Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<40C108B2.F2B16B47@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...

Jim Sheffield wrote:

roger_pearse@yahoo.co.uk (Roger Pearse) wrote in message news:<3a88eeea.0406040312.6513ebe6@posting.google.com>...

Libertarius <Libetarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<8f0d743eaa6a26cd0b3fbd16de0f1bc6@news.teranews.com>...

Roger Pearse wrote:

Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<40BA4355.F37FD17D@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...

bv_schornak wrote:

Bob Crowley wrote:

True we have evidence in the form of historical accounts eg. Josephus
and other sources. There is archaelogical evidence, including the
Wailing Wall, the only part of the old temple still standing.

On the other hand we have existence that Christianity also began
around or before the time of the temple's destruction, since quotes by
both Christian sources and Roman historians, bureaucrats (eg. Pliny
the Younger) indicate Christians were around at that time.

Prior to the the year dot, there is no evidence of a Christian faith,
although there is evidence of Judaism, and Rome, the Maccabees,
Alexander the Great etc. Crucifixion was a Roman custom, apparently
copied from the Carthaginians.

The temple existed, Golgotha can still be seen, the old towns
mentioned eg. Bethelehem, Jericho are still around in one form or
another. The administrative areas eg. Herod's and Pilate's seem to be
accurate. The chief obstacle therefore seems to be the problem of
miracles and predictions, and Christ's alleged existence. And the
Jews were scattered amongst the nations for the better part of 1900
years.

When a movement springs up, there is a founder. Islam has Mohammed,
Buddhism has Guatama Buddha, Communism has Karl Marx, and the Church
of England has Henry VIII with his six wives.

Therefore since Christianity exists, it is likely Christ existed.

Agreed. I don't doubt the existence of Jesus, even if it
can't be proven. A personality cult cannot be based on a
virtual person who never existed.

===>Check into the history of religions.
Did Osiris, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithras, Krishna, etc.
exist???[etc]

Kindly switch your mind on. I don't see that it is the responsibility
of the rest of us to educate the wilfully obtuse.

===>Proof of your nonsensical approach to things.
Of course lots of cults have been based on fictitious
"persons". What is "obtuse" about that, silly boy? -- L.

As I said, I don't owe you an education. Grow up.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Good point! Libertarius loves the use of false anology. The creeds
all say, "under Pontius Pilate", Pilate was the historical prefect
of Judea. Jerusalem is a known city, Herod Antipas was King of Gallilee,
Caiphas was high priest,

===>So far, the history.

You don't know whether that is history or not. You merely want to
believe it.

Now, here comes the fictional part of the novels:

You need to get past the idea that you can make up reality.

Jesus was buried in a known tomb surrounded
by armed guards, his resurrection was proclaimed in Jerusalem 50 days
after His Crucifixion.

===>No credible evidence exists for that, other than the fictional
biographies depicting an executed would-be king of the Jews.

No evidence whatever for your statement exists.

No credible ancient tome was ever published
refuting the Four Gospels.

===>No credible tome was published refuting the "Wizard of OZ", either.
Or "GONE WITH THE WIND".

Indeed. But such an argument is just desperation.

Of course the various "Gospels", canonical and others, do a pretty
good job of refuting one another.

Only in the eyes of those with some other motive they dare not
mention, eh, Mr. L?

Tertullian circa 200 A.D. dared Rome to
publish the Acts of Pilate and they never did.

===>There never was such a thing.

I look forward to the evidence for such a positive statement.

No other religion
gave so many ways to falsify it and all the historians and power
of Rome couldn't.

===>How can you "falsify" a myth?

If you don't know, on what basis are you claiming to have done so?

Libertarius denial is not a river in Egypt.

===>That is a cute pun. But it does not refute the fact
there is not a shred of historical evidence for the figure
depicted in the Gospels, which are themselves mutually
contradictory, refuting one another. -- L.

Argument from assertion of what everyone knows to be untrue is a sign
of desperation.

On Fri, 04 Jun 2004 17:41:38 -0600, Libertarius
<Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote:

<<selectively skissored>>

No credible ancient tome was ever published
refuting the Four Gospels.

===>No credible tome was published refuting the "Wizard of OZ", either.
Or "GONE WITH THE WIND".
Of course the various "Gospels", canonical and others, do a pretty
good job of refuting one another.

