There is NO Historical Evidence for Jesus

[Subduction Zone]

What does Genesis

There's nothing there in.Genesis stating God created the world..
Not only that..
What does Genesis creation week.
Have to do with.the historical evidence of Jesus Christ

I thought this post was about
The historical evidence of Jesus Christ...
I know I entered the right room.
Maybe your in the wrong room

It has quite a bit to do with the credibility of the Bible as a whole.

 

[joelr]

Disgusting. Not your words, I know.

This is a rationalization for "sinning," like saying that if I don't sin, Jesus died for nothing. Viewing lying for Jesus as a virtue was still alive during the Renaissance and got a boost from the father of Protestantism, Martin Luther: "What harm would it do, if a man told a good strong lie for the sake of the good and for the Christian church … a lie out of necessity, a useful lie, a helpful lie, such lies would not be against God, he would accept them." And it's alive and well in biblical apologetics sources like the one you quoted, where it is affectionately known as "lying for Jesus" or Pious Fraud

That is another option regarding Paul, that since he already bought into the Jesus cult hat was happening he told lies about a "vision" for the sake of the movement. He may have felt God was on his side anyway and it's for the good of the Christian movement.
This is done so many times throughout history, even with the fake Epistles hat church fathers added. Yet apologists still simplify the issue and strawman the situation and say "so Paul died for a lie"?
It isn't a "lie"? He either believed stories to be true OR he told white lies for the good of the movement. Like Eusubius did when adding the Christian Creed to Josephus' words on Jesus.

 

[Faithofchristian]

So what proof of evidence do you have to back up what your saying.
Your called into question by your own questions.
You first have to provide evidence to support what your saying.
Without any evidence of your own
.your question is invalid, void, full of empty words
.

 

[joelr]

Your questions are completely legitimate questions, but I have no proofs.

Our family attended a moderate Methodist church where I heard stuff that I did NOT believe, OT stuff like Noah's flood, parting seas, a monstrous deity responsible for horrific atrocities. Oddly, I never had an issue with Jesus, I assumed that his spiritual truth was superior and did not endorse the OT ways. It was obvious to me before I ever really thought about it that the earth is quite old, that life evolved, and man is related to other living things.

My father was a closet Urantia Book reader from the 60's. The family would be gathered in the den watching M.A.S.H. or Archi Bunker, dad is over in his recliner reading the UB. Every so often he would get our attention and read an interesting paragraph from the UB. My ears would perk up, it was as if I already knew the material!

Feeling like you are familiar with fictive material is not uncommon and is what draws people to fantasy and sci-fi. It isn't an indication of truth.
The LOTR universe starts with a supreme God who creates other Gods and goes from there. The creation story is fascinating and almost sounds like it could be a. real possibility. Sound is used in the creation process.

Its the arrangement of the material by the minds behind the book that I find compelling. Revelators are NOT allowed to give mankind unearned knowledge about science. We are supposed to be searching for both material and spiritual truth. However it appears that some of the content had been proposed by humans but not widely known in 1911-34, printed 1955. I will give a couple of examples:

That is total BS. Of course they can give information to demonstrate they are legit. It can be a simple math thing where they give 1 million digits of pi at the septillion mark or some such thing. This will not advance us but merely demonstrate they have capabilities. Of course they "cannot give information". The clever authors of channeling always use that. Any actual alien race would know it looks like sketch city and if they wanted people to take it serious they would provide information.
"Not earned", seriously? Or maybe it's " don't have"?


We still have no proof of ANYTHING spiritual, whatever that means. And they have not demonstrated they have capabilities. Again, you have capabilities? OK, What are the 100 digits of pi at 10^10 ,and e?

I mean they say no new knowledge but then they give a number for the amount of new galaxies new telescopes will reveal? They reveal all kinds of stuff but it's random,

BY CAITLIN O'KANE

FEBRUARY 19, 2019 / 3:35 PM / CBS NEWS

Scientists have discovered 300,000 new galaxies

Urantia Book 1955

12:2.2 (130.4) Although the unaided human eye can see only two or three nebulae outside the borders of the superuniverse of Orvonton, your telescopes literally reveal millions upon millions of these physical universes in process of formation. Most of the starry realms visually exposed to the search of your present-day telescopes are in Orvonton, but with photographic technique the larger telescopes penetrate far beyond the borders of the grand universe into the domains of outer space, where untold universes are in process of organization. And there are yet other millions of universes beyond the range of your present instruments.

12:2.3 (130.5) In the not-distant future, new telescopes will reveal to the wondering gaze of Urantian astronomers no less than 375 million new galaxies in the remote stretches of outer space. At the same time these more powerful telescopes will disclose that many island universes formerly believed to be in outer space are really a part of the galactic system of Orvonton. The seven superuniverses are still growing; the periphery of each is gradually expanding; new nebulae are constantly being stabilized and organized; and some of the nebulae which Urantian astronomers regard as extragalactic are actually on the fringe of Orvonton and are traveling along with us.

As fantastic as some writings are if someone is trying to pass something off as truth you should run it by cosmologists and others who may have a different point of reference to understand if you are being snowed.
The Skeptics Dictionary goes over many issues:

Urantia Book - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com

skepdic.com

A Cosmologist reviews the claims here:

Problems with the Cosmology and Astronomy of The Urantia Book

ABSTRACT The purpose of this essay is to set the cosmology and astronomy of the Urantia Book against what modern, twenty-first-century cosmology and astronomy observe in the physical universe. I wi…

ruminations.blog

his conclusions - " In short, the authors created a fantasy universe to emphasize the drama and adventure of the ascension. The purpose of the fantasy universe is literary! "



In 1955 cosmologists new about galaxies, the formation of galaxies, the curvature of space and they already had a concept called the "supergalaxy". You can get a book by George Gamow and he talks about all that stuff.

