godnotgod
Thou art That
I agree. So when are you going away? Or do you have a compulsive disorder that first tells you to ignore me, but then cannot help but pay attention?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No Evidence for 1st Century Nazareth
- Thread starter godnotgod
- Start date
I agree. So when are you going away? Or do you have a compulsive disorder that first tells you to ignore me, but then cannot help but pay attention?
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
I agree. So when are you going away? Or do you have a compulsive disorder that first tells you to ignore me, but then cannot help but pay attention?
He's reading your stuff when I quote you.
(sorry Jay)
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
That Dude is referring to the synagogue inscription found in the 1960s that gives a list of reassigned priests after the Bar Kokbha Rebellion 132-5CE.
Some websites inexplicably date it at 70CE.
In any case, the town probably didn't spring out of the ground fully formed in 135CE.
note - Avi-Yonah, M. (1962). "A List of Priestly Courses from Caesarea". Israel Exploration Journal 12: 137139.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
godnotgod
Thou art That
I don't need to.
Oh, that's right! But of course: You're totally self-adoring. How quaint.
Last edited:
godnotgod
Thou art That
"Jesus Christ" never existed as an historical figure.
It is a curious fact that the oldest components of the so-called New Testament, the letters believed to have been written by one Saul/Paul, know almost nothing of any Jesus biography. Neither Bethlehem nor Nazareth are mentioned in these charter documents of the Christian religion. Only in the much later Book of Acts is it claimed that Saul (Paul) had an interview with "Jesus of Nazareth." The later the document, the greater the detail of the Jesus story presented.
There is no convincing evidence to make one suppose that any of the surviving "gospels" were written by eyewitnesses. Indeed, study of the gospels shows quite conclusively that they were not. For example, the authors of the gospels of Matthew and Luke incorporate nearly the entire Greek text of the gospel of Mark, adding sayings taken from yet another document (the so-called "Q-Document"), and generally make the miracles recounted by Mark even more miraculous. Had Matthew and Luke been eyewitnesses, they would have written their own accounts, without recourse to plagiarism.
Mark's gospel, the oldest of the official set of four, contains errors of geography and custom that would not have been made by an eyewitness. John's gospel, the latest of the set, is both too late and too ethereal to be taken as a biographical account at all - eyewitness or otherwise. There is nothing about the gospels to make one take them seriously from a biographic point of view: there is no good reason to think them other than ancient examples of the art of fiction.
If the historicity of Jesus cannot be supported by the New Testament writings, what about extrabiblical sources? Did any Greek or Roman or Jewish historians observe his career and write about it? Not one.
Although Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and other ancient authors are often cited as evidence for an historical Jesus, it is clear that their accounts (even if they could be proven authentic) are derivative, not original. Josephus, the oldest of these historians, was born at least five years after the date of the alleged crucifixion! There are no eyewitnesses. Moreover, the ancient non-Christian accounts of Jesus all were written at a time when Christianity already was a thriving delirium, and our pagan authors can be taken only as being witnesses of the state to which Christian traditions had evolved in their times, not as witnesses of an historical Jesus of Nazareth.
There is no credible evidence indicating Jesus ever lived.
This fact is, of course, inadequate to prove he did not live. Even so, although it is logically impossible to prove a universal negative, it is possible to show that there is no need to hypothesize any historical Jesus. The Christ biography can be accounted for on purely literary, astrological, and comparative mythological grounds. The logical principle known as Occam's Razor tells us that basic assumptions should not be multiplied beyond necessity. For practical purposes, showing that an historical Jesus is an unnecessary assumption is just as good as proving that he never existed.
HOW JESUS GOT A LIFE
It is a curious fact that the oldest components of the so-called New Testament, the letters believed to have been written by one Saul/Paul, know almost nothing of any Jesus biography. Neither Bethlehem nor Nazareth are mentioned in these charter documents of the Christian religion. Only in the much later Book of Acts is it claimed that Saul (Paul) had an interview with "Jesus of Nazareth." The later the document, the greater the detail of the Jesus story presented.
There is no convincing evidence to make one suppose that any of the surviving "gospels" were written by eyewitnesses. Indeed, study of the gospels shows quite conclusively that they were not. For example, the authors of the gospels of Matthew and Luke incorporate nearly the entire Greek text of the gospel of Mark, adding sayings taken from yet another document (the so-called "Q-Document"), and generally make the miracles recounted by Mark even more miraculous. Had Matthew and Luke been eyewitnesses, they would have written their own accounts, without recourse to plagiarism.
