| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"No Rest for the Wicked" |
| Date: |
08 Jan 2004 03:34:25 PM |
| Object: |
Jesus Never Existed |
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no
one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person,
yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible reference to Jesus dates to at
least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least
A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D. 170).
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already existed in
numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. Chrishna, Horus,
Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo, Hercules, Adonis,
Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ‘dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc. The motif of a Crucified
Savior was already extant prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for the
sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of the year.
Jesus travels throughout his one year ministry, and the description of his
travels exactly match that of the sun traveling through the Zodiac during
the year. Here we have the origin of the Jesus story. This common origin
explains why all the stories of crucified saviors are essentially the same.
HISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said to
have done then surely many people would have written about it during and
immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at the time, yet an
extensive search by many scholars over centuries has turned up nothing. The
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime are
clearly forgeries, forged no doubt hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified (see
Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small
number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date back to
his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a huge wealth of
writing about this person that was written during his lifetime.
Jesus allegedly had crowds of thousands follow him around. Once he fed 5000
people with only a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish (Mark 6:39-44).
Later he repeated the miracle again feeding a crowd of 4000 people (Mark
8:1-9). Jesus cured sick people miraculously and raised people from the
dead. He changed water into wine at a wedding reception. He exorcised
demons. He commanded 2000 pigs to rush into a lake and drown themselves,
inciting the people of the nearby town and countryside, who asked him to
leave. (No mention is made of what happened to the poor pig hearder whose
livelihood must have been ruined. Mark 5:1-20).
Wherever Jesus went a crowd gathered and wondered in amazement who this
person was. Jesus was a very controversial person. Finally he got himself
into so much trouble that huge crowds of Jews demanded his execution. There
was a controversial trial followed by his public execution. Three days later
he is seen walking around alive again. And no one wrote any of this down
when it allegedly happened?
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of Mark, is
admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70, a full 40 years
after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection. (Mark makes reference to an
event that happened around A.D. 70, so it could not have been written any
earlier. Modern scholars now date the Gospels as being written near A.D.
170, a full 140 years after the alleged event, since no one makes any
reference to a Gospel of Mark, or any other Gospel, prior to this time.)
It's inconceivable that no one at the time bothered to write down anything
about the most important person in the whole of human history. Writing was
common back then. People wrote letters. Historians wrote commentaries on
current events. The Romans wrote and kept legal documents about trials. It's
considered one of the best documented periods of history. Yet no one wrote
anything about this Jesus; no one painted a portrait of this Jesus; no one
drew a sketch of this Jesus; no one cast a coin depicting this Jesus; no one
made a statue of this Jesus; no one makes any reference whatsoever to this
Jesus. The historical evidence is overwhelming‹the Jesus of the Bible never
existed.
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/appendixd.html
Comparative Religion
³For only words and forms divide the faiths of Mankind, and at heart the one
object of our desires is Life.²
‹John Denham Parsons (1896)
Comparative Religion shows that the basic story of Jesus' one year ministry
and the motif of a crucified savior already existed in numerous other
religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. I do not extensively discuss
Comparative Religion here, as it is a topic which has already been
thoroughly researched and documented. Instead I direct your attention to
some of the excellent books which have been written on the subject. Some of
the best books were written quite a long time ago.
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#CR
**For a picture of the Pre-Christian Greek demigod Orpheus Bacchus
(Bakkikos) crucified, go to:
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/cr.htm
**For more on Solar Mythology and the Jesus Story, go to:
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/solarmyth/christ2002.htm
.
|
|
| User: "Steve O" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 02:27:14 AM |
|
|
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction short story
I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot built a time machine
and travelled back to the scene of the nativity where he was horrified to
discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 12:43:16 PM |
|
|
"Steve O" <stoboyle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:btod0q$9skht$1@ID-136766.news.uni-berlin.de...
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction short
story
I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot built a time machine
and travelled back to the scene of the nativity where he was horrified to
discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
No, but it reminds me of the Jesuit priest flying back from the remnants of
a distant star that went Nova and destroyed a civilization. Turns out this
is the star the wise men followed and he's trying to reconcile his faith
with this event.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Steve O" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 12:54:34 PM |
|
|
Mike Painter wrote:
"Steve O" <stoboyle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:btod0q$9skht$1@ID-136766.news.uni-berlin.de...
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction
short story I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot
built a time machine and travelled back to the scene of the nativity
where he was horrified to discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs
Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
No, but it reminds me of the Jesuit priest flying back from the
remnants of a distant star that went Nova and destroyed a
civilization. Turns out this is the star the wise men followed and
he's trying to reconcile his faith with this event.
