Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 06-29-2008, 08:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mens_sana

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Well, name me a religion that just could not have started without a human being worshipped as a God.

Even in the NT, Paul became a Christian and started seven Churches and he only got revelations. Paul never needed the HJ, he just needed to believe Jesus was a God.

And the hundreds of millions believers do NOT need the HJ, they just NEED to believe Jesus was a God.

The Jesus story was just fiction believed to be true, this is by far the most economical explanation.

With the HJ position one must assume that everyone in the Jesus story, including his mother, his disciples and Jesus himself lied about or embellished every event written in the NT with respect to the prophecies, the conception, the temptation, the miracles, the transfiguration, resurrection and ascension of Jesus.

For example, for the HJ to feasible, it MUST be accepted that Mary lied about the conception of Jesus. And if Joseph was the actual father of Jesus, then Joseph also lied that Mary was a virgin after Jesus was born.

Jesus would have lied when, in the NT, he claimed to have raised a man from the dead who had died four days before. Jesus lied about his resurrection and the author of Acts, Peter and the other apostles lied about seeing Jesus going through the clouds on his way to heaven.

If Jesus was just a Christian preacher with his Christian disciples and thousands of Christian followers, why would all these Christians lie?

The simplest explanation is that the Jesus story was written as a believable story, although fiction, and was believed to be true by many and was made the official religion of Rome in the 4th century.

I don’t think “Christianity” started with Jesus being worshipped “as a God.” The Ebionite tradition seems to bear that out. The Book of James also.

Why does Paul keep getting dragged in? It would seem obvious, because of his contacts with the Jerusalem church, that he knew something of the physical Jesus. At the same time, we know that his Good News was based solely on his vision. So while he can testify indirectly to a physical Jesus, his interest and his preaching was solely concerned with the risen Christ and the imminent kingdom. (That he thinks J & JC were “related” doesn’t bother me. I have no problem separating them.)

And why are the millions of believers here? Their religious tenets and what they NEED to believe should be shelved along with the notions of "miracle" and divine intervention.

The HJ position really does NOT “assume that everyone in the Jesus story, including his mother, his disciples and Jesus himself lied about or embellished every event in the NT.” This is a take-off on Fundamentalist theology and belongs in a KJV-Only scenario, not in a historical undertaking. Come on, get serious! Where does Jesus or any other NT figure “lie”? How could they lie if the words are only later editions of what the authors had on hand in a mostly oral set of traditions? And did these NT figures embellish? We don’t know whether they did or not! We know only that the traditions got embellished by authors and editors working from 40 to 70 years after Jesus’ death.

A question — if we were to say that the physical Jesus is a myth, how did this business start? Dropping all the KJV/McKinsey/Fundamentalist baggage, how is the MJ more economical than the HJ?

Well, HJers are going to have a LOT of explaining to do. These are some of the hosts of questions that they need to answer.

Who was the mother of HJ?
Who was the father of HJ?
When was HJ born?
What was HJ real name?
Did HJ really meet John the Baptist?
Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist?
Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days?
What country did HJ actuallly live in?

I am not asking you to guess.
And remember the Jesus of the NT was the son of the God of the Jews born of the Holy Ghost as witnessed by Mary. The Jesus of the NT was NOT HJ, unless all the characters in the NT gave erroneous information.

The simplest explanation is that the Jesus story was fiction believed to be true. Very simple. This simple explanation solves all your problems.

Mormonism started without a physical human /God, or Jesus, but by revelations, now today there are millions of believers.

mens_sana · 06-30-2008, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Who was the mother of HJ?
Who was the father of HJ?
When was HJ born?
What was HJ real name?
Did HJ really meet John the Baptist?
Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist?
Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days?
What country did HJ actuallly live in?

I am not asking you to guess.
And remember the Jesus of the NT was the son of the God of the Jews born of the Holy Ghost as witnessed by Mary. The Jesus of the NT was NOT HJ, unless all the characters in the NT gave erroneous information.

The simplest explanation is that the Jesus story was fiction believed to be true. Very simple. This simple explanation solves all your problems.