Mark's gospel, the oldest of the official set of four, contains errors of geography and custom that would not have been made by an eyewitness. John's gospel, the latest of the set, is both too late and too ethereal to be taken as a biographical account at all - eyewitness or otherwise. There is nothing about the gospels to make one take them seriously from a biographic point of view: there is no good reason to think them other than ancient examples of the art of fiction.
If the historicity of Jesus cannot be supported by the New Testament writings, what about extrabiblical sources? Did any Greek or Roman or Jewish historians observe his career and write about it? Not one.
Although Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and other ancient authors are often cited as evidence for an historical Jesus, it is clear that their accounts (even if they could be proven authentic) are derivative, not original. Josephus, the oldest of these historians, was born at least five years after the date of the alleged crucifixion! There are no eyewitnesses. Moreover, the ancient non-Christian accounts of Jesus all were written at a time when Christianity already was a thriving delirium, and our pagan authors can be taken only as being witnesses of the state to which Christian traditions had evolved in their times, not as witnesses of an historical Jesus of Nazareth.
There is no credible evidence indicating Jesus ever lived.
This fact is, of course, inadequate to prove he did not live. Even so, although it is logically impossible to prove a universal negative, it is possible to show that there is no need to hypothesize any historical Jesus. The Christ biography can be accounted for on purely literary, astrological, and comparative mythological grounds. The logical principle known as Occam's Razor tells us that basic assumptions should not be multiplied beyond necessity. For practical purposes, showing that an historical Jesus is an unnecessary assumption is just as good as proving that he never existed.
HOW JESUS GOT A LIFE
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
More yummy spam
godnotgod
Thou art That
Nothing but gobs'ngobs o'lovin' spoonfuls of pure virgin spam generously administered. Bon apetit!
Last edited:
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Nothing but gobs'ngobs o'lovin' spoonfuls of pure virgin spam generously administered. Bon apetit!
Your spam is boring - so plain.
I want mine fried with some eggs and cheese - grilled onions and peppers on top.
No more of just throwing the can at me and making me open it my self. The least you can do is season it a little.
Page 92 ... 
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Just a bunch of monkeys throwing poo, man.
More like a juvenile gorilla and a playful bonobo: one looking silly beating his chest and the other just screwing around.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
godnotgod
Thou art That
That's down the street at the new Jesus Theme Park. Jesus crucified daily on a bloody stick. All the gore and sensation one could possibly hope for. Can't wait 'til they offer a visitor-participant program. Imagine: AE himself beaten bloody and crucified in front of tens of thousands, half of them shouting 'Crucify Him', with the other half bowing in rapt adoration. Oh, the thrill of it all! Spam Supreme 'mit all der fixins'.
Here, we can't offer such over the top excitement. We just have the plain old truth, served straight up. If that's not enough to titillate yer demanding superficial ball-park hot dog simple-minded simpleton, I am afraid we just cannot help you.
My offer still stands: I will donate $1 toward a trip of your choice: Vegas or the Jesus Theme Park in Orlando, Fla. Either guaranteed to get your rocks off. :yes:
You see what happens when you are raised on all that fancy muck you've been spoon-fed all those years? You get addicted, and then you want bigger and bigger fixes to get the same high. When someone offers you the real stuff, it just don't satisfy any more. But, as I said before, that muck is all just so much cheap theatrical glitter and empty calories.
Sober up and get a life. :beach:
Last edited:
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Spam hasn't made you a good judge of anything.
godnotgod
Thou art That
The Three Lower Centers of Consciousness: Power, Sensation, and Security, are all Addictions. Only when you enter into the Fourth Center, that of Love, do the first Three Centers become transformed from Addictions into Preferences. It's your choice: continue to be led on by the nose right into the grave, or wake up and be free.
godnotgod
Thou art That
I don't need to judge anything when the truth of the matter is plain to see.
So, which is it: You dress up in your Elvis outfit for Vegas, or your staff, robe and sandals headed for Florida? Either way, you get the thrill of a lifetime. Spam Supreme Galore, with your name in lights. What more could a High-Rolling Sensation-Seeker ask for?
Last edited: