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: 19
33
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


Credentials are given to those who succeed in swallowing information by means of Group-Think, which is applied by organizations firmly pinned over the thumb of data-filter oppression systems operated by the government.

In other words, credentials are not always a good thing. Sometimes, the process required to obtain credentials kind of hinders the learning process instead of assisting it. Don't ask me for an alternative, I don't have one.


edit on 7-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


I see your point, but in a case where someone is arguing against history and presenting their views as facts, credentials become important as a way of verifying if the individual has spent the time necessary to research facts.

I fully admit I am not a historian. But I have given links to people more qualified that have pretty much put this theory to bed. I'm also going to contact some historians to see if I can get their opinions on the subject as well, which I will post here if I hear back from any of them.

I'm by no means saying that Breeze isn't qualified to speak on the subject. I'm just curious why Breeze used the term "my colleague".



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 


No views are ever facts, because views are exactly like looking out a window: the scene changes according to the window. Which means no view is fact. The other guy made a mistaking passing off opinion as fact. You made a mistake calling that opinion wrong.

Let's find common ground and work toward a solution rather than a conflict, aye?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 




If your society is collapsing, the smartest thing to do would be to control that collapse. Become your opponent, and be ready to seize power under a new "name". All of that power went into the roman catholic church. Rome never really collapsed. It just changed its mask. And as history also shows, the catholic church became a very dominant force in the world. I see the whole story as deliberate misdirection.


Which is precisely what the Flavian dynasty did. They created the massive disinformation, fairy tale set known as the Gospels/NT. They assimilated the messianic Jews into messianic Christians then booted them to the curb or slaughtered them in their near entirety.

Sometime after the war between the Romans and the Jews, Christianity was created by Roman smarty, Flavian employed intellectuals working for the Flavian emperors Titus and Vespasian. They created Christianity as a pseudo-religion as a sociological, psychological and theological barrier to oppose messianic Judaism from (once more) disrupting their empire.

The fictional story of the mythical Jesus' ministry is nothing more than a prophetic fairy tale of Titus Flavius' military campaign through Judea.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by VonDoomen
reply to post by DeadSeraph
 

As history shows us, religion is a very powerful idea.


Exactly! But, why is that statement true? Why is it apparently so easy to capture the hearts and minds of the entire intellectual spectrum?
Religion is not just for dummies. There are multitudes of highly intelligent Christians. Many who were not raised in the doctrine, and many more, like myself, that abandoned their childhood spoonfed faith, just to return full circle after half a lifetime of considering all of the alternatives.

Why does the non-believer who has no problem believing other such far-fetched ideas, as those on the fringe of science, as well as many of the theories of a variety of self-proclaimed athiests and non-believers, but have not the ability to even entertain the possibility, of a Supreme Creator, and His subsequent teachings?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by GoOfYFoOt
 


I have no problem with the idea of a supreme mind.

I do however have a problem believing humans 2000 years ago had it all figured out.

Christianity =/= ultimate truth of reality and it would be ignorant to make that inference.
edit on 9/7/2012 by VonDoomen because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   
reply to post by VonDoomen
 


Totally off topic but I love your avatar. Hilarious


Back on topic:

I have sent out a few e-mails to various faculty members at reputable academic institutions to canvas their opinions on Mr.Atwills theories. Since breeze doesn't seem to want to address any of the questions asked or the points which have been raised that cast doubt on this conspiracy theory, perhaps the thoughts of qualified academics will hold more merit.

I'll return to share any responses if and when I receive them



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 09:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by HamrHeed

Originally posted by DeadSeraph

Originally posted by CoIntelPro
reply to post by jiggerj
 




In another thread it was suggested that I read the New Testament. Admittedly, it's been years since I've done this, but I used to read it often. Like the religious today, I allowed my eyes to glaze over the utterly ridiculous parts. I don't do that anymore.

God I have heard this schtik a 1000 times. Why is it the last refuge of the hilariously faithful to say "you need to read the bible" when I have read it back to back to back dozens of times?

oh well.


The suggestion was made when the OP referenced Old Testament scripture as justification for the immorality of the bible. I made that suggestion. While I can deal with the fact you find my "faith" hilarious, I also find it interesting how your first post was in this thread. Breeze started a new account during the course of this thread (after posting numerous times), and then posted again. You two wouldn't happen to know each other, would you?

