The Jesus Conspiracy

You might want to seriously consider what I just previously posted prior to your last posting, Iasion.

You have been warned.




seekerof

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Seekerof]

Greetings seekerof,

In short, these are but a few links that I have found with the very same information that you are now spreading, and in some form, copy-n-pasting from there to here, within this forum. More can be provided. if necessary.

Yes, I discuss this subject on several fora.

Yes, the same INFORMATION often comes up.

Yes, I sometimes post similar information on different fora.


But no, that is not cross-posting "content from other discussion boards".

On the contrary, it is MY content, MY essays, from MY hard drive, posted in various forms at various times in various places.

Yes, I sometimes paste small sections of one essay from another, all authors do that.

But if you READ my posts, you will find their content is NOT the same, but follows what the title of the post indicated. Of course the same issues come up at times, because the overall subject is the same.


Anyway,
It's clear that seekerof is looking for a reason to censor my posts, probably because I have offended his faithful beliefs. I doubt I will be able to post here much more.

I hope some of you here have benefitted from my essays. Those of you who actually want to debate the issues can find much discussion at Internet Infidels or EVC or Liberty Forums or Yahoo Jesus Mysteries group etc.


Iasion

Greetings again,

Your warning is false.

I did not "cross post content from other sites".

But,
it seems pretty clear you have decided to censor me.


Iasion

Typically it doesn't help to provoke someone who advises you of board policy. I don't think Seekerof is 'out of get you'. Just trying to help here.

Iasion, I am all for 'freedom of speech,' but with that 'freedom of speech' comes restrictions and limitations, as well. There is no "suppression" as you think that I am trying to do. Please read on....

Your views and opinions are refreshing, even if I do not necessarily agree with them all personally, but the point again, is not my welfare but the welfare of this site. Yes, I have an opinion when I post it, but when performing my moderator duties, it is not about "me" anymore, its about this community and this site.

As such, i noticed a trend, did a little digging. My point, as mentioned previosuly, is that if you are doing such (as described in the section of the Terms and Conditions I quoted), then to please refrain from doing such.

I thank you for the clarification, I just hope you understand mine and this sites position.



seekerof

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Seekerof]

Holy man! A lot of responses. I couldn't even read them all. Good arguments, guys, really. Especialy Iason, though I disagree with some of your stuff, actually a most of it, but you know how to back up most of what your saying. Sorry I generalized by calling it the jesus conspiracy, I guess it was just my ignorance.
I just got a few things to say here:
At the time of, and a little before, Jesus, there were many groups of Jewish people. Although there were 3 main groups, and I think one of them was usually dominating, there were always small, more radical ( though sometimes not that radical) groups or sects of Jewish people that would pop up. The dominating Jewish people hated when people went around saying they were son of God, because there had been a king in recent past who claimed he was Son of God, and was basically a tyrant. THat and a history of similar occurences made them hate this. When "christians" and jesus popped up, they thought it was just another new sect of judaism. Eventually they realized tha Jesus was professing that he was Son onf God, and the Jewish people began to literally hate Jesus, believing what he was saying was blasphemy, and ultimately killing him.
If you don't want to believe in Jesus' preachings and christianity, then fine, that's your right. But the argument of Jesus not existing is a tough one to stand by, with their being such a large amount of indirect evidence, with his existence fitting right along with what was going on at the time. But then so is the side of "christianity" with the lack of hard evidence (I'd just like to point out that in recent years, the existence of Shakespearre has become hot debate, and there are growing debates on who was/were the real shakespearre(s), and there are several figures in history that have no "hard" evidence to their existence, that we do accept as being real people, such as King Arthur and Jack the Ripper). What I'm trying to get at, is it will be impossible to convince either side to drop their ways and switch sides, especially when we purposely offend each others beliefs and insult each other. Now I'm no hippy, and I don't believe that any real "piece on earth" can be achieved, but I do believe in tolerance, and it seems with this topic, that's all we can do, is tolerate each others beliefs.
Oh, and by the way, if a theory is not proven entirely incorrect in physics and science in general, it is more or less accepted as true, even if it contradicts another theory that has not been proven wrong. In the eyes of science, both theories are correct until one or both are proven wrong because it is near imposssible to prove something right, but it takes little evidence to prove something wrong.

It just occurred to me how Silly this thread has become! We are talking about applying "Evidence" & "Proof" & "Fact" to "Religion" & "Faith"!

No wonder there is such a Disconnect!

