Proof that Jesus and all Religions are False

maybe he killed them all off in genesis because there were way too many mismatched species creating genetic havoc and killing each other, also not having a "level" playing field, physically and mentally however you see that. also perhaps they defied some direct orders hopefully he is not forced to do the same again, his plan if resource based would be easily uncovered his plan if based on something besides resources, if he has transended it would either be control or safekeeping of sentience, expansion of it, perhaps development of intricate genetic structuring and neural structuring. On a personal note my mind has a noah hope running on it, he wasnt the brightest he wasnt the strongest but his subconscous or soul was pretty clean in God's eyes. Im hoping for the same being tested sucks and being out of the loop sucks but testing it is, I just hope we dont have regenesis on our hands however its being told to anyone how its being done.

reply to post by mike73173


very well sir- i site Cornelius Tacitus, roman historian and Gov. of
turkey a.d. 112 - Tacitus writing from" the annals of pliney the younger" to suppress therfore the common rumar.Nero procured others
to be accused and inflicted exquisite punishments upon those people, who were in
abhorrence to thier crimes, and were commonly known as the Christians
as that was thier denomination from Christus (Christ). who in the reign of Tiberius WAS PUT TO DEATH AS A CRIMINAL by the prosecutor Pontius
pilot. now what

eternal life can be taken a number of ways maximise it to oneself living forever, genghis khan wanted to live forever and is in 1/200 percent of chinese people. or so i heard on a documentary. then theres living forever like a great musician does. or a writer or a king or a president. immortality via technology is surely possible and He that is omnipotent and omnisient could surely grant that. also there are higher issues to cover coding matisies for exsitance itself, if needing to be developed or re developed due to collapse. eternity is also a long time and without expanding exsistance or having set time interval memory therefore nor being omnisient and omnipotent you would either grasp everything and be a stability matrix for reality or you would choose to participate in direct small action for purposes based off your own mind IE Gods or whoever controls (if possile or in exsistance) would be for specific purpose compartmentalistaion of any system of mind of that type would be required. or one would grasp everything and just be an ambience to exsistance taking either the negative or positive polarity of experience. immortality would therefore be prefferable as positive rather than neutral but elimination of all negative polarity reverts to neutral nirvanna shortlived.

I actually did not know most of that. Thanks for posting that. I dont believe in one particular God, though I know there has to be one. When you look at the beauty of the world I cant help but think theres a higher power that created this all.

Here is that 'Hero Scale' I referenced a few pages ago, it seems to have been lost in the hijacking...

1: The Hero's mother is a royal virgin;
2: His father is a king, and
3: Often a near relative of his mother, but
4: The circumstances of his conception are unusual, and
5: He is also reputed to be the son of a god.
6: At birth an attempt is made, usually by his father or his maternal grandfather, to kill him, but
7: He his spirited away, and
8: Reared by foster-parents in a far country.
9: We are told nothing of his childhood, but
10: On reaching manhood he returns or goes to his future kingdom.
11: After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,
12: He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and
13: Becomes king.
14: For a time he reigns uneventfully, and
15: Prescribes laws, but
16: Later he loses favor with the gods and/or his subjects, and
17: Is driven from the throne and city, after which
18: He meets with a mysterious death,
19: Often at the top of a hill.
20: His children, if any, do not succeed him.
21: His body is not buried, but nevertheless
22: He has one or more holy sepulchres.

(Source: "The Hero Pattern: A Study in Myth and Tradition" By, Lord Raglan)

As you can see, Jesus (The character) is so common place, that there is a scale that he fits into. As well as the other gods/goddesses listed.

Furthermore, I noticed some musings on virgin births. In my thread, also posted a few pages ago, I go through at least 3 other virgin births

My thread always goes to the bottom of the heap, because their is no defence. Jesus fits the pattern, as every hero before him.

My final thought, there is more 'proof' as to the existance of UFO's than there is of Jesus the Christ, and that IS a fact.

(Proof for claim: We have many eye witnesses of UFOs, and many official documents. And neither for J the C.)