Yep, I read that too, but can't remember who wrote that one either.
You just doubled my agony, thanks, pal! ;-)
Hang on, was it Asimov???
Phew!!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "spakka" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 05:09:55 AM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:27:14 +0000, Steve O wrote:
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction short story
I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot built a time machine
and travelled back to the scene of the nativity where he was horrified to
discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
You could be thinking of 'Behold the Man' by Michael Moorcock. It's
a very short novel rather than a short story. Also, I think that Jesus
was a generic retard, rather than specificaly Downs.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 10:15:20 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 10 Jan 2004 08:27:14 -0000, "Steve O" <stoboyle@hotmail.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction short story
I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot built a time machine
and travelled back to the scene of the nativity where he was horrified to
discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
No, but it sounds as if I'd like to, and others by the author.
--
There are three kinds of men:
The ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence.
- (Will Rogers)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 01:01:56 PM |
|
|
Steve O wrote:
I'm trying to remember the name and author of a science fiction short story
I read quite a few years ago where a religious zealot built a time machine
and travelled back to the scene of the nativity where he was horrified to
discover that Jesus was in fact a Downs Syndrome baby.
Anyone else read it?
No, but I read the one where a time-traveler goes back to see the
Crucifiction and finds out that there's no Jesus. In the process of
explaining what he's looking for, he becomes the leader of a cult and
ends up being crucified.
And the one where they invent a time-viewer but so many people are
trying to see the crucifiction that there's too much interference.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 05:18:10 AM |
|
|
No Rest for the Wicked wrote:
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no
one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person,
yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible reference to Jesus dates to at
least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least
A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D. 170).
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already existed in
numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. Chrishna, Horus,
Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo, Hercules, Adonis,
Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ‘dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc. The motif of a Crucified
Savior was already extant prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for the
sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of the year.
Jesus travels throughout his one year ministry, and the description of his
travels exactly match that of the sun traveling through the Zodiac during
the year. Here we have the origin of the Jesus story. This common origin
explains why all the stories of crucified saviors are essentially the same.
HISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said to
have done then surely many people would have written about it during and
immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at the time, yet an
extensive search by many scholars over centuries has turned up nothing. The
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime are
clearly forgeries, forged no doubt hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified (see
Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small
number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date back to
his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a huge wealth of
writing about this person that was written during his lifetime.
Jesus allegedly had crowds of thousands follow him around. Once he fed 5000
people with only a few loaves of bread and a couple of fish (Mark 6:39-44).
Later he repeated the miracle again feeding a crowd of 4000 people (Mark
8:1-9). Jesus cured sick people miraculously and raised people from the
dead. He changed water into wine at a wedding reception. He exorcised
demons. He commanded 2000 pigs to rush into a lake and drown themselves,
inciting the people of the nearby town and countryside, who asked him to
leave. (No mention is made of what happened to the poor pig hearder whose
livelihood must have been ruined. Mark 5:1-20).
Wherever Jesus went a crowd gathered and wondered in amazement who this
person was. Jesus was a very controversial person. Finally he got himself
into so much trouble that huge crowds of Jews demanded his execution. There
was a controversial trial followed by his public execution. Three days later
he is seen walking around alive again. And no one wrote any of this down
when it allegedly happened?
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of Mark, is
admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70, a full 40 years
after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection. (Mark makes reference to an
event that happened around A.D. 70, so it could not have been written any
earlier. Modern scholars now date the Gospels as being written near A.D.
170, a full 140 years after the alleged event,
with life expectancy running at around 40 for males at the time that represents
almost four generations of lost recollections!
Bob
HK
since no one makes any
reference to a Gospel of Mark, or any other Gospel, prior to this time.)
It's inconceivable that no one at the time bothered to write down anything
about the most important person in the whole of human history. Writing was
common back then. People wrote letters. Historians wrote commentaries on
current events. The Romans wrote and kept legal documents about trials. It's
considered one of the best documented periods of history. Yet no one wrote
anything about this Jesus; no one painted a portrait of this Jesus; no one
drew a sketch of this Jesus; no one cast a coin depicting this Jesus; no one
made a statue of this Jesus; no one makes any reference whatsoever to this
Jesus. The historical evidence is overwhelming?the Jesus of the Bible never
existed.
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/appendixd.html
Comparative Religion
3For only words and forms divide the faiths of Mankind, and at heart the one
object of our desires is Life.2
?John Denham Parsons (1896)
Comparative Religion shows that the basic story of Jesus' one year ministry
and the motif of a crucified savior already existed in numerous other
religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. I do not extensively discuss
Comparative Religion here, as it is a topic which has already been
thoroughly researched and documented. Instead I direct your attention to
some of the excellent books which have been written on the subject. Some of
the best books were written quite a long time ago.
