Jesus Christ is probably the best known person who ever lived and maybe there is some truth in it, his name is certainly widely known to a great segment of humanity, but I find it hard to believe he was some supernatural figure, whether the son of god or one of the three in the holy trinity, whatever.

But many people would expect me to believe in this divinely supernatural figure who died a bloody death through crucification to some how save humanity from itself and usher it in a new relationship with god,

Given how my mind works, I simply do not buy it, now I believe that jesus Christ may have existed but was just a human being like you and me, and some how he had a story behind him which has been immensely exaggerated over the centuries from a human being to this supernatural deity who is worshiped as such.

Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 9:37am:

Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were.

Ohhhhh?

What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy?


>>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<<

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:09pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<<

Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris.

I can bu ythe Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:16pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped.

Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :)

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:30pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:16pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped. Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :)

Not really, existence of these has no correlation with the existence of God.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:39pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:30pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:16pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped. Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :) Not really, existence of these has no correlation with the existence of God.

So in essence, you're hopeless.

:P

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:43pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:39pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:30pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:16pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped. Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :) Not really, existence of these has no correlation with the existence of God. So in essence, you're hopeless. :P

Factually speaking, I must be

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 3:48pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:43pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:39pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:30pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:16pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped. Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :) Not really, existence of these has no correlation with the existence of God. So in essence, you're hopeless. :P Factually speaking, I must be.

Hopeless people need to be saved.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 4:07pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:48pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:43pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:39pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:30pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:16pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 3:09pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 9:37am: Yes, there are a lot of things out of the Bible I buy as having existed but with a twist put on it to make it seem more supernatural than they were. Ohhhhh? What sorts of things out of the Bible do you buy? >>> eyes wide like dinner plates here <<< Well for instance I can buy the existence of a flood. But not world wide, just a big one in the area of the Euphrates and Tigris. I can buy the Ark of the Covenant, just not with any sort of actual power of God, but instead a representation of God that people worshipped. Hmmm. There's hope for you yet. :) Not really, existence of these has no correlation with the existence of God. So in essence, you're hopeless. :P Factually speaking, I must be. Hopeless people need to be saved.

Screw that

Probably best to just discard the Old Testament.

Get rid of the unbelievable mumbo jumbo bits in the new Testament and you have a storey of a decent bloke in horrible times.

I think I could write it better tho.

miketrees wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 6:30pm:

Probably best to just discard the Old Testament. Get rid of the unbelievable mumbo jumbo bits in the new Testament and you have a storey of a decent bloke in horrible times. I think I could write it better tho.

The God of the old testament had the emotional temperament of any human being, he was jealous, angry at times, had chats as a voice from the sky or through a burning bush with various biblical figures like Abraham and moses and had no issue with killing children,

examples, GENISIS Gods test to Abraham to sacrifice his son issac to prove his love for him.

EXODUS, when God released one of the ten plagues against the pharaoh rhamses where the curse of death would be inflicted on every first born child in every Egyptian family

I would say that modern psychiatrists of today would say that the god of the old testament had some issues.

stryder wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 8:51pm:

miketrees wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 6:30pm: Probably best to just discard the Old Testament. Get rid of the unbelievable mumbo jumbo bits in the new Testament and you have a storey of a decent bloke in horrible times. I think I could write it better tho. The God of the old testament had the emotional temperament of any human being, he was jealous, angry at times, had chats as a voice from the sky or through a burning bush with various biblical figures like Abraham and moses and had no issue with killing children, examples, GENISIS Gods test to Abraham to sacrifice his son issac to prove his love for him. EXODUS, when God released one of the ten plagues against the pharaoh rhamses where the curse of death would be inflicted on every first born child in every Egyptian family I would say that modern psychiatrists of today would say that the god of the old testament had some issues.

Indeed he did.  Do you reckon his Son had his genes/DNA?

Did he do major back flips after his Son was born out of an adulterous relationship with a married Virgin?

I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model.

stryder wrote on Jun 25^th, 2016 at 8:17pm:

I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model.

If you are going to make assumptions about the appearances of early tribes, remember the Greeks were fair to blond until they mixed with outside populations. Similar changes may have taken place elsewhere.

Who is he?

I have hidden my light for long enough. Behold, I come before you.

Anyone for a fish dinner?

issuevoter wrote on Jun 26^th, 2016 at 2:01pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. If you are going to make assumptions about the appearances of early tribes, remember the Greeks were fair to blond until they mixed with outside populations. Similar changes may have taken place elsewhere.

Jesus was Judean, not Greek.

Spider man,, try and keep up.

The man said


Similar changes may have taken place elsewhere.

stryder wrote on Jun 27^th, 2016 at 6:41pm:

issuevoter wrote on Jun 26th, 2016 at 2:01pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. If you are going to make assumptions about the appearances of early tribes, remember the Greeks were fair to blond until they mixed with outside populations. Similar changes may have taken place elsewhere. Jesus was Judean, not Greek.

First you need to learn to read. See the highlight? I did not say he was Greek, I said similar changes may have taken place elsewhere.

issuevoter wrote on Jun 27^th, 2016 at 8:55pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 27th, 2016 at 6:41pm: issuevoter wrote on Jun 26th, 2016 at 2:01pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. If you are going to make assumptions about the appearances of early tribes, remember the Greeks were fair to blond until they mixed with outside populations. Similar changes may have taken place elsewhere. Jesus was Judean, not Greek. First you need to learn to read. See the highlight? I did not say he was Greek, I said similar changes may have taken place elsewhere.

I'm stating that jesus wasn't probably an Aryan model dreamt up by European Christians, I thinlk we can safely say that white people didn't populated the middle east in the past like they do in Norway or Sweden today, maybe a few of them and maybe some Nordics and germanics wandered into Judea in jesus's time, but I doubt that the real jesus he had any white European features, that's what I state in reflection of the racial groups that probably existed in ancient Judea in that time.

stryder wrote on Jun 25^th, 2016 at 8:17pm:

I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model.

Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::)

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 3:28pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::)

I think you have exhausted as much as you can possibly contribute with that post.

Aussie wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 3:46pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) I think you have exhausted as much as you can possibly contribute with that post.

Can't you stop following me around?

I'm not interested. 

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 3:28pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::)

Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about.

I guess the simplest thing is for you to give him an explanation.  Go on ~ do that, instead of the stupid sniping, stalker.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about.

Up for Spider Spunk!

I guess the simplest thing is for you to give him an explanation.  Go on ~ do that, instead of the stupid sniping, and 'upping,' stalker.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about.

Up for Spider Spunk!

Joshua Ben Joseph, Born to Mary and an unknown father, possibly a Roman soldier, is without a doubt the most influential man to walk the planet. Everybody has heard of him.

A well educated man from Galilee he was a radical of his time, preaching love and tolerance. Nothing is known about his life from the ages of  around 12 to the start of his ministry at 30 although there is a group in Kashmir who claim a boy from Judea studied, among other things Buddhism with them during those missing years. The truth of that is of course lost to time.

Curiously his own writings have also been lost to time. As an educated Jew it is inconceivable that he would not have kept a written account of his ministry in his own hand. All we can rely on is the gospels, the earliest of which was written decades after his crucifixion.

This may in fact enhance the story of the Nazarene. After all this was an era before recording equipment. If someone tells another person a story, then that person tells the same story to another and that person tells it to another and so on, after 20-30 years how close is that story going to resemble the original?

It's possible that Mark managed to find writings by the original apostles but this is unlikely, so essentially what we have is a word of mouth account passed down through the decades.

In essence it is highly likely that the Nazarene was a true historical figure. All that has been attributed to him must only be accepted on faith.      

Actually, many of the people and events recorded in the new testament corrolated with roman government records of the period. Unfortunatly Jesus was not one of these people. I always assumed he was a composite, a messiah built by committe. Id love to be wrong, but such is the lot of the agnostic.

Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 1:33pm:

Actually, many of the people and events recorded in the new testament corrolated with roman government records of the period. Unfortunatly Jesus was not one of these people. I always assumed he was a composite, a messiah built by committe. Id love to be wrong, but such is the lot of the agnostic.

Pure unadulterated bovine faecal matter!

Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 1:33pm:

Actually, many of the people and events recorded in the new testament corrolated with roman government records of the period. Unfortunatly Jesus was not one of these people. I always assumed he was a composite, a messiah built by committe. Id love to be wrong, but such is the lot of the agnostic.

Of course he was a composite. The legend of the Nazarene has evolved over centuries, the true historical figure has been lost to the ages

Raven wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 4:38pm:

Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:33pm: .....Jesus......I always assumed he was a composite, a messiah built by committe. Id love to be wrong, but such is the lot of the agnostic. Of course he was a composite. The legend of the Nazarene has evolved over centuries, the true historical figure has been lost to the ages

So certain are you.




Psalms 2:1
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing?
2  The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying,
3  Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
4  He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision.
5  Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure.
6  Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion.
7  I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.
8  Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.
9  Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel.



Deuteronomy 32:39
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.
40  For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever.
41  If I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me.
42  I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy.
43  Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29^th, 2016 at 4:00pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about.

I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception.

stryder wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 7:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception.

Oh that's all fine and dandy.

It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 7:47pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:27pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception. Oh that's all fine and dandy. It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is.

im only using the nazi version of what they described blond haired people, ARYANS,

maybe for you i should stick with the technical term, NORDIC,  :)

But i will call them as I like.

stryder wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 7:57pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:47pm: stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:27pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception. Oh that's all fine and dandy. It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is. im only using the nazi version of what they described blond haired people, ARYANS, maybe for you i should stick with the technical term, NORDIC,  :)

No, just be factual.

