Printer-friendly copy Email this topic to a friend
Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #29865

Subject: "Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?" This topic is locked.
Previous topic | Next topic
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 10:45 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
"Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?"


          

Someone point me to sources OTHER THAN THE BIBLE, or authors obviously christian or having Christian leanings, that document his life.

If he was truly an individual person who did all these great things and was the "son of god", then there should be other texts that were written DURING THE TIME PERIOD HE WAS ALIVE, that document his existence.

Point me to them please...if u can.

RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top


Topic Outline
Subject Author Message Date ID
Denial
Apr 13th 2005
1
Actually it would be more like "your mother never existed"
Apr 13th 2005
7
      RE: Actually it would be more like "your mother never existed"
Apr 13th 2005
9
Hold up
Apr 13th 2005
2
Don't need to
Apr 13th 2005
4
Never tested a hypothesis before? They do that @ science fairs
Apr 13th 2005
6
      It is the ABSENCE of experiment/evidence
Apr 13th 2005
8
           hilarious...absence of an experiment just means we don't know
Apr 13th 2005
11
                RE: hilarious...absence of an experiment just means we don't know
Apr 13th 2005
12
                     You get scientific evidence from experiments. What experiment
Apr 13th 2005
16
                          Let me break it down for you again..
Apr 14th 2005
39
                               Actually the hypothesis...you guys hypothesis...by way of the title
Apr 16th 2005
52
                                    Clutching at straws mate!!
Apr 17th 2005
59
                                         How so?
Apr 17th 2005
60
                                              Negative hypothesis!!
Apr 17th 2005
61
                                                   I thought the hypothesis (lol) was that Jesus didn't exixt...isn't that
Apr 17th 2005
62
                                                        But you are blending hypothesis and assertion as meaning
Apr 17th 2005
63
                                                        RE: This is actually...really simple...
Apr 19th 2005
65
                                                             weak is making a claim...
Apr 19th 2005
71
                                                                  *sigh* ...okay home-skillet...
Apr 20th 2005
72
                                                                       point out in 3x plagiarized post where X writer says Jesus never existe...
Apr 20th 2005
73
                                                                            RE: Damn home-skillet...
Apr 20th 2005
74
                                                                                 sad the best you can do is try and ridicule what others believe
Apr 20th 2005
75
RE: Hold up
Apr 13th 2005
5
      Mau....
Apr 14th 2005
40
      Why?
Apr 15th 2005
42
      Are you agreeing with me?
Apr 15th 2005
47
Nah, I gotta question the salience (sp?) of this post.
Apr 13th 2005
3
RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?
Apr 13th 2005
10
RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?
Apr 13th 2005
13
No it isn't a matter of 'perspective'.
Apr 13th 2005
21
the koran is as reliable as the bible
Apr 16th 2005
54
Ask and you shall recieve
Apr 13th 2005
14
I mean, you went and got that info, but I didn't even see a
Apr 13th 2005
15
RE: I mean, you went and got that info, but I didn't even see a
Apr 13th 2005
18
how is it a shock post? as a Christian someone once told me that
Apr 16th 2005
53
POST. OVER.
Apr 13th 2005
19
well,
Apr 13th 2005
26
      RE: well,
Apr 14th 2005
35
           RE: well,
Apr 14th 2005
37
                RE: well,
Apr 14th 2005
38
MOST. IGNORANT. POST. EVER.
Apr 13th 2005
17
Doesn't even make sense, does it? Mau77 is normally
Apr 13th 2005
20
Please Explain considering....
Apr 13th 2005
24
      Is this a semantic argument?
Apr 14th 2005
30
           I believe that is what this is. Christ is a title anyway...
Apr 14th 2005
41
                RE: I believe that is what this is. Christ is a title anyway...
Apr 15th 2005
44
Silence of Contemporary Writers
Apr 13th 2005
22
You are Muslim?
Apr 13th 2005
23
      LOL!!!
Apr 14th 2005
32
      I AINT A MUSLIM
Apr 19th 2005
69
He never Existed
Apr 13th 2005
25
RE: ^^^^ ignorant ^^^^
Apr 13th 2005
28
RE: dude..there are millions of records about him...peace..nm
Apr 13th 2005
27
RE: dude..there are millions of records about him...peace..nm
Apr 15th 2005
43
      RE: ahhh, there is more about jesus than "the bible"..
Apr 15th 2005
46
           RE: ahhh, there is more about jesus than "the bible"..
Apr 15th 2005
48
                that is about my only reason
Apr 25th 2005
77
RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?
Apr 13th 2005
29
he wasn't just one person, it was a community of people
Apr 14th 2005
31
the gaseous people.
Apr 14th 2005
33
it wouldn't matter if he didn't
Apr 14th 2005
34
dude would be dead either way.
Apr 14th 2005
36
does it even matter?
Apr 15th 2005
45
agreed, the issue is with the religion and its people
Apr 16th 2005
49
U should read what's being asked
Apr 16th 2005
50
      RE: U should read what's being asked
Apr 16th 2005
51
Considering the reliance on faith, do Christians need Jesus to have exi...
Apr 16th 2005
55
lmao
Apr 19th 2005
66
Damn...what's with all the Christ hate?
Apr 16th 2005
56
whats with all the Christ dickriding?
Apr 16th 2005
57
      *shrugs* If you follow someone...
Apr 16th 2005
58
absence of evidence
Apr 18th 2005
64
there is not an abscence of evidence
Apr 19th 2005
67
      maybe but
Apr 19th 2005
68
Religion like Politics uses FEAR to get people to BeLIEve Myths
Apr 19th 2005
70
first of all
Apr 25th 2005
76
RE: first of all
Apr 25th 2005
78
      Really? Seen proof?
Apr 25th 2005
79
           RE: Really? Seen proof?
Apr 25th 2005
80

moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 10:55 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
1. "Denial"
In response to Reply # 0


          

Its like telling somebody that the woman whose tit they have sucked on their whole lives, isn't actually their mother. I'd be devastated, wouldn't you?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:18 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
7. "Actually it would be more like "your mother never existed""
In response to Reply # 1


          

How I get here, then? Whose tits were I sucking on all this time?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:26 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
9. "RE: Actually it would be more like "your mother never existed""
In response to Reply # 7


          

I don't understand, are you correcting my grammar?

How I get here, then? Whose tits were I sucking on all this
>time?

I don't understand this either. You do know that tit was a metaphor don't you?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

insanejake
Member since Feb 18th 2003
4885 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 11:02 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
2. "Hold up"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

>Someone point me to sources OTHER THAN THE BIBLE, or authors
>obviously christian or having Christian leanings, that
>document his life.

The bible is a collection of sources, there is more than one source there. It is the definitive collection because many of the other accounts were destroyed...

Also bear in mind, that not too many people were literate in that place and time, so people to write the stories up would have been few and far between and may well have had their own agendas.

This is also true of the old testament, someone at some point decided which stories would be in it and which wouldnt. So stories like the book of Judith just werent included, although those still exist.

Personally, whilst Jesus may not have been the son of God (I dont believe that...), he probably existed as a person. I mean why not.

Now you PROVE he didnt exist. The fact is, there is no proof either way because many of these stories are so metaphorical, garbled and messed up over the course of time as to be basically fictional anyway...

"This isnt an argument, you are just contradicting everything Im saying"

"No Im not"
******************
"Dont open your mind too much or your brain will fall out"

******************************

Its 2005, where's my hoverboard and jetpack?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 11:19 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
4. "Don't need to"
In response to Reply # 2
Wed Apr-13-05 11:24 AM by moot_point

          

>Now you PROVE he didnt exist. The fact is, there is no proof
>either way because many of these stories are so metaphorical,
>garbled and messed up over the course of time as to be
>basically fictional anyway...

Scientists don't attempt to disprove hypotheses; they disprove theories. A hypothesis doesn't become a theory until its author backs it up with some coherent evidence. There is none, and so there is no need to prove he didn't exist to scoff at any hypothesis that he did.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
6. "Never tested a hypothesis before? They do that @ science fairs"
In response to Reply # 4


          

If the "existance of Jesus" is a hypothesis, WHAT experiment has failed to confirm the hypothesis?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:21 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
8. "It is the ABSENCE of experiment/evidence"
In response to Reply # 6


          

that fails to confirm the hypothesis.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:29 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
11. "hilarious...absence of an experiment just means we don't know"
In response to Reply # 8


          

As far as evidence...it's called the New Testament...oh I forgot...we have to strike that and every account anyone has written about Jesus, because...well...they're talking about Jesus and I don't believe he existed.

I ain't even trying to argue against "logic" like that.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                    
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:35 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
12. "RE: hilarious...absence of an experiment just means we don't know"
In response to Reply # 11
Wed Apr-13-05 12:36 PM by moot_point

          

>As far as evidence...it's called the New Testament...oh I
>forgot...we have to strike that and every account anyone has
>written about Jesus, because...well...they're talking about
>Jesus and I don't believe he existed.
>

Scientifically, it is not evidence.
Legally, it IS evidence but a case would NEVER stand on this alone.

>I ain't even trying to argue against "logic" like that.

You just have. Go figure.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                        
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:06 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
16. "You get scientific evidence from experiments. What experiment"
In response to Reply # 12


          

has been run to invalidate the hypothesis? There hasn't been. So how can you say the hypothesis is invalid? The best you can say is that you can neither deny or confirm the existance of Jesus. You can't even say there is strong evidence against his existance, because there's a tome called the New Testament that talks about him.

On the other hand, I don't have to prove Jesus' existance...it's called Faith. You guys posted about Jesus not existing...where's the scientific evidence that supports your claim?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                            
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 08:33 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
39. "Let me break it down for you again.."
In response to Reply # 16


          

>has been run to invalidate the hypothesis? There hasn't been.
>So how can you say the hypothesis is invalid? The best you
>can say is that you can neither deny or confirm the existance
>of Jesus. You can't even say there is strong evidence against
>his existance, because there's a tome called the New Testament
>that talks about him.
>On the other hand, I don't have to prove Jesus'
>existance...it's called Faith. You guys posted about Jesus
>not existing...where's the scientific evidence that supports
>your claim?
>
>
A scientist will come up with a hypothesis. He then tests his hypothesis by way of experiment. If the results of his experiment support the hypothesis it then becomes a theory. At this point the rest of the scientific community will attempt to disprove the theory by way of further experiment. If the community are unable to disprove the theory it then becomes law.

Therefore, the burden of proof is on the believer to provide evidence to support the hypothesis, not the doubting community. The New Testament is not evidence, it is a book of stories. Am I to believe in the existence Little Red Riding Hood because there is a story about it?

The key word is faith. I do not contend that Jesus exists internally (there is in fact much merit in this), but I do contend his external existence because there's no evidence to support it.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 06:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
52. "Actually the hypothesis...you guys hypothesis...by way of the title"
In response to Reply # 39
Sat Apr-16-05 06:42 PM by nonaime

          

of this post is Jesus didn't exist...balls in your court.

Scientific evidence to validate your hypothesis, please.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                    
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Sun Apr-17-05 07:21 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
59. "Clutching at straws mate!!"
In response to Reply # 52


          

!!!

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                        
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Sun Apr-17-05 07:29 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
60. "How so?"
In response to Reply # 59
Sun Apr-17-05 07:29 AM by nonaime

          

If I am to "accept that Jesus never existed", prove to me that He never existed.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                            
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Sun Apr-17-05 07:35 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
61. "Negative hypothesis!!"
In response to Reply # 60
Sun Apr-17-05 07:38 AM by moot_point

          

We both know full well that the (and I'm sick of writing this word!) 'hypothesis' is that Jesus exists.

Leave semantics well alone!!

You accept by faith; ergo internal existence. I'm not contending that.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Sun Apr-17-05 07:59 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
62. "I thought the hypothesis (lol) was that Jesus didn't exixt...isn't that"
In response to Reply # 61


          

the assertion of the original author (is that better lol). He wants us to repudiate his assertion. No. You made the assertion, YOU (meaning the author) back it up.

And I'm not talking about observations, because *I* have a Book of observations that say Jesus did exist...we're talking about cold hard facts that irrefutably show that Jesus didn't roam the earth.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Sun Apr-17-05 08:29 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
63. "But you are blending hypothesis and assertion as meaning"
In response to Reply # 62


          

the same thing. He made an assertion, he did not present a hypothesis. If you return to what I wrote earlier, he is an example of the scientific community, who by virtue of scientific privilege, is allowed to scoff at unsupported hypotheses.

>
>And I'm not talking about observations, because *I* have a
>Book of observations that say Jesus did exist...we're talking
>about cold hard facts that irrefutably show that Jesus didn't
>roam the earth.

It wouldn't surprise me if there was in fact a historical character called Jesus as described within the Bible. However, terms such as 'cold hard facts that irrefutably show' are worthless. Try using them in court!! In any case I read this forum as a criticism of the interpretation of Jesus as human manifestation of a higher power.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                    
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 07:42 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
65. "RE: This is actually...really simple..."
In response to Reply # 62


          

>the assertion of the original author (is that better lol).
>He wants us to repudiate his assertion. No. You made the
>assertion, YOU (meaning the author) back it up.

The Question : "Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?"

...if you believe Jesus exists and you can provide the valid documentation, you would say :

"Because ___ document written by *insert author* shows that blah blah blah..."

...but since you cannot provide even ONE document then you decide to try and throw it back on to me...that's weak. I could've titled the post, "Is there OBJECTIVE Documentation of Jesus?" The result would still be same, no one providing anything but there personal conviction, yet passing it off as fact. No one has even touched 3X's post.....cats don't like to have their shit shakin'. I don't have such a hard time refining my overview in the face of some real shit, but none of you can provide it, so...


>And I'm not talking about observations, because *I* have a
>Book of observations that say Jesus did exist...we're talking
>about cold hard facts that irrefutably show that Jesus didn't
>roam the earth.

Is the Bible an example of "cold hard facts"? A simple i BELIEVE so or not, will do.


RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                        
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 06:15 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
71. "weak is making a claim..."
In response to Reply # 65
Tue Apr-19-05 06:18 PM by nonaime

          

and NOT being able to back up what you wrote. You want ME to accept YOUR pov, remember? This isn't a Jesus is real post.

>...but since you cannot provide even ONE document then you
>decide to try and throw it back on to me...that's weak.

Because you wont accept the documents that DO talk about Jesus' existence, lol.

>I could've titled the post, "Is there OBJECTIVE Documentation of
>Jesus?" The result would still be same,

That and your original question are two different questions.

>no one providing anything but there personal conviction, yet passing it off as
>fact.

Yeah I remember somebody posting about wanting folks to accept that somebody never existed...they never posted facts supporting their personal convinctions. I see what you mean.

>No one has even touched 3X's post.....cats don't like to
>have their shit shakin'.

I don't remember seeing anything "shit shakin". Just a list of guys who DIDN'T say that Jesus never walked the earth.

>I don't have such a hard time
>refining my overview in the face of some real shit, but none
>of you can provide it, so...

Me neither. All I've asked is the same from you. A softball. You were supposed to hit that out the park. But you don't have any real proof that denies Jesus' existence.

I'll admit it. I don't have anything outside of the Bible that speaks about Jesus' existence, but that's okay. To be honest, I don't really care about your need of external observations. By FAITH *I* accept what the Bible says as being true.

It is by Faith I accept Jesus. What shred of scientific evidence supports your view on Jesus. Here I am being *weak* again, funny you can't answer the question.

What "real shit" led you to believe that Jesus DIDN'T exists? What is the *it* that excuses your ability to beleive something to be true or false when the best thing going for you is that a couple of people didn't write about what you suppose.

And I don't even need facts, just an observation that supports why you think the way you do.Pliny the elder wrote a book that said that he was with Mark and 'em and they a buncha liars? Name a credible writer, who was around when Jesus was alive, who wrote,"I was there the whole time in Jeruslem and I never saw Jesus or any of the people that he hung out with" Where are the observations that support what you believe. I have mine: Matthew, Mark, Luke, & John, despite YOUR objections, it's what I base my faith on. Hell I even go out on the web and search for what Thomas' doubting tail has to say.

1.You don't have any facts 2.you don't even have anyone that was alive when Jesus was alive denying Jesus' existence...you just BELIEVE that Jesus didn't exist. Just like I BELIEVE that he did. And you have the audacity to talk about people trying to pass their beliefs off as facts.

shame.on.you.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                            
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Wed Apr-20-05 01:23 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
72. "*sigh* ...okay home-skillet..."
In response to Reply # 71


          

>I'll admit it. I don't have anything outside of the Bible that
>speaks about Jesus' existence, but that's okay. To be honest,
>I don't really care about your need of external observations.
>By FAITH *I* accept what the Bible says as being true.

mmmhmm......this is all I really need to hear from you. You really shouldn't have even posted anything. Since you already have your conviction and ACCEPT by faith, the entire clergy could come out and say and show thru their own secret documentation, that the entire Jesus story was made up, and you still would hold your beliefs. All i need is ONE objective document to say "hmm...okay".
It's okay to move by faith, but you just a zombie if you don't support it with logic.


>
>It is by Faith I accept Jesus. What shred of scientific
>evidence supports your view on Jesus. Here I am being *weak*
>again, funny you can't answer the question.

...oh, but i can...i just, e'ry now and then, get kicks outta seein' zombies get all fired up over their beloved Heru...i mean Khrisna...i mean Mithras...i mean Jesus.

>
>What "real shit" led you to believe that Jesus DIDN'T exists?
>What is the *it* that excuses your ability to beleive
>something to be true or false when the best thing going for
>you is that a couple of people didn't write about what you
>suppose.

Posted by 3X.....READ ALL OF IT.

The Christ
by John E. Remsberg


Chapter 2
Silence of Contemporary Writers

Another proof that the Christ of Christianity is a fabulous and not a historical character is the silence of the writers who lived during and immediately following the time he is said to have existed.

That a man named Jesus, an obscure religious teacher, the basis of this fabulous Christ, lived in Palestine about nineteen hundred years ago, may be true. But of this man we know nothing. His biography has not been written. A Renan and others have attempted to write it, but have failed -- have failed because no materials for such a work exist. Contemporary writers have left us not one word concerning him. For generations afterward, outside of a few theological epistles, we find no mention of him.

The following is a list of writers who lived and wrote during the time, or within a century after the time, that Christ is said to have lived and performed his wonderful works:

Josephus
Philo-Judaeus
Seneca
Pliny the Elder
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Pliny the Younger
Tacitus
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Hermogones
Valerius Maximus
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Appian
Theon of Smyrna
Phlegon
Pompon Mela
Quintius Curtius
Lucian
Pausanias
Valerius Flaccus
Florus Lucius
Favorinus
Phaedrus
Damis
Aulus Gellius
Columella
Dio Chrysostom
Lysias
Appion of Alexandria


Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ.

Philo was born before the beginning of the Christian era, and lived until long after the reputed death of Christ. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Christ is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Christ's miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. He was there when Christ made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with its attendant earthquake, supernatural darkness, and resurrection of the dead took place -- when Christ himself rose from the dead, and in the presence of many witnesses ascended into heaven. These marvelous events which must have filled the world with amazement, had they really occurred, were unknown to him. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although this Word incarnate dwelt in that very land and in the presence of multitudes revealed himself and demonstrated his divine powers, Philo saw it not.

Josephus, the renowned Jewish historian, was a native of Judea. He was born in 37 A.D., and was a contemporary of the Apostles. He was, for a time, Governor of Galilee, the province in which Christ lived and taught. He traversed every part of this province and visited the places where but a generation before Christ had performed his prodigies. He resided in Cana, the very city in which Christ is said to have wrought his first miracle. He mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era. But Christ was of too little consequence and his deeds too trivial to merit a line from this historian's pen.

Justus of Tiberius was a native of Christ's own country, Galilee. He wrote a history covering the time of Christ's reputed existence. This work has perished, but Photius, a Christian scholar and critic of the ninth century, who was acquainted with it, says: "He makes not the least mention of the appearance of Christ, of what things happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did" (Photius' Bibliotheca, code 33).

Judea, where occurred the miraculous beginning and marvelous ending of Christ's earthly career, was a Roman province, and all of Palestine is intimately associated with Roman history. But the Roman records of that age contain no mention of Christ and his works. The Greek writers of Greece and Alexandria who lived not far from Palestine and who were familiar with its events, are silent also.



Josephus

Late in the first century Josephus wrote his celebrated work, The Antiquities of the Jews, giving a history of his race from the earliest ages down to his own time. Modern versions of this work contain the following passage:

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day" (Book XVIII, Chap. iii, sec. 3).

For nearly sixteen hundred years Christians have been citing this passage as a testimonial, not merely to the historical existence, but to the divine character of Jesus Christ. And yet a ranker forgery was never penned.

Its language is Christian. Every line proclaims it the work of a Christian writer. "If it be lawful to call him a man." "He was the Christ." "He appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him." These are the words of a Christian, a believer in the divinity of Christ. Josephus was a Jew, a devout believer in the Jewish faith -- the last man in the world to acknowledge the divinity of Christ. The inconsistency of this evidence was early recognized, and Ambrose, writing in the generation succeeding its first appearance (360 A.D.) offers the following explanation, which only a theologian could frame: "If the Jews do not believe us, let them, at least, believe their own writers. Josephus whom they esteem a very great man, hath said this and yet hath he spoken truth after such a manner; and so far was his mind wandered from the right way, that even he was not a believer as to what he himself said; but thus he spake, in order to deliver historical truth, because he thought it not lawful for him to deceive, while yet he was no believer, because of the hardness of his heart, and his perfidious intention."

Its brevity disproves its authenticity. Josephus' work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises twenty books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. Yet this remarkable being, the greatest product of his race, a being of whom the prophets foretold ten thousand wonderful things, a being greater than any earthly king, is dismissed with a dozen lines.