The claim was tacitly categorical. The "Wizard of OZ" and
"Gone with the Wind" novels are understood to be works of fiction and
make no pretense to the contrary. As these works don't claim to be
factual accounts, the necessity to debunk any spurious claim of
respective factuality is nil.

The Gospels are a recording of the history and teachings of
Christ and comport themselves as factual histories.

These records are
afforded a treatment of scrutiny deserving of any work that asserts
itself as factual, a measure not requisite for works of fiction.

If
one is going to rebut the argument sensibly and cogently, the sensible
tactic is to produce evidence that an ancient tome of credible
caliber, confuting the details of the gospels with insuperable
evidence, was actually produced.

But this is the why of the inert and vapid and vacuous
argument referencing notable works of fiction, if not for the
questionable intellectual caliber of the antagonist. No such "ancient
tome" is accessible.

Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message

Roger Pearse wrote:

Libertarius <Libetarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message

Roger Pearse wrote:

Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message

bv_schornak wrote:

Bob Crowley wrote:

True we have evidence in the form of historical accounts eg.

and other sources. There is archaelogical evidence,

Wailing Wall, the only part of the old temple still standing.

On the other hand we have existence that Christianity also

around or before the time of the temple's destruction, since

both Christian sources and Roman historians, bureaucrats (eg.

the Younger) indicate Christians were around at that time.

Prior to the the year dot, there is no evidence of a

although there is evidence of Judaism, and Rome, the

Alexander the Great etc. Crucifixion was a Roman custom,

copied from the Carthaginians.

The temple existed, Golgotha can still be seen, the old towns
mentioned eg. Bethelehem, Jericho are still around in one

another. The administrative areas eg. Herod's and Pilate's

accurate. The chief obstacle therefore seems to be the

miracles and predictions, and Christ's alleged existence.

Jews were scattered amongst the nations for the better part

years.

When a movement springs up, there is a founder. Islam has

Buddhism has Guatama Buddha, Communism has Karl Marx, and the

of England has Henry VIII with his six wives.

Therefore since Christianity exists, it is likely Christ

Agreed. I don't doubt the existence of Jesus, even if it
can't be proven. A personality cult cannot be based on a
virtual person who never existed.

===>Check into the history of religions.
Did Osiris, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithras, Krishna, etc.
exist???[etc]

Kindly switch your mind on. I don't see that it is the

of the rest of us to educate the wilfully obtuse.

===>Proof of your nonsensical approach to things.
Of course lots of cults have been based on fictitious
"persons". What is "obtuse" about that, silly boy? -- L.

As I said, I don't owe you an education. Grow up.

===>Why don't you follow your own advice, silly boy?

You're repeating yourself. At what point do you propose to back up
your silliness with some rational argument?

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<40C093AC.9D780A81@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...

Roger Pearse wrote:

Libertarius <Libetarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<8f0d743eaa6a26cd0b3fbd16de0f1bc6@news.teranews.com>...

Roger Pearse wrote:

Libertarius <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The.Truth> wrote in message news:<40BA4355.F37FD17D@Nothing_But_The.Truth>...

bv_schornak wrote:

Bob Crowley wrote:

True we have evidence in the form of historical accounts eg. Josephus
and other sources. There is archaelogical evidence, including the
Wailing Wall, the only part of the old temple still standing.

On the other hand we have existence that Christianity also began
around or before the time of the temple's destruction, since quotes by
both Christian sources and Roman historians, bureaucrats (eg. Pliny
the Younger) indicate Christians were around at that time.

Prior to the the year dot, there is no evidence of a Christian faith,
although there is evidence of Judaism, and Rome, the Maccabees,
Alexander the Great etc. Crucifixion was a Roman custom, apparently
copied from the Carthaginians.

The temple existed, Golgotha can still be seen, the old towns
mentioned eg. Bethelehem, Jericho are still around in one form or
another. The administrative areas eg. Herod's and Pilate's seem to be
accurate. The chief obstacle therefore seems to be the problem of
miracles and predictions, and Christ's alleged existence. And the
Jews were scattered amongst the nations for the better part of 1900
years.

When a movement springs up, there is a founder. Islam has Mohammed,
Buddhism has Guatama Buddha, Communism has Karl Marx, and the Church
of England has Henry VIII with his six wives.

Therefore since Christianity exists, it is likely Christ existed.

