It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

9 things you think you know about Jesus that are probably wrong

page: 14
21
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 04:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

We also have contemporary mention of Socrates in plays that were written during his life time.

There really is no comparison.

I don't get it, man.

Never mind the mythical overlay, why is the mention of Jesus in those gospels, and the non-religious sources, vacuous?

Are these historical figures truly being held under similar scrutiny?


They should be.




posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 04:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

just as there isn't physical proof for many historical figures we believe existed." Believe is the key word. I can claim I met with Frodo's brother. Where's the proof?


'We' being the operative word. I am talking about historical figures we actually believe to have existed. Characters from the Tolkien Universe, as much as I want to be true, is not something we believe is true and existent. You're failing to stay on point.


First-hand contemporaneous documentation

I am starting to see their point about your redundancy..


Indirect affiliation with eye-witness testimony? LMAO

Indeed. Not direct. The testimony of people that lived with Jesus [contemporaneous documentation if you will lol] were involved with Paul and the author of the Gospel of Mark. That's what I understand to be historical.


I don't understand your question about Paul

It appears so.
edit on 2-3-2015 by Lucid Lunacy because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 04:52 AM
link   



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 05:27 AM
link   
the bible says a lot of horrible stuff about a lot of people, look at the treatment of women, condoning rape and the death of women who have been raped.
Who would say that such a book is the word of God? or holds the complete truth.
Why argue over it, it's reidiculous.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: WilsonWilson

Not me.

The idea the Bible represents god is in my mind the gravest mistake someone could do.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I'm not syaing it doesnt have some spiritual truth, but it's obviously a document written by men and with all the arrogance and mistakes of man included, to say scipture is Gods written truth is just so strange.
If peoiple have studied the bible then they know about all the horrible stuff in it no benevolent God would come up with.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 06:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Pinocchio

God asked for Isaac's death. Abram obliged. The beginning of the ultimate DEBT.

Why would God be pleased by sacrificing a child? It certainly isn't my idea of a fatherly figure.

If Isaac was indeed sacrificed then surely neither Jesus nor Moses could possibly have existed.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 07:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: chuck258
You are citing a Left Wing Liberal news source that has a history of posting Anti Christian stories and expect us to believe what they think about Jesus is more true than hundreds of years of study of Christianity?


The article also doesn't give one sliver of solid proof, it cites an unconfirmed gospel, guesses his height because other men of the time were shorter (I guess Abraham Lincoln and George Washington must have been no more than 5'6 by that definition), tries to claim he wasn't put up on a cross even though they checked his hands for the wounds, etc.

Find a site that isn't left wing and obviously Anti Christian that offers solid proof instead of guesses from Progressives. This whole story is unreliable.


Are you saying that there are no left wing liberal Christians?

Are you saying that your sole opinion of a news source's past actions determine the facts of a given document or report?

Why would you compare "what they believe" with "hundreds of years of study of Christianity"? The article was written by one individual not a group. The article was originally published at Alternet not Salon; which was the "anti-Christian" site you were referring to?

Progressives can't make academic conclusions from sources? Progressives can't be Christian?

And, finally, if certain detectable political bias disqualifies a source's opinions ... then why should we listen to you?

Thank you kindly for your answers.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 07:24 AM
link   
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Nice. I knew or suspected all of these things. Good information though.



posted on Mar, 2 2015 @ 09:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
I don't get it, man.

Never mind the mythical overlay, why is the mention of Jesus in those gospels, and the non-religious sources, vacuous?

Yes, do mind the mythical "overlay" (is there really anything underneath it?). I doubt you are trying to get it. Otherwise you wouldn't have presented the irrelevant Socrates false dilemma/false equivalence diversion. Nor would you be asking about the "non religious sources" that you posted (while completely overlooking the fact that none of them are first person accounts anyway). You would instead be rebutting the, already given, explanation.

If you don't see the wildly contradictory and fanciful stories of the gospels as myth/fiction, that's up to you. What we know of Socrates doesn't have the aim of worshipping the god of an oppressed people who walked on water, healed sick and lame etc. Instead, at times he was criticised and lampooned by peers. Take all of the myth out of the gospels (such as walking on water, which we know didn't happen) and what historical info can we glean? Paint us a picture and back it up with sources. Please put it forward and we'll scrutinise it.

