop latley? Not the sci-fi/fantasy section, but the 'non-fiction' section. It is full of books talking about miraculous events and people with superhuman abilities.
If you were to write a book about a superhuman being who has telepathy, telekinesis, precognition or can cure cancer with energy fields you should make sure that someone of that name actually exists, if you want to make a lot of money. (Many modern authors use their own name for this.)
|
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 07:28:01 [Permalink]
|
Found this on an odd site about mushrooms, go figure:
http://www.bluehoney.org/Chart.htm
and this, though you have to highlight some text to read it because of the horrible background (was the author partaking in some of his own mushrooms?!):
[edit: go here instead, it's actually readable:]
http://www.alateus.it/achor.htm
An interesting quote that I'd love to have substantiated:
quote:
In fact, Pope Leo X, privy to the truth because of his high rank, made this curious declaration, "What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!"
(emphasis added)
------------
Sum Ergo Cogito
Edited by - tokyodreamer on 03/13/2002 07:30:41 |
|
|
|
Tokyodreamer
SFN Regular
USA
1447 Posts |
Posted - 03/13/2002 : 07:46:40 [Permalink]
|
I can only find reference online of Horus giving a Sermon on the Mount. There is also some about Buddha possibly having given some sort of speech on his favorite "mount".
------------
Sum Ergo Cogito |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
