Freethought & Rationalism Archive

outhouse · 02-13-2013, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

There is NO evidence that this fictional 'passover event' ever happened.
There is not a single verse of the Gospels relating to any 'Jezuz of Nazareth' that has any contemporary non-apologetic evidence or support.
The only thing appearing up till the writings of Justin Martyr, is the highly questionable, and admittedly fudged Josephus 'TF' citations.

'Jezuz christ' of Nazareth is an unknown and unattested to figure before approximately 150 CE.
And by that time no one would have known, and there would have been no way of determining whether he had ever existed.

This 'movement' did not spread throughout the Empire in the 1st century. It did not begin with any 'passover incident',
The Temple had already been destroyed and the Jews scattered before this gospel apologetic tale was written.

It was not until well into the 2nd century CE that this 'gospel' tale and 'christianiy' took hold and began its rapid spread, with many writings then being composed and retrojected into providing an imaginary past 'Church history'.

First of all, Christianity happened, like it or not, you will have to deal with it.

And nothing you can produce will go against the evidence of the time of its origin pre fall of temple.

some big changes happened to excelerate the movement away from Judaism.

the fall of the temple

Hellensitic Jewish Proselytes wanting their own religion

But you wouldnt place a man in living memory as a martyr at a passover with almost half a million in attendance that could blow your gig.

because you dont like the evidence, doesnt mean its not there.

outhouse · 02-13-2013, 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

And of course Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius know nothing of this alleged all important 'passover event' or of the great outcry and social upheaval it allegedly caused.

The story is total fiction, and was composed later than these writers.

You mean Romans were not paying attention to a peasant Jew places on a cross. Your kidding me!

Sheshbazzar · 02-13-2013, 10:41 PM

No I am not. The story is not history. These 'events' are religious fictions.

aa5874 · 02-13-2013, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

First of all, Christianity happened, like it or not, you will have to deal with it.

And nothing you can produce will go against the evidence of the time of its origin pre fall of temple...

You don't know what you are talking about.

There is no corroborative evidence for a Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century.

Non-Apologetic writers of antiquity never mentioned Jesus of Nazareth and no Gospel writer claimed they saw Jesus of Nazareth in the 1st century.

outhouse · 02-13-2013, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

No I am not. The story is not history. These 'events' are religious fictions.

It is not 100% fiction.

Not only that we have Paul writing early on before the temple fell about this character.

All this attacking the current status quo, but not one replacement guess that even makes a lick of sense.

outhouse · 02-13-2013, 10:53 PM

What year did someone sit down and write mythology?

Where did they write this mythology?

Why did they write this mythology?

How did it get spread throughout the Roman empire?

There is nothing you can write to explain anything better then the staus quo.

Not only that we have Roman authors competeing mortal man against mortal man. We have Augustus claiming "son of god" before the jesus character is even born, then later Roman authors giving this same human divinity to a Jewish peasant, explain why?

You ignore more then you can even begin to explain because you have nothing in return that makes sense.

Anyone can say no!

Sheshbazzar · 02-13-2013, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

There is NO evidence that this fictional 'passover event' ever happened.
There is not a single verse of the Gospels relating to any 'Jezuz of Nazareth' that has any contemporary non-apologetic evidence or support.
The only thing appearing up till the writings of Justin Martyr, is the highly questionable, and admittedly fudged Josephus 'TF' citations.

'Jezuz christ' of Nazareth is an unknown and unattested to figure before approximately 150 CE.
And by that time no one would have known, and there would have been no way of determining whether he had ever existed.

This 'movement' did not spread throughout the Empire in the 1st century. It did not begin with any 'passover incident',
The Temple had already been destroyed and the Jews scattered before this gospel apologetic tale was written.

It was not until well into the 2nd century CE that this 'gospel' tale and 'christianiy' took hold and began its rapid spread, with many writings then being composed and retrojected into providing an imaginary past 'Church history'.

First of all, Christianity happened, like it or not, you will have to deal with it.

But it didn't happen in the 1st century. Writers living in the first century know nothing about it.

Quote:

And nothing you can produce will go against the evidence of the time of its origin pre fall of temple.

There is no such evidence.

Quote:

you wouldnt place a man in living memory as a martyr at a passover with almost half a million in attendance that could blow your gig.

Never happened.
Contemporary writers display no knowledge at all of any such event, and no mention of any huge social upheaval as the result of some alleged 'passover event'.
The story is fiction through and through.

Quote:

because you dont like the evidence, doesnt mean its not there.

There is no 'evidence' to this story to dislike.

I dislike religious lies masqurading as history, and giving men an excuse to manipulate, to fleece, to engender hate, and murder their fellow men for gain.

outhouse · 02-13-2013, 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

But it didn't happen in the 1st century. Writers living in the first century know nothing about it.

False.

Paul had plenty to say.

And come on, were talking about a illiterate cultures, and a movement that was very small and not really politically dangerous that only worshipped in houses.

this will be hard to understand, but the movement factually evolved.

This means at one point in time it was very small

Throwing all of Paul away? you cannot.

Quote:

Contemporary writers display no knowledge at all of any such event, and no mention of any huge social upheaval

You call placing a trouble making Jew on a cross a social upheaval?

Sheshbazzar · 02-13-2013, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

What year did someone sit down and write mythology?

Sometime well after 70 CE .

Quote:

Where did they write this mythology?

Somewhere outside of Israel

Quote:

Why did they write this mythology?

A religious apologetic for the destruction of the Temple. (and other religious propaganda motives)

Quote:

How did it get spread throughout the Roman empire?

Beginning with Justin Martyr in the 2nd century CE.

Quote:

There is nothing you can write to explain anything better then the staus quo.

Not only that we have Roman authors competeing mortal man against mortal man. We have Augustus claiming "son of god" before the jesus character is even born, then later Roman authors giving this same human divinity to a Jewish peasant, explain why?

You ignore more then you can even begin to explain because you have nothing in return that makes sense.

Anyone can say no!

Horse crap.

aa5874 · 02-13-2013, 11:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

No I am not. The story is not history. These 'events' are religious fictions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

It is not 100% fiction.

OK. It is 99.99999% fiction and the rest is implausible.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Not only that we have Paul writing early on before the temple fell about this character.

That is 99.99999999% fiction the balance is questionable.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-13-2013, 10:41 PM	#23
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	No I am not. The story is not history. These 'events' are religious fictions.

02-13-2013, 10:53 PM	#26
outhouse Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Auburn ca Posts: 4,269	What year did someone sit down and write mythology? Where did they write this mythology? Why did they write this mythology? How did it get spread throughout the Roman empire? There is nothing you can write to explain anything better then the staus quo. Not only that we have Roman authors competeing mortal man against mortal man. We have Augustus claiming "son of god" before the jesus character is even born, then later Roman authors giving this same human divinity to a Jewish peasant, explain why? You ignore more then you can even begin to explain because you have nothing in return that makes sense. Anyone can say no!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.