Aryans were never blonde haired and blue eyed.

They were Indo Iranian.

They were dark.

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 8:01pm:

stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:57pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:47pm: stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:27pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception. Oh that's all fine and dandy. It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is. im only using the nazi version of what they described blond haired people, ARYANS, maybe for you i should stick with the technical term, NORDIC,  :) No, just be factual. Aryans were never blonde haired and blue eyed. They were Indo Iranian. They were dark.

That was until hitler and himmler came along and changed and construed that meaning, the nazi swasitika was a hindu peace symbol until the nazis came along and used it to signify white racial purity.

stryder wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 8:06pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 8:01pm: stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:57pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:47pm: stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:27pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception. Oh that's all fine and dandy. It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is. im only using the nazi version of what they described blond haired people, ARYANS, maybe for you i should stick with the technical term, NORDIC,  :) No, just be factual. Aryans were never blonde haired and blue eyed. They were Indo Iranian. They were dark. That was until hitler and himmler came along and changed and construed that meaning, the nazi swasitika was a hindu peace symbol until the nazis came along and used it to signify white racial purity.

Why bother googling stuff at me I already know..esp after what I've posted in here?

stryder wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 7:57pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:47pm: stryder wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 7:27pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 4:00pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 29th, 2016 at 3:28pm: stryder wrote on Jun 25th, 2016 at 8:17pm: I think that over time jesus appearance was washed over as a tall, handsome, blond haired with blue eyes figure splashed over cathedral decorations in churches and illustrated bibles, when most likely the people of Judea where mostly dark skinned with a Mediterranean appearances in that time, which most likely was the real appearance of jesus, where he was no Aryan model. Oh dear...where do I start with this  ::) Spider Spunk, with all due respect, your posts in this topic clearly indicate that don't know what you're on about. I beg to differ, the historical aspect of jesus outside of the canonised gospel versions have always appealed and fascinated me as someone who grew up in the christian faith, given the impact and the significance of the story of jesus throughout history and i have researched and read over it for over 25 years, and i dont dismiss the fact from it all, that human beings have always the capacity from then to now, to lie or exaggerate stories or myths to meet some end. and the story of jesus is no exception. Oh that's all fine and dandy. It's just that you've got no freaking idea about what an Aryan is. im only using the nazi version of what they described blond haired people, ARYANS, maybe for you i should stick with the technical term, NORDIC,  :) But i will call them as I like.

If you wish to continue basing your arguments on Nazi myths, then by all means go for it.

Just don't expect me to take you seriously.

Yadda wrote on Jun 30^th, 2016 at 5:49pm:

Raven wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 4:38pm: Pho Huc wrote on Jun 30th, 2016 at 1:33pm: .....Jesus......I always assumed he was a composite, a messiah built by committe. Id love to be wrong, but such is the lot of the agnostic. Of course he was a composite. The legend of the Nazarene has evolved over centuries, the true historical figure has been lost to the ages So certain are you. Psalms 2:1 Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? 2  The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the LORD, and against his anointed, saying, 3  Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. 4  He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh: the Lord shall have them in derision. 5  Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. 6  Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. 7  I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee. 8  Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. 9  Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Deuteronomy 32:39 See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand. 40  For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, I live for ever. 41  If I whet my glittering sword, and mine hand take hold on judgment; I will render vengeance to mine enemies, and will reward them that hate me. 42  I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword shall devour flesh; and that with the blood of the slain and of the captives, from the beginning of revenges upon the enemy. 43  Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people: for he will avenge the blood of his servants, and will render vengeance to his adversaries, and will be merciful unto his land, and to his people.

At least quote the New Testament Yadda to back up your view

The fact is Yadda he was a composite. The only evidence we have of his life are the gospels, the earliest of which was written nearly 40 years after his crucifixion. Trying to piece together accounts of a person after 40 years is not going to create an accurate result

True, Raven, although I think Joseph of Arimathea made a better messiah

Raven wrote on Jul 1^st, 2016 at 12:46pm:

The fact is Yadda he was a composite. The only evidence we have of his life are the gospels, the earliest of which was written nearly 40 years after his crucifixion. Trying to piece together accounts of a person after 40 years is not going to create an accurate result

To elaborate further on your point, Jesus death most likely occured in 36 A.D, with earliest gospel mark wriiten around 70 A.D it is believed mostly by scholars of the bible that none of the four gospels were written in palestine the location for the so called greatest story ever told, and a few scholars still debate some of locations of where each of gospels were written to this very day, most scholars are certain that the gospel of mark was written in Italy, luke in greece, john in turkey, and matthew in either egypt or syria.
The dating of these gospels is important for this reason, and its pretty obvious when you really think about it is the availability of eyewitnesses to the events  that are described, by the time mark began his writing in 70 A.D any living witnesses would have been aged and their memories would have been suspect to some deterioation, by the time matthew composed his in around 95 A.D - 100 A.D, he would definitely have been forced to rely on second and third hand sources, as mostly all of the eyewitnesses would have been dead by that time, the most important source would have been the book of Mark itself since its mostly believed to be the first one, the same thing would have been applied to luke which was published in around 105 A.D

stryder wrote on Jun 20^th, 2016 at 12:02am:

Jesus Christ is probably the best known person who ever lived and maybe there is some truth in it, his name is certainly widely known to a great segment of humanity, but I find it hard to believe he was some supernatural figure, whether the son of god or one of the three in the holy trinity, whatever. But many people would expect me to believe in this divinely supernatural figure who died a bloody death through crucification to some how save humanity from itself and usher it in a new relationship with god, Given how my mind works, I simply do not buy it, now I believe that jesus Christ may have existed but was just a human being like you and me, and some how he had a story behind him which has been immensely exaggerated over the centuries from a human being to this supernatural deity who is worshiped as such.

The most erroneous part of that post was to say "the best known person who ever lived". There is no truth in saying that Jesus ever lived and died as the person told in the Bible, simply because there is no evidence that can show that Jesus ever lived. Santa Claus is also a well-known person, too. Yet, he is based on lies and his existent is false.

If you could time travel back 2000 years, you would not find some teenager/young adult in Judea who could perform miracles at will, or who held audiences captive with his speeches/teachings. Most of the bible is made up of stories about mythology. The story of Jesus being among the mythology.

I can't entertain that someone would live to perform miraculous acts of God, and not be used by the Roman Empire to help alleviate suffering/make Rome even stronger. It's the whole "ho-hum" attitude of people after Jesus' death that leaves me to believe that, had Jesus been real, he did not have a major impact on his community. It feels as if the story about Jesus was that he did not want to prove his worth to people, and died as a fraud, and one massive disappointment.

I would not consider Jesus to have ever existed beyond the fables told in the Bible.

UnSubRocky wrote on Jul 2^nd, 2016 at 3:11am:

stryder wrote on Jun 20th, 2016 at 12:02am: Jesus Christ is probably the best known person who ever lived and maybe there is some truth in it, his name is certainly widely known to a great segment of humanity, but I find it hard to believe he was some supernatural figure, whether the son of god or one of the three in the holy trinity, whatever. But many people would expect me to believe in this divinely supernatural figure who died a bloody death through crucification to some how save humanity from itself and usher it in a new relationship with god, Given how my mind works, I simply do not buy it, now I believe that jesus Christ may have existed but was just a human being like you and me, and some how he had a story behind him which has been immensely exaggerated over the centuries from a human being to this supernatural deity who is worshiped as such. The most erroneous part of that post was to say "the best known person who ever lived". There is no truth in saying that Jesus ever lived and died as the person told in the Bible, simply because there is no evidence that can show that Jesus ever lived. Santa Claus is also a well-known person, too. Yet, he is based on lies and his existent is false. If you could time travel back 2000 years, you would not find some teenager/young adult in Judea who could perform miracles at will, or who held audiences captive with his speeches/teachings. Most of the bible is made up of stories about mythology. The story of Jesus being among the mythology. I can't entertain that someone would live to perform miraculous acts of God, and not be used by the Roman Empire to help alleviate suffering/make Rome even stronger. It's the whole "ho-hum" attitude of people after Jesus' death that leaves me to believe that, had Jesus been real, he did not have a major impact on his community. It feels as if the story about Jesus was that he did not want to prove his worth to people, and died as a fraud, and one massive disappointment. I would not consider Jesus to have ever existed beyond the fables told in the Bible.

You say there is no such truth that jesus ever lived, it seems hard to believe that given the legacy of christianity with its scale in impact and effects whether positive or negative which spread throughtout the world and through time was a story made up in some obscure persons imagination is way too hard to rationally fathom.

My second point is that even if you believe or come to accept that jesus was an actual person who existed, doesnt mean you have to buy into the whole supernatural divinal elements that has surrounded this central figure of christianity.

the purpose of this thread is while accepting that jesus may have existed, im trying to dig through the supernaturality around him and get to something close to the actual human being himself whose story which has a very significant impact in world history.

There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him

No one should ever allow their view be defined by what it is not.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4^th, 2016 at 12:19pm:

There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him

QUESTION;
Why not ? !!!!!!!!


e.g.
I've got and use, a wifi device.

The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too.




The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!!

For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body.

Dum!

And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality.




Dictionary;
vanity = =
1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements.
2 the quality of being worthless or futile.



Dictionary;
pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions.

