| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"John Kelley" |
| Date: |
27 Oct 2004 02:14:12 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Christ a fictional character? |
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
.
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
27 Oct 2004 03:56:33 PM |
|
|
John Kelley wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
quote
In conclusion, therefore, three great, independently established
facts-the empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, and the origin of
the Christian faith
/quote
The level of scholarship there is quite appalling
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
27 Oct 2004 04:17:42 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:56:33 +0100, Ash
<Ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
John Kelley wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
quote
In conclusion, therefore, three great, independently established
facts-the empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, and the origin of
the Christian faith
/quote
The level of scholarship there is quite appalling
I know. They don't know the difference between fact and religious
belief. It's pathetic.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
28 Oct 2004 03:51:55 AM |
|
|
Christopher A. Lee wrote:
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:56:33 +0100, Ash
<Ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
John Kelley wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
quote
In conclusion, therefore, three great, independently established
facts-the empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, and the origin of
the Christian faith
/quote
The level of scholarship there is quite appalling
I know. They don't know the difference between fact and religious
belief. It's pathetic.
There is also the unspoken assumption that anything any ancient
Christians said must be treated as true, but any criticism of
Christianity, ancient or modern must be treated as highly dubious at best
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
29 Oct 2004 03:34:54 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 21:56:33 +0100, Ash
<Ashamanic@winterfell73.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
John Kelley wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
quote
In conclusion, therefore, three great, independently established
facts-the empty tomb, the resurrection appearances, and the origin of
the Christian faith
/quote
The level of scholarship there is quite appalling
It is a perfect intellectual fit with Mr. Kelley.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion
.
|
|
|
| User: "kansasman" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
31 Oct 2004 02:27:51 PM |
|
|
In conclusion, therefore, three great, indepe
The level of scholarship there is quite appalling
It is a perfect intellectual fit with Mr. Kelley.
--
Nice theory- but don't count me in as a subscriber
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
27 Oct 2004 03:02:30 PM |
|
|
On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700, (John Kelley)
wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Sigh. Please give proof not rationalisations, ad hominems and
repetition of repeatedly debunked ignorance.
Face it, you have nothing. If you had, a crusading, evengelising
religion like Christianity would have used it long ago.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
28 Oct 2004 04:11:30 PM |
|
|
On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700, (John Kelley)
wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>...
Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
30 Oct 2004 09:28:11 AM |
|
|
(mclark) wrote in message news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>...
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote:
On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700, (John Kelley)
wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus Christ
purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your opinion.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
01 Nov 2004 01:03:53 PM |
|
|
(mclark) wrote in message news:<1gmirbu.c8hmya1hl2q82N%>...
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus Christ
purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
No, it wasn't. Sorry you missed the point. Do you contend that *all*
divine entities around the world are real?
Unlike stoney and her unanswered assertion that Jesus Christ was purely
fiction, I haven't made any assertions about Krishna. So you're not
passing the burden of any proof about Krishna to me.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed, and there're lots of valid reasons to believe he is likely a
fiction; take, for example, the many parallels with other religious
myths around the world. Fortunately, nobody is under any obligation
to accept unsupported assertions.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
02 Nov 2004 08:18:29 AM |
|
|
(mclark) wrote in message news:<1gmkx6d.1gxyuw31tflw8mN%>...
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmirbu.c8hmya1hl2q82N%>... > JessHC
<jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote: > > > (mclark)
wrote in message > >
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney > >
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700, > >
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus Christ
purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
No, it wasn't. Sorry you missed the point. Do you contend that *all*
divine entities around the world are real?
C'mon! I haven't asserted anything about any deity, not even Jesus
Christ.
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
Unlike stoney and her unanswered assertion that Jesus Christ was purely
fiction, I haven't made any assertions about Krishna. So you're not
passing the burden of any proof about Krishna to me.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed, and there're lots of valid reasons to believe he is likely a
fiction; take, for example, the many parallels with other religious
myths around the world. Fortunately, nobody is under any obligation
to accept unsupported assertions.
Again, I haven't asserted anything about Jesus Christ or any of the
so-called deities. The bottom line is that you've backed yourself into
a corner trying to insinuate that I have.
Really? It sure looks like you claim jesus is real in
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:idontreply%40toemail.com&start=320&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=1gmbb30.wemdoc1yatufwN%25idontreply%40toemail.com&rnum=323
"Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins. By doing
so he
also won us the choice of being able to spend eternity in heaven
with
Jesus in bliss, or eternity in the spiritual blackness of hell.
