I Just Proved That Jesus Is A False Messiah In Less Than 5 Minutes

[Fool]

So there we go. You're saying Mary and Anna and Jesus did not evolve. At least that what it sounds like to me.

evolve materialistically? spiritually?

 

[Jedster]

I once fired a guy for over using it!
I'm not joking!

To be fair, it was the 3rd time in a row that he had that remark on his code review.
3 strikes and you're OUT!

I would've done the same.

 

[Colt]

ok, got it, thank you. (lol.) Celestial transport, thank you. Thanks for explaining your viewpoint. So just to reiterate, no evolution, rather celestial transport of ??? every animal as well as trees and flowers?

NO! In the UB the evolution of life began on earth 550,000,000 years ago when the primitive life forms were first created on earth. Those forms evolved into life as we know it. My mention of Celestial transport was specific to Adam and Eve or any other beings who come from places other than Earth. Adam and Eve preexisted on another world. Gabriel for example would have used celestial transport to come to earth to suddenly appear in Mary's living room. There are practical aspects to how the universe works. Long distance travel is one of those.

 

[Colt]

national God promoted to supreme God,

-Other deities, who had previously been associated with national destiny (e.g., Zeus, Yahweh, and Isis), were raised to the status of transcendent, supreme
https://wwwc.com/topic/Hellenistic-religion/Beliefs-practices-and-institutions


God vs the Devil
Historically, the unique features of Zoroastrianism, such as its monotheism,[5] messianism, belief in free will and judgement after death, conception of heaven, hell, angels, and demons, among other concepts, may have influenced other religious and philosophical systems, including the Abrahamic religions ...

During the Second Temple Period, when Jews were living in the Achaemenid Empire, Judaism was heavily influenced by Zoroastrianism, the religion of the Achaemenids.[26][8][27] Jewish conceptions of Satan were impacted by Angra Mainyu,[8][28] the Zoroastrian god of evil, darkness, and ignorance.[


Mary Boyce

Those are mostly writings of someone else that you copy and pasted. There is truth in what you are saying, I do agree with your basic point about the influence of other beliefs on the evolution of Judaism and Christianity. As I said the virgin birth came from other beliefs, however I still believe that Jesus was a miraculous individual. Some truth and some myth is always mixed into religion. Pagan meant any religion other than Judaism and Christianity.

 

[YoursTrue]

evolve materialistically? spiritually?

lol, no, I mean by the laws of the process of evolution. Meaning (let me elucidate) -- do you believe either Mary or Jesus or Anna or any other human evolved as the theory of evolution goes, evolving as HUMANS, from some "Unknown Common Ancestor" in the ape category? (That's for starters -- I won't go back to fish evolving to mammals and thereafter to humans in the mammal category, thus including Mary, Anna, and Jesus. What do you think?) If you need further clarification of what I mean by evolution as far as any human goes, let me know, ok? Like I say, if you think all humans evolved from an unknown ape ancestor, again -- please let me know. I don't think it's a confusing question, but let me know anyway if you understand or not the question
Thanks.

 

[YoursTrue]

NO! In the UB the evolution of life began on earth 550,000,000 years ago when the primitive life forms were first created on earth. Those forms evolved into life as we know it. My mention of Celestial transport was specific to Adam and Eve or any other beings who come from places other than Earth. Adam and Eve preexisted on another world. Gabriel for example would have used celestial transport to come to earth to suddenly appear in Mary's living room. There are practical aspects to how the universe works. Long distance travel is one of those.

OK. I don't go along with the teachings in that book, please excuse from further conversation with me of it in particular, especiallyl as I believe what the Bible says.
I must say, however, that the Bible states it differently insofar as existence goes, and yes -- there are celestial beings that were not created to enjoy life on the earth. And yes, they (such as angels) can travel from their dwelling place to the earth, but were not meant to live on the earth as humans are.