Yadda wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 11:15am:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 12:19pm: There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him QUESTION; Why not ? !!!!!!!! e.g. I've got and use, a wifi device. The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too. The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!! For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body. Dum! And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality. Dictionary; vanity = = 1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements. 2 the quality of being worthless or futile. Dictionary; pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions.

Rising from the dead is still supernatural. Wi-fi has a perfectly scientific explanation.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 12:07pm:

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:15am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 12:19pm: There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him QUESTION; Why not ? !!!!!!!! e.g. I've got and use, a wifi device. The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too. The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!! For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body. Dum! And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality. Dictionary; vanity = = 1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements. 2 the quality of being worthless or futile. Dictionary; pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions. Rising from the dead is still supernatural. Wi-fi has a perfectly scientific explanation.

Oh, so you can see, that there is a difference, between mankind's comprehension of the existence and workings of one, and of the other ?

So, those things which you 'understand',    ....you say you understand those, because those things, can be explained scientifically ?

But that which you do not understand is 'supernatural', and is 'hocus pocus'.

I see.



I do not understand very much.

It is not within me, within my mental capacity, to understand many things.

But when i see something which i do not understand, i ask questions.

I even ask questions about, what others call, 'faerie tales'.

Coz i'm a very gullible person.

:)

Yadda wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 3:46pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 12:07pm: Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:15am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 12:19pm: There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him QUESTION; Why not ? !!!!!!!! e.g. I've got and use, a wifi device. The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too. The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!! For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body. Dum! And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality. Dictionary; vanity = = 1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements. 2 the quality of being worthless or futile. Dictionary; pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions. Rising from the dead is still supernatural. Wi-fi has a perfectly scientific explanation. Oh, so you can see, that there is a difference, between mankind's comprehension of the existence and workings of one, and of the other ? So, those things which you 'understand',    ....you say you understand those, because those things, can be explained scientifically ? But that which you do not understand is 'supernatural', and is 'hocus pocus'. I see. I do not understand very much. It is not within me, within my mental capacity, to understand many things. But when i see something which i do not understand, i ask questions. I even ask questions about, what others call, 'faerie tales'. Coz i'm a very gullible person. :)

Well the first problem is actually working out whether said events actually occurred

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 3:59pm:

Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 3:46pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 12:07pm: Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:15am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 12:19pm: There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him QUESTION; Why not ? !!!!!!!! e.g. I've got and use, a wifi device. The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too. The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!! For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body. Dum! And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality. Dictionary; vanity = = 1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements. 2 the quality of being worthless or futile. Dictionary; pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions. Rising from the dead is still supernatural. Wi-fi has a perfectly scientific explanation. Oh, so you can see, that there is a difference, between mankind's comprehension of the existence and workings of one, and of the other ? So, those things which you 'understand',    ....you say you understand those, because those things, can be explained scientifically ? But that which you do not understand is 'supernatural', and is 'hocus pocus'. I see. I do not understand very much. It is not within me, within my mental capacity, to understand many things. But when i see something which i do not understand, i ask questions. I even ask questions about, what others call, 'faerie tales'. Coz i'm a very gullible person. :) Well the first problem is actually working out whether said events actually occurred

There is not one scintilla of proof that it/they did.

[I told you that i was gullible.]

Yadda wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 4:04pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 3:59pm: Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 3:46pm: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 12:07pm: Yadda wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 11:15am: Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 4th, 2016 at 12:19pm: There are a lot of atheists who are prepared to accept Jesus existed, just not the supernatual acts ascribed to him QUESTION; Why not ? !!!!!!!! e.g. I've got and use, a wifi device. The ability of my wifi device would have been 'supernatual' 2000 years ago too. The truth is that, you atheists live in such a small 'universe' and on such a small 'world'.     !!! For you, and yours, nothing exists [or can exist], unless you can sense it with some part of you physical body. Dum! And evidence of an arrogant and immensely vain mind/personality. Dictionary; vanity = = 1 excessive pride in or admiration of one’s own appearance or achievements. 2 the quality of being worthless or futile. Dictionary; pride = = a feeling of deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from achievements, qualities, or possessions. Rising from the dead is still supernatural. Wi-fi has a perfectly scientific explanation. Oh, so you can see, that there is a difference, between mankind's comprehension of the existence and workings of one, and of the other ? So, those things which you 'understand',    ....you say you understand those, because those things, can be explained scientifically ? But that which you do not understand is 'supernatural', and is 'hocus pocus'. I see. I do not understand very much. It is not within me, within my mental capacity, to understand many things. But when i see something which i do not understand, i ask questions. I even ask questions about, what others call, 'faerie tales'. Coz i'm a very gullible person. :) Well the first problem is actually working out whether said events actually occurred There is not one scintilla of proof that it/they did. [I told you that i was gullible.]

Clearly, so until that point whats the point of debating them. I know wi-fi is real, resurrection not so sure

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 4:06pm:

Clearly, so until that point whats the point of debating them. I know wi-fi is real, resurrection not so sure

So you know that wifi is real.

Good on ya.


What about black, and white ?

What about up, and down ?

What about good, and evil ?

What about sanity, and insanity ?



Can't quite 'put your finger on them' ?

Have no particular interest, in discerning between them ?

You have more important things to do ?



Good.

Get on with your more important things then.

Yadda wrote on Jul 6^th, 2016 at 4:36pm:

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Jul 6th, 2016 at 4:06pm: Clearly, so until that point whats the point of debating them. I know wi-fi is real, resurrection not so sure So you know that wifi is real. Good on ya. What about black, and white ? What about up, and down ? What about good, and evil ? What about sanity, and insanity ? Can't quite 'put your finger on them' ? Have no particular interest, in discerning between them ? You have more important things to do ? Good. Get on with your more important things then.

Yep like being moral

One of the many details ive come across is with many Christians they don't highlight much of the details concerning Jesus' family and his dealings with them, most will know the identity of mary and joseph his legal father, but how many do know that jesus had four brothers, and they named, james, joses, judas and simon and at least two sisters,
If you read the gospels in reference to the situations between jesus and his family, has revealed some consistent hostility between them.

stryder wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:11pm:

One of the many details ive come across is with many Christians they don't highlight much of the details concerning Jesus' family and his dealings with them, most will know the identity of mary and joseph his legal father, but how many do know that jesus had four brothers, and they named, james, joses, judas and simon and at least two sisters. If you read the gospels in reference to the situations between jesus and his family, has revealed some consistent hostility between them.

Hostility???

Where???

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:35pm:

stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:11pm: One of the many details ive come across is with many Christians they don't highlight much of the details concerning Jesus' family and his dealings with them, most will know the identity of mary and joseph his legal father, but how many do know that jesus had four brothers, and they named, james, joses, judas and simon and at least two sisters. If you read the gospels in reference to the situations between jesus and his family, has revealed some consistent hostility between them. Hostility??? Where???

First example

Luke 2;41 -52

41 Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. 42 When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom. 43 After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. 44 Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. 45 When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.”

49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”[a] 50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.

stryder wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:42pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:35pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:11pm: One of the many details ive come across is with many Christians they don't highlight much of the details concerning Jesus' family and his dealings with them, most will know the identity of mary and joseph his legal father, but how many do know that jesus had four brothers, and they named, james, joses, judas and simon and at least two sisters. If you read the gospels in reference to the situations between jesus and his family, has revealed some consistent hostility between them. Hostility??? Where??? First example Luke 2;41 -52 41 Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. 42 When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom. 43 After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it. 44 Thinking he was in their company, they traveled on for a day. Then they began looking for him among their relatives and friends. 45 When they did not find him, they went back to Jerusalem to look for him. 46 After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. 47 Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. 48 When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” 49 “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?”[a] 50 But they did not understand what he was saying to them.

;D

Ok so in your mind, you interpret that example as an act of hostility.

It's not.

second example

John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV)

The Wedding at Cana
2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

stryder wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:47pm:

second example John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV) The Wedding at Cana 2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.”

Again, it's not an example of hostility.

Where is the aggression?

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 10:50pm:

stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:47pm: second example John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV) The Wedding at Cana 2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Again, it's not an example of hostility. Where is the aggression?

I think from those example, it does give a sense of some hostility between jesus and his family.

example 3

Matthew 12:46-50New International Version (NIV)

Jesus’ Mother and Brothers
46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.”

48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

stryder wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 11:01pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:50pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:47pm: second example John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV) The Wedding at Cana 2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Again, it's not an example of hostility. Where is the aggression? I think from those example, it does give a sense of some hostility between jesus and his family. example 3 Matthew 12:46-50New International Version (NIV) Jesus’ Mother and Brothers 46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” 48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.”

So in your mind, when a person sets boundaries, they're being hostile and aggressive.

Okkkkkayyyyy. :-/

Religion's just what we we thought before we understood mental illness

"A bush talked to me"

"Wow what did it say? What did the bush say? Let's live our lives by what the bush said"

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7^th, 2016 at 11:07pm:

stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 11:01pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:50pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:47pm: second example John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV) The Wedding at Cana 2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Again, it's not an example of hostility. Where is the aggression? I think from those example, it does give a sense of some hostility between jesus and his family. example 3 Matthew 12:46-50New International Version (NIV) Jesus’ Mother and Brothers 46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” 48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” So in your mind, when a person sets boundaries, they're being hostile and aggressive. Okkkkkayyyyy. :-/

Matthew 10:35-38New International Version (NIV)

35 For I have come to turn

“‘a man against his father,
    a daughter against her mother,
a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
    a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.
“Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me.

