Ancient Confession Found: 'We Invented Jesus Christ'

reply to post by ltheghost


Ahhh... a nice theory. But the "BUY TICKETS" sells me it's .. I mean tells me that it's just a story being sold.

Truth does not come with a price. If it does, you are not given truth but a version of a story...

But I could believe this. It is clear to me the intent of organised religion, is ORGANISATION! Invisible chains to control the populace.

How sad the world would be if the biggest scam of all was not the deception by the devil, but that there was never any reason to be so afraid...

reply to post by DeadSeraph


Yes, like those accounts they didnt like the Christians. The way I can imagine it that Christianity was a small following, cult like how there are people who really like certain musicians or rappers or philosophers or authors and think they are gods and the best, so that is what happened with jesus, who was just like a revolutionary thinker, and the gov hated them so they killed him, but then years later this story was tampered with to create a myth that jesus actually was god, and what he said was true. The probably saw the affect that jesus had on his followers, and thought that if they could get as many people as possible to believe that, but under their rule and control..it would be good for them. So they made up the magic stuff to strike fear in the hearts and minds of random people, to think that god is real and magical and powerful, and yea the rest is history.

My thoughts are:

If this is true, why did the Romans continue to persecute Christians for another 300 years until Constantine made it the state religion? Why actively engage in preventing the spread of the religion that you just invented, that you want to spread, by crucifying and throwing Christians to the lions?

If the nobility of Rome did indeed invent Jesus Christ, then I doubt they would have taken such extreme measures to dissuade people from joining. Because they would want it to spread. And they were smart.

hounddoghowlie
so it worked so good that they made up the books of peter, paul, james and john. just to seal it up hunh?
then there was the gnostic books, all written to fool the jews, yea right.

edit on 8-10-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

So the more complex a story is, the less likely it is just a story?

Do not watch cloud atlas... You'll flip out brother..

reply to post by TheComte


Who didn't the kings of rome persecute and crap on? That is generally what an empire does, crap on the common people, and make the already wealthy nobility even more rich and powerful.

danielsil18

whyamIhere
C'mon man.

Jesus is the most documented person in History.

You can question his story.....but he certainly wasn't made up.

Jesus THE MOST documented person in History?

Who taught you this lie?

It's called HISTORY some even call it FAITH.
Trinity

reply to post by DeadSeraph


i'm not necessarily a Dawkins fan. what historical books have proof of the existence of a real Jesus who had magical/supernatural powers? a real guy like that should have made every single history book ever shouldn't he? are there piles of examples of this and i'm just not aware of it?

Jordan River
Romans were terrible at myth stories. Most romans had a copy cat civilization which barrowed heavily from other cultures like the greeks. They suck at myth stories. They weren't original and they were too war like to think in psychowarfare

edit on 8-10-2013 by Jordan River because: (no reason given)

Actually, they were quite adept at "psycho warfare". It's how they defeated Europe when Julius was a general.

Bisman
and it ALL comes from the bible. a sourse that on its own, can't really be trusted to cite history.

UNMITIGATED, UNINFORMED, UNAWARE, OFF THE WALL NONSENSE.

1. It is simply NOT true that ALL the information about Jesus comes ONLY from the Bible.

2. The Bible has been proven exceedingly accurate regarding history.

around 1900 there were lots of so called "higher" criticism critics of the Bible. They frequently blathered on and on about how this verse HAD to be symbolic or simply not true

BECAUSE in their lofty ignorant brilliance,

THEY DECREED

that said town; said name; said tribal group etc.

SIMPLY COULD NOT POSSIBLY have existed.

There were hundreds of such "higher criticism" claims.

EVERY LAST ONE on which archeology had anything to say at all, in subsequent years,

EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE "higher criticism claims" so connected to later archeology, was

PROVEN

WRONG.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Bo, I see you using a lot of DSM references lately.

Yet you claim to be able to pray people sober.

DO you think perhaps that you are also suffering some delusions?

as did Jesus, if he were in fact real?

areycorneja.wordpress.com...

Jesus is the foundation figure of Christianity, who is thought to have lived between 7–2 BCE and 26–36 CE. The New Testament (NT) recalls Jesus as having experienced and shown behavior closely resembling the DSM-IV-TR–defined phenomena of AHs, VHs, delusions, referential thinking (see Figure 3), paranoid-type (PS subtype) thought content, and hyperreligiosity (see Table 1). He also did not appear to have signs or symptoms of disorganization, negative psychiatric symptoms, cognitive impairment, or debilitating mood disorder symptoms. NT accounts about Jesus mention no infirmity. In terms of potential causes of perceptual and behavioral changes, it might be asked whether starvation and metabolic derangements were present. The hallucinatory-like experiences that Jesus had in the desert while he fasted for 40 days (Luke 4:1–13) may have been induced by starvation and metabolic derangements. Arguing against these as explanations for all of his experiences would be that he had mystical or revelation experiences preceding his fasting in the desert and then during the period afterward. During these periods, there is no suggestion of starvation or metabolic derangement. If anything, the stories about Jesus and his followers suggest that they ate relatively well, as compared with the followers of his contemporary, John the Baptist (Luke 7:33–34). Epilepsy-associated psychotic symptoms are possible, but Jesus is not recounted as having any of the previously-mentioned common hallmarks of epilepsy. A decline in his occupational and social functioning cannot be established because of a lack of sufficient information. His experiences appear to have occurred over the course of at least the year before his death. The absence of physical maladies or apparent epilepsy leaves primary psychiatric etiologies as more plausible. As seen with the previous cases, Jesus’ experiences can be potentially conceptualized within the framework of PS or psychosis NOS. Other reasonable possibilities might include bipolar and schizoaffective disorders.