There was a debate about expanding vs steady state universe. But this quote "the periphery of each is gradually expanding;"
is wrong. It's written by a human who doesn't understand how spacetime is expanding because we didn't yet understand that.
The more I look the more I see these little mistakes that show it's written by a person from that time period.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Early Occupation of Britain Summary​

The Ancient Human Occupation of Britain project (“AHOB project”) was launched in 2001 to revitalize the study of ancient archaeological sites in Britain. By 2005 AHOB researchers were able to establish that primitive man occupied Britain 700,000 years ago. This discovery came as quite a surprise to the archaeological community. Prior to this recent development, the evidence for early human habitation only went back 500,000 years.

The Urantia Book, published in 1955, states that human habitation of Britain began approximately 900,000 years ago. Noting that there used to be a land bridge between Britain and France, it also remarks that, even though most of the evidence of human occupation is now submerged in the English Channel, there are still several sites near the coast bearing evidence of this early occupation. This is where recent discoveries have been made that push back the date of human habitation by 200,000 years. Additional work by the AHOB project is increasingly lending support to this aspect of The Urantia Book’s account of early human history. It is anticipated that this report will need to be updated numerous times in the next several years as the AHOB team continues to make new discoveries.

Seriously that doesn't make sense. The reason they cannot find human evidence from 200,000 - 900,000 years ago is because it's submerged in the English Channel?
Except there is no evidence of Homo Sapien EVER in Africa before 200,000 years ago? No modern humans and no migration. It would not just suddenly all be in the English Channel?

Early Migration to Britain Overview​

The Urantia Book, published in 1955, makes several statements about the early occupation of Britain. Recently, the Ancient Human Occupation of Britain project (“AHOB project”) has made a number of surprising discoveries which support the statements made in The Urantia Book.

Most importantly, the AHOB project findings have pushed the earliest human occupation of Britain back considerably. Until this decade, scientific consensus dated human life in Britain to about 500,000 years ago. However, the AHOB project has discovered two different sites with human artifacts that date to 700,000 years ago. At the first site, off the Norfolk coast near Happisburgh, two hand axes have been found sticking out of the seabed in the remains of an ancient forest. Both hand axes, as well as the forest, were dated to between 500,000 and 700,000 years ago.

Uh, no that isn't true. Homo heidelbergensis, who were BEFORE modern humans were there.

700,000 years ago the fourth glacier, the greatest of all in Europe, was in recession; men and animals were returning north. The climate was cool and moist, and primitive man again thrived in Europe and western Asia. Gradually the forests spread north over land which had been so recently covered by the glacier.

The Urantia Book states that the “Foxhall peoples” were the first human occupants of Britain. Interestingly, the name “Foxhall peoples” seems to have come from an obscure 1905 article by Nina Frances Layard detailing her excavation work at the Paleolithic site at Foxhall Road, Ipswich. Layard made a number of remarkable discoveries including early hand axes and remains of extinct mammals, but her work was not widely recognized until 2005, when two AHOB researchers published Miss Layard excavates: the Palaeolithic site at Foxhall Road, Ipswich, 1903-1905. The Urantia Booktherefore seems prescient in acknowledging this as an important piece of scholarly work.

The Urantia Book’s description of the “Foxhall peoples” is consistent with the findings of the AHOB project, stating that 1) the “Foxhall peoples” had knowledge of flint working, 2) their settlements were located near rivers and seashores on a land bridge connecting France to Britain, 3) only three or four settlements remain above water, and 4) they lived in this region as far back as 900,000 years ago.

In conclusion, the discoveries made by the AHOB project over the last ten years bring scientific consensus in line with statements made in The Urantia Book, which was published over fifty years ago. Scholars have now pushed back the date for the earliest human occupation of Britain to 700,000 years ago, which is consistent with The Urantia Book’s statements and bring them 200,000 years closer to its claim that humans were actually first there about 900,000 years ago.

I don't know if this is a lie or a lie of omission where they fail to say during these dates it was other hominids. I don't care really, it's a scam.

 

[Colt]

Feeling like you are familiar with fictive material is not uncommon and is what draws people to fantasy and sci-fi. It isn't an indication of truth.
The LOTR universe starts with a supreme God who creates other Gods and goes from there. The creation story is fascinating and almost sounds like it could be a. real possibility. Sound is used in the creation process.

This chart depicts the origins of the human race as describes in the UB.

https://squarecircles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Papers61-62_1.pdf

Evidence has been found already of the Foxhall people on land, not submerged in the English Channel. You clearly didn't bother to read what I provided.

The UB explains how life was created on earth:

THE LIFE-DAWN ERA​

58:4.1 That we are called Life Carriers should not confuse you. We can and do carry life to the planets, but we brought no life to Urantia. Urantia life is unique, original with the planet. This sphere is a life-modification world; all life appearing hereon was formulated by us right here on the planet; and there is no other world in all Satania, even in all Nebadon, that has a life existence just like that of Urantia.

58:4.2 550,000,000 years ago the Life Carrier corps returned to Urantia. In co-operation with spiritual powers and superphysical forces we organized and initiated the original life patterns of this world and planted them in the hospitable waters of the realm. All planetary life (aside from extraplanetary personalities) down to the days of Caligastia, the Planetary Prince, had its origin in our three original, identical, and simultaneous marine-life implantations. These three life implantations have been designated as: the central or Eurasian-African, the eastern or Australasian, and the western, embracing Greenland and the Americas.