1. Mary
2. Joseph (probably)
3. While Herod the Great was still alive
4. Some form of Joshua
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. Who knows? The number "40" should probably clue us in to a "preaching story," rather than a literal one.
8. Galilee
9. No. I refuse to accept your parsing of the Jesus of the NT, because there is a HJ under the JC.
10. "Erroneous" can be a loaded term. In the mouth of a "radical skeptic," it usually carries the baggage of Fundamentalist literalism, meaning that if there is a single "erroneous" jot or tittle, all the texts can be disregarded as completely meaningless, of no value in any study whatsoever. Eric Hoffer's concept of the "True Believer" finds examples galore in this particular arena.
[Numbering added to aa5874's quote, for clarity of reference.]

aa5874 · 06-30-2008, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mens_sana

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Who was the mother of HJ?
Who was the father of HJ?
When was HJ born?
What was HJ real name?
Did HJ really meet John the Baptist?
Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist?
Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days?
What country did HJ actuallly live in?

I am not asking you to guess.
And remember the Jesus of the NT was the son of the God of the Jews born of the Holy Ghost as witnessed by Mary. The Jesus of the NT was NOT HJ, unless all the characters in the NT gave erroneous information.

The simplest explanation is that the Jesus story was fiction believed to be true. Very simple. This simple explanation solves all your problems.

1. Mary
2. Joseph (probably)
3. While Herod the Great was still alive
4. Some form of Joshua
5. Yes
6. Yes
7. Who knows? The number "40" should probably clue us in to a "preaching story," rather than a literal one.
8. Galilee
9. No. I refuse to accept your parsing of the Jesus of the NT, because there is a HJ under the JC.
10. "Erroneous" can be a loaded term. In the mouth of a "radical skeptic," it usually carries the baggage of Fundamentalist literalism, meaning that if there is a single "erroneous" jot or tittle, all the texts can be disregarded as completely meaningless, of no value in any study whatsoever. Eric Hoffer's concept of the "True Believer" finds examples galore in this particular arena.
[Numbering added to aa5874's quote, for clarity of reference.]

1. You get ZERO for answering Mary. Mary is the mother of the Jesus the offspring of the Holy Ghost not HJ. I told you not to guess.

2. You have no basis to say Joseph was probably the father of HJ. The correct answer is you don't know. You answer was mis-leading. You get ZERO.

3.Again, you get ZERO. It is not even certain when the offspring of the Holy Ghost was born. You just guessed again.

4. The name of the offspring of the Holy Ghost was Jesus. The HJ could have any first name . It could have been Simon. ZERO for guessing.

5. It is the offspring of the Holy Ghost who met John the Baptist, please read your NT. ZERO for you. Stop guessing.

6. Same as #5. The offspring was baptized. Another guess, another ZERO.

7. Again, read your NT, it was the offspring of the Holy Ghost who was in the wilderness for forty days with the devil on a high moutain or on the pinnacle of the temple, and being tempted to turn stone to bread. ZERO, ZERO, ZERO.

8. In the NT, it was the offspring of the Holy Ghost who was living in Galilee. ZERO, again.

You have a grand total of ZERO.

You are a confirmed FUNDAMENTALIST.

Your HJ appear to be identical to the Jesus of the NT; same mother, unknown father, same first name, lived the same place, was in the wilderness, met and was baptized by John the Baptist.

Your believe the NT is fundamentally true.

mens_sana · 06-30-2008, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Your believe the NT is fundamentally true.

Guffaw

ChuckE99 · 06-30-2008, 04:25 PM

Assuming HJ to have existed, all we can say about him is this:

Who was the mother of HJ? - Unknown
Who was the father of HJ? - Unknown
When was HJ born? - Unknown
What was HJ real name? - Unknown
Did HJ really meet John the Baptist? - Unlikely
Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist? - Even more unlikely
Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days? - Possibly, but it would have been a coincidence (hey, people get lost, you know?)
What country did HJ actuallly live in? - Egypt

aa5874 · 06-30-2008, 04:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckE99

Assuming HJ to have existed, all we can say about him is this:

Who was the mother of HJ? - Unknown
Who was the father of HJ? - Unknown
When was HJ born? - Unknown
What was HJ real name? - Unknown
Did HJ really meet John the Baptist? - Unlikely
Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist? - Even more unlikely
Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days? - Possibly, but it would have been a coincidence (hey, people get lost, you know?)
What country did HJ actuallly live in? - Egypt

Fantastic. You get 87.5%.