So far we begin with two completely contradictory birth dates, a particular unprecedented type of census that seems to have only ever happened once and that no one else seemed to notice... a slaughter of the innocents that no one else (particularly in Rome) noticed, someone who drew great crowds as a faith healer and preacher that no one else noticed... a hugely popular rabble rousing Rabbi throwing the money changers out of a huge and heavily (armed) guarded temple complex that no one else noticed...an unprecedented sanhedrin meeting breaking umpteen Jewish laws that would have caused quite a ruckus (to say the least) that no one else noticed... a laughable portrayal of Pilate and a "custom" (letting known enemies of Rome go free) that no one else noticed...and so on...This all happened apparently, in one of the more well documented periods of ancient history...


Are these historical figures truly being held under similar scrutiny? I invoke any historical figure here per Tangerine's post and his appeal to anthropological evidence to substantiate said existence.

They never are, but they should be. Somehow it has become quite a "no no" to take a genuine look at the claims regarding the historicity of Jesus. It is one of the last bastions of pseudo/religious academia, that is really on level footing with creationism.

Anthropological evidence? What are you talking about?

More to the point, is there any genuine contemporary historical evidence of any type that would indicate Jesus existed as a historical figure? A simple "listened to that Jesus dude the other day bro" or "saw a great crowd following some dude called Jesus" or something... a letter...an inscription, a mention anywhere...anything?

Happy to wait...


Also which plays do you refer to?

Quite humorous in a way. Diverting from the fact that there is 0 evidence for the existence of Jesus, by requesting (completely irrelevant) sources for Socrates. I have doubts about what you have said so far (antitheist).
ebooks.adelaide.edu.au...

en.wikipedia.org...



edit on 2-3-2015 by Cogito, Ergo Sum because: for the heck of it



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: hidingthistime

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: hidingthistime

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Maybe the real thing the Vatican is guarding is how they're the absolute apostate church in this world filled with evil and liars? The Vatican being taken as a serious source on ANYTHING to do with Jesus is utterly laughable. Utterly. They're liars and false prophets, especially their pope with his assumed authority.

They're the Pagan sect of true Christians and most Christians know this. They worship idols and hoard wealth, if people can't see them as the blatant enemy of Christians everywhere, that's a sin in itself.


SPOT ON!


All the child abuse, pegan holidays etc... they are the anti Messiah, they put themselves on the throne of the creator... They paint themselves as an angel of light, pretty blatant, have to be truly blind to not see it!


Pegan? This is hilarious.


Hilarious how exactly??? Expand on your thoughts. Make me see the error of my ways if there be any...


This was your post: "All the child abuse, pegan holidays etc... they are the anti Messiah, they put themselves on the throne of the creator... They paint themselves as an angel of light, pretty blatant, have to be truly blind to not see it! "

First of all, it's spelled pagan not pegan. Secondly, what messiah? Your myths do not constitute fact. What creator? Again, your myths do not constitute fact. What angel of light? Again, your myths do not constitute fact. That you think your myths constitute fact is hilarious.



Being a spelling natzi realy is not on topic, tell me how the catholic church etc are not bathing in thier PAGAN holidays?? Everything they do is steeped in ancient Gods and BS..... seriously...lol



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Lucidity, I graded your paper and you made at best 44%. Funny thing though is that if you want to be an anti-Christ, you will have to make 100% on Jesus' test to pass...



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Read "The Bible Fraud" by Tony Bushby. The information in that book which came out about 10 years ago adds to the debate.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Ok Ill throw Some Logs in

Keep Stoking that Fire !


Council of Nicaea

How the Council of Nicea Changed the World
www.livescience.com...

Jesus Tomb

The Lost Tomb of Jesus
en.wikipedia.org...

and

Holy Blood Holy Grail
rationalwiki.org...


Just Some Random Websites ...



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: hidingthistime

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: hidingthistime

originally posted by: Tangerine

originally posted by: hidingthistime

originally posted by: Joneselius
a reply to: ~Lucidity

Maybe the real thing the Vatican is guarding is how they're the absolute apostate church in this world filled with evil and liars? The Vatican being taken as a serious source on ANYTHING to do with Jesus is utterly laughable. Utterly. They're liars and false prophets, especially their pope with his assumed authority.

