Jesus Christ

You asked exactly two questions. Only one of which I asked questions about and your answers to, would help me answer your question. Your other question I answered directly. So, as you say; “I think you may have a hard time reading.”

As I just pointed out your answers to the question I asked would help me answer your question, so why didn’t you answer my question?

Hard time reading? Is that because I didn’t say that it was in a Catholic School? By the way, is that the same Catholic religion that spent most of the “dark” ages trying to keep the “common people” from knowing what the Bible has to say, to the point of burning Bibles and jailing and burning at the stake those who translated the Bible into the “common“ languages? Why would they do that if the Bible is just a “book of fables” as your “RELIGION teacher in my CATHOLIC SCHOOL“ says?

Blue Ribbon? Are we at the County Fair?

Thanks for the warning but I already knew that and as I pointed out Wikipedia generally has footnotes so you can check out the reference works that were used.

Then did he happen to point out the Scripture that says the Bible is “book of fables that were passed down from generation to generation until one day people decided to start recording it”?

I’ve reviewed the article, no where does it say the ages are “just GUESSES”, although the documentation is not as verifiable as it is in the last 100 years, those who have done the research seem to believe there is reason to believe the ages cited and are not “just GUESSES”.

Truth? What do you use to determine what “Truth” is?

God speaks to you directly? What does his voice sound like?

Although, dinosaurs are not mentioned in the Bible, neither are platypuses or koalas or kangaroos but that does mean that God didn’t create them.

Using just the philosopher's standard, the only thing that is truly verifiable is “I think therefore I am” any thing else can be called in to question. So what do you use to verify something?

Yes, why do you ask?

 

* The history of Christianity, especially the doctrine of the earliest Christians, is consistent with Jesus having been a mythical character, with historical details only added on later.

* The Epistles of Paul, which were written before the Gospels, show no awareness on the part of the author that Jesus was supposed to have been a human being who recently lived. Paul mentions only the crucifixion, the resurrection and the ascension and presents them as having occurred in a mythic realm rather than an earthly one.

* The death-resurrection-ascension sequence was common in previous mythologies and religions, making it more likely that the Jesus character was inspired by his similar forebears than that he actually lived on Earth.

* Other details of the Jesus biography offered in the Gospels also have precedent in previous mythologies and religions, especially Judaism. For example, the "slaughter of the innocents" scene appears to be directly inspired by a nearly identical story in Exodus.

 

I know that on point three, you have already provided some info on why you believe it to be true but it would be interesting to see some of your proof for the others.

 

The death-resurrection-ascension sequence was common in previous mythologies and religions, making it more likely that the Jesus character was inspired by his similar forebears than that he actually lived on Earth.

I'm guessing your referring to your "all other religions are the work of Satan" theory on this?

The same can be said for the virgin birth, does the Bible ever mention what became of Joseph the step dad of Jesus, it must of been somewhat embarrassing for him when his wife proclaimed she was a virgin(but pregnant) throughout the land.

I have some ocean front property in Indiana I'd like to sell that guy.

 

Like I said; you have already provided some info on why you believe this to be true but I was more interested in more info about these;
* The history of Christianity, especially the doctrine of the earliest Christians, is consistent with Jesus having been a mythical character, with historical details only added on later.

* The Epistles of Paul, which were written before the Gospels, show no awareness on the part of the author that Jesus was supposed to have been a human being who recently lived. Paul mentions only the crucifixion, the resurrection and the ascension and presents them as having occurred in a mythic realm rather than an earthly one.

As for this;
* Other details of the Jesus biography offered in the Gospels also have precedent in previous mythologies and religions, especially Judaism. For example, the "slaughter of the innocents" scene appears to be directly inspired by a nearly identical story in Exodus.

Of course Jesus’ biography has precedent in the Hebrew scriptures seeing as most of them are prophecies of Jesus’ life.

I was not referring to anything but the fact that you had already given some info on “the death-resurrection-ascension sequence was common in previous mythologies and religions” and was saying there was no need for more on that but the two other points you mentioned seemed new and I would like more info about them.

The Bible does not say much about Joseph but then it doesn’t say that much more about Mary. Interestingly the Bible does mention Jesus’ brothers and sisters and since the Bible does not mention any virgin births other than Jesus’, I would say Mary did not remain a virgin and I would guess Joseph probably had something to do with that.