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#CR
**For a picture of the Pre-Christian Greek demigod Orpheus Bacchus
(Bakkikos) crucified, go to:
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/cr.htm
**For more on Solar Mythology and the Jesus Story, go to:
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/solarmyth/christ2002.htm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
08 Jan 2004 03:50:09 PM |
|
|
On 08 Jan 2004, No Rest for the Wicked <orangecrush@myhome.net> screwed
up his face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message
in news:BC230CE1.6A41%orangecrush@myhome.net:
Personally, I suspect that Saul of Tarsus decided to start a religion with
himself as the leader, and invented the whole thing in collaboration with
the other "Apostles".
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
08 Jan 2004 05:49:37 PM |
|
|
"Mekkala" <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote
Personally, I suspect that Saul of Tarsus decided to start
a religion with himself as the leader, and invented the
whole thing in collaboration with the other "Apostles".
I don't think it was any kind of conspiracy.
After their sound thrashing at the hands of the Romans, and
the destruction of the temple, the Jews recompiled the
Torah and did away with a lot of the teachings they viewed
as outside the law (has handed down by Moses). The number
of "Sacred Texts" was diminished. Significantly. It was no
longer fashionable to be in one of the many, "Way hip" and
oh so "Cool" religious sects that were popular in pre-war
Judea. "Christians" had every incentive to take their teachings
and go elsewhere with, what, the new found nationalism
having little room for "Suspect" teachings, and a lot of their
homes (and people) destroyed anyway...
At the same time though, this "Jesus" character is really
pretty convenient. His teachings are able to explain why
the forces of darkness -- as embodied by Rome -- were able
to destroy the children of the light, though they had the power
of God on their side. It seems that they got it wrong -- it
wasn't the final battle after all -- and Jesus tried to warn them
but the mainstream just wouldn't listen. That's why the Jews
got their asses kicked. The culprit here is the other sects, the
"mainstream" Jews who turned their backs on a confirmed
"Prophet" who told them where it's at, and they told him to
go screw.
Anyhow, the Jews were about the single most sophisticated
religious thinkers of the ancient world. They could do "subtle."
They had lots of help, sure, as they sat on the crossroads of
three continents and had access to every philosophical idea
in the world. But they didn't just pick from them, they developed
from them. They took the most advanced philosophical thinking
that the rest of the world could come up with, and improved
it. Yes, these were deep thinkers.
Know who weren't deep thinkers, at least not compared to the
Jews? The Greeks, for one. The Romans would have been
another. There wasn't anything particularly deep or philosophical
about their gods. Religion was a no-brainer for them. Mostly.
There's always exceptions, sure, but we're talking about the
rule here...
Anyway, if you want to take teachings from some of the most
advanced, philosophically deep religious minds the world
had ever produced, and dump them on people who's idea of
gods equates to men with a few super powers, you'd best be
prepared to do a little translating. Not just in worlds, mind
you, but concepts. You can't just ask them to throw out
everything they "know" about gods and create entirely new
concepts in their heads. Oh no, perish the thought. You take
what they already know & understand and map it over to
your new religion.
Of course, this doesn't mean that you're suddenly not dealing
with people for whom "religion" has never been more
complicated than a Saturday morning cartoon. Those far-less
-than-subtle cultural icons... these "concepts" you map over
to your oh so sophisticated religion stay. They stick. It's
the way they think, religiously speaking, and the way they
communicate. They always have, and they're not going to
change because you think it would be neat.
So, now we have a hybrid. A combination of all the
sophistication & subtleties of the finest eastern thinkers,
and the western tradition of deities being little more than
exceptionally accomplished humans.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 05:23:05 AM |
|
|
Mekkala wrote:
On 08 Jan 2004, No Rest for the Wicked <orangecrush@myhome.net> screwed
up his face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message
in news:BC230CE1.6A41%orangecrush@myhome.net:
Personally, I suspect that Saul of Tarsus decided to start a religion with
himself as the leader, and invented the whole thing in collaboration with
the other "Apostles"...
no doubt because the 'belief' was running out of steam and needed a 'shot in
the arm'
the virgin birth made a normal human into an object of reverence. Clever
that, same can be said for the 'resurection
Bob
HK
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 10:04:50 PM |
|
|
On 9 Jan 2004 05:23:05 -0600, bob young <alaspectrum@netvigator.com>
posted to alt.atheism:
Mekkala wrote:
On 08 Jan 2004, No Rest for the Wicked <orangecrush@myhome.net> screwed
up his face, groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message
in news:BC230CE1.6A41%orangecrush@myhome.net:
Personally, I suspect that Saul of Tarsus decided to start a religion with
himself as the leader, and invented the whole thing in collaboration with
the other "Apostles"...
no doubt because the 'belief' was running out of steam and needed a 'shot in
the arm'
the virgin birth made a normal human into an object of reverence. Clever
that, same can be said for the 'resurection
But there's no sign that the virgin birth was even thought of until a
few hundred years later.