Sad that people have to troll the # out of others spiritual beliefs in this day and age. But whatever. To each their own



Bro, there's no point in getting wrapped up in trying to set these people straight. It's made to be that way. Anything pro jesus is to be ridiculed by the people who don't understand the faith. They have to extend their hand and give thanks for their existence, and until that moment, they will not see.
It's sad but I don't blame them, as without a personal relationship with god, christianity will seem hollow.
Do you see his works in the world? You're a believer right?


The tribulation is happening now and I am a christian I am saved, I will sit at the lord's table. But wo to those who worship after the beast because he knows his time is short and those people are going to be weeded out soon as 2012 comes around and not at all far off future time.

The Bel-Marduk or Ram headed god, yeah that is a good one to follow.
edit on 7-9-2012 by MarkScheppy because: ad



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by MarkScheppy
 



The tribulation is happening now and I am a christian I am saved


Funny how the mere act of 'being' something can mean so much. And yet 'being' something means doing so little.


The fact is, you know very little of spirituality. You think you've experienced it because you're told that's what you're experiencing. Another fact is that you feel it because you're told you feel it...and have been told since you were a child. Repetition takes the place of doubt, and belief takes the place of fact.

That is your faith. That is your philosophy. We are regressing, because we are unwilling to do the work necessary. When you don't work for it, the result is not worth having. Only when you put in the effort, will the result be worth knowing and having. If you don't have to work for it, if you take unanswered in place of knowledge, then you will never go anywhere except exactly where you are now.

And you're convinced that that's perfectly okay. If that's all you want from your spirituality, then by all means. But there's so much more for you to find...if only you had the inclination to look for it. But that's your choice. That's your sacrifice. That's your cause, and your loss.

You can lead a human to knowledge, but you cannot make them learn. And even harder, is convincing them that it's necessary.
edit on 7-9-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoOfYFoOt
Why does the non-believer who has no problem believing other such far-fetched ideas, as those on the fringe of science, as well as many of the theories of a variety of self-proclaimed athiests and non-believers, but have not the ability to even entertain the possibility, of a Supreme Creator, and His subsequent teachings?


Where do I begin?


Even science on the fringe has to begin with the very basics of knowledge. Meaning that, when math came into existence a man could have brought his truth anywhere in the world and said, "Look, I have discovered that 2+2=4 !"
There is no place in the world, no civilization, that could either refute this, or didn't know it already. The people of these strange and far-away lands could whip out their math books and say, "Hey, we've learned the exact same thing!"

And yet, the three major religions came out of only the Middle east. China didn't have any teachings of Jesus and god before it was brought to them. If the Mongols had the same teachings of peace and love, Genghis Kahn certainly didn't get the memo.

When Christianity was first brought to the new world, why didn't the Aztecs or Mayans or Indians open a book and proclaim, "Hey, we have the exact same teachings on Jesus and god!"

It would have saved the Egyptians a lot of hardship if the god of Abraham thought to reveal himself before the Jews were made into slaves.

How could a supreme being forget to spread his message to the four corners of the planet? Why would a supreme being focus on one little region, and then have his message so obscured that it spread confusion and hate and split it into three warped religions?

It doesn't make any sense!



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I would like to add these non-biblical sources which mention the CHRISTIANS (implying that they had already been established for some time). If the Flavians authored the gospels, Why do we find these inconsistencies?

www.csun.edu...


TACITUS, The Annals of Imperial Rome Book XV, chapter 47 (A.D. 64) [during the Great Fire of Rome]
"...neither human resources, nor imperial generosity, nor appeasement of the gods, eliminated the sinister suspicion that the fire had been deliberately started. To stop the rumor, NERO, made scapegoats--and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved CHRISTIANS (as they were popularly called). Their originator, CHRIST, had been executed in Tiberius' reign by the Procurator of Judaea, PONTIUS PILATUS (governor from 26 to 36 A.D.). But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out again, not just in Judaea (where the mischief had started) but even in Rome. All degraded and shameful practices collect and flourish in the capital. First, NERO had the self-admitted Christians arrested. Then, on their information, large numbers of others were condemned--not so much for starting fires as because of their hatred for the human race. Their deaths were made amusing. Dressed in wild animals' skins, they were torn to pieces by dogs, or crucified, or made into torches to be seton fire after dark as illumination.... Despite their guilt as Christians, and the ruthless punishment it deserved, the victims were pitied. For it was felt that they were being sacrificed to one man's brutality rather than to the national interest."