Agreed. I don't doubt the existence of Jesus, even if it
can't be proven. A personality cult cannot be based on a
virtual person who never existed.

===>Check into the history of religions.
Did Osiris, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithras, Krishna, etc.
exist???[etc]

Kindly switch your mind on. I don't see that it is the responsibility
of the rest of us to educate the wilfully obtuse.

===>Proof of your nonsensical approach to things.
Of course lots of cults have been based on fictitious
"persons". What is "obtuse" about that, silly boy? -- L.

As I said, I don't owe you an education. Grow up.

===>Why don't you follow your own advice, silly boy?

You're repeating yourself. At what point do you propose to back up
your silliness with some rational argument?

"bv_schornak" <nowhere@schornak.de> wrote in message

< CLIP >

Do not mismatch Gods / Godesses with humans who were
posthumously "raised" to the status of a God, that's
a different quality. Also, people didn't invent some
other people, even if they invented some Gods. These
things came up with an established Christian Church.
Prior to that, people didn't lie that much, they had
too much respect for "devine" things...

I found Ovid's Metamorphosis quite interesting in this respect.
In the chapter which speaks of Julius Caesar's death, it is
revealed that Caesar was descended from a goddess. On the day of
his assassination, there was darkness in the middle of the day.
There were earth quakes. Graves opened, and the dead walked in
the streets. After Caesar died, there is a detailed description
of how he rose up to heaven. (Shakespeare echoes some of this in
the play "Julius Caesar".)

There are accounts that Julius Caesar was later seen by several
important individuals, such as Augustus. Although Augustus was
only Julius Caesar's stepson, after the Roman Senate declared
Julius to be a god, Augustus referred to himself as "the son of
God."

Later Roman Emperors took the title "god".

"bv_schornak" <nowhere@schornak.de> wrote in message

< CLIP >

Do not mismatch Gods / Godesses with humans who were
posthumously "raised" to the status of a God, that's
a different quality. Also, people didn't invent some
other people, even if they invented some Gods. These
things came up with an established Christian Church.
Prior to that, people didn't lie that much, they had
too much respect for "devine" things...

I found Ovid's Metamorphosis quite interesting in this respect.
In the chapter which speaks of Julius Caesar's death, it is
revealed that Caesar was descended from a goddess. On the day of
his assassination, there was darkness in the middle of the day.
There were earth quakes. Graves opened, and the dead walked in
the streets. After Caesar died, there is a detailed description
of how he rose up to heaven. (Shakespeare echoes some of this in
the play "Julius Caesar".)

There are accounts that Julius Caesar was later seen by several
important individuals, such as Augustus. Although Augustus was
only Julius Caesar's stepson, after the Roman Senate declared
Julius to be a god, Augustus referred to himself as "the son of
God."

Later Roman Emperors took the title "god".

--
Wax

bv_schornak wrote:

Libertarius wrote:

bv_schornak wrote:

... I don't doubt the existence of Jesus, even if it
can't be proven. A personality cult cannot be based on a
virtual person who never existed.

===>Check into the history of religions.
Did Osiris, Attis, Adonis, Dionysus, Mithras, Krishna, etc.
exist???
Was there really a man named "EBION"???
What about King Arthur and his Round Table knights??? -- L.

Hm, I differentiate between the spiritual story of a
religion and the person(s) in this story. While each
spiritual entity is suspect for me, I don't deny the
existence of the person(s) mentioned. I think, there
must have been someone who was the "model" for those
stories - which were blown up to supernatural events
later on. If we cut off the supernatural part, some-
thing remains. This something might be Gilgamesh, it
might be Jesus or Quetzalcoatl. Each of 'em might be
a myth - or a real existing person, either.

Do not mismatch Gods / Godesses with humans who were
posthumously "raised" to the status of a God, that's
a different quality. Also, people didn't invent some
other people, even if they invented some Gods. These
things came up with an established Christian Church.
Prior to that, people didn't lie that much, they had
too much respect for "devine" things...

===>There is no evidence that Adam, Eve, Noah, Lot,
Abraham, Moses, or Joshua ever existed.

It is quite likely that "Jesus" is a composite of several messianic
claimants Flavius Josephus talks about, created to appear that
a real person was the one Saul/Paul identified as the incarnate
savior god CHRISTOS of his new-fangled mystery cult. -- L.