FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-15-2001, 11:09 AM   #11
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi:
Layman: Nero, eh? That's very interesting. It fits, too, since he's legendary for "fiddling" while Rome burned, a patently ludicrous image that, from a propaganda standpoint would be equal to revisionist history of the South during the Civil War.

If Nero saw the writing on the wall of Rome's military downfall, then perhaps he would have been in the right place at the right time to create the idea of the Church/State? The problem, of course, is piecing together who then revised Roman historical timelines, what exactly was revised, and how did this transfer occur? Current speculation is with Constantine (sorry Nomad, but everything about history is necessarily speculation, no matter how many documents exist to support that speculation), so there's a generous time period to consider.

Your thoughts?
</font>
The only problem with it being Nero, of course, is that he was busy burning Christians alive like they were so much kindling.

But perhaps this story is more myth meant to cover his discreet support of Christianity and fabrication of its documents.
 
Old 03-15-2001, 12:01 PM   #12
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Wink

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi:

Nomad, relax. This has nothing to do with you and your childish little myths, ok? In case you didn't notice my caveat (if you don't believe the bible is a collection of myths, you'll have little to contribute here) that would apply to you. </font>
Yeah, I noticed how you asked me not to participate on this thread, but what can I say? Your theories are so screwball I just can't let this pass.

BTW, you aren't going to find anyone taking any of your theories seriously, and no, that does not mean we are all part of some grand conspiracy either.

What you need to do is actually produce any kind of evidence at all in support of any idea you have to offer. Give it a try, and let's see what you've got.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">You're more than welcome to contribute from a dissenting expert perspective, if you like, but this has nothing to do with theology or questions of divinity, so your defensiveness from a theological bent is unwarranted. </font>
Umm... I haven't offered any theological objections sport. Your facts or so screwed up and your thinking is so muddled that I don't even have to offer any. Plain history and the evidence is quite enough to expose your hypothesis for what it is.

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">I'm interested in investigating a hypothesis. Whatever factual information you can provide will be most welcome.</font>
I guess I could say the same. Do you have any factual information?

Liking the chance to have a nice lite conversation here...

Nomad
 
Old 03-15-2001, 12:18 PM   #13
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Nomad: Fuck off.

Layman: Unknown. But that's the fun of this kind of mind play.

I guess the search should focus more on the early formulation of the Catholic church as an institution. That's when the hierarchy is formed and the lies of the cult formalized. Perhaps a connection with Iraneus? Unfortunately the time frames are so disparate and we need to factor in all of the various cult sects and how they were monitored by Rome (if at all).


(edited for removal of lengthy and childish diatribe aimed at Nomad - Koy)

[This message has been edited by Koyaanisqatsi (edited March 15, 2001).]
 
Old 03-15-2001, 03:48 PM   #14
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Smile

The... Romans... and... Jewish... leaders... created... the... Jesus... myth?!?!? (Sorry, I had to say that one slowly ).

Nomad;
I believe this is called the "Pio Conspiracy theory" or is it Piso I forget, mainstream historians, agnostic or otherwise consider it nonsense, There may even be something in the II archives about it. British conspiracy buff David Icke is a major proponent of this idea, but he also believes that the earth is secretly run by Masonic Reptiles from the 4th dimension, so watch out. For some fun read 'The Gods of Eden" by William Bramley

[This message has been edited by marduck (edited March 15, 2001).]
 
Old 03-15-2001, 08:46 PM   #15
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Maybe it was actually Nero. According to the Roman Historian Cornelius Tacitus, Nero had a special place in his heart for Christians.</font>
LOL!
Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2"> And some evidence even suggests that Nero had a rather profound influence on the course of Peter's and Paul's life. </font>
Hahahahaha....
Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Also, the dates match, the early 60s. Just about when Christianity really started to take off.</font>
Stop it please, your killing me... I haven't laughed this much in a looong time.

And the funniest thing is that Koyaanisqatsi is apparently serious!!!

Hey everyone, I've got a new hypothesis. It goes like this:
In the real 19th century the people of earth were actually really technologically advanced and they left earth in spaceships. Later they decided to do an experiment: They rearranged the whole earth, made up a false history, changed the memories of a whole lot of people so that they 'remembered' this false past and put them on Earth. The real original earthlings are now watching us from their UFOs.
This is obviously a true theory as it explains UFOs.
What other evidence is there to support this hypothesis and what supportable arguments exist to detract from it?