Surprisingly, the only meaningful choice is not obvious to many
people."
and http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:idontreply%40toemail.com&start=340&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=1gm9w86.2zl50opv36d0N%25idontreply%40toemail.com&rnum=349
"Jesus works in us through his Holy Spirit. When somebody
sincerely
invites his Spirit into their spiritual heart the Spirit starts
rebuilding that person from the inside as indicated by the
character
traits of Galatians 5:19-23. This is also reflected in Luke
17:20-21.
"Indeed, return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and
have
eternal life."
among others, though. Are those not your words? Perhaps they were
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Mithras was the central savior god of Mithraism, a syncretic
Hellenistic mystery religion of male initiates that developed in the
Eastern Mediterranean in the 2nd and 1st centuries BC and was
practiced in the Roman Empire from the 1st century BC to the 5th
century AD. Parthian coins and documents bear a double date with a 64
year interval that represents Mithra's ascension to heaven,
traditionally given as the equivalent of 208 BCE, 64 years after his
birth.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/william_edelen/christmasmythology.html
Mithraism (6th century B.C. Persia and India). Mithras was born of a
virgin, with only shepherds present. Mithras was known as "the way",
"the truth", "the Life", "the Light", "the Word", the "Son of God",
and "the Good Shepherd". He was pictured carrying a Lamb on his
shoulders. Sunday was sacred and known as "the Lord's Day" centuries
before Jesus was ever born.
On December 25th, there were glorious celebrations with bells, hymns,
candles, gifts, and ‘communion' was observed by the followers.
From December 25 until the Spring Equinox (Estra or Easter) were the
"40 days" which later became Christian Lent. Mithras was finally
placed in a rock tomb called "Petra". After three days he was removed
with great festival, celebrations and joy.
The followers of Mithras believed there would be a day of "judgement"
when non-believers would perish and "believers" would live forever
with Mithras in "paradise", which is a Persian word, not Hebrew.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
03 Nov 2004 11:44:50 AM |
|
|
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras. Here they are:
<http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras>
What, I wonder, will you offer by way of demonstration for your
confident assertions?
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Not evidence. The opinion of some amateur webpage is not evidence.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/william_edelen/christmasmythology.html
Even less evidence: a collection of slanders.
Mithraism (6th century B.C. Persia and India). Mithras was born of a
virgin,
Curious. Mithras was born from a ROCK! (See the testimonia cited).
with only shepherds present. Mithras was known as "the way",
"the truth", "the Life", "the Light", "the Word", the "Son of God",
and "the Good Shepherd". He was pictured carrying a Lamb on his
shoulders.
No ancient text states any such thing.
Sunday was sacred and known as "the Lord's Day" centuries
before Jesus was ever born.
Cite a single ancient text so doing. (That Sunday was the day of the
Sun, as Monday was the day of the moon, is not in dispute).
On December 25th, there were glorious celebrations with bells, hymns,
candles, gifts, and ?communion' was observed by the followers.
No ancient text states any such thing.
From December 25 until the Spring Equinox (Estra or Easter) were the
"40 days" which later became Christian Lent. Mithras was finally
placed in a rock tomb called "Petra". After three days he was removed
with great festival, celebrations and joy.
No ancient text states any such thing.
The followers of Mithras believed there would be a day of "judgement"
when non-believers would perish and "believers" would live forever
with Mithras in "paradise", which is a Persian word, not Hebrew.
No ancient text states any such thing.
You said, "Lying is a sin, you know". No doubt you repeated all these
lies because you wanted to believe them. But where does their falsity
-- for you did not check any of them -- leave you?
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
04 Nov 2004 09:54:14 AM |
|
|
(Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411030944.498157a2@posting.google.com>...
jesshc@phantomemail.com (JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
When you claim "everyone knows" jesus was real, does that include,
say, everyone, or just the people who agree with you? That must be
the case, since you also are certain that I have only denied his
reality out of perversity, rather than the complete lack of any
convincing objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
Once again, a devastating rebuttal from Roger.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras. Here they are:
<http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras>
What, I wonder, will you offer by way of demonstration for your
confident assertions?
Speaking of confident assertions, I'm impressed how you referred to
your own efforts as definitive ("every single ancient literary
reference," you must be proud), despite the fact that you start out
with "This page makes no pretence to be a work of scholarship."