--
"I can't activate two neurons simultaneously, and I vote"
- The theistic majority
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 05:13:02 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:34:25 -0800, No Rest for the Wicked
<orangecrush@myhome.net> wrote:
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no
one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person,
yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible reference to Jesus dates to at
least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least
A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D. 170).
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of the earliest
Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's like saying the earliest
history book was published in 2003 because you pick up a copy of a recently
published history book.
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already existed in
numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. Chrishna, Horus,
Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo, Hercules, Adonis,
Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ‘dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc. The motif of a Crucified
Savior was already extant prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes back to
man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of years before these
fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for the
sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of the year.
Mythology shows something. Wow, a new one on me.
Jesus travels throughout his one year ministry,
Correction: 3 years recorded.
nd the description of his
travels exactly match that of the sun traveling through the Zodiac during
the year.
The sun travels around the earth in 3 years?
Here we have the origin of the Jesus story. This common origin
explains why all the stories of crucified saviors are essentially the same.
Copy cats of the prophesy of the coming of the Messiah.
ISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said to
have done then surely many people would have written about it during and
immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at the time, yet an
extensive search by many scholars over centuries has turned up nothing.
Jesus lived in a sparse desert area around a small wilderness Roman garrison, no
papers, no tv, no videocams. And news took years to go 10 miles because people
didn't take the train from city to city daily.
he
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime are
clearly forgeries,
Why clearly?
forged no doubt
Why "no doubt"
hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified (see
Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
Why does JW know what he's talking about?
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small
number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date back to
his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a huge wealth of
writing about this person that was written during his lifetime.
Wow, with all the "allegies", you're not real sure, are you?
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of Mark, is
admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70, a full 40 years
after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 09:17:59 AM |
|
|
On 09 Jan 2004, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> screwed up his face, groaned,
pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:eh2tvv0d3vkcu4oenv5jdni63o7dfks7f7@4ax.com:
And duke pokes his ugly head in here again. Allow me, please. I think
he could use a new *****.
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:34:25 -0800, No Rest for the Wicked
<orangecrush@myhome.net> wrote:
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of
Jesus no one bothered to write down anything about this most
extraordinary person, yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible
reference to Jesus dates to at least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel,
the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D.
170).
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of the
earliest Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's like
saying the earliest history book was published in 2003 because you
pick up a copy of a recently published history book.
All right then, it was published at that time (you admit it!). That
means, my friend, that before that NOBODY WROTE DOWN A GOSPEL. People
may have spoken about it, but the important point here is that somehow
it never occurred to anyone to actually WRITE IT DOWN until AD70.
That's really odd.
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already
existed in numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
Chrishna, Horus, Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo,
Hercules, Adonis, Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ‘dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc.
The motif of a Crucified Savior was already extant prior to the
alleged time of Jesus.
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes
back to man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of years
before these fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
Wow, the "copycats" who made up those "fakes" must have been quite
accomplished Biblical scholars, to get those prophecies almost perfectly
correct from the OT, despite the fact that the Jews themselves didn't
have any clue what those prophecies meant, or at least their
interpretation didn't jive even remotely with the ad-hoc interpretation
whipped up by the Christians.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for
the sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of
the year.
Mythology shows something. Wow, a new one on me.
Really? So the mythology in your Book o' Blood doesn't show anything?
Jesus travels throughout his one year ministry,
Correction: 3 years recorded.
nd the description of his
travels exactly match that of the sun traveling through the Zodiac
during the year.
The sun travels around the earth in 3 years?
Here we have the origin of the Jesus story. This common origin
explains why all the stories of crucified saviors are essentially the
same.
Copy cats of the prophesy of the coming of the Messiah.
Again, the interpretations of those prophecies used by the Christians
are interpretations that didn't appear in human society until *after*
Christ allegedly died and resurrected. How did they copy those
interpretations, when they didn't even exist then?
ISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said
to have done then surely many people would have written about it
during and immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at
the time, yet an extensive search by many scholars over centuries has
turned up nothing.
Jesus lived in a sparse desert area around a small wilderness Roman
garrison, no papers, no tv, no videocams. And news took years to go
10 miles because people didn't take the train from city to city daily.