58:4.3 500,000,000 years ago primitive marine vegetable life was well established on Urantia. Greenland and the arctic land mass, together with North and South America, were beginning their long and slow westward drift. Africa moved slightly south, creating an east and west trough, the Mediterranean basin, between itself and the mother body. Antarctica, Australia, and the land indicated by the islands of the Pacific broke away on the south and east and have drifted far away since that day.

58:4.4 We had planted the primitive form of marine life in the sheltered tropic bays of the central seas of the east-west cleavage of the breaking-up continental land mass. Our purpose in making three marine-life implantations was to insure that each great land mass would carry this life with it, in its warm-water seas, as the land subsequently separated. We foresaw that in the later era of the emergence of land life large oceans of water would separate these drifting continental land masses.

The celestial author is given for each paper.

1. 57. The Origin of Urantia - Life Carrier
2. 58. Life Establishment on Urantia - Life Carrier
3. 59. The Marine-life Era on Urantia - Life Carrier
4. 60. Urantia During the Early Land-Life Era - Life Carrier
5. 61. The Mammalian Era on Urantia - Life Carrier
6. 62. The Dawn Races of Early Man - Life Carrier
7. 63. The First Human Family - Life Carrier
8. 64. The Evolutionary Races of Color - Life Carrier
9. 65. The Overcontrol of Evolution - Life Carrier

 

[joelr]

Or deified men

Yes maybe. The latest historicity study (both) gives 3 to 1 odds in favor of mythicism.

If it wasn’t true you’d be able to name some examples but you can’t.

I just said Romulus? And why would giving examples mean what you claim? The church blacked out a huge religious period in history. They took over temples and destroyed everything they could get their hands on about other religions. So why would you make the claim that if x was true then y?
It doesn't follow?

Name a single purely mythical god whose biography resembles that of a human but with some magical bits and whose deification and cultic following began pretty much overlapping with his purported life and that if it’s early adherents.

Yes, ROMULUS.
Also all the other mystery religions which we only have limited information on may all be very similar to Jesus in that way.

Many of the Greek Gods also fit what you are asking. Hercules was married, had children, and underwent all types of earthly struggles before he attained godhood.

The 15 heros on the Rank Ragalin list all had earthly lives.

Romulus was:
the son of God, his corpse went missing, he resurrected in a new divine body, he meets with a follower on a road after his resurrection, he gives an inspired message, then he is taken up into a cloud and ascends.
His followers say there are dubious alternative accounts of his resurrection, his followers are initially in sorrow but later leads to belief and deification.
Romulus, the founder of Rome, completely made up.

Deified humans on the other hand commonly are deified during their lives or shortly after death:

Romulus was deified after his death.

Antinous, Hong Xuquan, Haile Selassie, Julius and Augustus Caesar, etc.

You keep giving Romulus, who was deified centuries after his purported human life as an example of someone who was deified around the time of their purported life. This is nonsense.

Romulus also came from a humble background, unjustly killed by the authorities and was an orphan, shepard and a nobody from a hill country.

The Jesus story would have happened around 1-30 AD. The current Gospels were written from 90-110, for the ENTIRE 2nd century the religion was 50% Gnostic, many other sects were using other gospels, the first canon was completely unknown (Marcionite) and the modern canon was established in early 318 AD and again in 380 AD.

So what you are saying here is wrong on several levels.

So try again, or accept that a mythical Jesus would appear to be completely unique in having these characteristics and it better matches the category of deified humans.

You have to actually use correct information. The lack of sources is a bit of a clue you are making stuff up.
Jesus fits the:
RR fable of the divine King
ascension to Godhood tale
the pre-Christian narratives of the life and death of Socrates and Aesop

"In Jewish and Pagan antiquity, in matters of religious persuasion, fabricating stories was the norm, not the exception, even in the production of narratives purporting to be true."

Dr Carrier, OHJ, pg 214

Given that we would expect both a deified human or a mythical god to rely on local cultural tropes of divinity, the fact Jesus would be unique among pure myths in this regard is more pertinent to historicity than the fact he takes on local tropes of divinity.

According to an expert,
"And in the case of non-existent persons (like Romulus or Moses), this was again the NORM. They would get complete biographies, with origins, and deaths, and adventures and quips and family and friends, including siblings with names, a home town, the whole shebang. All invented.
There was nothing exceptional or unusual about this at all. This is what typically happened. It therefore cannot be regarded as improbable."

Carrier, OHJ, pg 219

David Litwa, who you keep referring to, doesn’t see adoption of mythical tropes as being unique to mythical figures:

I have made the claim that early Christians imagined and depicted Jesus with some of the basic traits common to other Mediterranean divinities and deified men… What they indicate is that in Christian literature, the historical human being called Jesus of Nazareth received deification.

I reference Litwa to demonstrate Jesus is modeled after Greek deities. He isn't a mythicist.

James brother of Jesus might not mean brother so it doesn’t count.

We don't know what Paul meant but I think Carrier still counts it in his prior probability calculation.

James brother of Jesus might be a different James brother of a different Jesus or a fabrication so it doesn’t count.

That is a different topic. The scholarship suggests forgery.

That there are no instances of mythical figures being deified in near real time doesn’t count.

Of course there are, in the same time frame as Jesus. Yes there are?

Etc.