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Not evidence. The opinion of some amateur webpage is not evidence.
Brilliant. *YOUR* amature webpage is evidence, but all the rest
aren't. How advantageous for you. Since it is obvious you are the
self-proclaimed expert on Mithras, and that there is no information I
could possibly present regarding the mythical antecedants of Jesus
that you will not dismiss as "amature" or "slanderous," you should
kill-file me.
<snip>
Have a nice life.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
05 Nov 2004 03:47:09 PM |
|
|
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411040754.25bee5e8@posting.google.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411030944.498157a2@posting.google.com>...
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
When you claim "everyone knows" jesus was real, does that include,
say, everyone, ...
Cutting this short, I'm not sure why you ask me. Why not go and find
out?
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
Once again, a devastating rebuttal from Roger.
I agree. He that lives by the assertion, dies by it.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras. Here they are:
<http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras>
What, I wonder, will you offer by way of demonstration for your
confident assertions?
Speaking of confident assertions, I'm impressed how you referred to
your own efforts as definitive ("every single ancient literary
reference," you must be proud), despite the fact that you start out
with "This page makes no pretence to be a work of scholarship."
Glad you're impressed, although I'm not sure your comment reflects
well on those of your opinion. Should you ever find another
reference, let me know.
Anyone can make a useful contribution to the web, if they stop
repeating hearsay, eschew opinion, and start gathering raw data. I
wish more of your persuasion would do this.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Not evidence. The opinion of some amateur webpage is not evidence.
Brilliant. *YOUR* amature webpage is evidence, but all the rest
aren't.
I'm sure the difference will occur to you eventually. <chuckle>
<snip>
Have a nice life.
And you.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
08 Nov 2004 09:28:30 PM |
|
|
(Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411051347.787ae2c3@posting.google.com>...
jesshc@phantomemail.com (JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411040754.25bee5e8@posting.google.com>...
(Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411030944.498157a2@posting.google.com>...
jesshc@phantomemail.com (JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
When you claim "everyone knows" jesus was real, does that include,
say, everyone, ...
Cutting this short, I'm not sure why you ask me. Why not go and find
out?
Because I already know for a fact that the claim "everyone knows"
jesus was real is incorrect, and that the claim I'm denying the fact
of his reality "only out of perversity" is incorrect, and that nobody
is obliged to accept an unsupported claim. If someone wishes to
persuade me, they'll have to do more than say, "You should believe
this, because I do." And the more outrageous the claim, the more
persuasive the evidence will have to be; I have better things to do
with my time than disprove every bizarre claim that comes along, so
have to select only those that seem worth investigating.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
Once again, a devastating rebuttal from Roger.
I agree. He that lives by the assertion, dies by it.
Great. You must have some pretty unassailable evidence jesus was
something other than a magical fictional character.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras. Here they are:
<http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras>
What, I wonder, will you offer by way of demonstration for your
confident assertions?
Speaking of confident assertions, I'm impressed how you referred to
your own efforts as definitive ("every single ancient literary
reference," you must be proud), despite the fact that you start out
with "This page makes no pretence to be a work of scholarship."
Glad you're impressed, although I'm not sure your comment reflects
well on those of your opinion. Should you ever find another
reference, let me know.
How would my scepticism about your claiming to have read "every single
ancient literary reference" reflect poorly on "those of my opinion"?
Anyone can make a useful contribution to the web, if they stop
repeating hearsay, eschew opinion, and start gathering raw data. I
wish more of your persuasion would do this.
I've gathered as much raw data as I need to form an opinion. You
haven't presented anything persuasive enough to change it.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Not evidence. The opinion of some amateur webpage is not evidence.
Brilliant. *YOUR* amature webpage is evidence, but all the rest
aren't.
I'm sure the difference will occur to you eventually. <chuckle>
The only difference that occurs to me is that yours says one thing,
and the others say something else. <chuckle> Perhaps you could
explain any other significant difference.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
09 Nov 2004 04:03:25 PM |
|
|
"We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known
unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were
eyewitnesses of his majesty."
-- 2 Peter 1:16
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have
handled, of the Word of life; For the life was manifested, and we have
seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which
was with the Father, and was manifested unto us"
-- 1 John 1:1-2
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
10 Nov 2004 05:54:12 AM |
|
|
wrote:
"We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known
unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were
eyewitnesses of his majesty."