It interrupts the narrative. Section 2 of the chapter containing it gives an account of a Jewish sedition which was suppressed by Pilate with great slaughter. The account ends as follows: "There were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded; and thus an end was put to this sedition." Section 4, as now numbered, begins with these words: "About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder." The one section naturally and logically follows the other. Yet between these two closely connected paragraphs the one relating to Christ is placed; thus making the words, "another sad calamity," refer to the advent of this wise and wonderful being.

The early Christian fathers were not acquainted with it. Justin Martyr, Terullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen all would have quoted this passage had it existed in their time. The failure of even one of these fathers to notice it would be sufficient to throw doubt upon its genuineness; the failure of all of them to notice it proves conclusively that it is spurious, that it was not in existence during the second and third centuries.

As this passage first appeared in the writings of the ecclesiastical historian, Eusebius, as this author openly advocated the use of fraud and deception in furthering the interests of the church, as he is known to have mutilated and perverted the text of Josephus in other instances, and as the manner of its presentation is calculated to excite suspicion, the forgery has generally been charged to him. In his Evangelical Demonstration, written early in the fourth century, after citing all the known evidences of Christianity, he thus introduces the Jewish historian: "Certainly the citations I have already produced concerning our Savior may be sufficient. However, it may not be amiss if, over and above, we make use of Josephus the Jew for a further witness" (Book III, p. 124).

Chrysostom and Photius both reject this passage. Chrysostom, a reader of Josephus, who preached and wrote in the latter part of the fourth century, in his defense of Christianity, needed this evidence, but was too honest or too wise to use it. Photius, who made a revision of Josephus, writing five hundred years after the time of Eusebius, ignores the passage, and admits that Josephus has made no mention of Christ.

Modern Christian scholars generally concede that the passage is a forgery. Dr. Lardner, one of the ablest defenders of Christianity, adduces the following arguments against its genuineness:

"I do not perceive that we at all want the suspected testimony to Jesus, which was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius.

"Nor do I recollect that Josephus has anywhere mentioned the name or word Christ, in any of his works; except the testimony above mentioned, and the passage concerning James, the Lord's brother.

"It interrupts the narrative.

"The language is quite Christian.

"It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it had it been then in the text.

"It is not quoted by Photius, though he has three articles concerning Josephus.

"Under the article Justus of Tiberias, this author (Photius) especially states that the historian , being a Jew, has not taken the least notice of Christ.

"Neither Justin in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors, nor Origen against Celsus, has ever mentioned this testimony.

"But, on the contrary, in chapter xxxv of the first book of that work, Origen openly affirms that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ" (Answer to Dr. Chandler).

Again Dr. Lardner says: "This passage is not quoted nor referred to by any Christian writer before Eusebius, who flourished at the beginning of the fourth century. If it had been originally in the works of Josephus it would have been highly proper to produce it in their disputes with Jews and Gentiles. But it is never quoted by Justin Martyr, or Clement of Alexandria, nor by Tertullian or Origen, men of great learning, and well acquainted with the works of Josephus. It was certainly very proper to urge it against the Jews. It might also have been fitly urged against the Gentiles. A testimony so favorable to Jesus in the works of Josephus, who lived so soon after our Savior, who was so well acquainted with the transactions of his own country, who had received so many favors from Vespasian and Titus, would not be overlooked or neglected by any Christian apologist" (Lardner's Works, vol. I, chap. iv).

Bishop Warburton declares it to be a forgery: "If a Jew owned the truth of Christianity, he must needs embrace it. We, therefore, certainly conclude that the paragraph where Josephus, who was as much a Jew as the religion of Moses could make him, is made to acknowledge Jesus as the Christ, in terms as strong as words could do it, is a rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too" (Quoted by Lardner, Works, Vol. I, chap. iv).

The Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England, says:

"Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery, interpolated in the text during the third century by some pious Christian, who was scandalized that so famous a writer as Josephus should have taken no notice of the gospels, or of Christ, their subject. But the zeal of the interpolator has outrun his discretion, for we might as well expect to gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles, as to find this notice of Christ among the Judaizing writings of Josephus. It is well known that this author was a zealous Jew, devoted to the laws of Moses and the traditions of his countrymen. How, then, could he have written that Jesus was the Christ? Such an admission would have proved him to be a Christian himself, in which case the passage under consideration, too long for a Jew, would have been far too short for a believer in the new religion, and thus the passage stands forth, like an ill-set jewel, contrasting most inharmoniously with everything around it. If it had been genuine, we might be sure that Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Chrysostom would have quoted it in their controversies with the Jews, and that Origen or Photius would have mentioned it. But Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian (I, 11), is the first who quotes it, and our reliance on the judgment or even honesty of this writer is not so great as to allow our considering everything found in his works as undoubtedly genuine" (Christian Records, p. 30).

The Rev. S. Baring-Gould, in his Lost and Hostile Gospels, says:

"This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. i, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl. A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl. A.D. 193), and Origen (fl. A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. i)."

Dr. Chalmers ignores it, and admits that Josephus is silent regarding Christ. He says: "The entire silence of Josephus upon the subject of Christianity, though he wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, and gives us the history of that period in which Christ and his Apostles lived, is certainly a very striking circumstance" (Kneeland's Review, p. 169).

Referring to this passage, Dean Milman, in his Gibbon's Rome (Vol. II, p. 285, note) says: "It is interpolated with many additional clauses."

Cannon Farrar, who has written in ablest Christian life of Christ yet penned, repudiates it. He says: "The single passage in which he alludes to him is interpolated, if not wholly spurious" (Life of Christ, Vol. I, p. 46).

The following, from Dr. Farrar's pen, is to be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica: "That Josephus wrote the whole passage as it now stands no sane critic can believe."

"There are, however, two reasons which are alone sufficient to prove that the whole passage is spurious -- one that it was unknown to Origen and the earlier fathers, and the other that its place in the text is uncertain" (ibid).

Theodor Keim, a German-Christian writer on Jesus says: "The passage cannot be maintained; it has first appeared in this form in the Catholic church of the Jews and Gentiles, and under the dominion of the Fourth Gospel, and hardly before the third century, probably before Eusebius, and after Origen, whose bitter criticisms of Josephus may have given cause for it" (Jesus of Nazara, p. 25).

Concerning this passage, Hausrath, another German writer, says it "must have been penned at a peculiarly shameless hour."

The Rev. Dr. Hooykaas, of Holland, says: "Flavius Josephus, the well known historian of the Jewish people, was born in A.D. 37, only two years after the death of Jesus; but though his work is of inestimable value as our chief authority for the circumstances of the times in which Jesus and his Apostles came forward, yet he does not seem to have mentioned Jesus himself. At any rate, the passage in his 'Jewish Antiquities' that refers to him is certainly spurious, and was inserted by a later and a Christian hand" (Bible for Learners, Vol. III, p. 27). This conclusion of Dr. Hooykaas is endorsed by the eminent Dutch critic, Dr. Kuenen.

Dr. Alexander Campbell, one of America's ablest Christian apologists, says: "Josephus, the Jewish historian, was contemporary with the Apostles, having been born in the year 37. From his situation and habits, he had every access to know all that took place at the rise of the Christian religion.

"Respecting the founder of this religion, Josephus has thought fit to be silent in history. The present copies of his work contain one passage which speaks very respectfully of Jesus Christ, and ascribes to him the character of the Messiah. But as Josephus did not embrace Christianity, and as this passage is not quoted or referred to until the beginning of the fourth century, it is, for these and other reasons, generally accounted spurious" (Evidences of Christianity, from Campbell-Owen Debate, p. 312).

Another passage in Josephus, relating to the younger Ananus, who was high priest of the Jews in 62 A.D., reads as follows:

"But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper and very insolent; he was also of the sect of Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all of the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of judges and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned" (Antiquities, Book XX, chap. ix, sec. I).

This passage is probably genuine with the exception of the clause, "who was called Christ," which is undoubtedly an interpolation, and is generally regarded as such. Nearly all the authorities that I have quoted reject it. It was originally probably a marginal note. Some Christian reader of Josephus believing that the James mentioned was the brother of Jesus made a note of his belief in the manuscript before him, and this a transcriber afterward incorporated with the text, a very common practice in that age when purity of text was a matter of secondary importance.

The fact that the early fathers, who were acquainted with Josephus, and who would have hailed with joy even this evidence of Christ's existence, do not cite it, while Origen expressly declares that Josephus has not mentioned Christ, is conclusive proof that it did not exist until the middle of the third century or later.

Those who affirm the genuineness of this clause argue that the James mentioned by Josephus was a person of less prominence than the Jesus mentioned by him, which would be true of James, the brother of Jesus Christ. Now some of the most prominent Jews living at this time were named Jesus. Jesus, the son of Damneus, succeeded Ananus as high priest that very year; and Jesus, the son of Gamaliel, a little later succeeded to the same office.

To identify the James of Josephus with James the Just, the brother of Jesus, is to reject the accepted history of the primitive church which declares that James the Just died in 69 A.D., seven years after the James of Josephus was condemned to death by the Sanhedrim.

Whiston himself, the translator of Josephus referring to the event narrated by the Jewish historian, admits that James, the brother of Jesus Christ, "did not die till long afterward."

The brief "Discourse Concerning Hades," appended to the writings of Josephus, is universally conceded to be the product of some other writer -- "obviously of Christian origin" -- says the Encyclopedia Britannica.



Tacitus

(This section was repaired on October 4, 2002.)

In July, 64 A.D., a great conflagration occurred in Rome. There is a tradition to the effect that this conflagration was the work of an incendiary and that the Emperor Nero himself was believed to be the incendiary. Modern editions of the "Annals" of Tacitus contain the following passage in reference to this:

"Nero, in order to stifle the rumor, ascribed to those people who were abhorred for their crimes and commonly called Christians: These he punished exquisitely. The founder of that name was Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was punished, as a criminal by the procurator, Pontius Pilate. This pernicious superstition, thus checked for awhile, broke out again; and spread not only over Judea, the source of this evil, but reached the city also: whither flow from all quarters all things vile and shameful, and where they find shelter and encouragement. At first, only those were apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards, a vast multitude were detected by them, all of whom were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as their hatred of mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered over with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were crucified. Others, having been daubed over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burned to death. Nero made use of his own gardens as a theatre on this occasion, and also exhibited the diversions of the circus, sometimes standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer; at other times driving a chariot himself, till at length those men, though really criminal, and deserving exemplary punishment, began to be commiserated as people who were destroyed, not out of regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the cruelty of one man" (Annals, Book XV, sec. 44). This passage, accepted as authentic by many, must be declared doubtful, if not spurious, for the following reasons:

1. It is not quoted by the Christian fathers.

2. Tertullian was familiar with the writings of Tacitus, and his arguments demanded the citation of this evidence had it existed.

3. Clement of Alexandria, at the beginning of the third century, made a compilation of all the recognitions of Christ and Christianity that had been made by Pagan writers up to his time. The writings of Tacitus furnished no recognition of them.

4. Origen, in his controversy with Celsus, would undoubtedly have used it had it existed.

5. The ecclesiastical historian Eusebius, in the fourth century, cites all the evidences of Christianity obtainable from Jewish and Pagan sources, but makes no mention of Tacitus.

6. It is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the fifteenth century.

7. At this time but one copy of the Annals existed and this copy, it is claimed, was made in the eighth century -- 600 years after the time of Tacitus.

8. As this single copy was in the possession of a Christian the insertion of a forgery was easy.

9. Its severe criticisms of Christianity do not necessarily disprove its Christian origin. No ancient witness was more desirable than Tacitus, but his introduction at so late a period would make rejection certain unless Christian forgery could be made to appear improbable.

10. It is admitted by Christian writers that the works of Tacitus have not been preserved with any considerable degree of fidelity. In the writings ascribed to him are believed to be some of the writings of Quintilian.

11. The blood-curdling story about the frightful orgies of Nero reads like some Christian romance of the dark ages, and not like Tacitus.

12. In fact, this story, in nearly the same words, omitting the reference to Christ, is to be found in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, a Christian of the fifth century.

13. Suetonius, while mercilessly condemning the reign of Nero, says that in his public entertainments he took particular care that no human lives should be sacrificed, "not even those of condemned criminals."

14. At the time that the conflagration occurred, Tacitus himself declares that Nero was not in Rome, but at Antium.

Many who accept the authenticity of this section of the "Annals" believe that the sentence which declares that Christ was punished in the reign of Pontius Pilate, and which I have italicized, is an interpolation. Whatever may be said of the remainder of this passage, this sentence bears the unmistakable stamp of Christian forgery. It interrupts the narrative; it disconnects two closely related statements. Eliminate this sentence, and there is no break in the narrative. In all the Roman records there was to be found no evidence that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate. This sentence, if genuine, is the most important evidence in Pagan literature. That it existed in the works of the greatest and best known of Roman historians, and was ignored or overlooked by Christian apologists for 1,360 years, no intelligent critic can believe. Tacitus did not write this sentence.

--------------------------------------------------------------
All of this...

....Now add on the FACT that 100's of millions of people throughout time have died, entire cultures destroyed at the most, suppressed at the least and the str8 up fear and paranoia and fanatism that has/is being done in the name of YOUR savior(i won't even touch on the true spirit blocking and stagnation that happens as a result of holding the beliefs of your religion or the bullshit power struggles and manipulation that happens within the clergy AND the congregation)...you should see why i see the Jesus story as nothing but Santa Claus X 1,000,000,000.


But will say that i do think that at some point back then, there MAY have been a cat called by the Greeks "Jesus" and he was nice to a few people and maybe the government didn't like him....But i also think that there MAY have been some fat fuck named St. Nicolas(Nikolai) from Russia, who went around giving presents to little kids in his town. You'd be hard pressed to find any fiction writer who never drew inspiration from real life individuals.


>1.You don't have any facts 2.you don't even have anyone that
>was alive when Jesus was alive denying Jesus' existence...

Now lets touch on your faulty logic since you can't see how dumb your statement sounds. Moot Point touched on point #1, so concerning point #2....

C'mon mayne....Read wtf you just wrote,

"you don't even have anyone that was alive when Jesus was alive denying Jesus' existence."

Laugh-TheFuck-Out-Loud...Oh Man....

Actually, i feel you though....see, there's this dude i know named "Zombiechristfucked4life Allah" who doesn't exist, so i've been thinkin' about documenting the things he never did to prove he doesn't exist. I think it'll be a best seller and catapult my career as a historian.


>shame.on.you.

Is that what Jesus would say to me? Why not pray for me instead? Here you are, a "True Believer" and you have the opportunity to change my thoughts on Jesus' existence, but you can't do it, so u mad. I honestly could careless whether you believe in him or not.



  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-20-05 08:15 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
73. "point out in 3x plagiarized post where X writer says Jesus never existe..."
In response to Reply # 72
Wed Apr-20-05 08:25 AM by nonaime

          

None of the writers listed wrote that Jesus didn't exist. The rest of the commentary is bs. The people in the list who did write about Jesus...obvious forgeries...of course, lol.
Here's your list:
>Josephus
>Philo-Judaeus
>Seneca
>Pliny the Elder
>Suetonius
>Juvenal
>Martial
>Persius
>Plutarch
>Justus of Tiberius
>Apollonius
>Pliny the Younger
>Tacitus
>Quintilian
>Lucanus
>Epictetus
>Silius Italicus
>Statius
>Ptolemy
>Hermogones
>Valerius Maximus
>Arrian
>Petronius
>Dion Pruseus
>Paterculus
>Appian
>Theon of Smyrna
>Phlegon
>Pompon Mela
>Quintius Curtius
>Lucian
>Pausanias
>Valerius Flaccus
>Florus Lucius
>Favorinus
>Phaedrus
>Damis
>Aulus Gellius
>Columella
>Dio Chrysostom
>Lysias
>Appion of Alexandria

Produce a text from these contemporaries that says Jesus never existed. You can't. This is the facts I am speaking of. You huff and huff, but aint saying nothing. I have a Book that says He did exist. Where's your counter?

>>1.You don't have any facts 2.you don't even have anyone that
>>was alive when Jesus was alive denying Jesus' existence...
>
>Now lets touch on your faulty logic since you can't see how
>dumb your statement sounds. Moot Point touched on point #1, so
>concerning point #2....

No, moot point didn't touch on point 1. Make a claim back it up. You can't. Simple.

>C'mon mayne....Read wtf you just wrote,
>
>"you don't even have anyone that was alive when Jesus was
>alive denying Jesus' existence."
>
>Laugh-TheFuck-Out-Loud...Oh Man....
>
>Actually, i feel you though....see, there's this dude i know
>named "Zombiechristfucked4life Allah" who doesn't exist, so
>i've been thinkin' about documenting the things he never did
>to prove he doesn't exist. I think it'll be a best seller and
>catapult my career as a historian.

Paul spent most of his days in prison...not a 3 hots and a cot prison we have today. Some of the original apostles were executed. That's some real dedication, getting persecuted for writing about/believing in someone who never existed (oh did I just give a reason why there isn't much talk about Jesus outside of the Bible...silly me).

>Is that what Jesus would say to me? Why not pray for me
>instead? Here you are, a "True Believer" and you have the
>opportunity to change my thoughts on Jesus' existence, but you
>can't do it, so u mad. I honestly could careless whether you
>believe in him or not.

The Bible says if you aren't received to dust off your sandals and move on. I'm not going to post 3 "accept Jesus" post a month here, it's a waste of my time. It would seems post like yours are considered activism....who knew.

Mad? I honestly thought you were going to show me why I should "Accept That Jesus Never Existed". I am kinda upset that you keep pointing to a list of names without providing what it is they wrote that shows Jesus never existed.

I mean, okay, I get the fact that the people listed didn't write about Jesus, so somehow in you guys mind that equals to Jesus not existing.

But did they write about St. Peter? One of Christ's Disciple. Catholic's first pope. Must've never existed.
Did they write about Paul? Responsible for spreading the "Jesus Movement". Hmm...must've also not existed...those books in the New Testament must've wrote themselves.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                    
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Wed Apr-20-05 12:02 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
74. "RE: Damn home-skillet..."
In response to Reply # 73


          

"point out in 3x plagiarized post where X writer says Jesus never existed"

...If the writers lived during the supposed time of Jesus or around the time immediately following his death, they wouldn't write "Jesus didn't exist", cuz no one is saying that he does, they just wouldn't write about him. The point of mentioning the writers is that they document the major and minor events taking place around the supposed time of Jesus in the location Jesus was supposedly at, yet NONE of them mention him. There is no resaon for them not to mention him, if he existed, esp. considering all of the great events said to have taken place involving him. If you read it all like i said you would see that....but then again, i'm fully aware of how blind faith does truly blind.


I have a Book that
>says He did exist.

I have a book that says White People are the chosen people of Reptilian Aliens and Jesus was made up as the ultimate distraction and 3rd eye chakra blocker....actually i got a few books that have said that.

Where's your counter?

I don't need it. I already told you i feel you. Right after i posted the last time, i seen that dude i told you about, Zombiechristfuckedforlife Allah, you know...the dude that doesn't exist? Anyway, since i actually seen him in person now...i can officially write the book proving that he doesn't exist.

N/M

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                                                                        
nonaime
Charter member
3030 posts
Wed Apr-20-05 12:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
75. "sad the best you can do is try and ridicule what others believe"
In response to Reply # 74
Wed Apr-20-05 12:43 PM by nonaime

          

>I have a book that says White People are the chosen people of
>Reptilian Aliens and Jesus was made up as the ultimate
>distraction and 3rd eye chakra blocker....actually i got a few
>books that have said that.
>
>Where's your counter?

If that is what you believe, fine by me. Unlike you, I can live with people who believe things contrary to what I believe. There's no desire to try and get you to not believe the things you believe.

>I don't need it. I already told you i feel you. Right after i
>posted the last time, i seen that dude i told you about,
>Zombiechristfuckedforlife Allah, you know...the dude that
>doesn't exist? Anyway, since i actually seen him in person
>now...i can officially write the book proving that he doesn't
>exist.

lol. pity. You can't disprove that Jesus existed, so you resort to mockery. it's what I expected, though.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:01 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
5. "RE: Hold up"
In response to Reply # 2


          

>>Someone point me to sources OTHER THAN THE BIBLE, or
>authors
>>obviously christian or having Christian leanings, that
>>document his life.
>
>The bible is a collection of sources, there is more than one
>source there. It is the definitive collection because many of
>the other accounts were destroyed...

Those sources are not objective at all.

>
>Also bear in mind, that not too many people were literate in
>that place and time, so people to write the stories up would
>have been few and far between and may well have had their own
>agendas.

Have had their own agendas....hmm...I wonder who that/they could've been.


>
>This is also true of the old testament, someone at some point
>decided which stories would be in it and which wouldnt. So
>stories like the book of Judith just werent included, although
>those still exist.

Maybe those books didn't make it in, because the MAN/MEN who commissioned the whole project, didn't like how those books were written. he had the power to do that since he hired the writers in the first place....And yes, since the masses were mostly ignorant, it would take nothing to make them believe that these books came from writers during the time of this Jesus cat.

>
>Personally, whilst Jesus may not have been the son of God (I
>dont believe that...), he probably existed as a person. I mean
>why not.

An Agenda?

>
>Now you PROVE he didnt exist.

C'mon mayne...

First, the burden of proof is definitely not on me. I'm not tryna convert tsunami victims to 'Mau777ism'.

Second, i'll give you a minute to think about, "prove he didn't exist", hoping you can see the obvious lapse in logic.


The fact is, there is no proof
>either way because many of these stories are so metaphorical,
>garbled and messed up over the course of time as to be
>basically fictional anyway...

No, there's just no proof.


RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Kozmikblak
Member since Sep 10th 2002
1154 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 09:11 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
40. "Mau...."
In response to Reply # 5


  

          

Prove you have gotten rid of weapons you don't have.

--------------------
"...you cats are undercover like GAY rappers dealing with MYSTERY." -Talib Kweli This means you, from Reflection Eternal

"I don't blame Tiger Woods, but I overstand the mental poison that's even worse than drugs" -nas poison

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 01:08 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
42. "Why?"
In response to Reply # 40


          

?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
insanejake
Member since Feb 18th 2003
4885 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 07:46 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
47. "Are you agreeing with me?"
In response to Reply # 5


  

          


>>The bible is a collection of sources, there is more than one
>>source there. It is the definitive collection because many
>of
>>the other accounts were destroyed...
>
>Those sources are not objective at all.

