New Testament Fairy Tales

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Now we all know that isn't true.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Now we all know that isn't true.

It isn't?

reply to post by defcon5

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 [Cancerwarrior] never received proper teaching into what those doctrines actually entail.

Speak it, Brother.

I was raised thru HS as a RC and my best friend as a Lutheran. To even submit that there is great similarity between the two is absolutely ludicrous.

The disconnect between the creators of Christianity and its implementers is fascinating because it suggests that its first bishops did not need to understand a key element of Christianity. This may
have some bearing on a subject of interest but one that I will not cover in this post—this being, at what point did Christianity lose the memory of its Roman origins?

Silly Christians, and sillier Flavian NT authors? Yes to the first, no to the second. Aesop' hasn't a candle large enough to hold against those Roman fablers.

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
The disconnect between the creators of Christianity and its implementers is fascinating because it suggests that its first bishops did not need to understand a key element of Christianity. This may
have some bearing on a subject of interest but one that I will not cover in this post—this being, at what point did Christianity lose the memory of its Roman origins?

Silly Christians, and sillier Flavian NT authors? Yes to the first, no to the second. Aesop' hasn't a candle large enough to hold against those Roman fablers.

At what point will you address the rebuttals made to your (or should I say Joseph Atwill's) claims?

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I think we can all agree that anything more complicated than a mere handful of ideals is victim to either subjectivity or questionable record-keeping.

With that said, what bearing does the source have? Why do we need to worship the author? Let us simply keep the words in mind and recognize the universal truth to be had!

I wish I had a dollar for everytime I had to read the word "flavian" in this thread.
I'd take my extended family out for a very nice meal!

Pehaps, the windy one would care to read back a few pages? It seems the evidence has been presented to dispute your entire 10 year thesis...

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

I think we can all agree that anything more complicated than a mere handful of ideals is victim to either subjectivity or questionable record-keeping.

With that said, what bearing does the source have? Why do we need to worship the author? Let us simply keep the words in mind and recognize the universal truth to be had!

Embracing universal truths is one thing. Propagating lies because one doesn't like certain historical truths is another.

So many faery tale choices....

Kudos to the OP for this thoughtful thread topic!

Aw yes, the non-existent crucifixion. Well lessee now...

The Gospel of John is also different from the Synoptics in that it describes Jesus' crucifixion as occurring on the day before Passover, whereas in the Synoptics Jesus is crucified on Passover itself.



The differences between the dates of Jesus' crucifixion have always been attributed to the fact that each Gospel has a separate tradition. I, of course, would disagree and reiterate that while the four Gospels may have been produced by different individual [Flavian] scholars, they were under the control of a single editor who edited them where he saw fit.

Therefore, the differences in the dates of Jesus' crucifixion are by design. That is, they show that there was more than one "Jesus," because no one can be crucified twice.

Not even in such a well contrived faery tale should that happen.

I mean, how many Jesuses' can you count?

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Historical truths that germinate behavior which inevitably leads to destructive societal regime, as per human nature?

Whether history is accurate or not, I find the lessons we take from it to be completely detestable.

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
So many faery tale choices....

Kudos to the OP for this thoughtful thread topic!

Aw yes, the non-existent crucifixion. Well lessee now...

The Gospel of John is also different from the Synoptics in that it describes Jesus' crucifixion as occurring on the day before Passover, whereas in the Synoptics Jesus is crucified on Passover itself.

The differences between the dates of Jesus' crucifixion have always been attributed to the fact that each Gospel has a separate tradition. I, of course, would disagree and reiterate that while the four Gospels may have been produced by different individual [Flavian] scholars, they were under the control of a single editor who edited them where he saw fit.

Therefore, the differences in the dates of Jesus' crucifixion are by design. That is, they show that there was more than one "Jesus," because no one can be crucified twice.

Not even in such a well contrived faery tale should that happen.

I mean, how many Jesuses' can you count?

Guess we're never going to get a straight answer out of you. Figures. You have been completely debunked, and your resistance to addressing specific rebuttals proves it. Go ahead. Cling to your "faery" tale. Makes no difference to me, "sister".

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
reply to post by defcon5

 

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 [Cancerwarrior] never received proper teaching into what those doctrines actually entail.

Speak it, Brother.

I was raised thru HS as a RC and my best friend as a Lutheran. To even submit that there is great similarity between the two is absolutely ludicrous.

Yes, almost as ridiculous as 3 different Jesus in the New Testament.

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

Historical truths that germinate behavior which inevitably leads to destructive societal regime, as per human nature?