Matthew contains examples of Jesus' general attitude towards family relationships and doesn't sound positive.

Raven wrote on Jul 8^th, 2016 at 2:28am:

Religion's just what we we thought before we understood mental illness "A bush talked to me" "Wow what did it say? What did the bush say? Let's live our lives by what the bush said"

To those who ascribe to the Christian faith would undoubtly  accept Jesus' powers of healing, controlling the weather, walking on water, producing fish and loaves out of thin air.

In the 18th century, theologians held the view that the faith jesus was able to inspire in his patients by the power of his presence allowed them in effect to cure themselves.

stryder wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 6:30pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 11:07pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 11:01pm: Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:50pm: stryder wrote on Jul 7th, 2016 at 10:47pm: second example John 2:1-12English Standard Version (ESV) The Wedding at Cana 2 On the third day there was a wedding at Cana in Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. 2 Jesus also was invited to the wedding with his disciples. 3 When the wine ran out, the mother of Jesus said to him, “They have no wine.” 4 And Jesus said to her, “Woman, what does this have to do with me? My hour has not yet come.” 5 His mother said to the servants, “Do whatever he tells you.” Again, it's not an example of hostility. Where is the aggression? I think from those example, it does give a sense of some hostility between jesus and his family. example 3 Matthew 12:46-50New International Version (NIV) Jesus’ Mother and Brothers 46 While Jesus was still talking to the crowd, his mother and brothers stood outside, wanting to speak to him. 47 Someone told him, “Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you.” 48 He replied to him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 49 Pointing to his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers. 50 For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” So in your mind, when a person sets boundaries, they're being hostile and aggressive. Okkkkkayyyyy. :-/ Matthew 10:35-38New International Version (NIV) 35 For I have come to turn “‘a man against his father,     a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—     a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household. “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Matthew contains examples of Jesus' general attitude towards family relationships and doesn't sound positive.

The problem is though Matthew was written a good 50 years after the crucifixion so we have no real account of the Nazarene's view of his family.

As a conscientious Jew however he would have held his family in good stead. It's widely accepted that  his brother James was one of the 12 Apostles and his brother Judas (or Jude) is considered to be the author of the Epistle of Jude, though Catholics, who believe in the perpetual virginity of Mary disagree.

Following the death of his step father Joseph the Nazarene would have cared for his mother's wellbeing. He would be unlikely to turn her away.

stryder wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 6:46pm:

Raven wrote on Jul 8th, 2016 at 2:28am: Religion's just what we we thought before we understood mental illness "A bush talked to me" "Wow what did it say? What did the bush say? Let's live our lives by what the bush said" To those who ascribe to the Christian faith would undoubtly  accept Jesus' powers of healing, controlling the weather, walking on water, producing fish and loaves out of thin air. In the 18th century, theologians held the view that the faith jesus was able to inspire in his patients by the power of his presence allowed them in effect to cure themselves.

Yes the placebo effect has worked for countless generations in the human population.

stryder wrote on Jul 10^th, 2016 at 6:46pm:

In the 18th century, theologians held the view that the faith jesus was able to inspire in his patients by the power of his presence allowed them in effect to cure themselves.

It obviously didn't work too well because in the 18th century there was an average life expectancy of 40.

I have been watching a documentary on SBS about the origins of archaeology Among the many relics from the life of Jesus is, supposedly, one of the nails from the Crucifixion. It is a heavy four sided piece like a railroad spike. Its provenance is said to come down from the Emperor Constantine. It creates a bit of a puzzle, as does the whole record of Christ's execution.

All the depictions I have seen show Christ nailed through the hands and feet. It is widely believed that the weight of the body could not be supported in that way. The more common practice was to bind the limbs to the cross or a single stake. Iron was expensive, and I wonder if the Romans would have wasted it on a Jew who thought he was on intimate terms with God.

Modern day depictions of the crucifixion are indeed wrong issuevoter. In all likelihood the Nazarene would have been crucified through the wrists and, possibly, ropes tied around his arms to hold him on the cross.

That said it's also unlikely they would have wasted the effort of erecting a cross on a lowly Jew. It's very possible they would have crucified him to a tree.

In this day and age, it should be evident that Jesus never even existed as a person. He was merely an allegorical figure of the sun.

Yes, in the day, the allegorical story of planetary movement was probably the most important and the greatest story ever told. Also very common and widespread in varying forms.
However, science and literature has progressed beyond the need for the passing down of stories.
I think that should be embraced and modern day people should stop giving power to the usurpers of truth.

I would not be prepared to dismiss the existence of a figure in Roman Palestine more or less fitting  the Christian myth. But walking on water and rising from the dead are examples of the snake oil used by early Christians to sell their product.

The Abrahamic religions are a stage of the evolution of the God concept. They are dangerous, and they are resurgent. We have the politically correct governments of secular states bending over backwards to accommodate their false doctrines, in the name of open-mindedness. What a contradiction.

There is no danger when people just think for themselves...and with empathy.

Of course, early scientific information was spread by stories. There was no other vehicle to take it to the masses when literature was not widespread.

When these allegories of scientific information got bastardised with the rise of literature, then the problem of the power to the churches arose.

How the hell can we let them keep this power in this day and age? Spreading bs, molesting children for their own disgusting desires and reaping in money from the hard working masses:?

It's a joke that we still believe this utter nonsense.
Their real desire is corruption, not truth.

When we all will see the light, it will be a very bright day indeed.  :)

Hello Jesus. Where have you been all my life?

Up there in the stars maybe?

The main problem with God-freaks is their pathetically little human expectation of how such an entity would be in relation to them.
If the proselytizers want me to believe in their fantasies, they will have to come up with something more interesting. Until then, they can kiss my arse, especially the Muzlims who use God to justify cutting people's heads off.

issuevoter wrote on Aug 13^th, 2016 at 11:14pm:

I have been watching a documentary on SBS about the origins of archaeology Among the many relics from the life of Jesus is, supposedly, one of the nails from the Crucifixion. It is a heavy four sided piece like a railroad spike. Its provenance is said to come down from the Emperor Constantine. It creates a bit of a puzzle, as does the whole record of Christ's execution. All the depictions I have seen show Christ nailed through the hands and feet. It is widely believed that the weight of the body could not be supported in that way. The more common practice was to bind the limbs to the cross or a single stake. Iron was expensive, and I wonder if the Romans would have wasted it on a Jew who thought he was on intimate terms with God.

It's logical thinking that eventually uncovers the truth.

So many more important matters to be involved with, without the ridiculous distraction of religion making it nigh on impossible to progress.

issuevoter wrote on Nov 15^th, 2016 at 10:27am:

The main problem with God-freaks is their pathetically little human expectation of how such an entity would be in relation to them. If the proselytizers want me to believe in their fantasies, they will have to come up with something more interesting. Until then, they can kiss my arse, especially the Muzlims who use God to justify cutting people's heads off.

How's this: Jesus was a human being. He preached to the poor, and espoused peace and harmony to people. Although he had a following, he never gained anything (materially at least, but this is all that's relevant because we're arguing he's human); he never led an armed rebellion, even though he had the power to do so. When he entered Jerusalem on a donkey with his followers waving palm trees and shouting 'Here comes the King of the Jews', Jesus knew where he was heading? To humiliation, suffering and death.

Most people would agree that human beings are rational creatures, that each person acts in his/her own self-interest with the purpose of self-preservation. Jesus didn't care about these things; he meticulously took actions that would lead him down this path, which is contrary to normal human behaviour.

Do you know anyone in history who has lived this kind of life? Someone who consciously and rationally made decisions that would lead to his own suffering, humiliation, and ultimately death, whilst gaining no power, no wealth, and other pleasures?

Auggie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2017 at 2:16pm:

issuevoter wrote on Nov 15th, 2016 at 10:27am: The main problem with God-freaks is their pathetically little human expectation of how such an entity would be in relation to them. If the proselytizers want me to believe in their fantasies, they will have to come up with something more interesting. Until then, they can kiss my arse, especially the Muzlims who use God to justify cutting people's heads off. How's this: Jesus was a human being. He preached to the poor, and espoused peace and harmony to people. Although he had a following, he never gained anything (materially at least, but this is all that's relevant because we're arguing he's human); he never led an armed rebellion, even though he had the power to do so. When he entered Jerusalem on a donkey with his followers waving palm trees and shouting 'Here comes the King of the Jews', Jesus knew where he was heading? To humiliation, suffering and death. Most people would agree that human beings are rational creatures, that each person acts in his/her own self-interest with the purpose of self-preservation. Jesus didn't care about these things; he meticulously took actions that would lead him down this path, which is contrary to normal human behaviour. Do you know anyone in history who has lived this kind of life? Someone who consciously and rationally made decisions that would lead to his own suffering, humiliation, and ultimately death, whilst gaining no power, no wealth, and other pleasures?

Millions of followers, thousands of years of documented 'history', not a single shred of evidence this person ever existed, let alone was the son of god.

All religion is a scam, to delude and control the ignorant masses with feats of magic.

The bigger the religion the better the scam and the more corrupt the leaders of the scam.


No religion holds up to scientific reason, time to have it all deflated from constitutional right to barely tolerated past time.