EDIT (Thought I would add how JC fared on the scale, also from other thread)

(1) His mother was a virgin. His father was (2) god (also referred to as Lord (aka king)). He was (4) born of immaculate conception. Again his father is (5) god, or Jehova. King Herod heard of this "savior" and (6) attempted to have him killed. (7) He is spirited away. (9) We are told nothing of his childhood. (10) But when he hits manhood he returns to his future kingdom. (11) After a victory over Satan, he becomes (13) "king of the Jews". (14) For a time he reigns uneventfully, (15) and prescribes laws. However, (16) he loses favor with the Jews, and is (17) driven from his throne as king of the jews. He (18) meets with a mysterious death, (19) on top of a hill. (20) He has no children to succeed him. (21) His body is never buried, and (22) he has holy sepulchres.

[edit on 5/26/2009 by adigregorio]

reply to post by Jess_Undefined

When you look at the beauty of the world

With an Avatar like that, I must agree with you
I challenge the male atheists posting to this thread to disagree

To the other posters:
In all seriousness the master deceiver has done a brilliant job muddying the waters so you can't see to the bottom of the water, or your scared to drink any of it, AFTER it's been properly filtered, the majority of the world population is very spiritually dehydrated because of this.

I really don't blame anybody, I have tried to put myself in an atheists shoe's, and I get it. But really an atheist has faith in science and man made idea's that fluctuate with time. As I have talked to many Atheists over the years, they always say God would have done something by now, if he existed. He hasn't so he doesn't exist, if that's what you use to discredit God' existence, so be it. But in essence you want the sovereign of the entire universe, to conform to your thought process as to a proper time line.

We live between 70-100 years and we think we are so important that in a few decades we have it all figured out, we think we are Smarter, Wiser, and more Just than God. REALLY???

Here is the problem with movies like Ziegest or that type, they actually have some parts correct, they are telling the truth in SOME parts.

For many if it has a 50% ring of truth the other 50% must be correct too, right?
Not always that is the way the master deceiver operates he mixes truth with lies, to give you half-truths. Half-truth designed to deceive.

Let me illustrate this.

I tell you about a man that has a knife in hand, he is about to cut a woman in the stomach, the woman is screaming, then he cuts her, and she bleeds. Furthermore he then cuts an appendage of hers away. He then stabs her. And then leaves her.

Is this man bad? With just this information most people would say yes.





Oh but I left these key facts out, that the man is a doctor, the knife is a scalpel, the woman is pregnant, she is screaming because she is giving birth and in pain, the doctor performs a Cesarean section at her request, he gave her something for the pain, he cut the umbilical cord, put an IV in her, and then left the nurses to attend to her. She fully recovers with a new healthy baby.

Same question
Is this man bad?


You see how you can twist something to make somebody believe something else, if I can punch that up in five minutes, what can a evil spirit creature that has studied humanity for thousands of years do to us, if he wants to deceive us with half-truths.

My quick illustrative story shows just how easy it is to do.

So, Jesus Christ is real and many religions are and have been false.
This doesn't mean the bible is false or bad, just abused and misused and misinterpreted by the clergy and the masses that have been mislead.









[edit on 26-5-2009 by Blue_Jay33]

[edit on 26-5-2009 by Blue_Jay33]

That doesn't demonstrate anything. The template may well be largely BASED on Jesus. Indeed, the following don't apply to Jesus AT ALL:

Originally posted by adigregorio
3: Often a near relative of his mother

No.

Originally posted by adigregorio
9: We are told nothing of his childhood, but

The story of Jesus as a child in the temple?

Originally posted by adigregorio
11: After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,

No.

Originally posted by adigregorio
13: Becomes king.

No! Jesus is not popularly recognised as king at all at the time.

Originally posted by adigregorio
12: He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and

Doesn't happen.

Originally posted by adigregorio
14: For a time he reigns uneventfully, and

Doesn't happen. He is not recognised.

Originally posted by adigregorio
22: He has one or more holy sepulchres.

Where exactly is the sepulchre of Jesus Christ?