You can get 100% if you can explain why you answered Egypt for the last question.

mens_sana · 06-30-2008, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

You can get 100% if you can explain why you answered Egypt for the last question.

Becuz that's where the myths in pottery jars were found? :notworthy:

ChuckE99 · 06-30-2008, 04:41 PM

No proof. Just a gut feeling. Egypt is where monotheism started, IMO. Egypt is where the Jews "came out of" (but could they have been there all along?) Egypt had a son of god/christ cult with Osiris. Egypt is where the Savior was supposed to come out of. Egypt is where all the really cool NT texts come from (GThomas). If the story of Jesus originated there, it's understandable how the authors got so much of the geography of Israel wrong.

IMO. IMO. IMO.

Edit: corrected spelling error and elaborated on GThomas.

aa5874 · 06-30-2008, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChuckE99

No proof. Just a gut feeling. Egypt is where monotheism started, IMO. Egypt is where the Jews "came out of" (but could they have been there all along?) Egypt had a son of god/christ cult with Osiris. Egypt is where the Savior was supposed to come out of. Egypt is where all the really cool NT texts come from (GThomas). If the story of Jesus originated there, it's understandable how the authors got so much of the geography of Israel wrong.

IMO. IMO. IMO.

Edit: corrected spelling error and elaborated on GThomas.

The idea that the Jews, at around 33 CE, were asked by Peter and others to worship a mere man, who was most likely a sorcerer, or a magician, crucified for blasphemy, as the Son of the God of the Jews, who was believed to be resurrected and bodily ascended to heaven, even when the Jewish Temple was still standing, is SO outrageous AND INSANE that I think the HJ COULD NOT HAVE LIVED IN JUDAEA.

Jesus the Son of Ananus was beaten to a pulp on numerous occasions and declared to be a madman just for saying "Woe unto Jerusalem". See Wars of the Jews 6.5.

Jesus of the NT was not even incarcerated, beaten, or stoned once before his trial, yet he constantly called the Pharisees, Scribes, and Saducees, Vipers and Devils.

The Jesus of the NT could only be a God, no man could do those things without being beaten to a pulp.

aa5874 · 06-30-2008, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mens_sana

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Your believe the NT is fundamentally true.

Guffaw

Are you denying that FUNDAMENTALISTS and HJERS have in COMMON the SAME BELIEF?

HJERS and FUNDIES hold a COMMON belief that Jesus lived during the time of Pilate.

Both FUNDIES AND HJERS beliefs are IDENTICAL at times.

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

06-30-2008, 04:25 PM	#5
ChuckE99 Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Seattle Area Posts: 116	Assuming HJ to have existed, all we can say about him is this: Who was the mother of HJ? - Unknown Who was the father of HJ? - Unknown When was HJ born? - Unknown What was HJ real name? - Unknown Did HJ really meet John the Baptist? - Unlikely Was HJ baptized by John the Baptist? - Even more unlikely Was HJ in a wilderness for forty days? - Possibly, but it would have been a coincidence (hey, people get lost, you know?) What country did HJ actuallly live in? - Egypt

06-30-2008, 04:41 PM	#8
ChuckE99 Regular Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Seattle Area Posts: 116	No proof. Just a gut feeling. Egypt is where monotheism started, IMO. Egypt is where the Jews "came out of" (but could they have been there all along?) Egypt had a son of god/christ cult with Osiris. Egypt is where the Savior was supposed to come out of. Egypt is where all the really cool NT texts come from (GThomas). If the story of Jesus originated there, it's understandable how the authors got so much of the geography of Israel wrong. IMO. IMO. IMO. Edit: corrected spelling error and elaborated on GThomas.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.