Whether history is accurate or not, I find the lessons we take from it to be completely detestable.

That has very little to do with the historicity of Jesus, or the propagation of the Jesus as Osiris myth. But Lets take up your argument for a moment:

What makes you so sure the writings in the new testament are the cause of such societal strife? The fact people killed in the name of God? If nobody believed in God, people would kill in the name of money, or power, or "love". People are ultimately flawed (the entire REASON for the new testament). If it weren't religion, we'd find some other excuse to murder each other (and history proves this).

reply to post by ALightBreeze


As I thought...Another cut and paste...

Caesar's Messiah

Don't you have something original to waste our time with?

Then there is Jesus' childhood...

I have stated that the outline of Jesus' childhood was fictitious, copied typologically and intentionally from the life of Moses.

Here is another example of Jesus' fictitious childhood. In Luke's version of Jesus' childhood, Joseph takes his family out of Galilee to Bethlehem to register for the census. What a guy, what a concerned citizen!

And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from
Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.
This census first took place while Quirinius was gov-
erning Syria.

So all went to be registered everyone to his own city.
Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of
Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of Bethlehem, because he
was of the house and lineage of David.

The census of Quirinius was imposed on the area around Jerusalem, which was under Roman rule, and not on Galilee, which was part of the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas. At no time during the life of Jesus did the Romans raise tribute in Galilee. Why then would Joseph voluntarily travel to Bethlehem with a pregnant wife to register for a tax he was not required to pay?

Maybe they liked to travel, Mary with her bloated tummy humping on the back of a donkey and Joseph with his multicolored Dreamcoat!

reply to post by DeadSeraph


The history doesn't matter to me, Seraph. I couldn't care less about history. We've proven, again and again and again, that we don't become better. We don't WANT to become better. We just want to be better at being bad. We want impunity, not morality. And by 'we', I mean the human race...or those who control it, at least. Not "Satan", not "Lucifer"...I mean the human beings who control the purse strings, who have their hands in every political, financial, corporate and religious club in the world. The humans who believe it's their right to stand at the top and look down on the rest, giving orders and controlling fates without considering what the people below them want. What the people below them need.

I don't care about history. I care about what we do with it. I care about what we take from it. And right now, all I see is blood and greed. If it isn't blood from the vein, it's blood from the soul. And the greed saps all of our spiritual intellect, until all we care about is those things we can touch with our flesh.

We've forgotten what's inside. We've forgotten what's inside, and we use history to bolster that amnesia. And yes, like it or not, our leaders use religion to bolster that amnesia as well.

That's what I see. That's what I know. And that's what sickens me. What we've lost, and how hard we fight to keep ourselves from finding it again.

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
Then there is Jesus' childhood...

I have stated that the outline of Jesus' childhood was fictitious, copied typologically and intentionally from the life of Moses.

Here is another example of Jesus' fictitious childhood. In Luke's version of Jesus' childhood, Joseph takes his family out of Galilee to Bethlehem to register for the census. What a guy, what a concerned citizen!

And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from
Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.
This census first took place while Quirinius was gov-
erning Syria.

So all went to be registered everyone to his own city.
Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of
Nazareth, into Judea, to the city of Bethlehem, because he
was of the house and lineage of David.

The census of Quirinius was imposed on the area around Jerusalem, which was under Roman rule, and not on Galilee, which was part of the tetrarchy of Herod Antipas. At no time during the life of Jesus did the Romans raise tribute in Galilee. Why then would Joseph voluntarily travel to Bethlehem with a pregnant wife to register for a tax he was not required to pay?

Maybe they liked to travel, Mary with her bloated tummy humping on the back of a donkey and Joseph with his multicolored Dreamcoat!

Guess you missed the part about registering in the city you are from?

He was absolutely required to pay that tax by your own admission.

reply to post by AfterInfinity

The history doesn't matter to me, Seraph. I couldn't care less about history. We've proven, again and again and again, that we don't become better. We don't WANT to become better. We just want to be better at being bad. We want impunity, not morality. And by 'we', I mean the human race...or those who control it, at least.

Well said and spoken. Is anyone listening?

reply to post by DeadSeraph

What makes you so sure the writings in the new testament are the cause of such societal strife?

Because every single matter which could make a difference in the course of this world has a religious nut throwing his/her two bent pennies into the pool. And where does their authority come from?

Yep, the Bible.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

The passage also claims that Joseph went to Bethlehem because this was where the house of David registered. Scholars have long understood that this claim is untrue, both because the genealogy is
unknowable and because Augustus' decree would have been logistically impossible to implement.

Damn facts, they just get in the way of a great soap opera, yes?