 

[Fool]

lol, no, I mean by the laws of the process of evolution. Meaning (let me elucidate) -- do you believe either Mary or Jesus or Anna or any other human evolved as the theory of evolution goes, evolving as HUMANS, from some "Unknown Common Ancestor" in the ape category? (That's for starters -- I won't go back to fish evolving to mammals and thereafter to humans in the mammal category, thus including Mary, Anna, and Jesus. What do you think?) If you need further clarification of what I mean by evolution as far as any human goes, let me know, ok? Like I say, if you think all humans evolved from an unknown ape ancestor, again -- please let me know. I don't think it's a confusing question, but let me know anyway if you understand or not the question
Thanks.

i was having a discussion on spirituality. i'm not worried about forms, materialism. I don't have a problem with evolution, or the idea that a monkey could be spiritual/mental.

ecclesiastes 3:18-21


your question is irrelevant

 

[YoursTrue]

Historical records? What? Let me use a historian to explain this:
3. “Jesus’s crucifixion is historically certain”

Bishop bases this on his assertion that “there are many independent sources that attest to Jesus’ crucifixion.” That assertion is false. Christian apologists are confusing the word “independent” with the word “different.” A hundred different sources attest to the existence of Hercules. But they are not independent sources. They all derive, directly or indirectly, from the same single source, a myth about Hercules. Who never existed.

There is in fact only one explicit source for the historicity of Jesus: the Gospel of Mark. All other sources that mention the crucifixion of Jesus as an event in earth history derive that mention from Mark, either directly (e.g. Matthew, Luke, John; Celsus; Justin; etc.) or indirectly, as Christians simply repeat the same claims in those Gospels, which all embellish and thus derive from that same one Gospel, Mark, and their critics simply believed them because they would have thought it was too self-damning to make up, and because there was no way for them to check.

When Paul mentions the crucifixion of Jesus, he never places that event on earth. In fact, he doesn’t appear to even know about it having happened at the hands of Romans or Jews at all, but the demonic forces of evil (OHJ, ch. 11.4, 11.7-8), just as was originally said in the Christian Gospel known as the Ascension of Isaiah (OHJ, ch. 3.1).

Tacitus and Josephus
Hence even if they actually mentioned Jesus (and this is actually doubtful: OHJ, ch. 8.9-10), Tacitus and Josephus are just repeating what Christians told them (or their informants), and those Christians were just repeating what the Gospels told them, and the Gospels are just repeating the story that first appeared in only one place: Mark. That’s not independent evidence. It’s useless.

4. “The Gospels”

“This should actually count for four reasons to accept Jesus’ existence as each Gospel is an independent account of his life.” Nope. See above. Every Gospel is just an embellished redaction of Mark. Even John. The synoptic Problem proves Mark is the source for at least the first 3. Also Mark is 100% fiction. We can get into that.
5. “The disciples’ deaths.”

There are no reliable sources for the disciples’ deaths. We have, at most, some ridiculous and late legends, based on no identifiable sources. We do not in fact know why or when they died. Or what they died for. This whole argument is therefore hosed from top to bottom.
11. “Paul met Jesus’ brother James, and Jesus’ disciple Peter”

Paul never mentions anyone being a disciple. The word “disciple” is unknown to Paul. He only knows Peter as an apostle, and only knows apostles as those who received revelations of Jesus (Gal. 1; 1 Cor. 9:1; Rom. 16:25-26). And Paul only ever refers to baptized Christians as brothers of the Lord (Rom. 8:29). He shows no awareness of Jesus having biological brothers (OHJ, pp. 108 and ch. 11.10).

18. “Josephus refers to Jesus, twice”

No, he almost certainly did not (OHJ, ch. 8.9). And even if he did, he used the Gospels as his source. So he can provide no independent evidence.

19. “Cornelius Tacitus refers to Jesus”

Actually, he probably didn’t (OHJ, ch. 8.10). And even if he did, he used Christians repeating the Gospels as his source (ibid.). So, he can provide no independent evidence.

This goes on and on with late historical mentions of Christians.






The gospel outline is a Greek dying/rising savior demigod. This was very popular and comes from Hellenism, as does souls going to Heaven, baptiam, eucharist and most every other change from Judaism to Christianity.
That stuff is 100% mythic and written 100% like a myth.

But the lost history is VERY telling. There is a mysterious blackout period where only by accident (found letters and hidden scripture) do we know anything. This is highly suspicious and clearly much information was erased from history.
There were new discoveries. The lost Gospels showed that Gnosticism was huge which contained completely different beliefs.
You believe the "outline of history in the NT" which is all a myth but don't believe historical information about where all the theology comes from?




