aa5874

If Jesus did exist and was human then he was crucified and died for his own sins. His crucifixion and death cannot be on behalf of all mankind.

Examine Mark 10:17-18 - Jesus have admitted that he was NOT good.

Jesus died for his own sins.

Voice of reason

Yet more contradictions and errors from the bible. The most horrid book ever sold.

He is his own father per the trinity. Fuck what a terrible piece of crap that book is.

mountainman

But was the book ever sold? Could any self respecting person walk into a Greek bookshop in the 1st or 2nd or 3rd century and buy a copy? I dont think so!

Widespread publication awaited the time when "Jesus's servants would fight for His Kingdom on Earth. That is, the widespread publication of the bible awaited for the rise of the supreme imperial mafia fascist thug Constantine. At that time c.324/325 CE and onwards the bible was apparently published in a codified form. That is the key words and figures in the publications were not named in full, but were codified using Greek language symbolic "quasi-abbreviations".

The very simple question as to whether the book (and its 'ahem' "History")was fabricated by this barbarian warlord has not been given sufficient circulation, and analysis, by objective ancient historical commentary and with direct and specific correspondence to the evidence of that epoch, and later epoch (ie: the 4th and 5th centuries) in the Roman Empire. In the epoch of the Second Sophistic and the writings of Greek books like "Meditations" by Marcus Aurelius, we have the African Latin author Tertullian. Retrojected textual references to the "trinity" miraculously appear in this remote and obscure Latin writing author in the midst of the revival in Greek literature. The modus operandi of Constantine's tactics was literary "retrojection".


The Holy Trinity appeared in the works of the philosophy of Plotinus as published by one of his 12 disciples Porphyry. The concept of the trinity does not appear in the discussions of the "church councils" until after the Council of Nicaea. The "Trinity" and the "Logos" are Greek philosophical concepts, and hey were misappropriated in the "Fabrications of the Constantinians".

The warlord, described as brigand (pirate on land) and robber, steals the temples and shrines to the old Greek conceptions of divinity (because they were not "Christian") and their gold and silver and treasures. He destroys the literature of the Greek academies (ie: Porphyry and the neoplatonist lineage) and edicts for its prohibition and burning. He promotes the newly fabricated bible as his prefered "State Religion" -- which was the right of the rightful "Pontifiex Maximus". What were the "Sacred Assembly of the Greek Priesthood" to do with this renegade "Boss" and "Lord God Caesar Constantine"?

They could do nothing - fuck all. They could comply with his new cult or they could go into exile, such as hundreds of miles up the Nile to Nag Hammadi for example, or into the deserts of Syria for another. The old way of doing "religious or divine business" in the temples and shrines was VERBOTEN - FORBIDDEN - FORBIDDEN - "RELIGIOUS "PRIVILEGES ARE RESERVED FOR CHRESTIANS".

The victors of this struggle were the orthodox state church supported and focussed on the Imperial Army and the "Pontific Maximus" -- Lord God Caesar until the role of "Pontifex Maxim" was obtained by the Bishop of Rome, Damasius just after Julian's death. At that point these people rewrote the history of the reception of the bible from the council of Nicaea, and twisted the history of the 4th century to harmonise it with a favorable and popular acceptance of this fabricated literary collage of wisdom and rubbish people call the bible.

Did Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins actually suffer for their sins?
Did Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins actually "come in the flesh"?
Are Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins "docetic" figures of history?

Was there a time when Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins were not?
Before Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins were born, were they not?
Were Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins made out of nothing existing?
Were Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins from another subsistence/substance?
Was Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins subject to alteration or change?

Toto

Is there any value to this thread? Any objection to moving it to E??

Any further mention of Harry Potter or Bilbo Baggins in this forum is subject to the same fate.

Saramago

Devil's advocate position: He WAS good, in fact he was 100% free of sin*. He was just being modest here. Or, he was referring to the sin inherent in his human-form, which did not taint his God-nature.

[*Just ignore the whole "fools" episode, for the sake of argument.]

aa5874

The thread has just started. There is more posts to make.

If Jesus was human he died for his own sins. Humans are NOT sinless.

Examine Mark 14.60-64 Now, once the Sanhedrin did find that the statement of Jesus was blasphemous and once the penalty for blasphemy was death then Jesus was executed for his OWN SIN or Crime.

According to the NT Canon, Jesus was a Jew living in Galilee of Judea for about 30 years he ought to have known the penalty for blasphemy.

The execution of Jesus was the proper decision by the Sanhedrin once the Law did allow the death penalty for blasphemy.

In Acts of the Apostles, Stephen was stoned to death for making a similar blasphemous statement about Jesus, yet Stephen was NOT deemed to have died for the sins of ALL mankind. See Acts 7.56-60

In "Antiquities of the Jews" 20.9, James was stoned to death after a trial with the Sanhedrin, but James did NOT die for the sins of ALL mankind.

There were possibly many Jews who might have been killed or executed innocently by the Romans but their INNOCENT deaths do not qualify them as SAVIOURS of the Jews and ALL of mankind.

Jesus was executed for his own sin of blasphemy.

show_no_mercy

Paul contradicts Mark 10:17-18:

aa5874

Paul contradicts gMark's Jesus.

Well, the author of Mark did not use Paul's Jesus.

The Jesus in Mark did not teach his disciples that he would die for the sins of mankind. The Jesus in gMark taught his disciples that he would RISE on the THIRD day,

Examine Mark 9:31 - Mark 10:34 - And examine Mark 9.9-10 The Jesus in gMark TAUGHT the RESURRECTION but did NOT teach the meaning of the Resurrection.

It was after gMark that Paul or some other inventor INVENTED the SALVATION through the resurrection.

The death of Jesus in gMark signified the fulfillment of prophecy that God would make Jerusalem desolate.

Examine the words of the prophet Isaiah.

Isaiah 1:2-9 - The death of Jesus meant the wrath of God would be UNLEASHED.

The JEWS in Jerusalem and the Temple would NOT be SAVED.

Jesus WARNED the disciples about the destruction and desolation because of his rejection and death by the Jews.

Mr 13:17 - Mark 14:21 - There was NO SALVATION for the JEWS after they caused Jesus to be executed for blasphemy.

Nathaniel

Jesus says that only God is good; where does he say that he was not good?

aa5874

You seem not to have the ability to make deductions.

Please examine the passage again
Mark 10.17-18 In effect, JESUS admitted that he was NOT good ONLY GOD.

And once there was a death penalty for blasphemy and that Jesus made a statement that was considered blasphemy in the presence of the Sanhedrin then JESUS deserved the punishment according to the LAW.

Jesus died for his OWN sins.

JESUS was NOT good and was a BLASPHEMER based on his OWN words recorded in the NT.