All evidence counts, you judge based on the totality of evidence, not by simply saying whatever Richard Carrier dislikes "doesn't count" no matter how many other scholars disagree.

Yes, actual evidence. You haven't presented any. R. Lataster also agrees and his work supports mythicism.
Again it's 3 to 1, not definite.

We can construct alternative narratives for almost everything in ancient history, that doesn’t mean other more parsimonious explanations “don’t count“.

Which is a strawman because I have given simple explanation which can be elaborated on.

I understand that you are his number one fan, but the highly subjective opinion of one 'independent scholar' whose income depends on begging mythicist fans for donations, and the agreement of another minor faculty member at a decent university does not establish historical fact and settle the issue beyond doubt.

Another strawman. How many times do I say "3 to 1" which is 33.3% in favor of historicity for you to completely disregard that and completely change the math?
I am a fan of the truth. Especially over pure speculation. Which if you go back and read your posts, you enter ZERO sources. Now you are attacking Carrier as if this impacts truth.

Also never said it was settled beyond any doubt. You just haven't raised any points in favor. You raise a lot of assumptions. Which is the problem with historicity.

Of course, even a "non expert" like you could think for themselves and simply name one of the other completely mythical gods who was created in near real-time, failing that you could just repeat what's on his blog again if there is anything.

So I can engage with your weird strawman? What are you even talking about? What are your sources? What even are the stories you are talking about and timelines?
Jesus IS defined by Paul as a pre-existant angelic being. Jesus was an eschatological Christ. At that time Jesus was believed to be a preexistent being - 1 Cor 8:6, 10.1-4; Phil. 2.6-8, Rom. 8.3 - but was not identical to God. So he isn't starting out as just human at all.

But Plutarch's biography of Romulus was included alongside Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar, written in exactly the same style. In the same fashion historians like Livy or Dionysis would include mythological figures in their otherwise straightforward histories as if they actually existed. Representing myth as fact became so popular, a trend arose of inventing sources to cite as one's authority, thus completing the representation that myths were actual histories. This is how myth began to look under Roman Empire. The Pagan faith literature has exactly the same outcomes, almost all of it is fabricated, yet passed off as true. This was the norm.

 

[joelr]

So what proof of evidence do you have to back up what your saying.
Your called into question by your own questions.
You first have to provide evidence to support what your saying.
Without any evidence of your own
.your question is invalid, void, full of empty words
.

Regarding Genesis, academia (historical) are 100% it's a re-take on Mesopotamian creation/flood mythology. It's taught in Yale Divinity lectures this way and I can time stamp several of the lectures about it.

University textbooks:


These are all peer-reviewed PhD textbooks/monographs,


John Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible 3rd ed.
“Biblical creation stories draw motifs from Mesopotamia, Much of the language and imagery of the Bible was culture specific and deeply embedded in the traditions of the Near East.
2nd ed. The Old Testament, Davies and Rogerson
“We know from the history of the composition of Gilamesh that ancient writers did adapt and re-use older stories……
It is safer to content ourselves with comparing the motifs and themes of Genesis with those of other ancient Near East texts.
In this way we acknowledge our belief that the biblical writers adapted existing stories, while we confess our ignorance about the form and content of the actual stories that the Biblical writers used.”
The Old Testament, A Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, M. Coogan
“Genesis employs and alludes to mythical concepts and phrasing, but at the same time it also adapts transforms and rejected them”
God in Translation, Smith
“…the Bibles authors fashioned whatever they may have inherited of the Mesopotamian literary tradition on their own terms”
THE OT Text and Content, Matthews, Moyer
“….a great deal of material contained in the primeval epics in Genesis is borrowed and adapted from the ancient cultures of that region.”


The Formation of Genesis 1-11, Carr
“The previous discussion has made clear how this story in Genesis represents a complex juxtaposition of multiple traditions often found separately in the Mesopotamian literary world….”
The Priestly Vision of Genesis, Smith
“….storm God and cosmic enemies passed into Israelite tradition. The biblical God is not only generally similar to Baal as a storm god, but God inherited the names of Baal’s cosmic enemies, with names such as Leviathan, Sea, Death and Tanninim.”

Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text

The Enuma Elish (also known as The Seven Tablets of Creation) is the Babylonian creation myth whose title is derived from the opening lines of the piece,

www.worldhistory.org

Genesis/Enuma Elish

The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis. Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.

Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer, translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.


Both Genesis and Enuma Elsih are religious texts which detail and celebrate cultural origins: Genesis describes the origin and founding of the Jewish people under the guidance of the Lord; Enuma Elish recounts the origin and founding of Babylon under the leadership of the god Marduk. Contained in each work is a story of how the cosmos and man were created. Each work begins by describing the watery chaos and primeval darkness that once filled the universe. Then light is created to replace the darkness. Afterward, the heavens are made and in them heavenly bodies are placed. Finally, man is created.

Yahweh

Yahweh is the name of the state god of the ancient Kingdom of Israel and, later, the Kingdom of Judah. His name is composed of four Hebrew consonants (YHWH, known as the Tetragrammaton) which the prophet...

www.worldhistory.org

The meaning of the name `Yahweh' has been interpreted as “He Who Makes That Which Has Been Made” or “He Brings into Existence Whatever Exists”, though other interpretations have been offered by many scholars. In the late middle ages, `Yahweh' came to be changed to `Jehovah' by Christian monks, a name commonly in use today.