Actually, much of Jesus's ministry happened in highly populated areas
like Jerusalem. According to the Bible, thousands of people followed
him around for many, many miles. And, uh, news took "years" to go 10
miles? It takes a couple of hours to walk 10 miles.
he
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime
are clearly forgeries,
Why clearly?
forged no doubt
Why "no doubt"
hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified
(see Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
Why does JW know what he's talking about?
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small
number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date
back to his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a
huge wealth of writing about this person that was written during his
lifetime.
Wow, with all the "allegies", you're not real sure, are you?
First, it's "alleged", not "allegies". Second, yeah, you're right, he's
not real sure any of that drivel in the Bible is true. Matter of fact,
he's pretty sure it's *not* true. Shooting yourself in the foot now,
duke, might want to watch that.
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of
Mark, is admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70,
a full 40 years after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could
have just as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named
Mark?
What eye witness accounts? What simple writings? We've never found a
single copy. Where are they all at, if there are so many of them?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 09:44:41 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:17:59 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> posted to alt.atheism:
On 09 Jan 2004, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> screwed up his face, groaned,
pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:eh2tvv0d3vkcu4oenv5jdni63o7dfks7f7@4ax.com:
And duke pokes his ugly head in here again. Allow me, please. I think
he could use a new *****.
He isn't enough of an ***** just the way he is?
--
"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid
consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and
ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who
works on the basis of reward and punishment. "
- Letter to M. Berkowitz, October 25, 1950; Einstein Archive 59-215
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
12 Jan 2004 09:46:11 AM |
|
|
On 11 Jan 2004, Al Klein <rukbat@pern.invalid> screwed up his face,
groaned, pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:0t54005h407hg0djvjgen52gc626anscd2@Pern.rk:
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:17:59 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> posted to alt.atheism:
On 09 Jan 2004, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> screwed up his face,
groaned,
pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:eh2tvv0d3vkcu4oenv5jdni63o7dfks7f7@4ax.com:
And duke pokes his ugly head in here again. Allow me, please. I
think
he could use a new *****.
He isn't enough of an ***** just the way he is?
But if he gets a new one, that means the crap coming through any given
***** is cut in half, and therefore anyone standing near either
***** gets a bit of relief.
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 07:57:25 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:17:59 GMT, Mekkala <joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com>
wrote:
And duke pokes his ugly head in here again. Allow me, please. I think
he could use a new *****.
No, no thanks, one is enough.
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of the
earliest Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's like
saying the earliest history book was published in 2003 because you
pick up a copy of a recently published history book.
All right then, it was published at that time (you admit it!). That
means, my friend, that before that NOBODY WROTE DOWN A GOSPEL.
You obviously don't know the definition of "Gospel", do you?.
People
may have spoken about it, but the important point here is that somehow
it never occurred to anyone to actually WRITE IT DOWN until AD70.
That's really odd.
Your evidence that no eye witnesses wrote down what they saw and heard and
passed it own until it was recorded in the Gospel of Mark?
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes
back to man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of years
before these fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
Wow, the "copycats" who made up those "fakes" must have been quite
accomplished Biblical scholars, to get those prophecies almost perfectly
correct from the OT, despite the fact that the Jews themselves didn't
have any clue what those prophecies meant, or at least their
interpretation didn't jive even remotely with the ad-hoc interpretation
whipped up by the Christians.
And mithraites did?
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for
the sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of
the year.
Mythology shows something. Wow, a new one on me.
Really? So the mythology in your Book o' Blood doesn't show anything?
It's not mythology.
Again, the interpretations of those prophecies used by the Christians
are interpretations that didn't appear in human society until *after*
Christ allegedly died and resurrected. How did they copy those
interpretations, when they didn't even exist then?
ISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is said
to have done then surely many people would have written about it
during and immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common at
the time, yet an extensive search by many scholars over centuries has
turned up nothing.
Jesus lived in a sparse desert area around a small wilderness Roman
garrison, no papers, no tv, no videocams. And news took years to go
10 miles because people didn't take the train from city to city daily.
Actually, much of Jesus's ministry happened in highly populated areas
like Jerusalem. According to the Bible, thousands of people followed
him around for many, many miles. And, uh, news took "years" to go 10
miles? It takes a couple of hours to walk 10 miles.
he
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime
are clearly forgeries,
Why clearly?
forged no doubt
Why "no doubt"
hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified
(see Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
Why does JW know what he's talking about?
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very small
number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly date
back to his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There should be a
huge wealth of writing about this person that was written during his
lifetime.
Wow, with all the "allegies", you're not real sure, are you?