Koyaanisqatsi, your hypothesis is no less crazy than mine. (In fact it is probably more crazy because your humans who invented Christianity didn't have superhuman powers to stop people knowing that they did)

ps I do not believe my hypothesis. (Just in case anyone was wondering ... Not that I would think people stupid enough to believe I do, but Koyaanisqatsi apparently believes his...)
 
Old 03-16-2001, 05:23 AM   #16
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Layman:
Hey,

Maybe it was actually Nero. According to the Roman Historian Cornelius Tacitus, Nero had a special place in his heart for Christians. And some evidence even suggests that Nero had a rather profound influence on the course of Peter's and Paul's life.

Also, the dates match, the early 60s. Just about when Christianity really started to take off.

What do you think Koyaanisqatsi?
</font>

Hahahahahahahahaahahahaa, yes Nero found Christians to be very illuminating! You might even say they lit up his life.


 
Old 03-16-2001, 08:25 AM   #17
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Metacrock:

Hahahahahahahahaahahahaa, yes Nero found Christians to be very illuminating! You might even say they lit up his life.

</font>
Good One.
 
Old 03-16-2001, 08:33 AM   #18
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi:
[b]Nomad: Fuck off.

(edited for removal of lengthy and childish diatribe aimed at Nomad - Koy)</font>
Anyone ever see the MASH episode where Major Winchester says to Max Klinger (Max had just said "OH YEAH???"):

"ARRRGGHHHH!!! I lay mortally wounded, SCEWERED by your rapier wit!"

And ya know, it is this the kind of intermitent brilliance that makes coming to these boards so interesting sometimes. On the other hand, I think this particular thread can mercifully be declared dead now.

Koy? In the future, when you want to advance a hypothesis, try and offer something with at least some level of plausability to it. Wild eyed theories (especially those involving vast and mysterious conspiracies) tend to be discounted rather quickly, and the advocates viewed either as benign but misguided fools, or sky screaming lunatics. You are not doing your reputation any favours by posting this kind of thread, and before you do it again, may I recommend that you actually read up on the subject a little and in so doing, avoid much embarrassment for yourself.

Signing off on a hopeful note now...

Nomad
 
Old 03-17-2001, 04:51 PM   #19
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

Wow. Must have hit quite a nerve. Funny thing is, I didn't really give too much credence to the hypothesis; I just thought it would be an interesting theory to discuss, but your childish defensiveness makes me reallize there's definitely something to it. Thanks.

I guess Vespasian is as good a place to start as any other place. Thanks Nomad. Anybody beside the Ewings here knowledgable about Vespasian's reign? Or Roman transition from a military empire to a Christian one?

Perhaps a timeline of transition and the players involved would prove useful? Somebody had to take the myths and put the hierarchy into power. If Constantine was the end point, where was the start point? Romans were'nt exactly ignorant sheep like these idiots, so someone had to recognize either the Church/State concept or reallize that the way to usurp the Jews was not be force, but from within.
 
Old 03-17-2001, 10:21 PM   #20
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Koyaanisqatsi:
Wow. Must have hit quite a nerve. Funny thing is, I didn't really give too much credence to the hypothesis; I just thought it would be an interesting theory to discuss, but your childish defensiveness makes me reallize there's definitely something to it. Thanks.

I guess Vespasian is as good a place to start as any other place. Thanks Nomad. Anybody beside the Ewings here knowledgable about Vespasian's reign? Or Roman transition from a military empire to a Christian one?

Perhaps a timeline of transition and the players involved would prove useful? Somebody had to take the myths and put the hierarchy into power. If Constantine was the end point, where was the start point? Romans were'nt exactly ignorant sheep like these idiots, so someone had to recognize either the Church/State concept or reallize that the way to usurp the Jews was not be force, but from within.
</font>

O well by that logic I know i'm right because that is a really childish rebuttle. We have whole manuscripts of the NT that are older than Constantine, so the whole nonsenseical concept is put mercefully to rest.

The thing about Nero is just plain silly.

 
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:38 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.