The character and power of Yahweh were codified following the Babylonian Captivity of the 6th century BCE and the Hebrew scriptures were canonized during the Second Temple Period (c. 515 BCE-70 CE) to include the concept of a messiah whom Yahweh would send to the Jewish people to lead and redeem them. Yahweh as the all-powerful creator, preserver, and redeemer of the universe was then later developed by the early Christians as their god who had sent his son Jesus as the promised messiah and Islam interpreted this same deity as Allah in their belief system.

Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El. Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that “the Most High, El, gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.

 

[joelr]

This chart depicts the origins of the human race as describes in the UB.

https://squarecircles.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Papers61-62_1.pdf

Evidence has been found already of the Foxhall people on land, not submerged in the English Channel. You clearly didn't bother to read what I provided.

The UB explains how life was created on earth:

THE LIFE-DAWN ERA​

58:4.1 That we are called Life Carriers should not confuse you. We can and do carry life to the planets, but we brought no life to Urantia. Urantia life is unique, original with the planet. This sphere is a life-modification world; all life appearing hereon was formulated by us right here on the planet; and there is no other world in all Satania, even in all Nebadon, that has a life existence just like that of Urantia.

58:4.2 550,000,000 years ago the Life Carrier corps returned to Urantia. In co-operation with spiritual powers and superphysical forces we organized and initiated the original life patterns of this world and planted them in the hospitable waters of the realm. All planetary life (aside from extraplanetary personalities) down to the days of Caligastia, the Planetary Prince, had its origin in our three original, identical, and simultaneous marine-life implantations. These three life implantations have been designated as: the central or Eurasian-African, the eastern or Australasian, and the western, embracing Greenland and the Americas.

58:4.3 500,000,000 years ago primitive marine vegetable life was well established on Urantia. Greenland and the arctic land mass, together with North and South America, were beginning their long and slow westward drift. Africa moved slightly south, creating an east and west trough, the Mediterranean basin, between itself and the mother body. Antarctica, Australia, and the land indicated by the islands of the Pacific broke away on the south and east and have drifted far away since that day.

58:4.4 We had planted the primitive form of marine life in the sheltered tropic bays of the central seas of the east-west cleavage of the breaking-up continental land mass. Our purpose in making three marine-life implantations was to insure that each great land mass would carry this life with it, in its warm-water seas, as the land subsequently separated. We foresaw that in the later era of the emergence of land life large oceans of water would separate these drifting continental land masses.

The celestial author is given for each paper.

1. 57. The Origin of Urantia - Life Carrier
2. 58. Life Establishment on Urantia - Life Carrier
3. 59. The Marine-life Era on Urantia - Life Carrier
4. 60. Urantia During the Early Land-Life Era - Life Carrier
5. 61. The Mammalian Era on Urantia - Life Carrier
6. 62. The Dawn Races of Early Man - Life Carrier
7. 63. The First Human Family - Life Carrier
8. 64. The Evolutionary Races of Color - Life Carrier
9. 65. The Overcontrol of Evolution - Life Carrier

"550,000,000 years ago the Life Carrier corps returned to Urantia. In co-operation with spiritual powers and superphysical forces we organized and initiated the original life patterns of this world and planted them in the hospitable waters of the realm. "


Yes, of course. And in a galaxy far away rebel forces are raising an army.

This is fiction, written by people. We had knowledge in 1955.
If you want to demonstrate evidence show me one thing no human could possibly know in 1955 that wasn't a random projection that sort of panned out.

Likewise you did not read one word of my response. And I bet you will avoid those skeptic debunkings at all cost. And I did read some of that nonsense. You just didn't respond to my comments.
It isn't homo-sapien in Britian and those places it's H. Heidelburgensis. Why are you ignoring everything I responded to by spamming me with fiction?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Regarding Genesis, academia (historical) are 100% it's a re-take on Mesopotamian creation/flood mythology. It's taught in Yale Divinity lectures this way and I can time stamp several of the lectures about it.

University textbooks:


These are all peer-reviewed PhD textbooks/monographs,


John Collins, Introduction to the Hebrew Bible 3rd ed.
“Biblical creation stories draw motifs from Mesopotamia, Much of the language and imagery of the Bible was culture specific and deeply embedded in the traditions of the Near East.
2nd ed. The Old Testament, Davies and Rogerson
“We know from the history of the composition of Gilamesh that ancient writers did adapt and re-use older stories……
It is safer to content ourselves with comparing the motifs and themes of Genesis with those of other ancient Near East texts.
In this way we acknowledge our belief that the biblical writers adapted existing stories, while we confess our ignorance about the form and content of the actual stories that the Biblical writers used.”
The Old Testament, A Historical and Literary Introduction to the Hebrew Scriptures, M. Coogan
“Genesis employs and alludes to mythical concepts and phrasing, but at the same time it also adapts transforms and rejected them”
God in Translation, Smith
“…the Bibles authors fashioned whatever they may have inherited of the Mesopotamian literary tradition on their own terms”
THE OT Text and Content, Matthews, Moyer
“….a great deal of material contained in the primeval epics in Genesis is borrowed and adapted from the ancient cultures of that region.”


The Formation of Genesis 1-11, Carr
“The previous discussion has made clear how this story in Genesis represents a complex juxtaposition of multiple traditions often found separately in the Mesopotamian literary world….”
The Priestly Vision of Genesis, Smith
“….storm God and cosmic enemies passed into Israelite tradition. The biblical God is not only generally similar to Baal as a storm god, but God inherited the names of Baal’s cosmic enemies, with names such as Leviathan, Sea, Death and Tanninim.”