Yup.


>Maybe those books didn't make it in, because the MAN/MEN who
>commissioned the whole project, didn't like how those books
>were written.

No one commisioned it. It was probably a collection of oral histories, written down...

he had the power to do that since he hired the
>writers in the first place....

So no one was hired to write it (except for scribes who commited the physical act...)


>>Personally, whilst Jesus may not have been the son of God (I
>>dont believe that...), he probably existed as a person. I
>mean
>>why not.
>
>An Agenda?

The agenda made him more than just the illegitimate son of a carpenter. There probably was a charismatic Jewish man at that time who led people his name could easily have been Jesus...

>
>>
>>Now you PROVE he didnt exist.
>
>C'mon mayne...
>
>First, the burden of proof is definitely not on me. I'm not
>tryna convert tsunami victims to 'Mau777ism'.

Im not trying to convert anyone to Christianity. Im saying, that a man called Jesus could have existed...

>Second, i'll give you a minute to think about, "prove he
>didn't exist", hoping you can see the obvious lapse in logic.
>
>
>The fact is, there is no proof
>>either way because many of these stories are so
>metaphorical,
>>garbled and messed up over the course of time as to be
>>basically fictional anyway...
>
>No, there's just no proof.
>

I know, I just said that....

Im tempted to sift through Roman documents from the time and see who led uprisings...

"This isnt an argument, you are just contradicting everything Im saying"

"No Im not"
******************
"Dont open your mind too much or your brain will fall out"

******************************

Its 2005, where's my hoverboard and jetpack?

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 11:11 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
3. "Nah, I gotta question the salience (sp?) of this post."
In response to Reply # 0
Wed Apr-13-05 11:28 AM by FireBrand

  

          

Are there not two or three post on this topic up? Topic redundancy.

hit me on the inbox if you feel this has been locked unjustly. It will be deleted within the hour.




"I liked it," Gilliam said of playing gunner on punt team. "It was the first time I did anything like that. It was fun. It felt like, if he wasn't fair catching it, he was disrespecting me, so I was trying to take a head off if I could." Response-ability

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

AquamansWrath
Member since Apr 12th 2005
8480 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:27 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
10. "RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

Egyptian Sanskrits.
The Holy Quran.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
JSYM7
Member since Jul 31st 2003
219 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 12:49 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
13. "RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?"
In response to Reply # 10


          

really it only matter from the perspective of who views it.

If you don't think he exsisted fine go on your marry way live your life find your peace.

If you do then do what you do just don't subject others to your vision of god be mindful of the culture of those around and loose the us versus them attitude.

Religion is the greatest drug of all time the great social narcotic so people who want there culture to be dominent once they conquer a group will place there god over others and erase their ways there by instituting a new way of seeing god and isolate or demonize any difference. That is the man problem with how man sees religion and god they act as if the notion of god only belongs to one culture and everyone else is just pagan dog hethens unless they convert. People who want to prove the exsistance or none exisitance to belivers are nothing more than souped up devils advocates (no pun intended). They might as well let sleeping dogs lie you are not going to change the mind of anyone practicing any religion unless they are ready to change it themselves (when the student is ready a teacher will come).

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
MALACHI
Member since Jan 22nd 2003
10706 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:33 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
21. "No it isn't a matter of 'perspective'."
In response to Reply # 13


  

          

>really it only matter from the perspective of who views it.
>
>If you don't think he exsisted fine go on your marry way live
>your life find your peace.
>
>If you do then do what you do just don't subject others to
>your vision of god be mindful of the culture of those around
>and loose the us versus them attitude.

The post is concerning whether or not the man known around the globe as "Jesus", "Isa", "Yeshua" actually EXISTED or not. Someone is either right or wrong. PERIOD. In this particular case, Mau777 is as wrong as 2 left shoes.

"Is it not one father that all of us have? Is it not one God that has created us? Why is it that we deal treacherously with one another?" --Malachi 2:10

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
mcdeezjawns
Charter member
26056 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:15 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
54. "the koran is as reliable as the bible"
In response to Reply # 10


  

          

and that would be not at all

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Shakeet Lokh Em
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3451 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:00 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
14. "Ask and you shall recieve"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

The first century Jewish historian Josephus referred to the stoning of "James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ." - The Jewish Antiquities, Josephus, Book XX sec. 200

Tacitus, a Roman historian who lived during the latter part of the first century C.E. wrote: "Christus, from whom the name {Christian} had it's origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus." - The Complete Works Of Tacitus, "The Annals," Book 15, par. 44.

The Encyclopedia Britannica also speaks on it, stating that "these independent accounts prove that in ancient times, even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the existence of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries." - (1976), Macropedia, Vol. 10, p.145.

"I'm scientific, but my reflex gangsta"- Black Thought

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:03 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
15. "I mean, you went and got that info, but I didn't even see a"
In response to Reply # 14
Wed Apr-13-05 01:04 PM by FireBrand

  

          

point in getting it. This post is obviously just a shock post. I'm kind of shocked Mau posted this to begin with. Seems like anyone as well read as Mau would have come across this information.

Jesus existing is fact.

Folk WORSHIPPING him? Now, that is a different matter entirely.


"I liked it," Gilliam said of playing gunner on punt team. "It was the first time I did anything like that. It was fun. It felt like, if he wasn't fair catching it, he was disrespecting me, so I was trying to take a head off if I could." Response-ability

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Shakeet Lokh Em
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3451 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:15 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
18. "RE: I mean, you went and got that info, but I didn't even see a"
In response to Reply # 15


  

          

Yeah I know. But he did ask for it. Who am I not to take him seriously?

"I'm scientific, but my reflex gangsta"- Black Thought

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
The Damaja
Member since Aug 02nd 2003
18637 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:08 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
53. "how is it a shock post? as a Christian someone once told me that"
In response to Reply # 15


  

          

"esus was not crucified, he lived on and had a family, and the whole legend was just made up by people who didn't like the Jews (Judas=Jews). You're whole religion is garbage."

and I was like

"Back up... we can't even be sure Jesus existed, nevermind him having a FAMILY."

whether Jesus existed is a question I always wonder about
you would think it's quite possibly a hoax

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
MALACHI
Member since Jan 22nd 2003
10706 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:24 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
19. "POST. OVER."
In response to Reply # 14


  

          

"Is it not one father that all of us have? Is it not one God that has created us? Why is it that we deal treacherously with one another?" --Malachi 2:10

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
12403 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 06:33 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
26. "well,"
In response to Reply # 14


          


>The Encyclopedia Britannica also speaks on it, stating that
>"these independent accounts prove that in ancient times, even
>the opponents of Christianity never doubted the existence of
>Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate
>grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, 19th, and
>at the beginning of the 20th centuries." - (1976), Macropedia,
>Vol. 10, p.145.

The modern, online Britannica doesn't state this nearly as strongly. In fact it largely rebuts it. In the article "Sources for the Life of Jesus":

"There are a few references to Jesus in 1st-century Roman and Jewish sources. Documents indicate that within a few years of Jesus' death, Romans were aware that someone named Chrestus (a slight misspelling of Christus) had been responsible for disturbances in the Jewish community in Rome (Suetonius, The Life of the Deified Claudius 25.4). Twenty years later, according to Tacitus, Christians in Rome were prominent enough to be persecuted by Nero, and it was known that they were devoted to Christus, whom Pilate had executed (Annals 15.44). This knowledge of Jesus, however, was dependent on familiarity with early Christianity and does not provide independent evidence about Jesus. Josephus wrote a paragraph about Jesus (The Antiquities of the Jews 18.63ff.), as he did about Theudas, the Egyptian, and other charismatic leaders (History of the Jewish War 2.258263; The Antiquities of the Jews 20.9799, 167172), but it has been heavily revised by Christian scribes, and Josephus's original remarks cannot be discerned."


So the statements of Tacitus are largely irrelevant, and those of Josephus are not historically trustworthy.

I mean, we must at least admit that it's a little peculiar. As is noted in the article posted below by marcus, there was no lack of historians in that time and place. Yet references to the man as a historical figure, outside of the movement that required him to exist, are incredibly rare.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Shakeet Lokh Em
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3451 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 07:16 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
35. "RE: well,"
In response to Reply # 26
Thu Apr-14-05 07:17 AM by Shakeet Lokh Em

  

          

The whole point is people don't want to acccept Jesus and in some cases God himself. Is it not peculiar that as man gets more "advanced" with technology and what not, people all of a sudden don't need this "story" about Jesus or God for that matter. How all of a suddden did Josephus become less relevant? Between now and 1976? It's funny how we are living in the worst time in human history and nobody wants to acknowledge Jesus. Jesus' 'Sermon On the Mount' foretold the signs of our last days, but I forgot he didn't exist and the bible is a relic. The bottom line is mankind has gotten too "intelligent" for their own good, and doesn't want to believe in Jesus or God because that would mean acknowledging a power greater than their self. Whatever.

"I'm scientific, but my reflex gangsta"- Black Thought

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
12403 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 07:36 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
37. "RE: well,"
In response to Reply # 35


          

>The whole point is people don't want to acccept Jesus and in
>some cases God himself. Is it not peculiar that as man gets
>more "advanced" with technology and what not, people all of a
>sudden don't need this "story" about Jesus or God for that
>matter. How all of a suddden did Josephus become less
>relevant? Between now and 1976?

He didn't become less relevant, he simply came to be more widely understood as an inaccurate representation of history.

>It's funny how we are living
>in the worst time in human history and nobody wants to
>acknowledge Jesus. Jesus' 'Sermon On the Mount' foretold the
>signs of our last days, but I forgot he didn't exist and the
>bible is a relic. The bottom line is mankind has gotten too
>"intelligent" for their own good, and doesn't want to believe
>in Jesus or God because that would mean acknowledging a power
>greater than their self. Whatever.

Cute, you get schooled on the facts, see that they don't support your case, so you respond that humanity as a whole has become too intelligent for its own good. You like epistemology, even use it, when it supports your cause, then you dismiss it like the work of the devil when it doesn't.

And as far as "acknowledging a power greater than self," I'm perfectly willing to accept such a power. If I fall off a cliff, I'll die. If my building collapses in an earthquake, I'll die. God isn't the only power greater than me.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Shakeet Lokh Em
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3451 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 07:55 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
38. "RE: well,"
In response to Reply # 37


  

          

I didn't get schooled on anything first of all. The truth is the truth. I gave the homey what he asked for. Proof outside of the scriptures of Jesus Christ's existence. But it's no point in these posts because there are always going to be people who won't accept the hard proof that you give them. It'a bottomless pit of egos. I respect your reference but it doesn't disprove mine. We could go all day back and forth and get nowhere, because every member who is in this post will believe what they want, no matter what you provide them. It's whatever man for real.