BigOl64 wrote on Mar 7^th, 2017 at 2:32pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 7th, 2017 at 2:16pm: issuevoter wrote on Nov 15th, 2016 at 10:27am: The main problem with God-freaks is their pathetically little human expectation of how such an entity would be in relation to them. If the proselytizers want me to believe in their fantasies, they will have to come up with something more interesting. Until then, they can kiss my arse, especially the Muzlims who use God to justify cutting people's heads off. How's this: Jesus was a human being. He preached to the poor, and espoused peace and harmony to people. Although he had a following, he never gained anything (materially at least, but this is all that's relevant because we're arguing he's human); he never led an armed rebellion, even though he had the power to do so. When he entered Jerusalem on a donkey with his followers waving palm trees and shouting 'Here comes the King of the Jews', Jesus knew where he was heading? To humiliation, suffering and death. Most people would agree that human beings are rational creatures, that each person acts in his/her own self-interest with the purpose of self-preservation. Jesus didn't care about these things; he meticulously took actions that would lead him down this path, which is contrary to normal human behaviour. Do you know anyone in history who has lived this kind of life? Someone who consciously and rationally made decisions that would lead to his own suffering, humiliation, and ultimately death, whilst gaining no power, no wealth, and other pleasures? Millions of followers, thousands of years of documented 'history', not a single shred of evidence this person ever existed, let alone was the son of god. All religion is a scam, to delude and control the ignorant masses with feats of magic. The bigger the religion the better the scam and the more corrupt the leaders of the scam. No religion holds up to scientific reason, time to have it all deflated from constitutional right to barely tolerated past time.

Most historians agree that Jesus was a historical figure.

Second, I'm not talking about the institution of religion, I'm talking only of Jesus'' deeds according to sources available.

I don't think that Jesus was divine, otherwise it makes his actions less significant. It's like a tightrope walker who has a net underneath. "Yeah but he's god..."

Ya gotta love that line..."Most historians agree that Jesus was a(n) historical figure".

No evidence required, no nothing. Merely,  ..."Most historians agree that Jesus was a(n) historical figure".

Auggie wrote on Mar 7^th, 2017 at 2:46pm:

Most historians agree that Jesus was a historical figure. Second, I'm not talking about the institution of religion, I'm talking only of Jesus'' deeds according to sources available. I don't think that Jesus was divine, otherwise it makes his actions less significant. It's like a tightrope walker who has a net underneath. "Yeah but he's god..."

He was a magician? If he was not god how do you explain his deeds? I think it would be more correct to say most historians believe/think Jebus was based on an historical person(s). They'd probably say the same about Heracles.

http://www.solarmythology.com/bibleastrology.htm

The nature of man describes the idea of religion to a tee.

We all want to have this "secret knowledge" that places us above all others.

Amadd wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 1:04am:

http://www.solarmythology.com/bibleastrology.htm The nature of man describes the idea of religion to a tee. We all want to have this "secret knowledge" that places us above all others.

I'm happy to be amongst equals.

Once again, if anyone is genuinely interested, and not just blowing their own trumpet, I direct you to a good place to start your investigation:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

issuevoter wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 6:40am:

Once again, if anyone is genuinely interested, and not just blowing their own trumpet, I direct you to a good place to start your investigation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

I agree. Read this in it's entirety and read it thoroughly. Then realise that there is actually no fact involved at all there except that people "believe" haha.

Have a look at that image of "the good shepherd". OMG! How laughable is that?

Does anybody care to debate a few points honestly? Or is ignorance so very blissful?

Jesus of Nazareth hey? Even that frikin' town never existed!!

Amadd wrote on Mar 4^th, 2017 at 1:13am:

issuevoter wrote on Aug 13th, 2016 at 11:14pm: I have been watching a documentary on SBS about the origins of archaeology Among the many relics from the life of Jesus is, supposedly, one of the nails from the Crucifixion. It is a heavy four sided piece like a railroad spike. Its provenance is said to come down from the Emperor Constantine. It creates a bit of a puzzle, as does the whole record of Christ's execution. All the depictions I have seen show Christ nailed through the hands and feet. It is widely believed that the weight of the body could not be supported in that way. The more common practice was to bind the limbs to the cross or a single stake. Iron was expensive, and I wonder if the Romans would have wasted it on a Jew who thought he was on intimate terms with God. It's logical thinking that eventually uncovers the truth.

If we persue truth then we may eventually discover/understand what truth is, and come to understand its importance.

Likewise, if we seek God, then we may eventually come an understanding, of what/who God is.




Deuteronomy 4:29
....if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul.

Q.
How does a man, that is 'bound' within a physical body, approach the task of seeking God ?

Is God hiding under my bed ?

Or, is God hiding in the top of my apple tree ?

Those are very deep and perplexing questions.             :o




John 4:24
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.


http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1435998745/0#0

Yadda wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 3:21pm:

Amadd wrote on Mar 4th, 2017 at 1:13am: issuevoter wrote on Aug 13th, 2016 at 11:14pm: I have been watching a documentary on SBS about the origins of archaeology Among the many relics from the life of Jesus is, supposedly, one of the nails from the Crucifixion. It is a heavy four sided piece like a railroad spike. Its provenance is said to come down from the Emperor Constantine. It creates a bit of a puzzle, as does the whole record of Christ's execution. All the depictions I have seen show Christ nailed through the hands and feet. It is widely believed that the weight of the body could not be supported in that way. The more common practice was to bind the limbs to the cross or a single stake. Iron was expensive, and I wonder if the Romans would have wasted it on a Jew who thought he was on intimate terms with God. It's logical thinking that eventually uncovers the truth. If we persue truth then we may eventually discover/understand what truth is, and come to understand its importance. Likewise, if we seek God, then we may eventually come an understanding, of what/who God is. Deuteronomy 4:29 ....if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul. Q. How does a man, that is 'bound' within a physical body, approach the task of seeking God ? Is God hiding under my bed ? Or, is God hiding in the top of my apple tree ? Those are very deep and perplexing questions.             :o John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1435998745/0#0

Your God fearing interpretation of truth is total bullsh1t. Truth is truth, you don't need a holy book or a Phd to see the sky is blue.

issuevoter wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 4:16pm:

[ Your God fearing interpretation of truth is total bullsh1t. Truth is truth, you don't need a holy book or a Phd to see the sky is blue.

If this fkked up country got rid of sect 116 in the constitution, is would get rid of this fkked up delusion as a right and doing so every single religious cretin could be dealt with as such.

No right to be a backward inbred religious fkkwit, fine. No-one care why you think kiddie rape is acceptable

issuevoter wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 4:16pm:

Yadda wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 3:21pm: Amadd wrote on Mar 4th, 2017 at 1:13am: issuevoter wrote on Aug 13th, 2016 at 11:14pm: I have been watching a documentary on SBS about the origins of archaeology Among the many relics from the life of Jesus is, supposedly, one of the nails from the Crucifixion. It is a heavy four sided piece like a railroad spike. Its provenance is said to come down from the Emperor Constantine. It creates a bit of a puzzle, as does the whole record of Christ's execution. All the depictions I have seen show Christ nailed through the hands and feet. It is widely believed that the weight of the body could not be supported in that way. The more common practice was to bind the limbs to the cross or a single stake. Iron was expensive, and I wonder if the Romans would have wasted it on a Jew who thought he was on intimate terms with God. It's logical thinking that eventually uncovers the truth. If we persue truth then we may eventually discover/understand what truth is, and come to understand its importance. Likewise, if we seek God, then we may eventually come an understanding, of what/who God is. Deuteronomy 4:29 ....if from thence thou shalt seek the LORD thy God, thou shalt find him, if thou seek him with all thy heart and with all thy soul. Q. How does a man, that is 'bound' within a physical body, approach the task of seeking God ? Is God hiding under my bed ? Or, is God hiding in the top of my apple tree ? Those are very deep and perplexing questions.             :o John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1435998745/0#0 Your God fearing interpretation of truth is total bullsh1t. Truth is truth, you don't need a holy book or a Phd to see the sky is blue.

Ah.      ....we only need open our eyes, to be able to see what is true.

The sky is blue.

Yes, it is!

Ah, i see how this truth and reality thing works now !


:)

Our collective waking, human perception of the reality, which we collectively experience is [mostly] reliable.

Its gotta be !

Right ?




Click the link.....

After the image loads, move your mouse from the centre of the checkered area, to the edge of the screen....

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap121007.html




AND ALWAYS REMEMBER GUYS!!!!

......THE SKY IS BLUE !

The problem Yadda is that your god doesn't exist. Certainly not in the form you think he takes.

You believe your god is loving, just and perfect.

He gives bone cancer to children, allowing them to suffer in agony until they die, that's very loving.

A good man who loves and cares for his family, who helps others without needing to be asked is bound for hell because he does not believe in god. A child rapist and murderer who accepts Jesus in his heart suffers no punishment and is rewarded with paradise for eternity. True justice indeed.

This is not how a perfect being behaves. Raven submits that a perfect being is incapable of being anything other than perfect, in thought or action. And yet he created us the most imperfect of beings.

*knock knock*

"Go away god"

"Let me in"

"Why?"

"So I can save you from what I'm going to do to you if you don't let me in"

This god gave us faults and then punishes us for eternity for the faults he gave us.

If god exists he is not loving, just nor perfect.

Quote:

AND ALWAYS REMEMBER GUYS!!!! ......THE SKY IS BLUE !

..And always remember Yadda, that you couldn't explain "Why" it appears blue (as does an unpolluted ocean), without the help of science.

Can you explain why the sky appears blue?