Enuma Elish - The Babylonian Epic of Creation - Full Text

The Enuma Elish (also known as The Seven Tablets of Creation) is the Babylonian creation myth whose title is derived from the opening lines of the piece,

www.worldhistory.org

Genesis/Enuma Elish

The Enuma Elish would later be the inspiration for the Hebrew scribes who created the text now known as the biblical Book of Genesis. Prior to the 19th century CE, the Bible was considered the oldest book in the world and its narratives were thought to be completely original. In the mid-19th century CE, however, European museums, as well as academic and religious institutions, sponsored excavations in Mesopotamia to find physical evidence for historical corroboration of the stories in the Bible. These excavations found quite the opposite, however, in that, once cuneiform was translated, it was understood that a number of biblical narratives were Mesopotamian in origin.

Famous stories such as the Fall of Man and the Great Flood were originally conceived and written down in Sumer, translated and modified later in Babylon, and reworked by the Assyrians before they were used by the Hebrew scribes for the versions which appear in the Bible.


Both Genesis and Enuma Elsih are religious texts which detail and celebrate cultural origins: Genesis describes the origin and founding of the Jewish people under the guidance of the Lord; Enuma Elish recounts the origin and founding of Babylon under the leadership of the god Marduk. Contained in each work is a story of how the cosmos and man were created. Each work begins by describing the watery chaos and primeval darkness that once filled the universe. Then light is created to replace the darkness. Afterward, the heavens are made and in them heavenly bodies are placed. Finally, man is created.

Yahweh

Yahweh is the name of the state god of the ancient Kingdom of Israel and, later, the Kingdom of Judah. His name is composed of four Hebrew consonants (YHWH, known as the Tetragrammaton) which the prophet...

www.worldhistory.org

The meaning of the name `Yahweh' has been interpreted as “He Who Makes That Which Has Been Made” or “He Brings into Existence Whatever Exists”, though other interpretations have been offered by many scholars. In the late middle ages, `Yahweh' came to be changed to `Jehovah' by Christian monks, a name commonly in use today.

The character and power of Yahweh were codified following the Babylonian Captivity of the 6th century BCE and the Hebrew scriptures were canonized during the Second Temple Period (c. 515 BCE-70 CE) to include the concept of a messiah whom Yahweh would send to the Jewish people to lead and redeem them. Yahweh as the all-powerful creator, preserver, and redeemer of the universe was then later developed by the early Christians as their god who had sent his son Jesus as the promised messiah and Islam interpreted this same deity as Allah in their belief system.

Although the biblical narratives depict Yahweh as the sole creator god, lord of the universe, and god of the Israelites especially, initially he seems to have been Canaanite in origin and subordinate to the supreme god El. Canaanite inscriptions mention a lesser god Yahweh and even the biblical Book of Deuteronomy stipulates that “the Most High, El, gave to the nations their inheritance” and that “Yahweh's portion is his people, Jacob and his allotted heritage” (32:8-9). A passage like this reflects the early beliefs of the Canaanites and Israelites in polytheism or, more accurately, henotheism (the belief in many gods with a focus on a single supreme deity). The claim that Israel always only acknowledged one god is a later belief cast back on the early days of Israel's development in Canaan.

Your first mistake is.
I don't go by mans teaching.
Man was not even around Millions to Billions of years ago.
So how would they know anything that actually took place..

You see..you put more weight into what man will say.
Which I don't follow nor go.by what man will.say.
That's why I said
Your called into question by your own question.
What proof of evidence do you have to support what your saying.
Without any proof of evidence of your own your question is pointless, invalid, void, meaningless.

 

[joelr]

Your first mistake is.
I don't go by mans teaching.

Man wrote all religious scripture.

Man was not even around Millions to Billions of years ago.

But science has excellent evidence of what was. The early Earth, 5 billion years ago.
The cosmic waters, heaven in outer space, all wrong.

And the story is still a remake of Mesopotamian myths.

So how would they know anything that actually took place..

The thing called science, that created the car you drive, computer you are writing on, MRI and medical care you gert, microwave and. tv you watch. Those are called evidence. Predictions from science can be shown to be true. We also can see billions of years into the past and see similar formations in other places in the galaxy.

You see..you put more weight into what man will say.
Which I don't follow nor go.by what man will.say.

Except you do. You are on a computer. Please throw away your computer, pray for a God computer and only use that one.

That's why I said
Your called into question by your own question.

No, you are using mumbo jumo nonsense that doesn't make sense. Because you are probably fine with "mans" everything else - ALL technology. Cell phone? Yep, probably.
Please throw that away and pray to a deity for a cell phone and just write to this forum on that device. See how that works.

What proof of evidence do you have to support what your saying.
Without any proof of evidence of your own your question is pointless, invalid, void, meaningless.

We have literary and historical proof.
As stated, the Epic of Gilamesh is on cuniform, far older than Israelite scripture from 6 BC.
Intertextuality is used to demonstrate the text relies on older versions of Akkadian and other versions.

But let me guess, even though you probably believe all general historical knowledge you will deny this because it doesn't support a story you believe without evidence.
Ok, don;t care. I'm interested in what is true. If you are more interested in delusion then you do that.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Man wrote all religious scripture.





But science has excellent evidence of what was. The early Earth, 5 billion years ago.
The cosmic waters, heaven in outer space, all wrong.

And the story is still a remake of Mesopotamian myths.




The thing called science, that created the car you drive, computer you are writing on, MRI and medical care you gert, microwave and. tv you watch. Those are called evidence. Predictions from science can be shown to be true. We also can see billions of years into the past and see similar formations in other places in the galaxy.