-- 2 Peter 1:16
"That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have
handled, of the Word of life; For the life was manifested, and we have
seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which
was with the Father, and was manifested unto us"
-- 1 John 1:1-2
And how do we know that aren't lying about this?
John 14:12-14
12: Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that
believeth on me, the works that I do shall he
do also; and greater works than these shall
he do;because I go unto my Father.
13: And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name,
that will I do, that the Father may be
glorified in the Son.
14: If ye shall ask any thing in my name,
I will do it.
--
Kerry - two medals a silver and bronze star.
Bush? Well they don't give medals
for going AWOL, missing your medical and
getting grounded or falling off of a bar stool.
Kerry - a hero, Bush - a zero
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Roger Pearse" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
10 Nov 2004 07:48:14 AM |
|
|
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411081928.719ca806@posting.google.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411051347.787ae2c3@posting.google.com>...
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411040754.25bee5e8@posting.google.com>...
roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0411030944.498157a2@posting.google.com>...
(JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
When you claim "everyone knows" jesus was real, does that include,
say, everyone, ...
Cutting this short, I'm not sure why you ask me. Why not go and find
out?
Because I already know for a fact that the claim "everyone knows"
jesus was real is incorrect...
I suggest in that case you seem medical assistance.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
Once again, a devastating rebuttal from Roger.
I agree. He that lives by the assertion, dies by it.
Great. You must have some pretty unassailable evidence jesus was
something other than a magical fictional character.
Of course. Ask any normal person.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras. Here they are:
<http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras>
What, I wonder, will you offer by way of demonstration for your
confident assertions?
Speaking of confident assertions, I'm impressed how you referred to
your own efforts as definitive ("every single ancient literary
reference," you must be proud), despite the fact that you start out
with "This page makes no pretence to be a work of scholarship."
Glad you're impressed, although I'm not sure your comment reflects
well on those of your opinion. Should you ever find another
reference, let me know.
How would my scepticism about your claiming to have read "every single
ancient literary reference" reflect poorly on "those of my opinion"?
By failing to offer anything but an assertion?
Anyone can make a useful contribution to the web, if they stop
repeating hearsay, eschew opinion, and start gathering raw data. I
wish more of your persuasion would do this.
I've gathered as much raw data as I need to form an opinion. You
haven't presented anything persuasive enough to change it.
I'm sure you're right!
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
Not evidence. The opinion of some amateur webpage is not evidence.
Brilliant. *YOUR* amature webpage is evidence, but all the rest
aren't.
I'm sure the difference will occur to you eventually. <chuckle>
The only difference that occurs to me is that yours says one thing,
and the others say something else. <chuckle> Perhaps you could
explain any other significant difference.
Not unless you offer to pay me.
All the best,
Roger Pearse
.
|
|
|
| User: "maf 1029" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
10 Nov 2004 02:19:35 PM |
|
|
On 10 Nov 2004 05:48:14 -0800, (Roger Pearse)
wrote:
THE BEST OF ROGER ***** (posting under his nom du voyage, Pearse)
"Quite why you abuse me in this manner, I do not know."
3a88eeea.0411060937.7ce093f2@posting.google.com
"[abuse]"
205 returned hits from 1 Jan 2004 to 10 Nov 2004
"I suggest in that case you seem medical assistance."
3a88eeea.0411100548.12ff6e02@posting.google.com
"He that lives by the assertion, dies by it."
3a88eeea.0411051347.787ae2c3@posting.google.com
"Such crass ignorance of history is depressing".
3a88eeea.0411101004.194e2e37@posting.google.com
"I hadn't realised atheists were still keen on poison gas!"
3a88eeea.0409021210.29b85f7a@posting.google.com
"What a nasty person you are!"
3a88eeea.0409021210.29b85f7a@posting.google.com
"Feel free to hold your breath as long as you like, Shirley."
3a88eeea.0409021210.29b85f7a@posting.google.com
"…what is it about atheism that creates such poor behaviour, in your
view? "
3a88eeea.0401291132.443a5ad6@posting.google.com
"Why is it that atheism seems to be the religion of the nasty people?"
3a88eeea.0311030443.b3ce844@posting.google.com
"Lazy little toad."
3a88eeea.0410050359.6f305f64@posting.google.com
"Then kindly push off …"
3a88eeea.0410050359.6f305f64@posting.google.com
"You need to learn some basic courtesy. If you respond to someone, do
so courteously and respond to what they say. Don't just barf up a load
of rubbish and whine when they step around it."