Amadd wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 12:37am:

Quote: AND ALWAYS REMEMBER GUYS!!!! ......THE SKY IS BLUE ! ..And always remember Yadda, that you couldn't explain "Why" it appears blue (as does an unpolluted ocean), without the help of science. Can you explain why the sky appears blue?

Because god of course

Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

The problem Yadda is that your god doesn't exist. Certainly not in the form you think he takes.

Not true.




Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

You believe your god is loving, just and perfect.

Correct and true.





Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

He gives bone cancer to children, allowing them to suffer in agony until they die, that's very loving.

Not true.

God gave us the freedom to make moral choices.

When we and our parents make poor moral choices, there are always consequences.

Deuteronomy 7:12
Wherefore it shall come to pass, if ye hearken to these judgments, and keep, and do them, that the LORD thy God shall keep unto thee the covenant and the mercy which he sware unto thy fathers:
13  And he will love thee, and bless thee, and multiply thee: he will also bless the fruit of thy womb, and the fruit of thy land, thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep, in the land which he sware unto thy fathers to give thee.
14  Thou shalt be blessed above all people: there shall not be male or female barren among you, or among your cattle.
15  And the LORD will take away from thee all sickness, and will put none of the evil diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest, upon thee; but will lay them upon all them that hate thee.



'poor moral choices' ?

e.g.
Some have demonstrated that there is a correlation, between women having abortions, and 1/ later 'suffering' miscarriage ['spontaneous' abortion, being unable to carry a pregnancy to term], and, 2/ between, having earlier abortions, and 'suffering' subsequent 'infertility'.

I haven't got a link to hand, but do some googling.


Dictionary;
correlation = =
1 a mutual relationship or connection.      the process of correlating two or more things.
2 interdependence of variable quantities.






Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

A good man who loves and cares for his family, who helps others without needing to be asked is bound for hell because he does not believe in god. A child rapist and murderer who accepts Jesus in his heart suffers no punishment and is rewarded with paradise for eternity.

Not true.





Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

This is not how a perfect being behaves.

Correct and true.





Raven wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 11:43pm:

This god gave us faults and then punishes us for eternity for the faults he gave us.

Not true.

God gave us the freedom to make moral choices.

Yadda wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 12:06pm:

Not true. God gave us the freedom to make moral choices.

Yes, I agree with that.

BigOl64 wrote on Mar 10^th, 2017 at 4:41pm:

issuevoter wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 4:16pm: [ Your God fearing interpretation of truth is total bullsh1t. Truth is truth, you don't need a holy book or a Phd to see the sky is blue. If this fkked up country got rid of sect 116 in the constitution, is would get rid of this fkked up delusion as a right and doing so every single religious cretin could be dealt with as such. No right to be a backward inbred religious fkkwit, fine. No-one care why you think kiddie rape is acceptable

116 was designed to restrict the power of the Commonwealth. Each State may make laws respecting religion; but not the centralized authority.

Interesting conversation.

My two cents I believe in God because nothing else can explain the universe and all that is within it or the Earth and all that is within that.

I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples.

Now if Jesus had come down to Earth and had found milk and honey with the Pharisees (priests) and scribes (theologians) I would probably have a hard time believing he was the son of God.

But it was the Jewish priests that had Jesus crucified, sure the romans carried out the actual act but it was at the behest of the Priests and scribes of the time, the men who were in charge of a religion, that’s why Pilot washed his hands for it was not by his doing that Jesus would be crucified.

Jesus himself said that his words would never be lost and would be with us to the end of times, in this day and age all we have to go by are the gospels and any spiritual experiences we may have had with loved ones.

It’s left to every man and woman to decide by faith that God and Jesus are what they are.

http://i65.tinypic.com/2nk7191.jpg

http://biblehub.com/bsb/matthew/13.htm

Ajax wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 6:26pm:

Interesting conversation. ......... Now if Jesus had come down to Earth and had found milk and honey with the Pharisees (priests) and scribes (theologians) I would probably have a hard time believing he was the son of God. But it was the Jewish priests that had Jesus crucified, sure the romans carried out the actual act but it was at the behest of the Priests and scribes of the time, the men who were in charge of a religion, that’s why Pilot washed his hands for it was not by his doing that Jesus would be crucified.

John 12:42
Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue:
43  For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.


Romans 2:28
For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:
29  But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God.


1 Samuel 16:7
But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for the LORD seeth not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart.


Psalms 73:1
Truly God is good to Israel, even to such as are of a clean heart.

Ajax wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 6:26pm:

I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples.

Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ.

Second, if you claim that Jesus did what he did because he was divine, then in my opinion, this diminishes his achievements as a human being, because: "... yeah, but he's God..." Think of a tightrope walker who has a net under him; that's what it's like. What made Jesus incredible was precisely the fact that HE WAS HUMAN and did what he did. That's true power. When he entered into Jerusalem on a donkey proclaiming that he was the King of the Jews, he knew exactly where he was headed - to his torture, crucifixion, and ultimately death. He made the conscious choice to act in a manner that led to end. Human beings don't behave or act like that. 

Auggie wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 8:30pm:

Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ. Second, if you claim that Jesus did what he did because he was divine, then in my opinion, this diminishes his achievements as a human being, because: "... yeah, but he's God..." Think of a tightrope walker who has a net under him; that's what it's like. What made Jesus incredible was precisely the fact that HE WAS HUMAN and did what he did. That's true power. When he entered into Jerusalem on a donkey proclaiming that he was the King of the Jews, he knew exactly where he was headed - to his torture, crucifixion, and ultimately death. He made the conscious choice to act in a manner that led to end. Human beings don't behave or act like that.

I like your general perspective, however, to respect him, I would require more knowledge of the man than what is actually in the record.

issuevoter wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 9:25pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 8:30pm: Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ. Second, if you claim that Jesus did what he did because he was divine, then in my opinion, this diminishes his achievements as a human being, because: "... yeah, but he's God..." Think of a tightrope walker who has a net under him; that's what it's like. What made Jesus incredible was precisely the fact that HE WAS HUMAN and did what he did. That's true power. When he entered into Jerusalem on a donkey proclaiming that he was the King of the Jews, he knew exactly where he was headed - to his torture, crucifixion, and ultimately death. He made the conscious choice to act in a manner that led to end. Human beings don't behave or act like that.  I like your general perspective, however, to respect him, I would require more knowledge of the man than what is actually in the record.

I appreciate your point of view. The two polarizing themes concerning Jesus are theological and historical perspectives. Most scholars agree that Jesus existed (that he was a historical figure). Therefore, in light of this, we must use whatever sources we can to extract a 'historical' account of Jesus. If you look at what he did and what he said, these are indications of historical events which are plausible  at the time.

Even if one argued that he wasn't a 'historical figure', the symbolism is incredibly powerful. Don't forget that Jesus was born with nothing, he gained nothing and he died with nothing (materialistically). He could've started a rebellion, or became super rich from his teachings, but he shunned all of those things and died as a 'criminal.' The selflessness in the face of power is so incredible that it's almost not human.

Auggie wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 8:30pm:

Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ.

Some people are unable to believe that God, the creator, could [or would] manifest himself, 'in the flesh', as a man.       [but if you believe scripture, he did once before.    see Genesis 18]


Regarding the veracity of the New Testament text, we must individually come to either accept, or reject, what the New Testament says, as being authentic and true.




Regarding the veracity of any information which is presented to us Moses law gives this advice.....


Deuteronomy 19:15
.....at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.


Regarding the testimony of multiple witnesses.....

--------- >

Matthew 17:1
And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart,
2  And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light.
3  And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him.
4  Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.
5  While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.
6  And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid.


John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


1 Corinthians 15:1
Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;
2  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.
3  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
5  And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
6  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.




n.b.
YOU may choose to not accept the record of those witnesses.

But, the record and account of those multiple witnesses exists.



On Jesus divinity.....

--------- >

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2  The same was in the beginning with God.
3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4  In him was life; and the life was the light of men.


John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.


Jesus said,

John 10:30
I and my Father are one.


John 12:45
And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me.
46  I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.


John 14:8
Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
9  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

issuevoter wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 9:25pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 8:30pm: Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ. Second, if you claim that Jesus did what he did because he was divine, then in my opinion, this diminishes his achievements as a human being, because: "... yeah, but he's God..." Think of a tightrope walker who has a net under him; that's what it's like. What made Jesus incredible was precisely the fact that HE WAS HUMAN and did what he did. That's true power. When he entered into Jerusalem on a donkey proclaiming that he was the King of the Jews, he knew exactly where he was headed - to his torture, crucifixion, and ultimately death. He made the conscious choice to act in a manner that led to end. Human beings don't behave or act like that.  I like your general perspective, however, to respect him, I would require more knowledge of the man than what is actually in the record.

;D Diplomatically put and well said.

Setanta wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 11:59pm:

issuevoter wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 9:25pm: Auggie wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 8:30pm: Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ. Second, if you claim that Jesus did what he did because he was divine, then in my opinion, this diminishes his achievements as a human being, because: "... yeah, but he's God..." Think of a tightrope walker who has a net under him; that's what it's like. What made Jesus incredible was precisely the fact that HE WAS HUMAN and did what he did. That's true power. When he entered into Jerusalem on a donkey proclaiming that he was the King of the Jews, he knew exactly where he was headed - to his torture, crucifixion, and ultimately death. He made the conscious choice to act in a manner that led to end. Human beings don't behave or act like that.  I like your general perspective, however, to respect him, I would require more knowledge of the man than what is actually in the record. ;D Diplomatically put and well said.