Seeing as you're now a counsellor, how would you treat your saviour?

BO XIAN
EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE "higher criticism claims" so connected to later archeology, was

Bo has a good point, as there was a period of substantiation of places which we regarded as only mythical. But for me, the suspicious conversion of Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus after being an agent of Rome opposing the religion in the first place, his retreat back to Rome to manage the Church and tell how Rome was persecuting him, via 'letters,' and the distinct polarity of Christianity before versus after the conversion of Constantine and the first Christian bishops conference in Nicaea in Bithynia directed by the Roman Emperor Constantine I in AD 325... all this...

...raise some serious concerns about the role of Rome in fabrication of the religion. It is not a point which is that easily dropped. The whole set of events was very 'Romanesque.'

Khaleesi

Actually there is documented evidence (non biblical) of Jesus' existence. Whether you believe he is the son of God is your choice but, there are Roman documents. Research it.

Given the premise here that Roman Aristocrats concocted the tale of a passive messiah, would they not have documents?

Perhaps this also explains the shroud of turin as being a hoax.. It was never intended to be tested in a modern era, only to fool the ignorant folk of the time.

Still, I don't go for it. I believe a man called jesus walked the earth and said nice things. And that over time christ became more and more removed from the man until he was god like in the minds of believers.

Humans are silly like that.

So Mary was either raped and kept it quiet, or artificially inseminated by an alien race?

reply to post by ltheghost


Read a book when I was younger that involved a way to travel back in time, and "see" history in the making. Anyone could do it. So they found out Jesus was just a man. The World imploded.

Cant remember the book though.

This reminds me of it.

Interesting thread.

S&F

BO XIAN

Bisman
and it ALL comes from the bible. a sourse that on its own, can't really be trusted to cite history.

UNMITIGATED, UNINFORMED, UNAWARE, OFF THE WALL NONSENSE.

1. It is simply NOT true that ALL the information about Jesus comes ONLY from the Bible.

2. The Bible has been proven exceedingly accurate regarding history.

around 1900 there were lots of so called "higher" criticism critics of the Bible. They frequently blathered on and on about how this verse HAD to be symbolic or simply not true

BECAUSE in their lofty ignorant brilliance,

THEY DECREED

that said town; said name; said tribal group etc.

SIMPLY COULD NOT POSSIBLY have existed.

There were hundreds of such "higher criticism" claims.

EVERY LAST ONE on which archeology had anything to say at all, in subsequent years,

EVERY LAST ONE OF THOSE "higher criticism claims" so connected to later archeology, was

PROVEN

WRONG.

Homer's Troy was also thought to be mythological. Now we know it wasn't. It was a real place. Does that mean everything he said about it in the story was true? Or that all he wrote about other places we know existed was true? Probably not.

Klassified
reply to post by Khaleesi

 

As a side note, I have a question for those that do not believe in Jesus. Do you believe in Mohammed? Why or why not? If you do not, what do Muslims say to you when you tell them Mohammed wasn't real? Are you as willing to dismiss Mohammed to Muslims? Why or why not?

They usually say the same thing Christians say. You'll find out when you die, he is real.

Also, they'll likely help you find out on the spot. Xtians just throw paper at you.

oO

Ahhh how would I know I've never met a real muslim.... only the ones who live in Australia.

trinityalways

danielsil18

whyamIhere
C'mon man.

Jesus is the most documented person in History.

You can question his story.....but he certainly wasn't made up.

Jesus THE MOST documented person in History?

Who taught you this lie?

It's called HISTORY some even call it FAITH.
Trinity

So you were born with this knowledge of history?

Or did someone tell you.

Who told you that jesus was THE MOST documented person in history? I bet you anything it was not someone who did not embrace christ as the son of god.

Mugen
So Mary was either raped and kept it quiet,

Sadly, this would have been the likely result of rape as even back then in both roman and christian times unless someone was of good standing in socety, they would often incur partial blame for their own rape.

Shunned and/or punished, which could be burning at the stake.

Easier to say "God did it." in a time when god was doing all sorts of magic...

reply to post by Jordan River


Well we all know how babes respond to bearded dudes with long air .

No I didn't know that I do understand that there is and has general been a general suppression of women relevancy in Judaic practices (that is clearly shared by all Abrahamic religions) but being Judaism the oldest of all I guess they (women) would be more prone to join Christianism (we also know that religions benefit from having ladies in it, especially as lure for devout man, from Pagan and Greek religions to more recent cults) most religions are also Patriarchal structures.

Patriarch and Patriarchate in Christian catholic structure is the names given to the highest ecclesiastical dignitaries after the pope. The name pope comes from father in Latin languages and father is also the name given to priests...

Well I still think that there is no factual base for Jesus existence as a person and I am certain (by logical reasoning) that all Abrahamic religions are constructs (or their God would indeed be very illogical). However I understand the power of faith and how we are hardwired for it.

TKDRL
reply to post by TheComte

 

Who didn't the kings of rome persecute and crap on? That is generally what an empire does, crap on the common people, and make the already wealthy nobility even more rich and powerful.

Even when they're crapping on their own invention? The premise is they invented it to control the population. So they want it to spread and be embraced by everyone. Yet they execute anyone who joins? Doesn't make sense.

The Romans were very logical.