3a88eeea.0410050359.6f305f64@posting.google.com
"Like (e)veryone, you too have a ideological agenda to peddle"
hhhqo01kjqdcphsru9cg0m38d1e77s0htf@4ax.com
"…ask what it is about your religious position that makes you behave
worse than any member of any other religious group would do."
3a88eeea.0410050359.6f305f64@posting.google.com
"What if your mummy is reading this, little boy?"
3a88eeea.0302191146.62eb24c4@posting.google.com
"What precisely is your contribution to this discussion, child? Other
than impudence?"
"***** off, you ignorant little *****."
3a88eeea.0203290426.23a02122@posting.google.com
"***** off, you dishonest little *****."
3a88eeea.0411051622.5e45e0f5@posting.google.com
3a88eeea.0409021619.4cab4f11@posting.google.com
3a88eeea.0409021514.71778fa1@posting.google.com
3a88eeea.0408272355.33089770@posting.google.com
3a88eeea.0401070325.2c2c54f1@posting.google.com
Now ***** off, you dishonest little *****.
3a88eeea.0407091233.582827de@posting.google.com
"…you dishonest little *****."
3a88eeea.0407080401.322c0c47@posting.google.com
"you are a dishonest little *****"
3a88eeea.0111080042.4744f0ef@posting.google.com
"…you ignorant *****."
3a88eeea.0401280718.7edaacc5@posting.google.com
"A ***** in every direction... is a good description of most
newsgroups!"
3a88eeea.0310080217.15937f6e@posting.google.com
"Pity your parents didn't bring you up to be honest."
3a88eeea.0409021619.4cab4f11@posting.google.com
"Perhaps it was too thickly overlaid with stupidity."
3a88eeea.0407091233.582827de@posting.google.com
"Sneers the kid who knows nothing."
3a88eeea.0407080401.322c0c47@posting.google.com
"Isn't it interesting that Christian-hate can only be maintained by
lies and abuse?"
3a88eeea.0407080401.322c0c47@posting.google.com
"Let us know when you're going to apologise for lying."
3a88eeea.0411020958.4e516c22@posting.google.com
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "maf 1029" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
06 Nov 2004 12:20:16 AM |
|
|
On 3 Nov 2004 09:44:50 -0800, (Roger Pearse)
wrote:
jesshc@phantomemail.com (JessHC) wrote in message news:<d58e3ac.0411020618.4a268d29@posting.google.com>...
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
As unfamiliar as yourself? Quite why anyone should prove to you what
everyone knows and you deny only out of perversity you do not say.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed,
Nonsense.
Then please kindly post a link or a cite which proves your assertion.
HINT: the New Testament doesn't count.
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
Oh good. I have read every single ancient literary reference to
Mithras.
Do you have a cite from the peer-reviewed, standard, academic
literature which confirms this assertion?
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "walksalone" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
02 Nov 2004 09:15:38 AM |
|
|
On 2 Nov 2004 06:18:29 -0800, JessHC wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message news:<1gmkx6d.1gxyuw31tflw8mN%>...
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmirbu.c8hmya1hl2q82N%>... > JessHC
<jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote: > > > (mclark)
wrote in message > >
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney > >
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700, > >
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus Christ
purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
No, it wasn't. Sorry you missed the point. Do you contend that *all*
divine entities around the world are real?
C'mon! I haven't asserted anything about any deity, not even Jesus
Christ.
Lying is a sin, you know.
I have only asked stoney to prove her assertion that Jesus
Christ is a fictitional character which she has so far not done. In
other words, she should have kept her mouth shut.
Why? What objective, verifiable, contemporary evidence is there that
Jesus was real? Are you unfamiliar with the myths from which the
story of jesus appears to have been fabricated, or do you just
rationalize them away?
Unlike stoney and her unanswered assertion that Jesus Christ was purely
fiction, I haven't made any assertions about Krishna. So you're not
passing the burden of any proof about Krishna to me.
You assert that Jesus was real, correct? Unfortunately, there is no
contemporary objective, verifiable evidence that Jesus actually
existed, and there're lots of valid reasons to believe he is likely a
fiction; take, for example, the many parallels with other religious
myths around the world. Fortunately, nobody is under any obligation
to accept unsupported assertions.