Seek and ye shall find......sweet FA.

Yadda wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 12:06pm:

Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: The problem Yadda is that your god doesn't exist. Certainly not in the form you think he takes. Not true. why? Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: You believe your god is loving, just and perfect. Correct and true. Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: He gives bone cancer to children, allowing them to suffer in agony until they die, that's very loving. Not true. God gave us the freedom to make moral choices. When we and our parents make poor moral choices, there are always consequences. [edit pointless biblical quotes] 'poor moral choices' ? Jesus titty f.ucking Christ. Do you listen to yourself? Innocent children get cancer because they are immoral? Children get cancer because their parents "make poor moral choices" What a loving god! Our god is so loving he punishes innocent children for the "crimes" of their parents. Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: A good man who loves and cares for his family, who helps others without needing to be asked is bound for hell because he does not believe in god. A child rapist and murderer who accepts Jesus in his heart suffers no punishment and is rewarded with paradise for eternity. Not true. Oh! A non believer can go to heaven? Then what is the point of religion? Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: This is not how a perfect being behaves. Correct and true. Good to see you realise "god" is not perfect. Raven wrote on Mar 10th, 2017 at 11:43pm: This god gave us faults and then punishes us for eternity for the faults he gave us. Not true. God gave us the freedom to make moral choices.

And then punishes us for exercising that choice.

Yadda wrote on Mar 11^th, 2017 at 10:06pm:

Auggie wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 8:30pm: Ajax wrote on Mar 11th, 2017 at 6:26pm: I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples. Ok, first of all, I have great respect for Jesus as a human being. The supposed 'miracles' he performed were not what he claimed, it was what OTHER PEOPLE claimed he did. The New Testament was written by communities after the Jesus' death, and were depictions of the spiritual experience they witnessed in Christ. Some people are unable to believe that God, the creator, could [or would] manifest himself, 'in the flesh', as a man.       [but if you believe scripture, he did once before.    see Genesis 18] Regarding the veracity of the New Testament text, we must individually come to either accept, or reject, what the New Testament says, as being authentic and true. Regarding the veracity of any information which is presented to us Moses law gives this advice..... Deuteronomy 19:15 .....at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established. Regarding the testimony of multiple witnesses..... --------- > Matthew 17:1 And after six days Jesus taketh Peter, James, and John his brother, and bringeth them up into an high mountain apart, 2  And was transfigured before them: and his face did shine as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. 3  And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias talking with him. 4  Then answered Peter, and said unto Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias. 5  While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him. 6  And when the disciples heard it, they fell on their face, and were sore afraid. John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. 1 Corinthians 15:1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2  By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3  For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4  And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5  And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6  After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. n.b. YOU may choose to not accept the record of those witnesses. But, the record and account of those multiple witnesses exists. On Jesus divinity..... --------- > John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2  The same was in the beginning with God. 3  All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4  In him was life; and the life was the light of men. John 1:14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. Jesus said, John 10:30 I and my Father are one. John 12:45 And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. 46  I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness. John 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9  Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

See, this is the thing, Yadda: you seem to take all religious scripture LITERALLY as though they are inerrant and infallible. Let me tell you now that NOTHING OR NO ONE IS INFALLIBLE OR INERRANT and to do so is to be subject to exploitation and be at the whim of religious institutions.

USE YOUR BRAIN and come to your own conclusions. At the end of the day, you are entitled to believe or practise your religion as you wish; that is what it means to live in a free society.

Don't fall into the same thinking as fundamentalists (in all faith traditions). Use rationale. I don't believe in a theistic God, but I have the greatest respect for Jesus, and considered myself a Christian. You might say that 'I'm chopping and changing' and 'cherry-picking' or 'whatever' and I KNOW. I have a brain and I am using rational thinking to come to my conclusions.

Quote:

I also believe that Jesus was the son of God firstly because no man in his right mind would go around proclaiming such a thing and also because of the words he spoke, no ordinary man could ever love humanity in that way, second because of the miracles he performed and thirdly because of the people that made up his disciples.

What if Nazareth never even existed?

Quote:

THE STORY OF JESUS There are three distinct theories on who Jesus was: Deity: Jesus was the son of God who came to earth in human form. Evemerism: Jesus was a man who was later deified. Myth: Jesus never existed. The whole story is a myth. 1. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person, yet the extensive historical record of that time makes no mention of Jesus. 2. The motif of a crucified savior God who dies and is resurrected already existed in many other religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. The parallels between Jesus and these other preexisting religious saviors were so strong that early church fathers resorted to the desperate claim that the Devil had deviously copied the true story of Jesus before it actually happened in an attempt to mislead the gullible. 3. Jesus begins his one year ministry by visiting John who baptizes with water. The Sun begins its yearly journey by visiting Aquarius, the water bearer. Jesus leaves John, who is put in prison, and visits Simon and Andrew, two fishermen. The Sun leaves Aquarius, who goes below the horizon, and visits Pisces, the two fish. The remarkable parallels continue. Jesus, who never existed, whose story existed prior to his alleged time, is a personification of the Sun, which dies in Winter and is resurrected in Spring, saving us from the evil of cold and darkness. The story is an allegory misinterpreted as history.

http://www.solarmythology.com/index.htm

Give it 10 or 20 years and people will no longer be afraid to discuss the probability that Jesus never really existed as an actual person.

If I was an egotist, I would consider myself ahead of the times, but I am not that type.

It's time that we call religion for what it is. ie:  a bastardisation, for money and power, of ritualistic celebrations that marked seasonal changes based on scientifically discovered planetary movements.

Can't get a debate in an "atheist" room? Go figure.

You might be able to get a debate going, but no one wants to hear a lecture on what they should believe. That's the whole problem with Yadda and It Is The Light.

Really? I'm lecturing?

All's I'm saying is "debate me" on the existence of Jesus.

Is that too much to ask?

So I'm in the same basket as Yadda and Light as far as you're concerned, just because I raise a point on the appropriate thread?

Please accept my apology. You are not lecturing. I didn't like your tone, but the internet, as wonderful as it is, has no capacity for nuance.

I am not an expert on Christian history, but the appearance of the Christians in Rome, in nothing but a few generations after the said execution of Christ, lends an authenticity to the legend of such a mortal man. That Tacitus goes to the trouble of citing the execution, is about as reliable a non-Christian source as we are likely to find.

History records individuals who have shunned worldliness and advised against its excesses. Confucius, Buddha, Socrates, and many others. I see Jesus as one of these. Their altruism was always strained through the sieve of their own tribal experience. With the Hindi, we have all the weird gods with animal heads and multiple arms, to get by before we can even begin to figure out what they were on about. And what all the Cadbury's chocolate around statues of Buddha has to do with Buddhism beats me.

The Jews, Muzlims, and Christians all come from the same ME tribal origin. In their particular fixation, there is only one God. Of course that was heretic in Pagan times, but ultimately, it does not make any difference whether we believe on one God or many, but it was one of the gimmicks Christians used to sell Christianity. Jesus's divine origin being the other.

One thing is for sure, it worked. The Christians had taken their cue from Abraham's hot line to God, and Mohamed got on the bandwagon, if a bit late. Of course you cannot have too many people claiming to talk to God before it starts looking like Sunday morning TV programs in Alabama.

The origin of Jesus is murky, but believable. Unfortunately, his story has been exaggerated to a ridiculous level, which in the end, deflects the follower from his humanity.

I don't care to debate something that I have no belief in. Whether he was historical or not matters not, it's irrelevant. If you want an appropriate thread to get a debate going, I'd suggest a Christian one. Those who do not believe are unlikely to have any interest, those that have bought into the scam of religion will defend it to the death.

Setanta wrote on Apr 5^th, 2017 at 12:13am:

I don't care to debate something that I have no belief in. Whether he was historical or not matters not, it's irrelevant. If you want an appropriate thread to get a debate going, I'd suggest a Christian one. Those who do not believe are unlikely to have any interest, those that have bought into the scam of religion will defend it to the death.

Setanta, this is a thread asking "Who is the real historical Jesus?".

Personally, from what I have come to know, I think it's far more likely that he was/is an allegorical figure depicting the sun, and never was a real person at all.

The reasons are numerous and one also needs to be able to imagine the world as it was then, not as it is now, to understand this point of view.

If indeed, Jesus was/is an astrological figure, then the "scam" of religion becomes far less powerful and far less relevant. As things stand now, religions are still unfairly holding back progress IMO.

Amadd wrote on Apr 6^th, 2017 at 3:14am:

Setanta wrote on Apr 5th, 2017 at 12:13am: I don't care to debate something that I have no belief in. Whether he was historical or not matters not, it's irrelevant. If you want an appropriate thread to get a debate going, I'd suggest a Christian one. Those who do not believe are unlikely to have any interest, those that have bought into the scam of religion will defend it to the death. Setanta, this is a thread asking "Who is the real historical Jesus?". Personally, from what I have come to know, I think it's far more likely that he was/is an allegorical figure depicting the sun, and never was a real person at all. The reasons are numerous and one also needs to be able to imagine the world as it was then, not as it is now, to understand this point of view. If indeed, Jesus was/is an astrological figure, then the "scam" of religion becomes far less powerful and far less relevant. As things stand now, religions are still unfairly holding back progress IMO.

There may well have been an historical Jesus, the god bothers of old that followed him may well have aligned him with the many other gods of old with virgin birth, astronomical happenings etc. They are not mutually exclusive. Personally I don't care.