Originally posted by adigregorio
My final thought, there is more 'proof' as to the existance of UFO's than there is of Jesus the Christ, and that IS a fact.

(Proof for claim: We have many eye witnesses of UFOs, and many official documents. And neither for J the C.)

Oh dear... "Facts" seem to be very broad in your world. Where are the "official" accounts of UFOs?

There are quite a few secular contemporary accounts of Jesus. Does the fact that they were written by historians instead of "government officials" mean that they are worthless?

You have not studied ALL religions therefore you are being presumptuous
and this makes you sound like an ignorant anti-religious bigot.

Religion may not work for you and for others-okay but why make
sweeping over-generalizations? It's the mark of a third rate mind.

If you can't find anything that can make you feel better in any religion
then fine leave it.
However, don't be a hypocrite and celebrate Christmas though
that's embracing religion only when it's convenient and fun
-that's out for you dummies.
-no Christmas tree -no giving and receiving of presents-Christmas is
after all a religious holiday.
I love Christmas-it's a part of religion that I thoroughly embrace.
It's the best.

All you scrooges who give up on religion unless you give up on Christmas
all your ranting is meaningless.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
3: Often a near relative of his mother

No.

So we are not all 'God's' children? Brothers in Christ? (Be careful, JC was alive at the time since conception is concidered life )

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
9: We are told nothing of his childhood, but

The story of Jesus as a child in the temple?

One small story is not a 'childhood', c'mon! But Raglan did say "nothing". Of course if we want to get technicall the bible says to stone disobediant teenagers.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
11: After a victory over the king and/or a giant, dragon, or wild beast,

No.

So Satan is neither "The King of Lies" nor "A Dragon"? He has never been referenced as such? Thin ice...

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
13: Becomes king.

No! Jesus is not popularly recognised as king at all at the time.

He is referenced as King of the Jews, Pilot calls him that I believe. (The scriptures are quoted in my thread, if you want to press the issue)

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
12: He marries a princess, often the daughter of his predecessor, and

Doesn't happen.

Did I say that it did happen? I said maybe, if Mary was more than just a close friend, wink wink say no more! And if I recall, I did not give it to him in the end, if I did apologies in advance.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
14: For a time he reigns uneventfully, and

Doesn't happen. He is not recognised.

Yes he was, did you even read the bible?

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
22: He has one or more holy sepulchres.

Where exactly is the sepulchre of Jesus Christ?

sep⋅ul⋅cher  /ˈsɛpəlkər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [sep-uhl-ker] Show IPA
–noun 1. a tomb, grave, or burial place.
2. Also called Easter sepulcher. Ecclesiastical. a. a cavity in a mensa for containing relics of martyrs.
b. a structure or a recess in some old churches in which the Eucharist was deposited with due ceremonies on Good Friday and taken out at Easter in commemoration of Christ's entombment and Resurrection

Source : Dictionary.com
(bolding done by me)

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
My final thought, there is more 'proof' as to the existance of UFO's than there is of Jesus the Christ, and that IS a fact.

(Proof for claim: We have many eye witnesses of UFOs, and many official documents. And neither for J the C.)

Oh dear... "Facts" seem to be very broad in your world. Where are the "official" accounts of UFOs?

Well the Air force released a very nice blue hued report, you should look into it.

Any other suggestions/questions?

EDIT--(Forgot a point)
About the pattern being 'based' on Jesus, this pattern was around LONG before Jesus, and will be around LONG after.

[edit on 5/26/2009 by adigregorio]

reply to post by Neon Haze


The source page for this thread has this at the top in small print:

This excerpt was outrageously stolen from the page linked at the bottom....It is presented in this way to cut through all the academic stuff and grab your attention. Please, refere to the link at the bottom for the full article, references and accuracy.

By "all the academic stuff" are they referring to research and valid sources? This should set off alarms with any readers.