Again, I haven't asserted anything about Jesus Christ or any of the
so-called deities. The bottom line is that you've backed yourself into
a corner trying to insinuate that I have.
Really? It sure looks like you claim jesus is real in
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:idontreply%40toemail.com&start=320&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=1gmbb30.wemdoc1yatufwN%25idontreply%40toemail.com&rnum=323
"Jesus died on the cross to pay the penalty for our sins. By doing
so he
also won us the choice of being able to spend eternity in heaven
with
Jesus in bliss, or eternity in the spiritual blackness of hell.
Surprisingly, the only meaningful choice is not obvious to many
people."
and http://groups.google.com/groups?q=author:idontreply%40toemail.com&start=340&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=1gm9w86.2zl50opv36d0N%25idontreply%40toemail.com&rnum=349
"Jesus works in us through his Holy Spirit. When somebody
sincerely
invites his Spirit into their spiritual heart the Spirit starts
rebuilding that person from the inside as indicated by the
character
traits of Galatians 5:19-23. This is also reflected in Luke
17:20-21.
"Indeed, return to God, believing in his Son Jesus in faith, and
have
eternal life."
among others, though. Are those not your words? Perhaps they were
forgeries. The fact remains, there is no objective, verifiable
evidence that any deity is real, and there is a great deal of evidence
that the myth of Jesus was derived from earlier myths. At the moment,
I'm thinking specifically of Mithras.
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Mithras
snip. Jess, you might try
THE MYSTERIES OF MITHRA by Franz Cumont [1903]
Ag one time, it was on http://sacred-texts.com & may still be.
Snip remnant, jut sharing info.
walksalone who has no doubt the xian christ is fictional from start to
finish.
--
A person usually has two reasons for doing something: a good reason and the
real reason. -Thomas Carlyle, historian and essayist (1795-1881)
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
04 Nov 2004 04:13:38 PM |
|
|
walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in message news:<ufcdezevlh77$.16j7c1a9ugq5.dlg@40tude.net>...
<snip>
snip. Jess, you might try
THE MYSTERIES OF MITHRA by Franz Cumont [1903]
Ag one time, it was on http://sacred-texts.com & may still be.
Snip remnant, jut sharing info.
walksalone who has no doubt the xian christ is fictional from start to
finish.
Thanks. This website looks interesting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "walksalone" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
04 Nov 2004 04:26:00 PM |
|
|
On 4 Nov 2004 14:13:38 -0800, JessHC wrote:
walksalone <spam@fcc.gov> wrote in message news:<ufcdezevlh77$.16j7c1a9ugq5.dlg@40tude.net>...
<snip>
snip. Jess, you might try
THE MYSTERIES OF MITHRA by Franz Cumont [1903]
Ag one time, it was on http://sacred-texts.com & may still be.
Snip remnant, jut sharing info.
walksalone who has no doubt the xian christ is fictional from start to
finish.
Thanks. This website looks interesting.
If you elect to buy the CD, it is usually updated to match the site every
Oct. or so. The info would be on the site.
I did & I don't regret it, if nothing else, someone doing that much work &
collecting that much information deserves a congrats in one form or
another.
Or else like some, you can download the files, page by page, when an
interesting article catches your eye. Perchance my favorite will be the
Celtic portion, haven't finished the CD yet.
walksalone who rarely finds a web site worth mentioning, but this one is.
--
Chief Aupumut, Mohican. 1725
"When it comes time to die, be not like those whose hearts are filled with
the fear of
death, so when their time comes they weep and pray for a little more time
to live
their lives over again in a different way. Sing your death song, and die
like a hero
going home."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
01 Nov 2004 12:22:39 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus Christ
purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Unlike stoney and her unanswered assertion that Jesus Christ was purely
fiction, I haven't made any assertions about Krishna. So you're not
passing the burden of any proof about Krishna to me.
Leaving Krishna and Jesus in equal positions. Clark the super boob
continues his never-ending fight against the evils of thinking.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 AM |
|
|
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark) wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
Alt-atheism website at: http://www.alt-atheism.org
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Being surprised at the fact that the universe
is fine tuned for life is akin to a puddle being
surprised at how well it fits its hole"
-- Douglas Adams
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
01 Nov 2004 11:04:21 AM |
|
|
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark) wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion
.
|
|
|
| User: "stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
01 Nov 2004 10:37:05 PM |
|
|
stoney wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion/
The Jewish first century hitorian Josephus wrote about Jesus. He is a real
historical person.
http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Read about it at that website.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>
.
|
|
|
| User: "JessHC" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
02 Nov 2004 04:35:28 PM |
|
|
"stone" <antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com> wrote in message news:<41870ef1_2@news1.uncensored-news.com>...
stoney wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion/
The Jewish first century hitorian Josephus wrote about Jesus. He is a real
historical person.
http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Read about it at that website.