Alongside this question is just what people mean by "Faith."

issuevoter wrote on Apr 6^th, 2017 at 6:44am:

Alongside this question is just what people mean by "Faith."

If it is a fact that biblical stories are (or were) largely pertaining to planetary movement, then there would be a realistic faith in the magi (or astronomers) who could predict future events.

As far as a person such as Jesus actually existing, the idea is ridiculous.

Amadd wrote on Apr 6^th, 2017 at 10:09am:

issuevoter wrote on Apr 6th, 2017 at 6:44am: Alongside this question is just what people mean by "Faith." If it is a fact that biblical stories are (or were) largely pertaining to planetary movement, then there would be a realistic faith in the magi (or astronomers) who could predict future events. As far as a person such as Jesus actually existing, the idea is ridiculous.

So, you reject Tacitus's account as ridiculous too? Why?

I should have clarified "The Biblical version".

Can you clarify the Tacitus account that you are referring to of Jesus please?

It seems that Tacitus is the only semi-reliable account of somebody known as the Christus.
Of course there is no mention of miracles..etc. etc. This is what I'm referring to when I say that it's ridiculous. I think Tacitus was a well enough regarded historian who would not make claim about such rot.

Jeez (no pun), you'd hardly bet your house on a "second coming" if the Tacitus account of Jesus is the only historical account that you're putting your faith in.

If you are only contesting the biblical Jesus, I would not bother commenting. Wikipedia has enough on Tacitus and the historical Jesus. I am not so interested in Roman writers to delve into the works. Overall, my view is that Jesus was a man, not a supernatural being.

issuevoter wrote on Apr 7^th, 2017 at 8:18am:

If you are only contesting the biblical Jesus, I would not bother commenting. Wikipedia has enough on Tacitus and the historical Jesus. I am not so interested in Roman writers to delve into the works. Overall, my view is that Jesus was a man, not a supernatural being.

I don't think it's possible to disregard the biblical Jesus, being that this is the true importance to this day. There could have been many ordinary fellows Jesus that fit the bill from very scarce historical records.

Christianity started from somewhere. I think it's more than co-incidental that the supernatural Jesus shares so many traits with foregone solar dieties.

Here's a good article on the subject:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died

But anyone who claims to have communication with, or esoteric knowledge of, cosmic forces, is indicating their particular neurosis. Basically, they need a hobby, preferably one including occupational therapy. Gardening is good.

post #124.....



Everyone is aware of [all of] the 'experiences' which this world 'thrusts' upon our awareness/consciousness.

[what this world 'presents to us, to our consciousness, is a very deliberate and intended distraction, imo]




But, if you believe that you experience self-awareness, what does that mean ?

It means that you have the capacity to meditate, and, to explore your 'circumstances'.

Some of us do that.




While many of us are happy to give our whole attention to the distractions which this world presents us with.

Yadda wrote on Apr 15^th, 2017 at 9:48am:

post #124..... Everyone is aware of [all of] the 'experiences' which this world 'thrusts' upon our awareness/consciousness. [what this world 'presents to us, to our consciousness, is a very deliberate and intended distraction, imo] But, if you believe that you experience self-awareness, what does that mean ? It means that you have the capacity to meditate, and, to explore your 'circumstances'. Some of us do that. While many of us are happy to give our whole attention to the distractions which this world presents us with.

Yes, except for the deliberate bit.

issuevoter wrote on Apr 15^th, 2017 at 6:32pm:

Yadda wrote on Apr 15th, 2017 at 9:48am: post #124..... Everyone is aware of [all of] the 'experiences' which this world 'thrusts' upon our awareness/consciousness. [what this world 'presents to us, to our consciousness, is a very deliberate and intended distraction, imo] But, if you believe that you experience self-awareness, what does that mean ? It means that you have the capacity to meditate, and, to explore your 'circumstances'. Some of us do that. While many of us are happy to give our whole attention to the distractions which this world presents us with. Yes, except for the deliberate bit.

Murder.

Yadda wrote on Apr 15^th, 2017 at 7:49pm:

issuevoter wrote on Apr 15th, 2017 at 6:32pm: Yadda wrote on Apr 15th, 2017 at 9:48am: post #124..... Everyone is aware of [all of] the 'experiences' which this world 'thrusts' upon our awareness/consciousness. [what this world 'presents to us, to our consciousness, is a very deliberate and intended distraction, imo] But, if you believe that you experience self-awareness, what does that mean ? It means that you have the capacity to meditate, and, to explore your 'circumstances'. Some of us do that. While many of us are happy to give our whole attention to the distractions which this world presents us with. Yes, except for the deliberate bit. Murder.

You will have to explain what that means. (Oh boy! I asked for it, didn't I?)

issuevoter wrote on Apr 15^th, 2017 at 7:48am:

Here's a good article on the subject: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died But anyone who claims to have communication with, or esoteric knowledge of, cosmic forces, is indicating their particular neurosis. Basically, they need a hobby, preferably one including occupational therapy. Gardening is good.

Yeah, I agree that gardening would be a great religion. If only the same tax breaks were on offer  >:(

I also understand Yadda's POV that time for personal reflection and spirituality should be held sacred.
But that should be done without the bs of a supernatural Jesus IMO. Because that belief only leaves the door open for the propagation of even more bs.

je ( son of ) sus ( zeus )

the real name is Yahweh

in christs light ..

http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/avatars/UserAvatars/it_is_the_light.jpg

▲

Believe what you want to believe. Just don't preach about it. That is a sure sign of someone looking for verification from others. The more people you can get to agree with you, the better you feel about yourself. Childish. There's better things to do, like origami or scrabble.

yes knowledge is power ..

when you research you have the answer .. many prefer apathy

yet either way be at peace

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christiancrier/2014/05/30/what-does-yahweh-mean-a-biblical-study/

What Does Yahweh Mean? A Biblical Study


Is YHWH Yahweh?
YHWH is a Tetragrammaton or God’s given name in the Old Testament but Bible scholars cannot agree on exactly how this name of God was or is to be pronounced.  The Hebrew language does not contain vowels (e.g. e, I o, u, a) so that is why God’s name appears as YHWH and that is why all the letters of His name are always capitalized since His name is a proper noun.  When God revealed His name to Moses, He revealed Himself as YHWH or Yahweh which is best translated as “I AM WHO I AM” again, in all capital letters (EX 3:14-15).  The Hebrew for “I AM” is “ehyeh” which could also be read to mean “I will be” but when God refers to Himself it must mean “I AM.”   I AM means that God exists already and is the speaker when this is used but when humans speak of Him it could be said “HE IS” (again, all caps).

http://www.ozpolitic.com/yabbfiles/avatars/UserAvatars/it_is_the_light.jpg

I met a bloke once called Jesus.

I suspect that his name was quite a hindrance to his success.

Heheh! Trigonometrinity...

I believe there was a 'man' called Jesus
He was sacrificed by his Jewish people.
Because there was a Jewish man called Hitler
Who sacrificed his Jewish people in return.

...what goes around.

Jasin wrote on Oct 29^th, 2017 at 7:43pm:

I believe there was a 'man' called Jesus He was sacrificed by his Jewish people. Because there was a Jewish man called Hitler Who sacrificed his Jewish people in return. ...what goes around.

Prove it, or admit this is a flight of fancy on the part of those who prefer such things to fact.

Jasin wrote on Oct 29^th, 2017 at 7:43pm:

I believe there was a 'man' called Jesus He was sacrificed by his Jewish people. Because there was a Jewish man called Hitler Who sacrificed his Jewish people in return. ...what goes around.

The first line was laughable. Then I shook my head in disbelief at the third and fourth line.

Hitler was a Catholic who committed ethnic cleansing against Jewish people, amongst others, in retaliation for the loss Germany suffered (literally) from World War One. Hitler could not give a shite about Jewish people allegedly being partly responsible for a mythology character called "Jesus". Hitler's actions were focussed on the rearming and renewing the German society to become a world superpower.

And Jesus said unto his Jewish people,
from the Cross upon which they had him placed.
"Wait till my little brother Hitler get's yas ya bastards!"

...that is History and what goes around, comes around.


Watch the 'Messiah' Henry arise soon, to die for Mohommed's sins  ;) long ago

Jasin wrote on Oct 30^th, 2017 at 5:42pm:

And Jesus said unto his Jewish people, from the Cross upon which they had him placed. "Wait till my little brother Hitler get's yas ya bastards!" ...that is History and what goes around, comes around. Watch the 'Messiah' Henry arise soon, to die for Mohommed's sins  ;) long ago

I think you need to move your comments to the Spirituality Forum with the rest of the crackpots.

issuevoter wrote on Oct 30^th, 2017 at 8:20pm:

Jasin wrote on Oct 30th, 2017 at 5:42pm: And Jesus said unto his Jewish people, from the Cross upon which they had him placed. "Wait till my little brother Hitler get's yas ya bastards!" ...that is History and what goes around, comes around. Watch the 'Messiah' Henry arise soon, to die for Mohommed's sins  ;) long ago I think you need to move your comments to the Spirituality Forum with the rest of the crackpots.

You're wrong Issuevoter.
The future is set in stone because of the past.
And remember...

A Scientist will tell you that the Earth is NOT at the centre of the Universe and he/she is Right.
A Spiritualist will tell you that the Earth is the centre of OUR Universe and he/she is also Right.
;)

This Topic was moved here from Atheism by freediver.