I have seen enough proof that it is a fact that I am a believer. That is as much proof and fact as I can find in the area of faith. It is called faith for a reason...........
Proof pretty much ends the need for faith, and that is the one bizarre thing about my faith. As I said, I have seen much proof. Though, my faith does not include a firm stance on if, or what God is. It only consists of a strong belief in angel/spirit guide/spirits, in prayer, in miracles, and in a purpose for all this...........a purpose that is so far completely unknown by me.

Quote: "It is called Faith for a Reason."

Yes because someone says "I Believe" XYZ - for whatever reason - perhaps something that they experienced in Life. But as we all know things are very Impermanent in Life in this World. Things are
Constantly Changing - as are People's Beliefs - Positions - Points of View - the World itself. Everything in this World is RELATIVE!

Reason & Logic are very different creatures than Faith. But in the end I would have to say that all are needed & useful to Humanity - especially if used in Combination.

Seeker,


Off topic information clarification requested?

Did you mean to state Iasion has posted someone elses comments or those of himself?

If the whole Idea of your stance is some sort of plagerism, then wouldn't it seem that the evidence he provides, was plagerized by the people he is quoting?


Should the information he provided be questioned, or is he providing information that is factually? Another words is his information true or
fabricated , did the historical accountings actually make print as he stated,
irreguardless of who first researched it.


I'm not meaning to pry or be rude I was just curious does the information he provided have merit or is it contrived from partiality to his position. I mean he went around and took bits of supporting information from others who supported his position. Is this the way I am supposed to be seeing this or are you saying he didnt do any research but totally plagerized everything and had no position or knowledge of the subject based on his personal experience?

Quote: "In other words - None of the Gospels was written by anyone who met any Jesus."

So YOU Say Iasion! I guess that you never heard of "Oral Tradition" - if you knew anything about Judaism you would know about the "Oral Tradition"!

I just wanted to let you know that you never really answered my Question!

OK lets take ONLY the Gospel of Thomas. Have you Read the
Gospel of Thomas? It was Discovered in the 1950's -> It is Very Ancient However! It has been Scientifically Dated -> Do you know how Old it is?

The Gospel of Thomas is quite a Different Document than the Other Gospels! The other Gospels are written in a "Story" manner. The Gospel of Thomas is written like this: "Jesus Said... Jesus Said... Jesus Said..."

In other words it’s not a Story - it’s the Actual Sayings of Jesus!

Now let me ask you another question: Do YOU have any "PROOF" or "EVIDENCE" that this document is "Forged" or "Invalid" or "Fiction"?

I hold that it is AUTHENTIC!!! What say you?

[edit on 13-2-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]

[edit on 13-2-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]

Originally posted by Seraphim_SerpenteOK lets take ONLY the Gospel of Thomas. Have you Read the
Gospel of Thomas? It was Discovered in the 1950's -> It is Very Ancient However! It has been Scientifically Dated -> Do you know how Old it is?

The Gospel of Thomas is quite a Different Document than the Other Gospels! The other Gospels are written in a "Story" manner. The Gospel of Thomas is written like this: "Jesus Said... Jesus Said... Jesus Said..."

In other words it’s not a Story - it’s the Actual Sayings of Jesus!

Now let me ask you another question: Do YOU have any "PROOF" or "EVIDENCE" that this document is "Forged" or "Invalid" or "Fiction"?

I hold that it is AUTHENTIC!!! What say you?

Mind if I answer for Iasion?

Excerpted from this thread, elision applied: www.abovetopsecret.com...


The Gospel of Thomas came into open circulation early 4thcentury and by 350 was uncovered as having been written by Mani.

Quote Cyril:- "The Manichaeans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being anointed with the fragrance of the name 'Gospel' destroys the souls of those who are rather simple-minded."

Extant is the Oxyrhynchus 1, 654 and 655 fragments with sayings 26-30; 1-7 and 36-39 respectively. This gospel is called the Gospel of Thomas, the other the Infancy Gospel of Thomas quoted by Irenaeus c180 which obviously rules it out as the reference made by Cyril. Earliest writings decrying this Gospel come to us from Origen circa mid 3rd century and Eusebius, circa mid 3rd to mid 4th centuries. The teachings within the gospel are those followed by the Persian Mani, mid 3rd century, who started the very popular and damaging Manichaen Gnostic sect based on these teachings.

Since Iraneaus’s quotes cannot be attributed to a period 100 years in the future, the gospel reference by Cyril can only be the sayings gospel

Greetings again,

Originally posted by Seekerof
Iasion, I am all for 'freedom of speech,' but with that 'freedom of speech' comes restrictions and limitations, as well. There is no "suppression" as you think that I am trying to do. Please read on....