This topic has been covered going back to at least 1875 with Kersey Graves "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors". Graves premise was that there was a line of man/God/Savior myths throughout history. The retelling of the myth with Jesus as the central figure was at the end of the time line. Graves writing has been criticized for poor research and sources. He did however inject plenty of opinion and artistic license. There are many sites that discuss Graves and his works and some of these sites have extensive excerpts from "The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors". Infidels dot org has the entire book online:

The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviors

I'm certain most of you have seen artistic depictions of Mary and Jesus compared to those of Isis and Horus. If not here are a couple examples. Look toward the bottom right of these linked pages.

Isis - Wikipedia

Positive Birth Afirmations

And so this is an old and ongoing topic. I think there are many similarities in these savior myths but I don't think we have a definitive answer. The various authors have done much damage to their arguments by trying to achieve a dead on match and in general fudging facts to fit the premise. Experience tells us that stories mutate substantially over days and weeks, why should we believe that this would not happen over hundreds if not thousands of years? There are multiple websites that debunk the various savior myth comparisons. Those also have agendas and should be thoroughly scrutinized. This is an intriguing premise, one that will be continually revisited.

reply to post by adigregorio


Yeah, I do read the Bible...

Christ is not recognised as King of the Jews during his time on earth. The "INRI" plaque is affixed to his cross as a mocking gesture.

You gave me the dictionary definition of sepulchre. Again, where is Jesus Christ's sepulchre? He has no final resting place due to his (apparent) resurrection.

Originally posted by adigregorio
About the pattern being 'based' on Jesus, this pattern was around LONG before Jesus, and will be around LONG after.

I was talking about the template, which was written very recently. It may well have been based on Christ to make it "fit" better. It certainly seems so. There are certainly some vague common elements with a lot of heroes, but it really doesn't demonstrate anything apart from the fact that there's.... well... some vague common elements.

Cheers.

Originally posted by Roark
reply to post by adigregorio

 

Yeah, I do read the Bible...

Christ is not recognised as King of the Jews during his time on earth. The "INRI" plaque is affixed to his cross as a mocking gesture.

Well I have proof that people referred to him as such, it is in the Bible for Christs' sake (Pun definatly intended!) So deny your book, but it says he was king of the Jews. But this is moot, and off topic. Go to my thread, it proves your comment wrong (I imagine that is why you have not stated it in there.)

Originally posted by Roark
You gave me the dictionary definition of sepulchre. Again, where is Jesus Christ's sepulchre? He has no final resting place due to his (apparent) resurrection.

Well the dictonary points out that many old churches have the area designated, I am sure if you run a quick google search you will find them. Or are you grasping at strawmen?

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
About the pattern being 'based' on Jesus, this pattern was around LONG before Jesus, and will be around LONG after.

I was talking about the template, which was written very recently. It may well have been based on Christ to make it "fit" better. It certainly seems so. There are certainly some vague common elements with a lot of heroes, but it really doesn't demonstrate anything apart from the fact that there's.... well... some vague common elements.

I can't even begin to point out the flaws in this logic.

Let me try
(Hypothetical Senario Alert)

0 = None
0 = Nothing
0 = Zero
0 = Zilch

The words (none, nothing, zero, zilch) were recently discovered. Zilch being the most recent, and most believed to be true.

We have some upstart saying that 0 was here all along, and that Zilch is just based off of that, well I say that they modified the idea of 0 to make it fit Zilch.

Needless to say, 0 was around and would have been around with or without Zilch (or the others)

This is the pattern that Lord Raglan, and the OP have noticed. Unfortunatly my pattern is off topic, if you feel you have a valid defense please contribute to my thread (bet you won't though).

In my opinion, you have failed to disprove my observations. Of course I will leave the ultimate descision up to the other readers.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Well I have proof that people referred to him as such, it is in the Bible for Christs' sake (Pun definatly intended!) So deny your book, but it says he was king of the Jews. But this is moot, and off topic. Go to my thread, it proves your comment wrong (I imagine that is why you have not stated it in there.)

Dude, he was not popularly recognised as king of the Jews. If he was, his own people (uhh, the Jews) wouldn't have assisted in his crucifixion!

The fact that he had "King of the Jews" on a plaque on his cross was a mockery, same as the crown of thorns and purple robe.