They're the Pagan sect of true Christians and most Christians know this. They worship idols and hoard wealth, if people can't see them as the blatant enemy of Christians everywhere, that's a sin in itself.


SPOT ON!


All the child abuse, pegan holidays etc... they are the anti Messiah, they put themselves on the throne of the creator... They paint themselves as an angel of light, pretty blatant, have to be truly blind to not see it!


Pegan? This is hilarious.


Hilarious how exactly??? Expand on your thoughts. Make me see the error of my ways if there be any...


This was your post: "All the child abuse, pegan holidays etc... they are the anti Messiah, they put themselves on the throne of the creator... They paint themselves as an angel of light, pretty blatant, have to be truly blind to not see it! "

First of all, it's spelled pagan not pegan. Secondly, what messiah? Your myths do not constitute fact. What creator? Again, your myths do not constitute fact. What angel of light? Again, your myths do not constitute fact. That you think your myths constitute fact is hilarious.



Being a spelling natzi realy is not on topic, tell me how the catholic church etc are not bathing in thier PAGAN holidays?? Everything they do is steeped in ancient Gods and BS..... seriously...lol


The first sentence that you attributed to me was written by someone else. I can spell pagan.

I have no idea what you mean by "tell me how the catholic church etc. are not bathing in thier (misspelled) PAGAN holidays??" You even misspelled Nazi. LOL

If you mean to say that the Catholic church incorporates some pagan iconography in their beliefs, of course they do. So do protestant churches. Ever heard of Easter? It's a perversion of the pagan spring fertility festival honoring Oestre. Ever hear of Christmas? It's a perversion of the pagan winter solstice festival and Saturnalia. The Catholics have their saints and Mary and God and the protestants have their trinity. Tell me you didn't know any of this.
edit on 3-3-2015 by Tangerine because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: VigiliaProcuratio
a reply to: Tangerine


God is often referred to by masculine pronouns, not necessarily implying that the speaker believes God to be male.

I do not regard God as having a gender, I don't need to explain this.

Are you saying that God in Judaism is the same as in Christianity and Islam?

I have always been a free-thinker and always will be.
 


Of course the God of Judaism is the same as the God of Christianity and Islam. The three Abrahamic religions share a single source. You do know that Christianity evolved from Judaism, right?



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: Tangerine

just as there isn't physical proof for many historical figures we believe existed." Believe is the key word. I can claim I met with Frodo's brother. Where's the proof?




Indirect affiliation with eye-witness testimony? LMAO

Indeed. Not direct. The testimony of people that lived with Jesus [contemporaneous documentation if you will lol] were involved with Paul and the author of the Gospel of Mark. That's what I understand to be historical.



If you don't know that second-hand claims are not historical evidence, I'm afraid I can't help you. I understand that you very much want to believe that Jesus actually lived. You may do so. What you may not do is claim that it's a fact that he lived.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
the bible says a lot of horrible stuff about a lot of people, look at the treatment of women, condoning rape and the death of women who have been raped.
Who would say that such a book is the word of God? or holds the complete truth.
Why argue over it, it's reidiculous.


There are two possibilities: 1) they agree with what it says about women or 2) they've never actually read it.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: WilsonWilson
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I'm not syaing it doesnt have some spiritual truth, but it's obviously a document written by men and with all the arrogance and mistakes of man included, to say scipture is Gods written truth is just so strange.
If peoiple have studied the bible then they know about all the horrible stuff in it no benevolent God would come up with.


True. Have you considered the possibility that the Christian god is a monster? Just a thought.



posted on Mar, 3 2015 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Wolfenz
Ok Ill throw Some Logs in

Keep Stoking that Fire !


Council of Nicaea

How the Council of Nicea Changed the World
www.livescience.com...

Jesus Tomb

The Lost Tomb of Jesus
en.wikipedia.org...

and

Holy Blood Holy Grail
rationalwiki.org...


Just Some Random Websites ...



Good idea. I'm familiar with Holy Blood Holy Grail and the Council of Nicea but, to entice those who are unfamiliar, you might want to provide a brief description of the information provided by those sources.



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join