This argument makes no sense. First deaths in the gospels are just stories. But we know for a demonstrable fact that people TODAY and in those times were giving up their lives for other religions? Which were myths? Is Islam true? Do you realize how many have died for the religion?

People following the Gospels are following a myth. What do you think the BILLIONS. of Islamic people are following? Or the Billions of Hindu?? Or the thousands of other religions? People dying for stories doesn't make them real.

Martyrdom was extensively promoted by the Tongmenghui and the Kuomintang party in modern China. Revolutionaries who died fighting against the Qing dynasty in the Xinhai Revolution and throughout the Republic of China period, furthering the cause of the revolution, were recognized as martyrs.[citation needed]

Despite the promotion of ahimsa (non-violence) within Sanatana Dharma, and there being no concept of martyrdom,[27] there is the belief of righteous duty (dharma), where violence is used as a last resort to resolution after all other means have failed. Examples of this are found in the Mahabharata. Upon completion of their exile, the Pandavas were refused the return of their portion of the kingdom by their cousin Duruyodhana; and following which all means of peace talks by Krishna, Vidura and Sanjaya failed. During the great war which commenced, even Arjuna was brought down with doubts, e.g., attachment, sorrow, fear. This is where Krishna instructs Arjuna how to carry out his duty as a righteous warrior and fight.

Islam[edit]
Shahid originates from the Quranic Arabic word meaning "witness" and is also used to denote a martyr. Shahid occurs frequently in the Quran in the generic sense "witness", but only once in the sense "martyr, one who dies for his faith"; this latter sense acquires wider use in the hadiths. Islam views a martyr as a man or woman who dies while conducting jihad, whether on or off the battlefield (see greater jihad and lesser jihad).[28] The concept of the martyr in Islam had been made prominent during the Islamic revolution (1978/79) in Iran and the subsequent Iran-Iraq war, so that the cult of the martyr had a lasting impact on the course of revolution and war.[29]

All I can say in response is that I believe (not saying you believe what I believe, or should confirm what I believe) that God led me to study the Bible with those that He chooses. I believe it is HIS book written by holy spirit. Thank you.

 

[Fool]

NO! In the UB the evolution of life began on earth 550,000,000 years ago when the primitive life forms were first created on earth. Those forms evolved into life as we know it. My mention of Celestial transport was specific to Adam and Eve or any other beings who come from places other than Earth. Adam and Eve preexisted on another world. Gabriel for example would have used celestial transport to come to earth to suddenly appear in Mary's living room. There are practical aspects to how the universe works. Long distance travel is one of those.

this still occurs as walk-ins. those who come from other densities, heavens to raise the spirit, consciousness of the children in service to love/light

the problem is that the veil over the subconscious creates the illusion of uniqueness and individuality, until the veil is removed. everytime a walk-in, or re-incarnate reappears in this density, it can become enmeshed in the illusion.

overcoming the illusion is the game. removing the veil can only happen through meditation, rumination, wondering, immersion in the name

the book of revelation is the uncovering of this veil. the seven seals, veils. only love can accomplish this.

 

[YoursTrue]

i was having a discussion on spirituality. i'm not worried about forms, materialism. I don't have a problem with evolution, or the idea that a monkey could be spiritual/mental.

ecclesiastes 3:18-21


your question is irrelevant

Not really. Because if Mary, Anna, and Jesus evolved from another said (as those who believe in the theory of evolution) form of ape ancestor, they then come from the apes in essence, and there's nothing an adherent to the theory of evolution can do to change that. If you don't want to say if these persons are part of the process of having evolved in the long or short run from an unknown common ape ancestor, just let me know -- that's ok. However I will possibly ask in the future since some are saying Mary and Anna were conceived by immaculate conception, or something like that. Therefore yes, the question must be considered -- do humans come from, or evolve from, apelike ancestors. Thank you again.

 

[Colt]

this still occurs as walk-ins

the problem is that the veil over the subconscious creates the illusion of uniqueness and individuality, until the veil is removed. everytime a walk-in, or re-incarnate reappears in this density, it can become enmeshed in the illusion.

overcoming the illusion is the game. removing the veil can only happen through meditation, rumination, wondering, immersion in the name

the book of revelation is the uncovering of this veil. the seven seals, veils. only love can accomplish this.