Except you do. You are on a computer. Please throw away your computer, pray for a God computer and only use that one.




No, you are using mumbo jumo nonsense that doesn't make sense. Because you are probably fine with "mans" everything else - ALL technology. Cell phone? Yep, probably.
Please throw that away and pray to a deity for a cell phone and just write to this forum on that device. See how that works.




We have literary and historical proof.
As stated, the Epic of Gilamesh is on cuniform, far older than Israelite scripture from 6 BC.
Intertextuality is used to demonstrate the text relies on older versions of Akkadian and other versions.

But let me guess, even though you probably believe all general historical knowledge you will deny this because it doesn't support a story you believe without evidence.
Ok, don;t care. I'm interested in what is true. If you are more interested in delusion then you do that.

Okay man wrote the scriptures.
Now would you be so kind and explain who those men are and from where did they come from.
You like everyone else..thinks those men are just average men like all other men..
Which they are not..those men were specially chosen for a task.
So where do you suppose those men came from and who those men are..
I know that's totally going to.blow your mind away.
I'll be waiting for your answer.

 

[Colt]

"550,000,000 years ago the Life Carrier corps returned to Urantia. In co-operation with spiritual powers and superphysical forces we organized and initiated the original life patterns of this world and planted them in the hospitable waters of the realm. "


Yes, of course. And in a galaxy far away rebel forces are raising an army.

This is fiction, written by people. We had knowledge in 1955.
If you want to demonstrate evidence show me one thing no human could possibly know in 1955 that wasn't a random projection that sort of panned out.

Likewise you did not read one word of my response. And I bet you will avoid those skeptic debunkings at all cost. And I did read some of that nonsense. You just didn't respond to my comments.
It isn't homo-sapien in Britian and those places it's H. Heidelburgensis. Why are you ignoring everything I responded to by spamming me with fiction?

To the contrary, I read your entire response. I've been studying the UB and its skeptics for 38 years. Skeptics believe skeptics, hook, line and sinker!​

​

Here's something, maybe? You decide. In my way of thinking someone who wanted to write a fraud book would avoid saying debunkable things.​

​

UBtheNEWS: Inner Ionosphere Report – Urantia Book Study Aids​

​

In discussing earth’s atmosphere, The Urantia Book states the following, “The lower five or six miles of the earth’s atmosphere is the troposphere; this is the region of winds and air currents which provide weather phenomena. Above this region is the inner ionosphere and next above is the stratosphere.” Urantia Book enthusiasts and critics alike have long considered this statement to be a mistake because the longstanding understanding of the earth’s atmosphere has been that the ionosphere exists above the stratosphere. However, in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s, over thirty years after The Urantia Book’s publication, observation of “blue jets” were conclusively documented and accepted as an atmospheric condition. Notwithstanding that this phenomenon is still not well understood, what has been learned about blue jets indicates that there must be an ionospheric layer below the stratosphere. Blue jets form above thunderclouds and often reach a height of about 25 miles above sea level. The long-recognized ionosphere, which exists above the stratosphere, begins at around 30 miles above sea level. Calculations based on videos taken of blue jets, as well as other associated research, indicate that the ionic condition necessary to create their luminescent quality could not have its source in the thunderclouds over which they occur.

​

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

​

Scientists have been uncertain about whether Tibet has been rising over the last tens of millions of years or so.

Urantia Book [Emphasis added.]

(61:1.11) 40,000,000 years ago the land areas of the Northern Hemisphere began to elevate, and this was followed by new extensive land deposits and other terrestrial activities, including lava flows, warping, lake formation, and erosion. …

(61:1.13) Considerable foraminiferal limestone was deposited in European waters. Today this same stone is elevated to a height of 10,000 feet in the Alps, 16,000 feet in the Himalayas, and 20,000 feet in Tibet. The chalk deposits of this period are found along the coasts of Africa and Australia, on the west coast of South America, and about the West Indies.

(64:1.1) Primitive man made his evolutionary appearance on earth a little less than one million years ago, and he had a vigorous experience. He instinctively sought to escape the danger of mingling with the inferior simian tribes. But he could not migrate eastward because of the arid Tibetan land elevations, 30,000 feet above sea level; neither could he go south nor west because of the expanded Mediterranean Sea, which then extended eastward to the Indian Ocean; and as he went north, he encountered the advancing ice. But even when further migration was blocked by the ice, and though the dispersing tribes became increasingly hostile, the more intelligent groups never entertained the idea of going southward to live among their hairy tree-dwelling cousins of inferior intellect.

A May 2021 report out of the University of Copenhagen states:

There has long been controversy about whether the world’s highest region, Tibet, has grown taller during the recent geological past. New results from the University of Copenhagen indicate that the ‘Roof of the World’ appears to have risen by up to 600 meters and the answer was found in underwater lava. The knowledge sheds new light on Earth’s evolution.
Tibet is referred to as the Roof of the World for good reason. With an average altitude of 4,500 meters above sea level and the world’s two highest peaks, Mount Everest and K2, the vast Himalayan mountain range towers higher than anywhere else on Earth.
But the Tibetan plateau’s height has been the subject of academic controversy for many years. Some researchers believe that the area has been as high as it is today for most of its existence, while others believe that the area has increased in height over the past 20 — 30 million years. It is a riddle that until recently has stood and flickered unanswered in the wind. …

 

[Riders]

well, I saw a program on amazon fire tv about Caiphas the guy responsible for Jesus' death along with Pilot. They seem to think they have found the tomb of Caiphas and the writings say they had 2 nails from the cross of Jesus. I did see the nails and they think maybe it could be the nails of Jesus when he was crucified. I was wondering if anyone had any opinions about that.