First, it's "alleged", not "allegies". Second, yeah, you're right, he's
not real sure any of that drivel in the Bible is true. Matter of fact,
he's pretty sure it's *not* true. Shooting yourself in the foot now,
duke, might want to watch that.
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of
Mark, is admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70,
a full 40 years after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could
have just as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named
Mark?
What eye witness accounts? What simple writings? We've never found a
single copy. Where are they all at, if there are so many of them?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mekkala" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
12 Jan 2004 09:44:58 AM |
|
|
On 11 Jan 2004, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> screwed up his face, groaned,
pushed hard, and farted out the following message in
news:vhl20018hqahu6p34rd2hi3b6iiho0nrh3@4ax.com:
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 15:17:59 GMT, Mekkala
<joremovedathiskimtoreply@attbi.com> wrote:
And duke pokes his ugly head in here again. Allow me, please. I
think he could use a new *****.
No, no thanks, one is enough.
You sure? Buy two, you get a discount!
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of
the earliest Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's
like saying the earliest history book was published in 2003 because
you pick up a copy of a recently published history book.
All right then, it was published at that time (you admit it!). That
means, my friend, that before that NOBODY WROTE DOWN A GOSPEL.
You obviously don't know the definition of "Gospel", do you?.
You obviously don't know the definition of "write down", do you?
People
may have spoken about it, but the important point here is that somehow
it never occurred to anyone to actually WRITE IT DOWN until AD70.
That's really odd.
Your evidence that no eye witnesses wrote down what they saw and heard
and passed it own until it was recorded in the Gospel of Mark?
That we've never found a SINGLE COPY. Now, it's easily possible that a
few people wrote it down and none of those copies survived. However, a
person as highly noticeable as Jesus would have prompted a good number
of people writing it down, since there were many people in those days
with the ability to read and write. It's just very, very strange that
not a single contemporary account survived, but the "official" account
written by leaders of that new religion stuck around. Quite a
coincidence, no?
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes
back to man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of
years before these fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
Wow, the "copycats" who made up those "fakes" must have been quite
accomplished Biblical scholars, to get those prophecies almost
perfectly correct from the OT, despite the fact that the Jews
themselves didn't have any clue what those prophecies meant, or at
least their interpretation didn't jive even remotely with the ad-hoc
interpretation whipped up by the Christians.
And mithraites did?
No, you see, that's my point. You say, "and mithraites did?" as if it's
highly unlikely that they would and the Jews wouldn't... and you know
what? I agree! It's *extremely* unlikely! And since we *know* the
Jews hadn't "figured out" the ad-hoc Christian interpretations, simple
logic leads us to conclude that the mithraites didn't know those
interpretations either, and that therefore the mithraites had their own
source for their oddly similar mythology, which calls into question the
uniqueness of the Christian story.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory
for the sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the
seasons of the year.
Mythology shows something. Wow, a new one on me.
Really? So the mythology in your Book o' Blood doesn't show anything?
It's not mythology.
You know, when I wrote that, I was thinking, "Now he's going to say,
'It's not mythology.'"
.... :P
So duke, how do you know it's not mythology? It looks like mythology,
it walks like mythology, it quacks like mythology, sure seems like
mythology to me!
Again, the interpretations of those prophecies used by the Christians
are interpretations that didn't appear in human society until *after*
Christ allegedly died and resurrected. How did they copy those
interpretations, when they didn't even exist then?
ISTORY.
If Jesus actually existed and did all the miraculous things he is
said to have done then surely many people would have written about
it during and immediately following Jesus' life. Writing was common
at the time, yet an extensive search by many scholars over centuries
has turned up nothing.
Jesus lived in a sparse desert area around a small wilderness Roman
garrison, no papers, no tv, no videocams. And news took years to go
10 miles because people didn't take the train from city to city
daily.
Actually, much of Jesus's ministry happened in highly populated areas
like Jerusalem. According to the Bible, thousands of people followed
him around for many, many miles. And, uh, news took "years" to go 10
miles? It takes a couple of hours to walk 10 miles.
he
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his
lifetime are clearly forgeries,
Why clearly?
forged no doubt
Why "no doubt"
hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified
(see Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
Why does JW know what he's talking about?
http://home1.gte.net/deleyd/religion/bookr.html#WHELESS2
Even if we ignore the evidence that they are forgeries, the very
small number of these questionably authentic writings that allegedly
date back to his alleged lifetime are still far too few. There
should be a huge wealth of writing about this person that was
written during his lifetime.
Wow, with all the "allegies", you're not real sure, are you?