Anyway, this is just ridiculous semantics. The Bible is not "my" book, but I apparently know the context of this specific content a lot better than you, my friend.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Well the dictonary points out that many old churches have the area designated, I am sure if you run a quick google search you will find them. Or are you grasping at strawmen?

Huh, do you even know what a strawman/logical fallacy is?

The area may well be "designated" (not that the freaking dictionary is any authority on the archaeology of Jesus' tomb), but there is no location for the tomb of Jesus.

This is getting silly.

Originally posted by adigregorio
I can't even begin to point out the flaws in this logic.

Let me try
(Hypothetical Senario Alert)

0 = None
0 = Nothing
0 = Zero
0 = Zilch

The words (none, nothing, zero, zilch) were recently discovered. Zilch being the most recent, and most believed to be true.

We have some upstart saying that 0 was here all along, and that Zilch is just based off of that, well I say that they modified the idea of 0 to make it fit Zilch.

Needless to say, 0 was around and would have been around with or without Zilch (or the others)

This is the pattern that Lord Raglan, and the OP have noticed.

I don't see how any of this relates to what I have posted. You're on your own with this one.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Unfortunatly my pattern is off topic, if you feel you have a valid defense please contribute to my thread (bet you won't though).

I don't even know what thread you keep referring to. I'l have a look, but your constant self-promotion is a bit odious, to be honest.

Originally posted by adigregorio
In my opinion, you have failed to disprove my observations. Of course I will leave the ultimate descision up to the other readers.

I didn't really have anything to disprove. You posted someone else's template on commonalities between hero myths. I merely pointed out that they were very broad and that Jesus didn't fit with a few of them.

OK, I found your "Hero Pattern" thread. Interesting and fun, but I don't think it has any bearing on whether Jesus existed or not.

As was already said, the criteria are broad enough to fit so many personalities (including Anakin Skywalker) that all it does is demonstrate that there exist certain archetypes and commonalities throughout history - whether via myth, fiction or historical figures.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
Well I have proof that people referred ...

Dude, he was not popularly recognised as king of the Jews. If he was, his own people (uhh, the Jews) wouldn't have assisted in his crucifixion!

Could you please show me where in the scale it said he had to be popularly recognized at the time of his reign? And, he DEFINATLY is recognized as the king now. So sorry, my friend, he still gets the point.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
Well the dictonary points out that many old churches have the area designated, I am sure if you run a quick google search you will find them. Or are you grasping at strawmen?

Huh, do you even know what a strawman/logical fallacy is?

To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.

Source: Wikipedia.org (Sorry)

Which churches have the sepuchlres is the strawman you are trying to attack, the point is that they have them. And again, JC still gets the point.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
I can't even begin to point out the flaws in this logic...

I don't see how any of this relates to what I have posted. You're on your own with this one.

My response was in the initial post. I figured it would go over your/others head(s).

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
Unfortunatly my pattern is off topic...

I don't even know what thread you keep referring to. I'l have a look, but your constant self-promotion is a bit odious, to be honest.

Actually, I am trying to keep us from hyjacking this thread. Since you obviously can't take a hint that this is not really on topic, to be honest.

Originally posted by clcreek
reply to post by Soulfear

 

The bible does not support this notion of eternal torture in hell for sinners. It is not a Christian concept, even though many proclaiming Christian churches preach it. That concept is a twisting of the scriptures and is simply not true.

Tell me you werent insinuating that there is no such thing as hell here! Then you say:

hell exists and the bible says that those that reject God will go there. It also says that once there you will die and your body and soul will be destroyed.

NICE. Let me do this one more time.

And for me the collest thing about my God is that even if you don't believe in him, he still loves you.

AHH but LOVE means death and destruction in hell, for sinning and not believing. Your sick. How is that love?

Originally posted by adigregorio
Could you please show me where in the scale it said he had to be popularly recognized at the time of his reign? And, he DEFINATLY is recognized as the king now. So sorry, my friend, he still gets the point.