 

[lukethethird]

well, I saw a program on amazon fire tv about Caiphas the guy responsible for Jesus' death along with Pilot. They seem to think they have found the tomb of Caiphas and the writings say they had 2 nails from the cross of Jesus. I did see the nails and they think maybe it could be the nails of Jesus when he was crucified. I was wondering if anyone had any opinions about that.

Of course they're the ones of Jesus, who else?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your first mistake is.
I don't go by mans teaching.
Man was not even around Millions to Billions of years ago.
So how would they know anything that actually took place..

Because if events happen they tend to leave evidence behind. When the evidence is everywhere it is of course possible that an all powerful God planted endless false evidence. But that would be a from of lying. If you reject that evidence due to your belief in your version of God you are also calling that God a liar.

You see..you put more weight into what man will say.
Which I don't follow nor go.by what man will.say.
That's why I said
Your called into question by your own question.
What proof of evidence do you have to support what your saying.
Without any proof of evidence of your own your question is pointless, invalid, void, meaningless.

As I said, you can claim this, but since according to your beliefs God made everything he also made the evidence that refutes Genesis. You are calling your own God a liar.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

principally Zeus the Savior, but other gods as well) in support of his arguments. It is notable, for instance, that his attitude toward homosexuality was based on his belief in God

I’m dying laughing. Has he never heard of Zeus’s sexual exploits?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I´ll start by asking, what exactly do you mean by Empiricist?

A person who decides what is true about the world using (physical) evidence interpreted according to the laws of valid reasoning.

For example according to ancient historians (Plutarch and Arian for example) Alexander the Great had a father named Philip …… as en empiricist do you accept this historical claim? Why?

Tentatively, yes, because the claim is not extraordinary and there is (physical) evidence to support it.

What does Genesis creation week.
Have to do with.the historical evidence of Jesus Christ

Leroy and I went off on a tangent about the evidence for the resurrection, which he originally offered as evidence for the historicity of the Gospels. The god of the Genesis creation story doesn't exist and those things reported there didn't happen as described.

There's nothing there in.Genesis stating God created the world..

Sure there is. There are two timelines delineating how he did it in steps. And it's church doctrine, although science has forced many to soften their stances.

Man was not even around Millions to Billions of years ago.
So how would they know anything that actually took place

By examining the evidence that DOES exist today.

What proof of evidence do you have to support what your saying.
Without any proof of evidence of your own your question is pointless, invalid, void, meaningless.

He gave you a variety of citations that you didn't acknowledge. It's your job to look or not, but if you don't, your claims that there is no evidence fail and reflect on your inability to assimilate it.

Okay man wrote the scriptures.
Now would you be so kind and explain who those men are and from where did they come from.

They were local Hebrews.

You like everyone else..thinks those men are just average men like all other men..

Yes. None of them wrote anything that isn't very human sounding.

 

[Augustus]

Yes, ROMULUS.

You genuinely think there is evidence Romulus was deified close to his purported lifetime?

He supposedly lived around 750BC and his myth isn’t documented until the 4th C BC.

You can’t make up a mythical founder of a city in real time as the city has real origins that are known by those who lived at that time.

“Remember when Romulus founded our city 20 years ago?”

“Yes of course, but I always find it strange as I lived here 30 years ago and my dad before that and his dad before him but he is a god so maybe I just misremembered living here before that.”

No wonder you are so easily impressed by Carrier making up some subjective odds

I just said Romulus? And why would giving examples mean what you claim?

You just spouted some obvious nonsense about Romulus whose myth emerged centuries after his purported life.

Why would evidence that even a single mythical gI’d has emerged in near real time be relevant to differentiating whether he is likely a deified man or a mythical god given we know many deified men appeared in real time?

Come on, you can work that one out for yourself surely…

The church blacked out a huge religious period in history. They took over temples and destroyed everything they could get their hands on about other religions. So why would you make the claim that if x was true then y?

“Even if there is no evidence for my claim then it’s because the evil church destroyed it all so that just proves my point all the better”.

You have some fantasy idea about how powerful the early church was and the extent to which it had the ability to eradicate ideas over vast geographical areas including those outside of the Roman Empire.

The vast majority of temples weren’t destroyed by evil Christians, they just fell into dispepair as no one was paying for their upkeep. A bit like how today many churches are being turned into cafes or apartments.

It would be inane for someone in the future to talk about irreligious folk in the 21st C destroying and desecrating them to hide the story of Christianity.

I am a fan of the truth

Certainly not in that post

 

[ppp]

Name a single purely mythical god whose biography resembles that of a human but with some magical bits and whose deification and cultic following began pretty much overlapping with his purported life and that if it’s early adherents.

1. Sathya Sai Baba
2. Sun Myung Moon
3. L. Ron Hubbard
4. Shoko Asahara (founder of Aum Shinrikyo)
5. José Luis de Jesús Miranda (founder of Growing in Grace)

 

[Augustus]

1. Sathya Sai Baba
2. Sun Myung Moon
3. L. Ron Hubbard
4. Shoko Asahara (founder of Aum Shinrikyo)
5. José Luis de Jesús Miranda (founder of Growing in Grace)

They were real people, not purely mythological characters who never actually existed.

Real people have often been seen as divine close to their lifetime. Purely mythical divine figures emerge in differnt time scales.

Thats the point.