Mysticism is a poor mans drug. Something is true, not everything is true. Beliefs and understanding change. The truth doesn't.

Man may have once believed that since Adam and Eve was an ancient story then God must have created everything just prior. But the authors of Genesis didn't know that the layers of evolutionary history can be found in the earth. At the time the Hebrew priest didn't claim to be writing "the word of God". That came latter among the priest class who use inspiration by the holy spirit as the foundation of their authority.

 

[Fool]

Mysticism is a poor mans drug. Something is true, not everything is true. Beliefs and understanding changes. The truth doesn't.

Man may have once believed that since Adam and Eve was an ancient story then God must have created everything just prior. But the authors of Genesis didn't know that the layers of evolutionary history can e found in the earth. At the time the Hebrew priest didn't claim to be writing "the word of God". That came latter among the priest class who use inspiration by the holy spirit as the foundation of their authority.

love is the mystery. infinite and without measure, or comparison. i'd prefer to be the poor servant of a poor master than to think as some do.

llresearch.org

 

[YoursTrue]

Mysticism is a poor mans drug. Something is true, not everything is true. Beliefs and understanding changes. The truth doesn't.

Man may have once believed that since Adam and Eve was an ancient story then God must have created everything just prior. But the authors of Genesis didn't know that the layers of evolutionary history can be found in the earth. At the time the Hebrew priest didn't claim to be writing "the word of God". That came latter among the priest class who use inspiration by the holy spirit as the foundation of their authority.

I am aware the Bible is a collection of writings over time and put together. So then -- do you believe that the various lifeforms, including worms, trees, and humans, etc., came about as described by scientists according to the theory of evolution? Just to clarify.

 

[Fool]

Not really. Because if Mary, Anna, and Jesus evolved from another said (as those who believe in the theory of evolution) form of ape ancestor, they then come from the apes in essence, and there's nothing an adherent to the theory of evolution can do to change that. If you don't want to say if these persons are part of the process of having evolved in the long or short run from an unknown common ape ancestor, just let me know -- that's ok. However I will possibly ask in the future since some are saying Mary and Anna were conceived by immaculate conception, or something like that. Therefore yes, the question must be considered -- do humans come from, or evolve from, apelike ancestors. Thank you again.

you're like the atheist, the materialist, you believe consciousness arises from matter. it doesn't. forms of matter arise from consciousness.

forms follow function. forms don't arise from inert no thing. matter doesn't adapt. consciousness does

 

[Colt]

I am aware the Bible is a collection of writings over time and put together. So then -- do you believe that the various lifeforms, including worms, trees, and humans, etc., came about as described by scientists according to the theory of evolution? Just to clarify.

Yes, life evolved, and within the evolution of life we can see a purposive potential. Life progresses, there is a perfection hunger. Science is also unaware of the influence of the spirits of God or cosmic mind on the evolution of the brain.

 

[Sheldon]

NO! In the UB the evolution of life began on earth 550,000,000 years ago when the primitive life forms were first created on earth.

The oldest known fossils, are cyanobacteria from Archaean rocks of western Australia, dated 3.5 billion years old. Oops...

 

[sojourner]

Jesus never was and never will be the messiah. Here is why.

He failed one of the first OT prophecies which was to be descended from king David and king Solomon. Genesis 49:10 states that the messiah would descend from king David's side and king Solomon in Chronicles 22:9-10. Jesus already failed this due to a virgin birth. Mary in the NT has no genealogy except for it being hinted at in Luke 1:34-36. The angel confirmed Mary is biologically blood related to Elizabeth. And Luke 1:5 clearly states that Elizabeth is descended from king Aaron. Therefore since Mary is blood related to Elizabeth, she also follows that lineage. So we can conclude Mary is descended from king Aaron of the Levi tribe. There is no mention other than this of her genealogy.


We can also disregard her being descended from king David and Solomon at this point and also because she is not mentioned anywhere in the NT that she was descended from those two anyway. Now, even though Joseph is descended from king David and Solomon, he is disqualified from having any affiliation with Jesus since he made no biological contribution to Jesus' birth as clearly mentioned in Matthew 1:22-25. Only after his birth did Mary and Joseph biologically "consummate." This is a clear indication that Jesus failed this OT prophecy.

What can we logically conclude from this fact alone? That Jesus is NOT the messiah. And I just made the case for Judaism that much stronger ironically...

