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.

 

New Testament Fairy Tales

page: 13
33
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
More to the OP Subject of NT fairy tales...

Our fictitious Jesus appears to be speaking in a spiritual sense when he uses phrases like "fishers of men," "eat of my flesh," "resurrection," "the stone that crushes," "the temple that will be destroyed," "demons," and "follow me." In War of the Jews we learn that Jesus' words were not references to something spiritual.

In fact, Jesus is speaking literally throughout the New Testament and those who see spiritual meaning in his words are being played for a fool were consistently ridiculing those who see symbolic meaning where there is none.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls there are many allegorical interpretations of passages from the Pentateuch.

This way of interpreting scripture no doubt helped form the theology of a "coming" Messiah that inspired the first-century Jewish rebels. The point I think the creators of Christianity were making with their use of comedy is that there are unlimited ways to interpret scripture and it is easy for the gullible and the uneducated to see symbolic meaning where there is none.

This point is evidenced by creating the New Testament as an example.




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Please keep the discussion on topic and not directed at each other. Opinions about others posts and snide remarks are not the topic.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:41 PM
link   
The Jesus who is crucified in the Gospel of John could not be the Jesus who is crucified in any of the Synoptic Gospels, because he is crucified on the day before Passover, whereas the all the other Jesuses are crucified on Passover itself. Also, each of the Jesuses in the four Gospels has a group of disciples with slightly different names. And, of course, nowhere in the Gospels is there a physical description of Jesus.

If I were so inclined, I could find evidence for several more Jesuses but since I don't believe anyone of them physically existed, why should I?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:52 PM
link   
More faery tales...

Early in Christian history a redactor made an editorial change to the name of the New Testament
character known today as Barabbas. Barabbas is a composite word made up from the Hebrew bar (son) and abba (father), which is to say "son of the Father." While the character is known today simply as Barabbas, this was not his name in the version of the New Testament early church scholars were familiar with. We know from Origen (c. 250 C.E.) and others that the versions of the New Testament they were familiar with referred to this character as Jesus Barrabas.

what a coincidence.


The purpose of the character named Jesus Barabbas becomes clear. The New Testament is flatly stating that there was more than one "Jesus." Notice the humor in Pilate's statement below,

"I will therefore chastise him and release him."

The joke being that it is impossible to know which "Jesus" Pilate is referring.

Ah, those Flavians, they are still rolling in their graves in sounds of laughter thunder.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
The Jesus who is crucified in the Gospel of John could not be the Jesus who is crucified in any of the Synoptic Gospels, because he is crucified on the day before Passover, whereas the all the other Jesuses are crucified on Passover itself. Also, each of the Jesuses in the four Gospels has a group of disciples with slightly different names. And, of course, nowhere in the Gospels is there a physical description of Jesus.

If I were so inclined, I could find evidence for several more Jesuses but since I don't believe anyone of them physically existed, why should I?


Please excuse my lack of intellect, but if you have all of this "evidence" for all of these imposter jesuses, and claim to be able to readily find more, then why can't you find any for the one True Jesus, when many have no problem doing so?

And, if we must provide physical evidence to prove our Jesus, why do we have to just take your word for it, about all of yours?

Seems a bit agenda based, your comments do...



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 


"Many" have no problem doing so, because they are so desperate for it, they see pink elephants where there are none.

Basic psychology, derp.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 


Didn't I just say that I didn't have proof he existed?
I literally said that in my last post to you, why would you ask that question?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 


"Many" have no problem doing so, because they are so desperate for it, they see pink elephants where there are none.

Basic psychology, derp.


But what of those like myself, who aren't desperate, and have spent nearly a lifetime trying to understand it all?
When we come to those realizations, mini-epiphanies, if you will, and it blows our minds, because we just KNOW, but are unable to prove it, it is quite humbling, when viewed in the grand scheme of things...

Ah. Psychology, one of the many "sciences" where things only have to be empirical and not absolute, to be considered fact...derp



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 


Well, answer me this, if you would: if the Bible and all of its tales are so accurate and absolute, why do so many people question it?

We don't question gravity. We don't question the weather (except for its more vindictive timing). We don't question the sun, and we don't question the earth. Everything we do question, we have the technology or are developing the technology to answer it.

So why does something that is supposedly the True Word cause so much confusion? Especially when everything that is of the "Devil" makes so much more sense? Coincidence?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 





Please excuse my lack of intellect, but if you have all of this "evidence" for all of these imposter jesuses, and claim to be able to readily find more, then why can't you find any for the one True Jesus, when many have no problem doing so?


What "one true Jesus"? There isn't one. Note the OP subject...

New Testament Fairy Tales




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
More to the OP Subject of NT fairy tales...

Our fictitious Jesus appears to be speaking in a spiritual sense when he uses phrases like "fishers of men," "eat of my flesh," "resurrection," "the stone that crushes," "the temple that will be destroyed," "demons," and "follow me." In War of the Jews we learn that Jesus' words were not references to something spiritual.

In fact, Jesus is speaking literally throughout the New Testament and those who see spiritual meaning in his words are being played for a fool were consistently ridiculing those who see symbolic meaning where there is none.


So you're saying that Jesus actually went fishing and caught people with a net? Or that he actually cut off peices of himself to feed to his cannibal followers?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:45 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 


I've read the entire New Testament, gospels included. Would you care to give a book or chapter/verse for some of these "several other" Jesus' instead of just your own biased speculation?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Yet more faery tales...

An intellect of the Flavian court—one who was familiar with the Old Testament and therefore understood the humor in the passages, certainly had a great laugh when "Jesus", in the midst of a series of predictions, describes something that has already occurred.

Josephus then "records" it coming to pass, a second time, in the future. An absurd comic romp comparable with the woe-saying Jesus being struck dead by a stone. Imagine someone today who, claiming to be able to see the future, gives a list of events that will happen in the coming century. At the end of the list, he pre-
dicts that Germany will lose World War II.

The comedy is vaudevillian.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Originally posted by AfterInfinity



Well, answer me this, if you would: if the Bible and all of its tales are so accurate and absolute, why do so many people question it?

Excellent question! Why do you suppose so many do? What other ancient Works draw such critical attention?
Do you suppose that attention came before or after the Words themselves began to transform those around them? If the Books are true, who or what would benefit from dissuading belief in them?



We don't question gravity. We don't question the weather (except for its more vindictive timing). We don't question the sun, and we don't question the earth. Everything we do question, we have the technology or are developing the technology to answer it.


Sure we do! Especially here on ATS. We pride ourselves in questioning everything!
And as for technology, it seems to me, that the more we learn, in respect to our Universe, the more things fall in line with the Scriptures. So, not only were the windy lady's aforementioned flavorites, geniuses, they were psychic, as well.



So why does something that is supposedly the True Word cause so much confusion? Especially when everything that is of the "Devil" makes so much more sense? Coincidence?


Your guess is as good as mine. I have my theories, but I keep them to myself. I try not to spew opinions without at least a firm conviction behind them. If I ever figure it out, to the point of certainty, ATS would be one of the first to know.
Pure evil, is a tough nut to comprehend. We see glimpses of it, all around us. We attempt to understand it, for that is what the human mind does, but I believe it to be more than just a mysterious force. I believe it to be an entity, just as the Bible says. And as such, we can not know it, until it knows us. And then my friend, it is too late...



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 




I've read the entire New Testament, gospels included.

Stars, flags and lollipops for you!



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Fairy tale after faery tale...

Like Jesus' other comic self-designations, (fisher of men, living bread, living water) with "stone" the physical location where Jesus uses the expression is part of the joke. He calls himself a "stone" rejected by the builders (meaning the Jews), which will "utterly crush" those on whom it falls, at the exact spot where Josephus records that stones did actually fall on Jews during the war with Rome.

In the "lunatic Jesus" passage above, Josephus continues the comic theme of Jesus calling himself a stone that will "crush." The lunatic Jesus is killed just as the Roman siege of Jerusalem begins.

Josephus records this slapstick Jesus' last words:


"Woe, woe to the city again, and to the people, and to the
holy house!" And just as he added at the last, "Woe, woe to
myself also!" there came a stone out of one of the engines,
and smote him, and killed him immediately; and as he was
uttering the very same presages he gave up the ghost.


Knowing what the Roman war catapults had done to the Jewish defenders of Jerusalem, reading about a Messiah who, while standing beneath that city's walls, calls himself a stone and threatens to fall on and utterly crush Jews. For such an individual, the humor would have been obvious to the Flavian authors of the New TestaTale.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 


What's comical is that you have yet to provide a single shred of evidence for any of your claims, and completely passed over my request for you to do so. No matter though. I have a few flaws to point out in your theory:

-If the NT was a work of fiction written by Josephus in some sort of Roman conspiracy, why is Jesus mentioned in the Talmud? Or the Quran for that matter? We are NOT talking about multiple people named Jesus. We are talking about the historical person the NT was based on. Jesus of Nazareth.

-Josephus was born in 37AD. Galatians, widely considered to be the earliest known book of the NT, was written between 48-49 AD. Are you suggesting that Josephus wrote the NT when he was 11 or 12 years old?


-Josephus did not even encounter vespasian until 67AD. A full 30 years after Galatians was written. How exactly does your story reconcile this fact?

-How does your theory reconcile the "James Ossuary" (which has yet to be proven fake, 10 years on), which is inscribed: "James, Son of Joseph, Brother of Jesus"? This is I might add, archaeological evidence (however contentious).