I liked this bit at that website
(http://www.carm.org/evidence/Josephus_Jesus.htm):
"Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both
mentions Jesus as a historical figure who was able to perform many
surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of
Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing."
In other words, it's okay if the bit in Josephus was forged, it still
supports that Jesus was real. Hmm.
.
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
04 Nov 2004 12:27:06 AM |
|
|
On 2 Nov 2004 14:35:28 -0800, (JessHC) wrote:
"stone" <antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com> wrote in message news:<41870ef1_2@news1.uncensored-news.com>...
stoney wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC < > wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion/
The Jewish first century hitorian Josephus wrote about Jesus. He is a real
historical person.
http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Read about it at that website.
I liked this bit at that website
(http://www.carm.org/evidence/Josephus_Jesus.htm):
"Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both
mentions Jesus as a historical figure who was able to perform many
surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of
Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing."
In other words, it's okay if the bit in Josephus was forged, it still
supports that Jesus was real. Hmm.
Theist scholarship at its best.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
04 Nov 2004 10:02:53 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 07:27:06 +0100, thomas p
<thomasagainspam@yahoo.dk> wrote:
On 2 Nov 2004 14:35:28 -0800, (JessHC) wrote:
"stone" <antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com> wrote in message news:<41870ef1_2@news1.uncensored-news.com>...
stoney wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC < > wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion/
The Jewish first century hitorian Josephus wrote about Jesus. He is a real
historical person.
http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Read about it at that website.
I liked this bit at that website
(http://www.carm.org/evidence/Josephus_Jesus.htm):
"Even if both versions have been tampered with, the core of them both
mentions Jesus as a historical figure who was able to perform many
surprising feats, was crucified, and that there were followers of
Jesus who were still in existence at the time of its writing."
In other words, it's okay if the bit in Josephus was forged, it still
supports that Jesus was real. Hmm.
Theist scholarship at its best.
Just like; theist honesty, theist compassion, theist empathy, theist
humanity, theist intelligence, theist integrity.....
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Christ a fictional character? |
02 Nov 2004 10:36:29 AM |
|
|
On 2 Nov 2004 04:37:05 GMT, "stone" <antiaging@ineedhits-mail.com>
wrote:
stoney wrote in message ...
On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 07:42:22 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In our last episode <4dlbo0p2fh9hhpuc1ji3hkrvof1bj3oq5l@4ax.com>, thomas p
lept out of the bushes shouting:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 13:09:31 -0700, (mclark)
wrote:
JessHC <jesshc@phantomemail.com> wrote:
(mclark) wrote in message
news:<1gmfjpb.cmsz0d16p2z6N%>... > stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote: > > > On 27 Oct 2004 12:14:12 -0700,
jkelley@zoomnet.net (John Kelley) > > wrote:
Beowulf <beowulf@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:<pan.2004.10.26.23.24.05.452845@nowhere.net>... Was Jesus
Christ purely fiction?
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/robert_price/fiction.html
Nope:
http://www.christiancadre.org/topics/historicaljesus.html
Yes.
If your "Yes" is to the "Was Jesus Christ purely fiction?" question
above, will you please prove your "yes"? Otherwise, thank you for
your opinion.
First prove Krishna was purely fiction. Otherwise, thank you for your
opinion.
What a copout reply! :^(
I wonder if Clark missed the point delibrately, or if he is just
incredibly stupid. I vote for stupid.
Clark? M. Clark?
Stupid isn't even the *word. The level of density of that one is so high,
it actually bends light rays...
Looks like Shrub's got some hefty competition.
The Jewish first century hitorian Josephus wrote about Jesus. He is a real
historical person.
http://www.carm.org/questions/Josephus.htm
Read about it at that website.
(laughing AT you)
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Vote for Bush. Why vote for the lesser of two evils?
No matter the candidates the superstition industry wins.
'Jesus' is a sock-puppet Christians utilize to add 'authority' to
whatever action they intend on taking. -Stoney
And Duty Imp and Rapscallion
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
