It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
reply to post by texastig
He did exist out of religious doctrine. The Gospels are historical books.
Not really no.
They are accounts of Jesus written decades after his death.
The Gospels are a religious doctrine, not a history book. At least not to those of us who have extensively studied ALL religious doctrine from that era, before than era and beyond.
Why is that the most convinced people are the ones who know the least about it?
All of the other 'gods and saviors' writings came hundreds of years after.
Ah no, that's just false.
Apollonius of Tyana*
MOST all of these were stories that surfaced FAR BEFORE Jesus.
Jesus was written about 25 years after his resurrection by Paul which means no myths and fairy tales could be inserted.
That's ridiculous logic. Do you mean to say that because Jesus was written about 25 years after his 'resurrection' that they could not have lied about it? Or embellished it?
The logic behind that statement is dumbfounding.
edit on 1/2/2014 by tothetenthpower because: (no reason given)
I don't want to be rude here or offend anyone, but is there any proof that god exists?
reply to post by windword
Do you agree that Christos (Christ or any other language --spelling --you choose for it) is also another name for Logos?
That's the doctrine of Logos. It has nothing to do with the life and/or teachings of Jesus the Nazarene. His message was not new or unique. It is the same message that the Buddha taught, that Lao Tzu taught and the ancient Egyptian mythology and the Eleusinian mysteries are echoed in Christian ritual and mythology.
I can't just superimpose the philosophies of Pythagoras, the logic of Platonic solids and the harmonics of the creation of the universe onto the "Jesus" figure, hanging in perpetuity on a wooden cross.
edit on 2-1-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)
Firstly, literacy wasn't common back in the time that Jesus was said to walk the Earth, so there would only be few people that would be capable of recording his activities.
That is not true. Matthew was a tax collector and he had to keep records. Then you have Luke who was a physician.
That's the doctrine of Logos. It has nothing to do with the life and/or teachings of Jesus the Nazarene. His message was not new or unique. It is the same message that the Buddha taught, that Lao Tzu taught and the ancient Egyptian mythology and the Eleusinian mysteries are echoed in Christian ritual and mythology. Windword
I'd love to see some!
........... Compare Alexander the great, he was written about 400 years after he died....... People believe that Nero, Alexander the Great, Caesar were real. There are historical standards that are used for someone being real.
Your post has a logic which although I don't agree seems sensible...
But when trying to understand ancient greek philosophies and religion you have to realize that their consept of God(s)
was entirely different from the Judeochristianic ideology.
Logos is not a ''God''
It is nature worhip, the gods are not persons or beings, they never existed as persons but they exist as Gods and
they are all real. And thats coming from an atheist
But the gospell writers, his sollowers where worshiping Jesus as a God
Certainly, Jesus Christ never existed.
Jesus, if he existed, didn't have the last name "Christ". In fact, there were many "Christs" before and after the advent of the birth of Jesus, if he existed.
Christ is a pagan construct that was used by multiple pagan cults to describe initiates, deities, leaders and teachers.
If modern believers were truly sincere in their desire for a more intimate relationship with the Lord, they would immediately want to know and question why "early believers avoided" using the name Christian? When it is realized that even the very name Christian was in use prior to the time of Jesus, we truly begin to grasp the Pagan connection. The name Christian was a term employed to describe one who was an initiate, and understood the inner meaning of the Greek and Roman mystery religions. Thus, the early followers of Jesus refused to be called Christian, and call Jesus the Christ, because the word was used in reference to enlightened Pagans and their gods.
Since early Christians weren't even called "Christian", but "Nazarene", there is no way that Jesus, if he existed, was called Jesus "Christ" during his lifetime. Why would Jesus, a Jew, and probably, if he existed, an Essene of the Nazorean sect, from Nazareth, a tiny farm settlement at the foothills of Mount Carmel, Essene headquarters, would NEVER accept a pagan title!
Jesus Christ certainly NEVER existed. Jesus the Nazarene, maybe.