If you’re talking about Indiana Beach, if the price is right, let’s talk.

 

LMAO I swear I have more intelligent conversations with atheists about God than I do with Christians, and that's 100% sarcasm free.

I'm not even getting into all that religious shit with you anymore. I should have really stopped after you said Noah lived to be 950 but I saw potential intelligence in you and I'm not even mad at you because that was my mistake.

Nigga really asked me what does God's voice sound like. I truly am in awe. Just the fact you even think God speaking has anything to do with a voice you can hear with your human ears shows how stupid your religion keeps you. And why in the fuck would you fear God? Fear and God are polar opposites. How about you stop getting all your information from that book, your pastor, and whoever else might be in your ear and let your inner guide show you the way. If your inner guide led you to the Bible, that's not a bad thing but know the difference between a fable and a real story when you're reading it. You will never find the complete Truth in other people or writings, and you damn sure aint gonna find everything you need to know in one book or even one faith. And belief in God means nothing without a direct relationship with God. Do you think of God as an entity separate from yourself? If the answer to that question is yes, you are in desperate need of some soul searching.

 

People imitate the God they worship, you seem to have demonstrated the personality of your God very well and if the way you treat others is any demonstration of the way he treats you, I hope you are happy with the way he treats you.

 

The way I treat others?

All I did was point out fallacies in the Bible.

And your God says you should fear him. Your God is also judgmental, spiteful, vindictive, jealous, possessive, and controlling. My God is none of the above and tells me there's nothing whatsoever to fear, not even death itself.

I think I'ma stick with my God.

 

"Man is certainly stark mad; he cannot make a worm, yet he will make gods by the dozen." -- Michel de Montaigne

 

I wish people would stop talking about him. He's irrelevant.

 

http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_similarities.html

 

All I did was point out fallacies in the Bible? Okay let's see:

"Nigga"?!

Yeah, All you did was point out fallacies in the Bible and you did it with so much loving kindness.

 

Nigga aint even a bad word and even if it were I'd be one of the people "allowed" to use it being that I'm black.

But yea I was frustrated when I was telling you to shut your old ass up. That was a bit disrespectful I suppose. My fault.

 

Paul mentions the witness to the resurrection by people who supposedly knew Jesus, including his brother James and Cephas (Peter). These people still lived in Jerusalem and claimed to have been part of the inner circle of a real person, and Paul was in close (though not always friendly) contact with them.

Not nearly as common as was once thought in the days when James Frazier's The Golden Bough was taken seriously. As a result of scholarly attacks on Frazier's dying rising god thesis by R. De Vaux, J.Z. Smith and Mark S. Smith, the thesis was regarded as discredited, until it was revisited by Tyggve Mettinger in 2001. Mettinger concludes that Frazier's critics went too far, and comes up with a (very)few candidates that he thinks can meet critical tests of legitimate dying rising saviors. Of course, most Christians and atheists have been oblivious to this debate, the former believing that there was only one, the latter that they were commonplace.

I think your interpretaion is plausible. The "slaughter of the innocents" story comes from Matthew and is not found in the other gospels. The "Jesus- Moses" parallel is pretty obvious in Matthew, although I expect OWB to disagree that it was "directly inspired" by Exodus. Let me guess: God was responsible for both events, and He chose that theme.

 

Before guessing how I might answer a question, perhaps it would be good to see how I've already answered it:

 

Let me see ... what's the topic of this thread ... Oh ... Yeah! Jesus Christ!

Seems to me this thread has taken on an evolution all it's own, and has nothing to do with the thread topic ...

Warning!

Any further OFF-TOPIC comments will result in this thread being closed ...

How about everyone PLAY NICE ? ? ?



.

 

oh thanks buddy!

















(the dude doesnt even post in these threads......)

 

I think that the best approach to see if religious texts compare to each other is to actually read the religious texts ourselves and then make a comparison. Too often do we rely on critical review of texts instead of seeing for ourselves if these texts share similarities. This way, we don't rely on critical review that can have biased interpretation. Critical review is a second resource, so it makes sense to go directly to the source ourselves.

A good place to start:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/

 

Am I psychic or what?!

 

You don't have to be a psychic to guess what has already been said.