Your views and opinions are refreshing, even if I do not necessarily agree with them all personally, but the point again, is not my welfare but the welfare of this site. Yes, I have an opinion when I post it, but when performing my moderator duties, it is not about "me" anymore, its about this community and this site.

As such, i noticed a trend, did a little digging. My point, as mentioned previosuly, is that if you are doing such (as described in the section of the Terms and Conditions I quoted), then to please refrain from doing such.

I thank you for the clarification, I just hope you understand mine and this sites position.

Thanks for your moderate response :-)
I look forward to more debate here...

Actually, I note that I did accidentally post my Early Writers list twice - I posted once late at night when I had finished, then next morning I did the rounds of my favourite sites and posted here again without remembering I had - sorry.

I do tend post a lot, but I try to observe the rules.


Iasion

'The Gospel of Thomas came into open circulation early 4thcentury and by 350 was uncovered as having been written by Mani.

Quote Cyril:- "The Manichaeans also wrote a Gospel according to Thomas, which being anointed with the fragrance of the name 'Gospel' destroys the souls of those who are rather simple-minded." '
somewhereinbetween


I think that this Cyril fellow you are relying on to refute the validity of these scriptures is the same Cyril that was responsible for burning the Library of Alexandria, and also for killing Hypatia, a very learned Pagan citizen of the same city. I am loathe to accept his word after reading of these other activities he was involved in. The angry mob of Christians flayed Hypatias skin from her body and buried her alive........WWJD?

Quote: "The Gospel of Thomas came into open circulation early 4th Century and by 350 was uncovered as having been written by Mani."

Lovely Words this "Proof" & "Evidence"! Do you have any PROOF or EVIDENCE to back up the above Claim my friend? Or are you just
Copying & Pasting from Different Sources?

Anyhow - THANX for the Link!!!

"These are the Secret Words which the *Living Jesus Spoke* and
*Didymus (Twin) Judas (no not that Judas) Thomas Wrote them down*."

[edit on 14-2-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]

Greetings Seraphim_Serpente,


Iasion: "In other words - None of the Gospels was written by anyone who met any Jesus."

So YOU Say Iasion! I guess that you never heard of "Oral Tradition" - if you knew anything about Judaism you would know about the "Oral Tradition"!

Actually, this is what modern NT scholars say.
I provided quotes and many references where you can check this.
Have you ever read Brown? Aland? Metzger? Crossan? Fitzmyer?

If you wish to argue that any of the NT books were written by an eye-witness to Jesus, then the onus is on you to present your case.

So far what we have seen is statements of faith.

I just wanted to let you know that you never really answered my Question!

What question?

OK lets take ONLY the Gospel of Thomas. Have you Read the
Gospel of Thomas? It was Discovered in the 1950's -> It is Very Ancient However! It has been Scientifically Dated -> Do you know how Old it is?

I have a pretty good idea, do you?

The Gospel of Thomas is quite a Different Document than the Other Gospels! The other Gospels are written in a "Story" manner. The Gospel of Thomas is written like this: "Jesus Said... Jesus Said... Jesus Said..."
In other words it’s not a Story - it’s the Actual Sayings of Jesus!

Pardon?
How does that follow?
A religious work is often cast in this form.
The hermetic writings were given in the form of speeches like this - does that make them true?
There is no connection between the FORM of a writing and its historicity.

Now let me ask you another question: Do YOU have any "PROOF" or "EVIDENCE" that this document is "Forged" or "Invalid" or "Fiction"?

If you are claiming this Gospel is from an eye-witness to Jesus, then you will have to present your argument. You will also have to deal with the arguments of scholars who think otherwise.

I hold that it is AUTHENTIC!!! What say you?

I say you are a true believer who is repeating what you have heard from other believers, but who hasn't studied the issue very well.


Iasion

Quote: "There is no connection between the FORM of a Writing and its Historicity."

How can you apply History to “Religion” & “Faith”? That is what you are doing in your Postings! Has it occurred to you that when you talk about "Jesus" or "Christ" or
"Jesus Christ" you are talking about the Religion of Christianity & Judaism?
People are Sensitive to this!

Religion is not an Exact Science - we are simply just trying to get to the Jist of what Jesus' Message was all about! This Message has OBVIOUSLY been Twisted & Corrupted over the Years of History – when “Politics” was inserted into it!

Iasion let me ask you another question - are you an Atheist?

If the answer is Yes then so be it – but please realize that people have a RIGHT to Hold & Practice their various forms of Faith/Spirituality &
Religious Beliefs!


