Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
10-14-2010, 12:15 AM | #141 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
Evidence generally helps one or the other or is not relevant. Quote:
From the start the MJ theory is well supported but HJ cannot up to this day find any external or internal source to begin their or argument. The HJ is based on the premise that the extant information about Jesus is NOT credible which is tantamount to admitting in a trial that your main witness has perjured themselves. |
|||
10-14-2010, 12:34 AM | #142 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Steven, you have thus far only focused your attentions on the final paragraph of my post. Here again is that portion which you passed over.
Quote:
A 'Name' which I find to have long been besmirched through the means of 'Scripture' so called, and through the 'works' and the words of the Bible's advocates; Men who have said 'Thus saith The LORD' when יהוה never spoke, but they put their own words into 'his' mouth, so making 'him' and 'his' Holy Name to stink in the eyes of honest and rational men. My יהוה is not their יהוה, my יהוה reveals their יהוה to be a liar, and not יהוה at all. |
|
10-14-2010, 12:51 AM | #143 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: seattle, wa
Posts: 9,337
|
Quote:
|
|
10-14-2010, 12:55 AM | #144 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
'Historical Jesus?' what does this have to do with this thread? Perhaps it would help your comprehension if you would be a little less 'selective' as to which small portions of my posts that you choose to address.
summary; " I do not believe in 'Jesus' Christ, nor that there ever was a man with some other spelling or pronunciation that did those things written in the Christian texts. ........ haShem YHWH is not a man. And that 'YAH-hoshua' of which I write is not a man, never was and never will be. ....... The Jesus Christ god/man as presented within the NT texts is certainly a mythical creation........ I say unequivocally that the Jesus written about in the Christian Cannon and idolised by Christians does not exist, and never has existed. " All of which directly pertains to the subject of this thread. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 'HISTORICAL JESUS' |
10-14-2010, 06:43 AM | #145 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
|
Quote:
The reason is that Constantine and Eusebius not only invented Christianity in the 4th century, they also invented Jews and Samaritans in the 4th century as well. It is so obvious!!!!! That is why there is an Israeli/Palestinian conflict today. How absurd would the Palestinians be if they knew that Jews had been living in that area 2,000 years ago? The reason they are warring so badly is because the Palestinians knew that no Jewish temple existed in 70 CE to be destroyed... because the Jews were an invention of Constantine c. 330 CE and thus never lived in Palestine. All references to Jews before 330 CE are 4th century forgeries. It's no coincidence that our earliest manuscripts of Tacitus are from the 11th century! |
|
10-14-2010, 06:53 AM | #146 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 3,210
|
Quote:
The traditional Jesus would be comparable to a unicorn - i.e inherently implausible given common sense and science - but the historical Jesus isn't. |
|
10-14-2010, 09:00 AM | #147 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Would advocates of a 'Historical Jesus' care to provide us with even one verifiable and provable 'historical' fact about their man Jesus?
From my point of view, the only 'history' that is really 'HISTORY', that can be recovered is a history of the growth of a myth, and the successive stages of the cult that cultivated that myth. There is nothing that is identifiable as any particular 1st century man isolatable from that contrived corpus of myth. (And even if it there were established beyond any shadow of doubt that there was such a core individual, that person having not done all of the fantastic miracles attributed in the NT....would not, and could not be that 'Jesus Christ' of NT fame, as he never actually did those things reported within the NT.) |
10-14-2010, 09:08 AM | #148 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 758
|
Sheshbazzar:
I've followed these threads for the past few weeks and I don't believe anyone has asserted that a man that did everything Jesus is represented as having done in the Greek Testament actually existed. No one on these threads has said that. Who exacly are you arguing with? Steve |
10-14-2010, 09:21 AM | #149 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
Look at the title of this thread, and then look at in how many places others have repeatedly used the phrase.... 'the historical Jesus'.. every time it is used it implies that there is such a thing as a 'historical Jesus', when in point of fact no such individual has ever been identified, and has absolutely NO verifiable provable history.
The only Jesus Christ known to History is the mythological god/man of the Christian writers religious propaganda text, a phantasmagoria that has never existed in flesh and blood. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A 'HISTORICAL JESUS' |
10-14-2010, 09:30 AM | #150 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Earth
Posts: 320
|
Quote:
Plus, that no accounts exist is only have the story - the other is that a HJ is not needed to explain the data that we do have today. No evidence + no need = failed hypothesis. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|