Well, this is misleading, as the hero pattern was presented as a timeline. In that part of Jesus' life (as per the timeline, after his birth and before his death) he wasn't recognised as a king. Now you're saying that this aspect of the pattern/template doesn't apply. OK. I guess you're intent on getting everything to fit to prove your theory. or whatever

Originally posted by adigregorio
Which churches have the sepuchlres is the strawman you are trying to attack, the point is that they have them. And again, JC still gets the point.

Sepulchre = tomb/burial place of Jesus, in my mind. Why would there be more than one tomb?

This isn't me attacking a strawman. This is us having different definitions of sepulchre.

Originally posted by adigregorio
My response was in the initial post. I figured it would go over your/others head(s).

Yes, you're clearly very clever. And the lack of understanding is clearly the fault of the reader rather than your bizarre mathematical analogy.

Originally posted by adigregorio
Actually, I am trying to keep us from hyjacking this thread. Since you obviously can't take a hint that this is not really on topic, to be honest.

This isn't off-topic at all. This topic is about proof that Jesus is "false". The hero pattern lends to the subject matter.

In any case, don't get snippy at me for responding to an "off-topic" post that you created.

Originally posted by Roark
Well, this is misleading, as the hero pattern was presented as a timeline. In that part of Jesus' life (as per the timeline, after his birth and before his death) he wasn't recognised as a king. Now you're saying that this aspect of the pattern/template doesn't apply. OK. I guess you're intent on getting everything to fit to prove your theory. or whatever

Ahh more strawmen?

I never presented the pattern as a timeline, it is a 22 point scale that defines a 'hero's' story. Converting my original point does not invalidate it.

He was considered king of the jews, a mockery from the Romans AND truely by his followers. I really can't believe you are saying they did not view him as 'Lord' considering it is what they called him.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
Which churches have the sepuchlres is the strawman you are trying to attack, the point is that they have them. And again, JC still gets the point.

Sepulchre = tomb/burial place of Jesus, in my mind. Why would there be more than one tomb?

Did you read the definition I posted earlier, there were 2 of them. One was burial place, the other was in DIRECT REFERENCE TO JESUS.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
My response was in the initial post. I figured it would go over your/others head(s).

Yes, you're clearly very clever. And the lack of understanding is clearly the fault of the reader rather than your bizarre mathematical analogy.

To avoid misunderstanding, I was referencing my inablity to put my thoughts into text. I was not inferring that others were less than I.

Originally posted by Roark

Originally posted by adigregorio
Actually, I am trying to keep us from hyjacking this thread. Since you obviously can't take a hint that this is not really on topic, to be honest.

This isn't off-topic at all. This topic is about proof that Jesus is "false". The hero pattern lends to the subject matter.

Fair enough, I fear of being a hypocrite so I tend to play my postings safely. If no one objects I have no issue continuing the discussion.

(Hypothetical Senario Alert)

0 = None
0 = Nothing
0 = Zero
0 = Zilch

The words (none, nothing, zero, zilch) were recently discovered. Zilch being the most recent, and most believed to be true.

We have some upstart saying that 0 was here all along, and that Zilch is just based off of that, well I say that they modified the idea of 0 to make it fit Zilch.

Needless to say, 0 was around and would have been around with or without Zilch (or the others)

Hero = Merlin
Hero = Odipus
Hero = Zeus
Hero = Jesus

The heros (Merlin, Odipus, Zeus, Jesus) were recently discovered. Jesus being the most recent, and most believed to be true.

We have some upstart saying that the Hero was here all along, and that Jesus is just based off of that! Well I say they modified the idea of the Hero to make it fit Jesus.

Needless to say, the Hero was around, and would have been around, with or without Jesus (Or the others).

(Does that help with comprehension of my 'bad equation'?)

reply to post by Daniem


hello! to believe so much design has no designer well thats just ignorence.

but then to rather your beliefs over to some man made fairytale like evolution, where first you have to get past the most fantastic monumental
most stupendous hurdle of all religions ever dreamed up anywhere in the
cosmos or other dimension or hyperdimension in and/or between Heaven
n Hell and that is to believe there is even the slightest chance that everything has happened by chance. thats inexcuseble ignorense lol