"I'm scientific, but my reflex gangsta"- Black Thought

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

MALACHI
Member since Jan 22nd 2003
10706 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:13 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
17. "MOST. IGNORANT. POST. EVER."
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

"Is it not one father that all of us have? Is it not one God that has created us? Why is it that we deal treacherously with one another?" --Malachi 2:10

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 01:28 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
20. "Doesn't even make sense, does it? Mau77 is normally"
In response to Reply # 17


  

          

on point.

I don't get it.




"I liked it," Gilliam said of playing gunner on punt team. "It was the first time I did anything like that. It was fun. It felt like, if he wasn't fair catching it, he was disrespecting me, so I was trying to take a head off if I could." Response-ability

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
3X
Member since Oct 18th 2004
7667 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 04:57 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
24. "Please Explain considering...."
In response to Reply # 17


  

          

some of our greatest scholars such as Yosef Ben-Jochannan, Ashra Kewsi, Anthony Browder, Walter Willams, Indus Kush, Runoko Rashidi, Ivan Van Sertima and others have presented credible evidence suggesting that a man called Jesus The Christ is a myth borrowed from other religions and cultures that pre-date the so-called birth of Jesus The Christ. There are plenty of non-black scholars such as kersey graves, gerald massey, t.w. doane and others who take the position that Jesus The Christ is a myth.

Weighing the evidence that both positions present I would put my money on those who believe Jesus the Christ never existed.

-------
It's incredible how the people that know the least are the first to offer advice.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10849 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 12:46 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
30. "Is this a semantic argument?"
In response to Reply # 24


          

I.E. Is there a difference between Jesus the Christ and Jesus The Man? Maybe "The Christ" was invented but several sources have been shown that recognized a "prophet" of the time named Jesus.

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 09:53 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
41. "I believe that is what this is. Christ is a title anyway..."
In response to Reply # 30


  

          

You have any idea how many "Christs" there were? The Jewish people were looking for a messiah thinking he could show up any day. There were a littany (sp?) of Christs mulling about that region around that time.

The issue is not about the "Christ" as much as it is about Jesus, who DID exist.


"I liked it," Gilliam said of playing gunner on punt team. "It was the first time I did anything like that. It was fun. It felt like, if he wasn't fair catching it, he was disrespecting me, so I was trying to take a head off if I could." Response-ability

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 01:16 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
44. "RE: I believe that is what this is. Christ is a title anyway..."
In response to Reply # 41


          

>
>The issue is not about the "Christ" as much as it is about
>Jesus, who DID exist.
>

All this dialogue, yet still no one has provided one objective source that documents his existence.

If you have one, please post it.


RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

3X
Member since Oct 18th 2004
7667 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 04:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
22. "Silence of Contemporary Writers"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

The Christ
by John E. Remsberg


Chapter 2
Silence of Contemporary Writers

Another proof that the Christ of Christianity is a fabulous and not a historical character is the silence of the writers who lived during and immediately following the time he is said to have existed.

That a man named Jesus, an obscure religious teacher, the basis of this fabulous Christ, lived in Palestine about nineteen hundred years ago, may be true. But of this man we know nothing. His biography has not been written. A Renan and others have attempted to write it, but have failed -- have failed because no materials for such a work exist. Contemporary writers have left us not one word concerning him. For generations afterward, outside of a few theological epistles, we find no mention of him.

The following is a list of writers who lived and wrote during the time, or within a century after the time, that Christ is said to have lived and performed his wonderful works:

Josephus
Philo-Judaeus
Seneca
Pliny the Elder
Suetonius
Juvenal
Martial
Persius
Plutarch
Justus of Tiberius
Apollonius
Pliny the Younger
Tacitus
Quintilian
Lucanus
Epictetus
Silius Italicus
Statius
Ptolemy
Hermogones
Valerius Maximus
Arrian
Petronius
Dion Pruseus
Paterculus
Appian
Theon of Smyrna
Phlegon
Pompon Mela
Quintius Curtius
Lucian
Pausanias
Valerius Flaccus
Florus Lucius
Favorinus
Phaedrus
Damis
Aulus Gellius
Columella
Dio Chrysostom
Lysias
Appion of Alexandria


Enough of the writings of the authors named in the foregoing list remains to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ.

Philo was born before the beginning of the Christian era, and lived until long after the reputed death of Christ. He wrote an account of the Jews covering the entire time that Christ is said to have existed on earth. He was living in or near Jerusalem when Christ's miraculous birth and the Herodian massacre occurred. He was there when Christ made his triumphal entry into Jerusalem. He was there when the crucifixion with its attendant earthquake, supernatural darkness, and resurrection of the dead took place -- when Christ himself rose from the dead, and in the presence of many witnesses ascended into heaven. These marvelous events which must have filled the world with amazement, had they really occurred, were unknown to him. It was Philo who developed the doctrine of the Logos, or Word, and although this Word incarnate dwelt in that very land and in the presence of multitudes revealed himself and demonstrated his divine powers, Philo saw it not.

Josephus, the renowned Jewish historian, was a native of Judea. He was born in 37 A.D., and was a contemporary of the Apostles. He was, for a time, Governor of Galilee, the province in which Christ lived and taught. He traversed every part of this province and visited the places where but a generation before Christ had performed his prodigies. He resided in Cana, the very city in which Christ is said to have wrought his first miracle. He mentions every noted personage of Palestine and describes every important event which occurred there during the first seventy years of the Christian era. But Christ was of too little consequence and his deeds too trivial to merit a line from this historian's pen.

Justus of Tiberius was a native of Christ's own country, Galilee. He wrote a history covering the time of Christ's reputed existence. This work has perished, but Photius, a Christian scholar and critic of the ninth century, who was acquainted with it, says: "He makes not the least mention of the appearance of Christ, of what things happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did" (Photius' Bibliotheca, code 33).

Judea, where occurred the miraculous beginning and marvelous ending of Christ's earthly career, was a Roman province, and all of Palestine is intimately associated with Roman history. But the Roman records of that age contain no mention of Christ and his works. The Greek writers of Greece and Alexandria who lived not far from Palestine and who were familiar with its events, are silent also.



Josephus

Late in the first century Josephus wrote his celebrated work, The Antiquities of the Jews, giving a history of his race from the earliest ages down to his own time. Modern versions of this work contain the following passage:

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day" (Book XVIII, Chap. iii, sec. 3).

For nearly sixteen hundred years Christians have been citing this passage as a testimonial, not merely to the historical existence, but to the divine character of Jesus Christ. And yet a ranker forgery was never penned.

Its language is Christian. Every line proclaims it the work of a Christian writer. "If it be lawful to call him a man." "He was the Christ." "He appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him." These are the words of a Christian, a believer in the divinity of Christ. Josephus was a Jew, a devout believer in the Jewish faith -- the last man in the world to acknowledge the divinity of Christ. The inconsistency of this evidence was early recognized, and Ambrose, writing in the generation succeeding its first appearance (360 A.D.) offers the following explanation, which only a theologian could frame: "If the Jews do not believe us, let them, at least, believe their own writers. Josephus whom they esteem a very great man, hath said this and yet hath he spoken truth after such a manner; and so far was his mind wandered from the right way, that even he was not a believer as to what he himself said; but thus he spake, in order to deliver historical truth, because he thought it not lawful for him to deceive, while yet he was no believer, because of the hardness of his heart, and his perfidious intention."

Its brevity disproves its authenticity. Josephus' work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises twenty books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. Yet this remarkable being, the greatest product of his race, a being of whom the prophets foretold ten thousand wonderful things, a being greater than any earthly king, is dismissed with a dozen lines.

It interrupts the narrative. Section 2 of the chapter containing it gives an account of a Jewish sedition which was suppressed by Pilate with great slaughter. The account ends as follows: "There were a great number of them slain by this means, and others of them ran away wounded; and thus an end was put to this sedition." Section 4, as now numbered, begins with these words: "About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder." The one section naturally and logically follows the other. Yet between these two closely connected paragraphs the one relating to Christ is placed; thus making the words, "another sad calamity," refer to the advent of this wise and wonderful being.

The early Christian fathers were not acquainted with it. Justin Martyr, Terullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen all would have quoted this passage had it existed in their time. The failure of even one of these fathers to notice it would be sufficient to throw doubt upon its genuineness; the failure of all of them to notice it proves conclusively that it is spurious, that it was not in existence during the second and third centuries.

As this passage first appeared in the writings of the ecclesiastical historian, Eusebius, as this author openly advocated the use of fraud and deception in furthering the interests of the church, as he is known to have mutilated and perverted the text of Josephus in other instances, and as the manner of its presentation is calculated to excite suspicion, the forgery has generally been charged to him. In his Evangelical Demonstration, written early in the fourth century, after citing all the known evidences of Christianity, he thus introduces the Jewish historian: "Certainly the citations I have already produced concerning our Savior may be sufficient. However, it may not be amiss if, over and above, we make use of Josephus the Jew for a further witness" (Book III, p. 124).

Chrysostom and Photius both reject this passage. Chrysostom, a reader of Josephus, who preached and wrote in the latter part of the fourth century, in his defense of Christianity, needed this evidence, but was too honest or too wise to use it. Photius, who made a revision of Josephus, writing five hundred years after the time of Eusebius, ignores the passage, and admits that Josephus has made no mention of Christ.

Modern Christian scholars generally concede that the passage is a forgery. Dr. Lardner, one of the ablest defenders of Christianity, adduces the following arguments against its genuineness:

"I do not perceive that we at all want the suspected testimony to Jesus, which was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius.

"Nor do I recollect that Josephus has anywhere mentioned the name or word Christ, in any of his works; except the testimony above mentioned, and the passage concerning James, the Lord's brother.

"It interrupts the narrative.

"The language is quite Christian.

"It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it had it been then in the text.

"It is not quoted by Photius, though he has three articles concerning Josephus.

"Under the article Justus of Tiberias, this author (Photius) especially states that the historian , being a Jew, has not taken the least notice of Christ.

"Neither Justin in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew, nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors, nor Origen against Celsus, has ever mentioned this testimony.

"But, on the contrary, in chapter xxxv of the first book of that work, Origen openly affirms that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ" (Answer to Dr. Chandler).

Again Dr. Lardner says: "This passage is not quoted nor referred to by any Christian writer before Eusebius, who flourished at the beginning of the fourth century. If it had been originally in the works of Josephus it would have been highly proper to produce it in their disputes with Jews and Gentiles. But it is never quoted by Justin Martyr, or Clement of Alexandria, nor by Tertullian or Origen, men of great learning, and well acquainted with the works of Josephus. It was certainly very proper to urge it against the Jews. It might also have been fitly urged against the Gentiles. A testimony so favorable to Jesus in the works of Josephus, who lived so soon after our Savior, who was so well acquainted with the transactions of his own country, who had received so many favors from Vespasian and Titus, would not be overlooked or neglected by any Christian apologist" (Lardner's Works, vol. I, chap. iv).

Bishop Warburton declares it to be a forgery: "If a Jew owned the truth of Christianity, he must needs embrace it. We, therefore, certainly conclude that the paragraph where Josephus, who was as much a Jew as the religion of Moses could make him, is made to acknowledge Jesus as the Christ, in terms as strong as words could do it, is a rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too" (Quoted by Lardner, Works, Vol. I, chap. iv).

The Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England, says:

"Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery, interpolated in the text during the third century by some pious Christian, who was scandalized that so famous a writer as Josephus should have taken no notice of the gospels, or of Christ, their subject. But the zeal of the interpolator has outrun his discretion, for we might as well expect to gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles, as to find this notice of Christ among the Judaizing writings of Josephus. It is well known that this author was a zealous Jew, devoted to the laws of Moses and the traditions of his countrymen. How, then, could he have written that Jesus was the Christ? Such an admission would have proved him to be a Christian himself, in which case the passage under consideration, too long for a Jew, would have been far too short for a believer in the new religion, and thus the passage stands forth, like an ill-set jewel, contrasting most inharmoniously with everything around it. If it had been genuine, we might be sure that Justin Martyr, Tertullian, and Chrysostom would have quoted it in their controversies with the Jews, and that Origen or Photius would have mentioned it. But Eusebius, the ecclesiastical historian (I, 11), is the first who quotes it, and our reliance on the judgment or even honesty of this writer is not so great as to allow our considering everything found in his works as undoubtedly genuine" (Christian Records, p. 30).

The Rev. S. Baring-Gould, in his Lost and Hostile Gospels, says:

"This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. i, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl. A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl. A.D. 193), and Origen (fl. A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. i)."

Dr. Chalmers ignores it, and admits that Josephus is silent regarding Christ. He says: "The entire silence of Josephus upon the subject of Christianity, though he wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, and gives us the history of that period in which Christ and his Apostles lived, is certainly a very striking circumstance" (Kneeland's Review, p. 169).

Referring to this passage, Dean Milman, in his Gibbon's Rome (Vol. II, p. 285, note) says: "It is interpolated with many additional clauses."

Cannon Farrar, who has written in ablest Christian life of Christ yet penned, repudiates it. He says: "The single passage in which he alludes to him is interpolated, if not wholly spurious" (Life of Christ, Vol. I, p. 46).

The following, from Dr. Farrar's pen, is to be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica: "That Josephus wrote the whole passage as it now stands no sane critic can believe."

"There are, however, two reasons which are alone sufficient to prove that the whole passage is spurious -- one that it was unknown to Origen and the earlier fathers, and the other that its place in the text is uncertain" (ibid).

Theodor Keim, a German-Christian writer on Jesus says: "The passage cannot be maintained; it has first appeared in this form in the Catholic church of the Jews and Gentiles, and under the dominion of the Fourth Gospel, and hardly before the third century, probably before Eusebius, and after Origen, whose bitter criticisms of Josephus may have given cause for it" (Jesus of Nazara, p. 25).

Concerning this passage, Hausrath, another German writer, says it "must have been penned at a peculiarly shameless hour."

The Rev. Dr. Hooykaas, of Holland, says: "Flavius Josephus, the well known historian of the Jewish people, was born in A.D. 37, only two years after the death of Jesus; but though his work is of inestimable value as our chief authority for the circumstances of the times in which Jesus and his Apostles came forward, yet he does not seem to have mentioned Jesus himself. At any rate, the passage in his 'Jewish Antiquities' that refers to him is certainly spurious, and was inserted by a later and a Christian hand" (Bible for Learners, Vol. III, p. 27). This conclusion of Dr. Hooykaas is endorsed by the eminent Dutch critic, Dr. Kuenen.

Dr. Alexander Campbell, one of America's ablest Christian apologists, says: "Josephus, the Jewish historian, was contemporary with the Apostles, having been born in the year 37. From his situation and habits, he had every access to know all that took place at the rise of the Christian religion.

"Respecting the founder of this religion, Josephus has thought fit to be silent in history. The present copies of his work contain one passage which speaks very respectfully of Jesus Christ, and ascribes to him the character of the Messiah. But as Josephus did not embrace Christianity, and as this passage is not quoted or referred to until the beginning of the fourth century, it is, for these and other reasons, generally accounted spurious" (Evidences of Christianity, from Campbell-Owen Debate, p. 312).

Another passage in Josephus, relating to the younger Ananus, who was high priest of the Jews in 62 A.D., reads as follows:

"But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper and very insolent; he was also of the sect of Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all of the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the Sanhedrim of judges and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned" (Antiquities, Book XX, chap. ix, sec. I).

This passage is probably genuine with the exception of the clause, "who was called Christ," which is undoubtedly an interpolation, and is generally regarded as such. Nearly all the authorities that I have quoted reject it. It was originally probably a marginal note. Some Christian reader of Josephus believing that the James mentioned was the brother of Jesus made a note of his belief in the manuscript before him, and this a transcriber afterward incorporated with the text, a very common practice in that age when purity of text was a matter of secondary importance.

The fact that the early fathers, who were acquainted with Josephus, and who would have hailed with joy even this evidence of Christ's existence, do not cite it, while Origen expressly declares that Josephus has not mentioned Christ, is conclusive proof that it did not exist until the middle of the third century or later.

Those who affirm the genuineness of this clause argue that the James mentioned by Josephus was a person of less prominence than the Jesus mentioned by him, which would be true of James, the brother of Jesus Christ. Now some of the most prominent Jews living at this time were named Jesus. Jesus, the son of Damneus, succeeded Ananus as high priest that very year; and Jesus, the son of Gamaliel, a little later succeeded to the same office.

To identify the James of Josephus with James the Just, the brother of Jesus, is to reject the accepted history of the primitive church which declares that James the Just died in 69 A.D., seven years after the James of Josephus was condemned to death by the Sanhedrim.

Whiston himself, the translator of Josephus referring to the event narrated by the Jewish historian, admits that James, the brother of Jesus Christ, "did not die till long afterward."

The brief "Discourse Concerning Hades," appended to the writings of Josephus, is universally conceded to be the product of some other writer -- "obviously of Christian origin" -- says the Encyclopedia Britannica.



Tacitus

(This section was repaired on October 4, 2002.)

In July, 64 A.D., a great conflagration occurred in Rome. There is a tradition to the effect that this conflagration was the work of an incendiary and that the Emperor Nero himself was believed to be the incendiary. Modern editions of the "Annals" of Tacitus contain the following passage in reference to this:

"Nero, in order to stifle the rumor, ascribed to those people who were abhorred for their crimes and commonly called Christians: These he punished exquisitely. The founder of that name was Christus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, was punished, as a criminal by the procurator, Pontius Pilate. This pernicious superstition, thus checked for awhile, broke out again; and spread not only over Judea, the source of this evil, but reached the city also: whither flow from all quarters all things vile and shameful, and where they find shelter and encouragement. At first, only those were apprehended who confessed themselves of that sect; afterwards, a vast multitude were detected by them, all of whom were condemned, not so much for the crime of burning the city, as their hatred of mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to expose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered over with the skins of wild beasts, and torn to pieces by dogs; some were crucified. Others, having been daubed over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the night time, and thus burned to death. Nero made use of his own gardens as a theatre on this occasion, and also exhibited the diversions of the circus, sometimes standing in the crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer; at other times driving a chariot himself, till at length those men, though really criminal, and deserving exemplary punishment, began to be commiserated as people who were destroyed, not out of regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the cruelty of one man" (Annals, Book XV, sec. 44). This passage, accepted as authentic by many, must be declared doubtful, if not spurious, for the following reasons:

1. It is not quoted by the Christian fathers.

2. Tertullian was familiar with the writings of Tacitus, and his arguments demanded the citation of this evidence had it existed.

3. Clement of Alexandria, at the beginning of the third century, made a compilation of all the recognitions of Christ and Christianity that had been made by Pagan writers up to his time. The writings of Tacitus furnished no recognition of them.

4. Origen, in his controversy with Celsus, would undoubtedly have used it had it existed.

5. The ecclesiastical historian Eusebius, in the fourth century, cites all the evidences of Christianity obtainable from Jewish and Pagan sources, but makes no mention of Tacitus.

6. It is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the fifteenth century.

7. At this time but one copy of the Annals existed and this copy, it is claimed, was made in the eighth century -- 600 years after the time of Tacitus.

8. As this single copy was in the possession of a Christian the insertion of a forgery was easy.

9. Its severe criticisms of Christianity do not necessarily disprove its Christian origin. No ancient witness was more desirable than Tacitus, but his introduction at so late a period would make rejection certain unless Christian forgery could be made to appear improbable.

10. It is admitted by Christian writers that the works of Tacitus have not been preserved with any considerable degree of fidelity. In the writings ascribed to him are believed to be some of the writings of Quintilian.

11. The blood-curdling story about the frightful orgies of Nero reads like some Christian romance of the dark ages, and not like Tacitus.

12. In fact, this story, in nearly the same words, omitting the reference to Christ, is to be found in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, a Christian of the fifth century.

13. Suetonius, while mercilessly condemning the reign of Nero, says that in his public entertainments he took particular care that no human lives should be sacrificed, "not even those of condemned criminals."

14. At the time that the conflagration occurred, Tacitus himself declares that Nero was not in Rome, but at Antium.

Many who accept the authenticity of this section of the "Annals" believe that the sentence which declares that Christ was punished in the reign of Pontius Pilate, and which I have italicized, is an interpolation. Whatever may be said of the remainder of this passage, this sentence bears the unmistakable stamp of Christian forgery. It interrupts the narrative; it disconnects two closely related statements. Eliminate this sentence, and there is no break in the narrative. In all the Roman records there was to be found no evidence that Christ was put to death by Pontius Pilate. This sentence, if genuine, is the most important evidence in Pagan literature. That it existed in the works of the greatest and best known of Roman historians, and was ignored or overlooked by Christian apologists for 1,360 years, no intelligent critic can believe. Tacitus did not write this sentence.

-------
It's incredible how the people that know the least are the first to offer advice.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
FireBrand
Charter member
145739 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 04:43 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
23. "You are Muslim?"
In response to Reply # 22


  

          


"I liked it," Gilliam said of playing gunner on punt team. "It was the first time I did anything like that. It was fun. It felt like, if he wasn't fair catching it, he was disrespecting me, so I was trying to take a head off if I could." Response-ability

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 02:25 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
32. "LOL!!!"
In response to Reply # 23


          


RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
3X
Member since Oct 18th 2004
7667 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 03:24 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
69. "I AINT A MUSLIM"
In response to Reply # 23


  

          

NUFF SAID

-------
It's incredible how the people that know the least are the first to offer advice.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

G_Smooth
Member since Oct 07th 2003
4109 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 05:08 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
25. "He never Existed"
In response to Reply # 0


          

did I hurt some feelings...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
BarTek
Member since Nov 10th 2002
51250 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 09:12 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
28. "RE: ^^^^ ignorant ^^^^"
In response to Reply # 25


  

          


~
This is the life I chose, or rather the life that chose me
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I fade to black
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I f

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

BarTek
Member since Nov 10th 2002
51250 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 09:11 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
27. "RE: dude..there are millions of records about him...peace..nm"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          


~
This is the life I chose, or rather the life that chose me
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I fade to black
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I f

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 01:10 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
43. "RE: dude..there are millions of records about him...peace..nm"
In response to Reply # 27


          

Post one valid one. "Valid", in this case, meaning objective.

RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
BarTek
Member since Nov 10th 2002
51250 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 03:24 AM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
46. "RE: ahhh, there is more about jesus than "the bible".."
In response to Reply # 43


  

          

even so, if jesus exists within the confines of that book, he must surely have existed, think about it. there are financial, family, etc. records of jesus. a man who has that much influence is going to be noticed. jesus may not have been a christian, but he was here. you can't fool every dominant religion in the world. peace
~
This is the life I chose, or rather the life that chose me
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I fade to black
If you can't respect that, your whole perspective is whack
Maybe you'll love me when I f

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
stravinskian
Member since Feb 24th 2003
12403 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 08:42 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
48. "RE: ahhh, there is more about jesus than "the bible".."
In response to Reply # 46


          

>even so, if jesus exists within the confines of that book, he
>must surely have existed, think about it. there are financial,
>family, etc. records of jesus.

Then why can't anybody find one for us?! That's the whole point of this thread! There is a peculiar lack of historical information on the man, despite the sweeping movement he's said to have founded.

Now I don't really doubt that a man named Jesus actually existed. The early Christian movement clearly existed, and it doesn't make much sense for this movement to claim a leader who really didn't exist. But people around here are unwilling to admit the lack of historical support for his existence.

>a man who has that much
>influence is going to be noticed.

That's what's so strange about the situation. He wasn't noticed.

>jesus may not have been a
>christian, but he was here. you can't fool every dominant
>religion in the world.

No, but they can fool you.
(sorry, that's an irrelevant, offhand comment, but I couldn't pass it up)

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

                
LexM
Charter member
28342 posts
Mon Apr-25-05 12:01 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
77. "that is about my only reason"
In response to Reply # 48


  

          

>Now I don't really doubt that a man named Jesus actually
>existed. The early Christian movement clearly existed, and it
>doesn't make much sense for this movement to claim a leader
>who really didn't exist. But people around here are unwilling
>to admit the lack of historical support for his existence.
>
>>a man who has that much
>>influence is going to be noticed.
>
>That's what's so strange about the situation. He wasn't
>noticed.
>
>>jesus may not have been a
>>christian, but he was here. you can't fool every dominant
>>religion in the world.

for believing he actually did walk the earth & do the things they said he did. they were following something/someone...

all the xtra rigamarole....that's a different story.

but this is kind of in the same vein as debating whether he was "black" or not. basically, we know he wasn't nordic-looking. who cares about the details.

use the example. learn the lessons. the rest is window dressing.


~~~~
~fear is the mind-killer~

"...jesus had a wife. and she was his
messiah like that stranger may be
yours. who holds the subtle knife that
carves through worlds like magic
doors." ~saul wms

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

commondeenominator
Member since Nov 30th 2004
26 posts
Wed Apr-13-05 11:32 PM

Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
29. "RE: Why Can't People Accept That Jesus Never Existed?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

So how do you know if something or somebody physically exists or not exists if you have never seen it exist or not exist? I mean, I ve never seen your faces before, but I know you exist. Ive never met Michael Jackson before, but I know he exists. How can you prove somebody does not exist when there is all kinds of proof that they do!? I know Jesus is not god, but i know the man existed. Why would people throughout generations go through such lengths to make the dude up? People who read too much of those crappy books in college libraries get a little bit too big for their britches and start trippin.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Allah
Charter member
47754 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 01:08 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
31. "he wasn't just one person, it was a community of people"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

that's the thing.

_______________________
"Arm Leg Leg Arm Hate." c/o desus
_______________________
Divine Ruler
http://www.facebook.com/divineruler
__gigs__
__stuff__

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Ioness
Member since Feb 04th 2003
14778 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 04:22 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
33. "the gaseous people."
In response to Reply # 31


          

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

DrNO
Charter member
25381 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 04:34 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
34. "it wouldn't matter if he didn't"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

_
http://youtube.com/watch?v=4TztqYaemt0
http://preptimeposse.blogspot.com/

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
tohunga
Charter member
32612 posts
Thu Apr-14-05 07:32 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
36. "dude would be dead either way."
In response to Reply # 34


  

          

i can't think of a topic more in need of *shrug* then this one.

who. the. fuck. cares.

now let's get back to the good ole' days of throwing christians in an amphitheatre with the lions, instead of this pussy psychological taunting.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

J_Stew
Member since Jul 06th 2002
22363 posts
Fri Apr-15-05 02:32 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
45. "does it even matter?"
In response to Reply # 0


          

even if he is a fictional character he carries a pretty darn good message. i have yet to see superior values and morals espew out of anyone elses mouth, fictional or non. why do atheists and other non jesus believers care so much? i dont believe in scientology, but i dont spend my time reminding everyone that i dont believe in Xenu. im sure someone will say they are concerned because of christianity and its role or place in the world, but you should have issue with the people in the religion today not jesus

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

BassyJazzy
Member since Apr 15th 2005
2046 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 02:51 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
49. "agreed, the issue is with the religion and its people"
In response to Reply # 0
Sat Apr-16-05 02:54 AM by BassyJazzy

  

          

leave Jesus alone, he did his work and he prolly sayin f*&^% yall wherever he is, mind your own sh*t and find what makes you happy

he made a change and thas all that counts, and that to me is revolutionary

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
learn something today...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Mau777
Charter member
2780 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:35 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
50. "U should read what's being asked"
In response to Reply # 49


          

> mind your own sh*t and find what makes
>you happy

I really try to...but Catholics just irritate me....fuck-a-pope.

>he made a change and thas all that counts, and that to me is
>revolutionary

So did Simba in the Lion King.

><<<<<<<<<<<<<<
>learn something today...

I'm want to...but none of you cats wanna post sumthin' for me to learn from.


RealTalkInfinite

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
The Hammer Man
Member since Apr 09th 2005
1858 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:44 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
51. "RE: U should read what's being asked"
In response to Reply # 50


          

..yeah i get what your saying. maybe the representation of christ you get in the bible wasn't the real person. maybe he was a drunken womanising violent son of a bitch who when he was feeling guilty did good deeds to make up for it all. See people wrote the bible and from the parts i've read it sure as shit isn't an encyclopedia.

...guess what, you can't swing in scotland either.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Cocobrotha2
Charter member
10849 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:16 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
55. "Considering the reliance on faith, do Christians need Jesus to have exi..."
In response to Reply # 0
Sat Apr-16-05 07:19 PM by Cocobrotha2

          

I can see fundamentalists who take the bible as incontrevirtable truth maybe having some issues, but I don't think they're the majority of Christians (I may be wrong).

So would disproving the existence of Jesus make a difference to most Christians who already view the bible allegorically?

<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->
<-><-><-><-><-><-><-><-><->

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
bigbabyjesus
Member since Nov 06th 2003
4291 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 02:10 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
66. "lmao"
In response to Reply # 55


  

          

if one views the bible as anything other than the word of god, they are not christians. christians believe that jesus was the son of god who was crucified for their sins. that is the only belief that makes one a christian. if he didnt exist, neither does christianity.

------------------------------------------------------------------
meh

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Dr Bombayz Evil Twin
Member since Sep 23rd 2003
1004 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 07:24 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
56. "Damn...what's with all the Christ hate?"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Self for self only doesn't work/your soul holds no weight when you let the devil lurk"--Del
"Every black man in Amerikkka faces imprisonment; ridicule and torment"--Jeru

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
Stephbit
Member since Oct 18th 2004
8526 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 08:43 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
57. "whats with all the Christ dickriding?"
In response to Reply # 56


  

          

nm

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
Dr Bombayz Evil Twin
Member since Sep 23rd 2003
1004 posts
Sat Apr-16-05 08:56 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
58. "*shrugs* If you follow someone..."
In response to Reply # 57


  

          

you're basically on their dick. I'ont know...don't ask me.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Self for self only doesn't work/your soul holds no weight when you let the devil lurk"--Del
"Every black man in Amerikkka faces imprisonment; ridicule and torment"--Jeru

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

wickenching
Member since Apr 01st 2004
386 posts
Mon Apr-18-05 02:00 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
64. "absence of evidence"
In response to Reply # 0


          

is not evidence of absence.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
bigbabyjesus
Member since Nov 06th 2003
4291 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 02:11 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy listClick to send message via AOL IM
67. "there is not an abscence of evidence"
In response to Reply # 64


  

          

people who choose not to believe, such as this fool, will find some reason to deny every form of evidence becasue they just dont want to believe it.

------------------------------------------------------------------
meh

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
wickenching
Member since Apr 01st 2004
386 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 02:58 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
68. "maybe but"
In response to Reply # 67


          

Most of the people putting forth the evidence have an agenda in doing so. The same goes for the people coming from the opposite end of the spectrum.

To me it's all moot anyway. Because if you need to have proof then you don't have faith... and faith is an essential component to love, which in itself is intangible and can't be reliably proven or measured. Sounds like a cop out catch 22 to those who don't believe, but unfortunately, I think that's just the way it is.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

3X
Member since Oct 18th 2004
7667 posts
Tue Apr-19-05 03:32 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
70. "Religion like Politics uses FEAR to get people to BeLIEve Myths"
In response to Reply # 0
Tue Apr-19-05 03:32 PM by 3X

  

          

most people believe in the jesus STORY in FEAR of going to some hot place called HELL. today we witness the republicans using FEAR to get people to beLIEve a myth about WMDs.

-------
It's incredible how the people that know the least are the first to offer advice.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

LexM
Charter member
28342 posts
Mon Apr-25-05 11:47 AM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
76. "first of all"
In response to Reply # 0


  

          

i can't believe i'm seeing this name on here again...

secondly, it seems to me--from debates here & elsewhere--that there's just about as much evidence saying he *did* exist as there is he didn't. scholars & others have been debating the point for centuries.

really doesn't matter to me either way. what matters more is what he did (even allegorically speaking) & the example he set.

but *shrug* that's just my opinion.


~~~~
~fear is the mind-killer~

"...jesus had a wife. and she was his
messiah like that stranger may be
yours. who holds the subtle knife that
carves through worlds like magic
doors." ~saul wms

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

    
ChuckNeal
Member since Feb 03rd 2004
5458 posts
Mon Apr-25-05 03:30 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
78. "RE: first of all"
In response to Reply # 76


          

I haven't seen any evidence saying he didn't exist, but I have seen proof that he did.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

        
moot_point
Member since Mar 22nd 2005
3842 posts
Mon Apr-25-05 03:41 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
79. "Really? Seen proof?"
In response to Reply # 78


          

Share it with us...

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

            
ChuckNeal
Member since Feb 03rd 2004
5458 posts
Mon Apr-25-05 04:44 PM

Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
80. "RE: Really? Seen proof?"
In response to Reply # 79


          

First off, let me apologize for not editing my post, b/c I know these boards love to get on you for any word typed out of place. In proof I mean evidence, and I there is a difference. My apologies. I'll warn you now, they are other written documents outside of the Bible, and I know you guys hate other writings.

  

Printer-friendly copy | Top

Lobby Okay Activist Archives topic #29865 Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.25
Copyright © DCScripts.com