[edit on 14-2-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]

Greetings again,

How can you apply History to “Religion” & “Faith”?

Religions are part of history.
What are you trying to say?

You seem to be arguing that any religious BELIEFS must be considered true without checking the facts.

Do YOU believe in the magic plates of the Mormons?
We have a dozen signed, named and dated eye-witness accounts that they were real - do YOU believe it?

The Quran says the moon split in two - do YOU believe that?

That is what you are doing in your Postings! Has it occurred to you that when you talk about "Jesus" or "Christ" or "Jesus Christ" you are talking about the Religion of Christianity & Judaism?
People are Sensitive to this!

How sensitive to Muslims are you?
To Hindus? Mormons?

Religion is not an Exact Science - we are simply just trying to get to the Jist of what Jesus' Message was all about! This Message has OBVIOUSLY been Twisted & Corrupted over the Years of History – when “Politics” was inserted into it!

You have ASSUMED there WAS a Jesus.
But the evidence is not good, and you won't look at it.

Iasion let me ask you another question - are you an Atheist?

No.
You think everyone who disagrees with you is an "atheist", don't you?

If the answer is Yes then so be it

You could not even consider the posibility that I wasn't an atheist, could you?

– but please realize that people have a RIGHT to Hold & Practice their various forms of Faith/Spirituality & Religious Beliefs!

Of course I realise it -
where have I ever said otherwise?

So,
you would be happy to have a Muslim mosque or a Jewish synagogue near your place, wouldn't you?


The issue is about the FACTS - the EVIDENCE - the HISTORY.
But you don't seem to know any of the facts and history of your own religion.


Iasion

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente
Quote: "The Gospel of Thomas came into open circulation early 4th Century and by 350 was uncovered as having been written by Mani."

Lovely Words this "Proof" & "Evidence"! Do you have any PROOF or EVIDENCE to back up the above Claim my friend? Or are you just
Copying & Pasting from Different Sources?

Anyhow - THANX for the Link!!!

What did you do prior to the internet when you were in disagreement with another, ask then to produce a book, or run to the library and copy same? I am quickly coming to understand that those who depend on the internet for their education, do so by expecting others to do their research for them.

You might want to take note that you made statements regarding the Gospel of Thomas as though they were fact, without benefit of any support or links, where I was kind enough to not only reference a year, and the names of two players, and you have the gall to demand a link? It is not flattering to seek humiliation of yourself.

You want links? Well here is your primary link: The Catechetical Lectures; You will find it on the 3rd shelf, 6th book from the left, on my bookcase.

And here are other links to ably assist you or anyone willing to undertake your research for you, and assuming you are American:
www.publiclibraries.com...
www.barnesandnoble.com...
www.amazon.com...

It is not up to me educate you on a topic you argue when you do so based on statements of belief. So here is your chance to prove that I have provided you with false information relative to Cyril of Jerusalem, and you are welcome for my having provided a narrowed search. This Cyril, the same Cyril who was advanced to sainthood would not tell a lie would he? You cannot prove me wrong with this, but at least prove me wrong that you can do your own research.


[edit on 2/14/05 by SomewhereinBetween]

Quote: "You could not even consider the possibility that I wasn't an Atheist, could you?"

Well then Iasion - may I ask just what "Factual" Religion you Believe in & Practice?

Quote: "But you don't seem to know any of the Facts and History of your Own Religion."

Now it is my turn to say PARDON ME?!! How DARE YOU!!!

First of all you do not know me! Nor do you know about my Religious Affiliations! Do you Realize how many Sects of Christianity are in Existence? Did you know that I practice not only Christianity but also Buddhism? I have Studied & Practiced Plenty of other Religions as well! I consider myself a Mystic. I also consider myself a Free Thinking Intellectual! I am an Individual that also uses Science, Reason & Logic as Tools!

What - I am not allowed to Dis-Agree with you? Am I automatically wrong because I Dis-Agree with You? You need to work on your Debating Skills my friend!

In my Opinion the Function of Religion & Spirituality is for Ecstatic Union with the Divine (or God if you Will). Spirituality is all about Sacred & Holy Experiences! In my experience I have observed that
"Organized Religion" rarely offers this!

Yes - just look at the History of our Species on this Planet. How much War & Violence & Murder is enough - especially when it is KILLING in the name of "God, Creed & Religion"!

History is FULL of the Politics & Machinations of Vulgarians such as yourself - so excuse me if I am Dis-Inclined to Participate in your Anti-Christian Agenda - you can have your beliefs & I will have mine!

[edit on 15-2-2005 by Seraphim_Serpente]