-If the argument is that Tacitus was in on this conspiracy, Why does he condemn the Christians? His words here seem to indicate that the Romans considered Christians a problem, not a boon to their cause. They also imply (having been written in 117AD) that Christians existed BEFORE the reign of Vespasian, and BEFORE Josephus even MET Vespasian.

What say you, Breeze?



edit on 8-9-2012 by DeadSeraph because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
Kenneth Humphreys is a featured scholar in the documentary film "Caesar's Messiah:The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus".

Here he deconstructs "Jesus" and gives some historical background that sets the stage for the film. Kenneth Humphreys holds a Master's degree from the University of Essex in history and social sciences, a post-graduate pedagogic certificate from the University of Leicester, and a higher national certificate in business studies. He taught for many years in the UK and abroad. Religion, and in particular the claims of Christianity, have been a life-long interest. His book Jesus Never Existed, published in 2005 by Iconoclast Press, currently ships to 30 countries. His website receives more than a million visitors a year.

He is now fully occupied as a writer, radio broadcaster, and public speaker, and campaigns energetically against the tide of resurgent superstition, stupidity and unreason.

6 min vid "Jesus Never Existed"




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 




Another dodged question.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
Timothy Freke -- Bestselling author and internationally respected authority on world spirituality is a featured scholar in the film "Caesar's Messiah:The Roman Conspiracy to Invent Jesus".

Tim has an honours degree in philosophy and is the author of over thirty books that have established his reputation as a scholar and free-thinker. He is best known for his groundbreaking work on Christian Gnosticism with his close friend Peter Gandy, including The Jesus Mysteries, which was a top 10 best-seller in the UK and USA, and a "Book of the Year" in the UK Daily Telegraph. In recent years he has articulated his own "lucid philosophy" in The Laughing Jesus, Lucid Living, and How Long is Now? He has appeared in the documentaries Who's Driving the Dreambus?, Secrets of the Code, and Time Machine: Beyond the Da Vinci Code.

9 min vid




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Hey seraph thanks for clearing that up. There is alot of nonsense that has been "tacked on" to the breast plate of Christianity, and the holy spirit will never be contained.
I find it deplorable that people can even suggest that you have to choose one or the either, christianity or science..
Until science can explain the universe, they will have to put up with LOVE



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:19 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 


Neither of these videos support your claims that the Flavian Dynasty was responsible for the authorship of the New Testament. Neither of them cite the quote I listed above from Tacitus.

In short, your conspiracy theory has been debunked, and you are now dodging questions and shifting the focus of the argument. I have already said to you that even if we assume Jesus was invented (and not a historical figure), it could still be demonstrated that your assertions the New Testament was authored by the Romans was completely false.

Consider yourself debunked.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by HamrHeed
 




There is alot of nonsense that has been "tacked on" to the breast plate of Christianity, and the holy spirit will never be contained.


Point made.

Exactly how do you contain something that doesn't exist?



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
Red Ice Creation with Henrik and Joseph Atwill. "An important hour ahead" claims Henrik.


1 hr aud/vid for your perusal.




posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ALightBreeze
reply to post by HamrHeed
 




There is alot of nonsense that has been "tacked on" to the breast plate of Christianity, and the holy spirit will never be contained.


Point made.

Exactly how do you contain something that doesn't exist?


Love doesn't exist?

I find it telling that alot of people are trying to destroy something they don't understand. Yes there are bad "christians" but we are not to judge what being sinful entails, as it's subjective.
Are you casting judgement as a mortal? Happens to the best of us. Maybe love can cure that for you.
Peace brother
edit on 7-9-2012 by HamrHeed because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-9-2012 by HamrHeed because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 11:39 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightBreeze
 




More dodging. I will say this much, Breeze (despite the fact you never seem to acknowledge anything I say, or points which I raise that poke holes in the theories you present here as facts): This debate has been very stimulating for me (however one sided).

I've learned more about the evidence in favor of a historical Jesus than I could have possibly hoped to otherwise. For that much, I suppose I should thank you.

I just wish you'd acknowledge the fact that Atwill hasn't got a leg to stand on, and that your own assertions that the Flavian Dynasty was responsible for the authorship of the New Testament have been debunked.




top topics



 
33
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join