First, it's "alleged", not "allegies". Second, yeah, you're right,
he's not real sure any of that drivel in the Bible is true. Matter of
fact, he's pretty sure it's *not* true. Shooting yourself in the foot
now, duke, might want to watch that.
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of
Mark, is admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D.
70, a full 40 years after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that
could have just as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy
named Mark?
What eye witness accounts? What simple writings? We've never found a
single copy. Where are they all at, if there are so many of them?
--
Mekkala, Atheist #2148
"Atheism is ... the bed-rock of sanity in a world of madness."
--Emmett F. Fields
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 09:46:59 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 07:57:25 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> posted
to alt.atheism:
Your evidence that no eye witnesses wrote down what they saw and heard and
passed it own until it was recorded in the Gospel of Mark?
Uh, uh, Earl. You claim that someone did, it's your burden to prove
it. We have no burden to prove that something doesn't exist.
Wow, the "copycats" who made up those "fakes" must have been quite
accomplished Biblical scholars, to get those prophecies almost perfectly
correct from the OT, despite the fact that the Jews themselves didn't
have any clue what those prophecies meant, or at least their
interpretation didn't jive even remotely with the ad-hoc interpretation
whipped up by the Christians.
And mithraites did?
No. No one interpreted the bible to mean that Jesus was coming -
until MANY years after he supposedly died.
3. Solar Mythology shows the story of Jesus is just an allegory for
the sun passing through the Zodiac and the passage of the seasons of
the year.
Mythology shows something. Wow, a new one on me.
Really? So the mythology in your Book o' Blood doesn't show anything?
It's not mythology.
Evidence? You know we don't accept your assertions.
--
"...I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.
When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand
why I dismiss yours."
- Stephen F. Roberts
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 09:41:27 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 05:13:02 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> posted
to alt.atheism:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:34:25 -0800, No Rest for the Wicked
<orangecrush@myhome.net> wrote:
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no
one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person,
yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible reference to Jesus dates to at
least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least
A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D. 170).
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of the earliest
Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's like saying the earliest
history book was published in 2003 because you pick up a copy of a recently
published history book.
So the earliest writing mentioning the biblical Jesus was what?
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already existed in
numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. Chrishna, Horus,
Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo, Hercules, Adonis,
Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ?dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc. The motif of a Crucified
Savior was already extant prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes back to
man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of years before these
fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
So the actual written mention of Jesus' name before his birth was
what?
Jesus lived in a sparse desert area around a small wilderness Roman garrison, no
papers, no tv, no videocams.
But literate people. Which one of them wrote which book reporting
Jesus' preachings and miracles at the time they happened?
he
very few references to Jesus that allegedly date back to his lifetime are
clearly forgeries,
Why clearly?
Because a Jew wouldn't have written a Christian document. (Not that
Josephus was contemporary - there WERE NO contemporary writings of
Jesus.)
forged no doubt
Why "no doubt"
If, in 2,000 years, we found a book, supposedly written by the Pope,
that claimed that Christianity was all wrong, and Satan was god, would
you ask why someone claimed it was forged?
hundreds of years later by people who
realized this embarrassing lack of evidence needed to be rectified (see
Joseph Wheless Forgery in Christianity).
Why does JW know what he's talking about?
Since Josephus wouldn't have written what's in "his" writings, someone
else MUST have written those words.
Even the earliest full account of Jesus in the Bible, the Gospel of Mark, is
admitted by the Catholic Church to date to at least A.D. 70, a full 40 years
after Jesus' alleged death and resurrection.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
Since the life span was much shorter then than it is now, most of the
adults who had witnessed Jesus' life would be dead by the time "Mark"
was writing his book, so who were his witnesses?
--
"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of all that exists, but
not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and actions of human beings."
-A. Einstein (1929 -- Einstein Archive 33-272)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thomas P." |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 10:09:54 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 05:13:02 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:34:25 -0800, No Rest for the Wicked
<orangecrush@myhome.net> wrote:
The three topics which suggest that Jesus never existed are:
1. History
2. Comparative Religion
3. Solar Mythology
1. History. It's inconceivable that during the alleged time of Jesus no
one bothered to write down anything about this most extraordinary person,
yet we have nothing. Even the earliest Bible reference to Jesus dates to at
least A.D. 64, and the first Gospel, the Gospel of Mark, dates to at least
A.D. 70 (and probably to A.D. 170).
No, no little buddy. The date AD64 is the date of publication of the earliest
Gospel called the Gospel according to Mark. That's like saying the earliest
history book was published in 2003 because you pick up a copy of a recently
published history book.
No, it is like pointing out that Biblical scholars agree that it was
the first gospel; that it was not written earlier than 64 A.D. and
possibly after 70 A.D. The Catholic Church, on the other hand,
continues to insist it was the second gospel.