Jesus, in a way, was a founder of a religious movement. He founded, through his apostles, the sect of the Nazarenes within Judaism. The sect did not last more than four centuries. It was another religion, Christianity, which claimed him not only as its founder but also as God incarnate. It was something the historical Jesus would have probably been shocked to hear, as we can vouched from the reaction of the Nazarenes to it. The sect he founded dwindled and disappeared form the face of the earth. One man, Paul, took his name and expounded his own theology that developed the heretical doctrine which was called Christianity. The historian Hugh Schonfield summarized the situation thus:
It is to the Nazarene records that we ought chiefly to look for our knowledge of Jesus, and we must regard Nazarenism as the true Christianity. As the Nazarenes throughout the period of personal recollection and down to the third generation, that is to say at least seventy five years after the death of Jesus, denied his deity and his virgin birth, we must recognize that these are alien doctrines subsequently introduced by a partly paganized Church, as Justin Martyr in the middle of the second century more or less admits. The Church which received them had no other course open than to belittle the Nazarenes and denounce them as heretics. The historian here has no difficulty in detecting the real heretics..
Windword: That's the doctrine of Logos. It has nothing to do with the life and/or teachings of Jesus the Nazarene. His message was not new or unique. It is the same message that the Buddha taught, that Lao Tzu taught and the ancient Egyptian mythology and the Eleusinian mysteries are echoed in Christian ritual and mythology.
"What profit has not that
fable of Christ brought us! "
Pope Leo X
Contrary to popular belief, there was no single man at the genesis of Christianity but many characters rolled into one, the majority of whom were personifications of the ubiquitous solar myth, whose exploits were well known, as reflected by such popular deities as Mithra, Heracles/Hercules, Dionysus and many others throughout the Roman Empire and beyond. The story of Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels is revealed to be nearly identical in detail to that of the earlier savior-gods Krishna and Horus, who for millennia preceding Christianity held great favor with the people in much the same way as Jesus does today.
Thus, the Jesus character is not unique or original, not "divine revelation." These redeemer tales are similar not because they reflect the actual exploits of a variety of men who did and said the identical things, but because they are representations of the same extremely ancient body of knowledge that revolved around the celestial bodies and natural forces.
The result of this myth making has been foretold in a book called "The Christ Conspiracy - The Greatest Story Ever Sold."
In this highly controversial and explosive book, archaeologist, historian, mythologist and linguist Acharya S marshals an enormous amount of startling evidence to demonstrate that Christianity and the story of Jesus Christ were created by members of various secret societies, mystery schools and religions in order to unify the Roman Empire under one state religion.
In making such a fabrication, this multinational cabal drew upon a multitude of myths and rituals that already existed long before the Christian era, and reworked them for centuries into the story and religion passed down today.
It has also been demonstrated that the world into which Christianity was born was filled with assorted gods and goddesses, as opposed to a monotheistic vacuum. In fact, in their fabulous exploits and wondrous powers many of these gods and goddesses are virtually the same as the Christ character, as attested to by the Christian apologists themselves.
In further inspecting this issue we discover that "Jesus Christ" is in fact a compilation of these various gods, who were worshipped and whose dramas were regularly played out by ancient people long before the Christian era....
Nope! There are only lots and lots of Bibles, and people who've made their careers studying it and writing ABOUT THE BIBLE. There is very little, if any, actual "historical evidence." As many members in this thread have already showed us.
What?!! Are you actually serious with this line of argument, tig?
I'll ignore the 'pun', but again -- the birth circumstances and maternal conception would be CONSISTENT if there were any truth to it. AND, where was he during his youth? Hmmm? Just picking his nose for almost 20 years?
Sorry, dear, but you can not claim this as fact. There is ONE PLACE that claims it, and that is in the Bible - not the early texts, and you simply can not use the Bible to prove the Bible is true.
Like most people, but when and where are up for debate among the most learned professionals.
"According to the scriptures" is not FACTUAL DOCUMENTATION; and it's very easy to retrofit a legend to fit earlier works that were composed by people 'guessing. Ever heard of "fan fiction"? Nowadays if someone came up with something based entirely on, say, the "Dune" series, and used only those characters and scenarios, they would be writing "fan fiction." If they claimed it was original, it would constitute plagiarism.
I suggest you do some serious research - not on websites, but in scholarly tomes that are difficult to read and full of notes along with an extensive Bibliography and Suggested Reading section. (Lee Strobel DOES NOT COUNT, btw.) But it's okay, you're not alone in 'buying in' to a clergy's representation. They bank on you doing that. And I mean that as a pun, and a literal phrase.
Cheers; happy new year.
It will all be okay in the end. We'll all get there. Might be several lifetimes after this one, but - we will. We all have passports.