Except that Jesus’ birth mirrors exactly the places in the Hebrew texts where the younger son inherits, and the spiritually bankrupt are favored. It’s this exact precept that Jesus answered: the unworthy are found worthy. Isaiah states this, as do other books.

 

[sojourner]

The story of Jesus being born of a virgin isn't the first of its kind. There are stories of other Christ-like figures that predate Christianity and Jesus' alleged life on earth (10 Christ-Like Figures that Predate Jesus). In fact, there are many stories about Jesus' life that parallel the stories of these Christ-like figures that predate Christianity. For instance, being tempted by the devil before an earthly ministry began, miraculously healing sick people, being crucified, dying for humanity, and being resurrected from the dead after three days. The story of Jesus' death on the cross and his resurrection from the dead after three days parallels the life of the Greek god, Attis (1250 BCE). The stories of Attis include being born of a virgin; being crucified, descending into the underworld after dying, and being resurrected from the dead after three days (Attis: Born of a Virgin on December 25th, Crucified and Resurrected after Three Days).

Jesus’ birth narrative is an almost exact ripoff of Augustus’ miracle birth. From a literary perspective, Jesus myths mirror and supplant those of Augustus, in order to appeal to the Romans.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Jesus’ birth narrative is an almost exact ripoff of Augustus’ miracle birth. From a literary perspective, Jesus myths mirror and supplant those of Augustus, in order to appeal to the Romans.

The more I read information like this, the more I'm convinced that the Bible is plagiarized from older pagan religions that predate it and Christianity. And as I explained in my post here, I'm also convinced that the Bible has many contradictions within its pages too.

 

[Only Reason]

Jesus never was and never will be the messiah. Here is why.

He failed one of the first OT prophecies which was to be descended from king David and king Solomon. Genesis 49:10 states that the messiah would descend from king David's side and king Solomon in Chronicles 22:9-10. Jesus already failed this due to a virgin birth. Mary in the NT has no genealogy except for it being hinted at in Luke 1:34-36. The angel confirmed Mary is biologically blood related to Elizabeth. And Luke 1:5 clearly states that Elizabeth is descended from king Aaron. Therefore since Mary is blood related to Elizabeth, she also follows that lineage. So we can conclude Mary is descended from king Aaron of the Levi tribe. There is no mention other than this of her genealogy.


We can also disregard her being descended from king David and Solomon at this point and also because she is not mentioned anywhere in the NT that she was descended from those two anyway. Now, even though Joseph is descended from king David and Solomon, he is disqualified from having any affiliation with Jesus since he made no biological contribution to Jesus' birth as clearly mentioned in Matthew 1:22-25. Only after his birth did Mary and Joseph biologically "consummate." This is a clear indication that Jesus failed this OT prophecy.

What can we logically conclude from this fact alone? That Jesus is NOT the messiah. And I just made the case for Judaism that much stronger ironically...

king solomon descendant line with David: 1 chronicles 22:9-10 I forgot to explicitly mention that.

There are many other prophecies he didn't fulfill such as Jeramiah 30:3 and Isaiah 11:11-12 stating that the messiah would have been able to convince all the jews who are away from Israel to come back to their original home which is Israel. The third temple should've been built while the messiah was reigning the first time around; Isaiah 2:2-3, Ezekiel 37:26-27. There should've been worldwide peace and a complete end to war while the messiah reigned the first time around; Isaiah 60:18, Micah 4:1-4. But instead Jesus came to bring endless war and not peace as mentioned here, Matthew 10:34. Jesus never ruled as king, never sat on David's throne as king over Israel. Not all the jews observed God's commandments in the Torah, Deuteronomy 30:8. Not all people came to worship the one and only God in the Torah, Ezekiel 38:23.


Everything here prophesied in the OT was never fulfilled by Jesus' first coming. And so to make up for this, Christians claim that Jesus will one day come back to fulfill the OT prophecies he failed to do the first time around. This gives more incentive for the Jews not to think of him as the messiah even more though. As there is no second coming prophecy in the OT and the real Messiah would complete these prophecies the first time around, outright. Jesus simply lied about being God since he made the claim that he was God, yet, failed to do what he "supposedly" prophesied about in the OT. Proving him to be nothing more than a liar.