2. Comparative Religion shows that the story of Jesus already existed in
numerous religions prior to the alleged time of Jesus. Chrishna, Horus,
Orpheus, Bacchus, Osiris, Dionysus, Buddha, Apollo, Hercules, Adonis,
Ormuzd, Mithras, Indra, ‘dipus, Quetzalcoatle, etc. The motif of a Crucified
Savior was already extant prior to the alleged time of Jesus.
No, no little buddy. The prophecy of the coming of the Messiah goes back to
man's earliest existance from thousands and thousands of years before these
fakes you mentioned above played copy cat.
Then you should have no problem citing one document predicting the
Jewish Messiah that goes back thousands of years before (for example)
Hindu scriptures were written.
Thomas P.
None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JPG" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 07:25:19 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 05:13:02 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 13:34:25 -0800, No Rest for the Wicked
<orangecrush@myhome.net> wrote:
snip
No, no little buddy.
Patronising jerk.
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 05:52:58 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1 person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 08:12:28 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:qjfuvv49fl3nt1snau4da6ecf27lacv6um@4ax.com...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could
have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1
person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark
wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
Note that Earl does not have an answer so changes the subject.
2/3 of the world denies him and he will tell you that half of the 1/3 are
wrong because they are not catholics.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 09:48:14 PM |
|
|
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 17:52:58 -0600, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> posted
to alt.atheism:
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1 person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
Evidence that there were eye-witnesses? (Stop trying to evade the
question.)
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 09:20:27 PM |
|
|
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message news:<qjfuvv49fl3nt1snau4da6ecf27lacv6um@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1 person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
What was that supposed to mean? Was that your eye-witness account evidence?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
09 Jan 2004 09:27:30 PM |
|
|
"JessHC" <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote in message
news:d58e3ac.0401091920.244f2c08@posting.google.com...
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:<qjfuvv49fl3nt1snau4da6ecf27lacv6um@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could
have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1
person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark
wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
What was that supposed to mean? Was that your eye-witness account
evidence?
Maybe he's being honest and realizes that it was some guy named Paul who
became head salesman and was smart enough to include gentiles.
Nah, It's Earl, who isn't even honest about his name.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 12:26:30 PM |
|
|
On 9 Jan 2004 19:20:27 -0800, (JessHC) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message news:<qjfuvv49fl3nt1snau4da6ecf27lacv6um@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass 1 person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named Mark wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
What was that supposed to mean? Was that your eye-witness account evidence?
If it was all just a fabrication, it would have died off 2000 years ago.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
10 Jan 2004 08:09:12 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:3tg000p0i9aus0uuj7bl1cn3cbsd5si4j7@4ax.com...
On 9 Jan 2004 19:20:27 -0800, (JessHC) wrote:
duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:<qjfuvv49fl3nt1snau4da6ecf27lacv6um@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 09 Jan 2004 13:25:19 +0000, JPG <me@privacy.net> wrote:
How about all the eye witness accounts and simple writings that could
have just
as easily been fed into one book prepared by a guy named Mark?
What eye-witness accounts ? Evidence please.
This one act resounded throughout the world and has grown to encompass
1 person
in 3 in the world today. It's didn't happen because some guy named
Mark wrote
an unsubstantiated book 30 years later.
What was that supposed to mean? Was that your eye-witness account
evidence?
If it was all just a fabrication, it would have died off 2000 years ago.
Then Judaism must be more true and Islam a bit less true. There are a lot
of other religions that must also be true.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 08:52:20 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:09:12 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net> wrote:
If it was all just a fabrication, it would have died off 2000 years ago.
Then Judaism must be more true and Islam a bit less true. There are a lot
of other religions that must also be true.
No, these two plus Christianity all profess belief in the one and only almighty
God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Jesus Never Existed |
11 Jan 2004 02:07:31 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:kno200trivo0cd79druqmv0jn8io09sj6d@4ax.com...
On Sun, 11 Jan 2004 02:09:12 GMT, "Mike Painter" <mdotpainter@att.net>
wrote:
If it was all just a fabrication, it would have died off 2000 years
ago.
Then Judaism must be more true and Islam a bit less true. There are a
lot
of other religions that must also be true.
No, these two plus Christianity all profess belief in the one and only
almighty
God.
Just in case there is anyone here that does not know this:
Both Judaism and Islam specifically deny that they worship the christian
gods.
They deny a trinity.
Earl knows this and has been given specific references but continues to lie
about it.
But then Earl knows more than anybody.
During the crusades he would have turned people around because they were
facing the wrong way.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