Further reading (Though I doubt you'll bother to look. You seem quite content in believing this roman conspiracy of yours dispelled any validity of the historicity of Jesus):

-Archaeological evidence of the NT

-The "James Ossuary"

-The Historicity of Christ

-A critique of G.A Wells "Mythical Jesus"

-Flavius Josephus

In short, the bulk of the evidence favors the notion that Jesus of Nazareth (who the NT is based on) was a real historical figure.

The counter argument, is that any sources which mention him were written after his death, However I can not find a SINGLE shred of evidence to support your wild claims.

Even Richard Dawkins, who would love to see Christianity stamped out, concedes that it is likely the NT was based on a real persons life (although he contends the miraculous parts were fabricated).
edit on 6-9-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 





Please excuse my lack of intellect, but if you have all of this "evidence" for all of these imposter jesuses, and claim to be able to readily find more, then why can't you find any for the one True Jesus, when many have no problem doing so?


What "one true Jesus"? There isn't one. Note the OP subject...

New Testament Fairy Tales



It saddens me, to consider that you and the OP have not had the pleasure of becoming acquainted, with the Jesus I know:
That you have not experienced the life-changing events, that can only be attributed to His guiding hand,
That you have never known the Pure Peace, of being uplifted, by Him, in the worst of times,
That you have never felt the Power, of His healing abilities,
That you have, at some point in your life, turned your back on Him, and denied Him, as Peter did.
That you may never get to enjoy Heaven.
That you may never re-unite with loved ones, who have accepted Him, and now sleep.

I pray that your heart does not remain hard. And in spite of your own grief and anger, something changes in you, and causes you to reconsider His gift and sacrifice.



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 07:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 




I've read the entire New Testament, gospels included.

Stars, flags and lollipops for you!


Maybe you should try reading it yourself sometime since it is very obvious that you are condemning something that you have not even tried to educate yourself on. I could sit here and tell you all day how much skydiving sucks, but I've never been skydiving so I really would not know what the heck I was talking about now would I?

All attempts to try and get some evidence for these utter ridiculous claims of yours is met with deflection tactics from you. So I'll ask a 4th time, do you have a chapter and verse for some of these "imposter Jesus' that you claim are all over the New Testament?



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Lutherans especially always love to point out how much different their denomination is than the other Christian denominations. I heard it all the time when i went to church. Fundamentally they are the same. There are some minor differences like what you posted above.


I beg to differ on this with you. I went to Lutheran school, and am confirmed as one, then I later was sent to Catholic school. There are MAJOR difference between the two religions and their beliefs. If you don't understand how big a difference that even just the things I mentioned above are, I'm not sure what to tell you, as obviously you never received proper teaching into what those doctrines actually entail.

Would you say that Mormons are also 'fundamentally', the same as other Christians as well?


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
But ultimately all christian faiths boil down to the same thing. You must believe that Jesus died for your sins.

Actually there is a movement in the RCC to equate Mary an equal portion in the act of salvation as Christ. She now holds the title of being a Co-Redemptix...
Now do you still believe that all Christian faiths are fundamentally the same?


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Sin I believe is a man-made concept.

Anything that does not come from God, or falls short of the perfection of God, is by default sinful. Sin was not made by either God or man, as I stated above, it exists because God is a perfect being.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
God is all I need.

You do realize that Christ is also God, as is the Holy Spirit. Christ is the 'Word of God made flesh' and the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of God.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Sorry, I don't believe in original sin, or that God judges me for the mistakes I've made in life.

Even if you don't believe in original sin, you still have to realize that you have sinned in some way during your life. Even a single sin is enough to keep you out of the presence of God. God does not so much judge you, as your sin judges you. If you have sinned, and do not have grace, you fall short of being allowed in the presence of God.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
Even if I was a christian, why would I have to have fellowship with other christians? Thats something pastors say to try and keep you coming to church.

Well for one reason:

Mat 18:20 - "For wherever two or three people have come together in my name, I am there, right among them!"

But throughout the bible it discusses Christian 'Fellowship'. Other Christians are to be like your family to you, and in some cases even closer to you then your family (hence the fact that Christians call each other Brothers and Sisters). You should want to be around others of your belief for all the same reasons you want to spend time with any family.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
I find it to be much better discussions with people that believe different than me. Not the brain-washed churchgoers.

You are also supposed to spend time working with nonbelievers. By allowing them to see how you act, and your representation of Christianity, you may draw them into the faith as well. I'm not saying to force your beliefs on them, as many churches do, but rather just be an example, and discuss it with them if they want.


Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
And while you can ask questions in the church, it is generally frowned upon. "Jesus loves me this I know, for the bible tells me so." Believe this because you are told to.

Well... I'm a Christian, and I'm answering your questions, so its not the way that all churches operate. I never had any problems asking questions or answering others questions. You must understand though that not everyone has the same level of understanding, and if you ask someone who doesn't know the answer, especially someone who should (such as a pastor), you might get an embarrassed brush-off or 'canned response' from them.




top topics



 
33
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join