Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Mars Man · 06-25-2010, 09:30 PM

When I have a bit more time, I'd hope to get back here more fully, yet thought it might be productive to clarify that I am more fundamentally taking the position that there was a Jewish male whose name was Yeshua, who was active in formulating some sub-cult within peripheral Jewish belief system. I have no qualms with the understanding of embellishment (as you have demonstrated with those 10 points, aa5874)

BlessNot · 06-25-2010, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

This is a misleading headline:
Jesus did not die on cross, says scholar

Quote:

The legend of his execution is based on the traditions of the Christian church and artistic illustrations rather than antique texts, according to theologian Gunnar Samuelsson.

He claims the Bible has been misinterpreted as there are no explicit references the use of nails or to crucifixion - only that Jesus bore a "staurus" towards Calvary which is not necessarily a cross but can also mean a "pole".

Samuelsson, a committed Christian, gives a fuller discussion here.

Quote:

The thesis, entitled Crucifixion in Antiquity: An Inquiry into the Background of the New Testament Terminology of Crucifixion, offers the reader samples of antiquity’s most terrifying texts and gives examples of mankind’s amazing resourcefulness in terms of mind-boggling cruelty against fellow human beings. Samuelsson has studied the available ancient Greek, Latin and Hebrew/Aramaic literature all the way from Homer to the first century A.D. While the texts indicate a vast arsenal of suspension punishments, they do not say much about the kind of punishment the Christian tradition claims Jesus was forced to endure.

The thesis clearly shows that although the studied texts are full of references to suspension of objects and the equipment used to this end, no reference is made to ‘crosses’ or ‘crucifixion’. Samuelsson therefore concludes that the predominant account of the destiny of Jesus is not based on the antique texts, but rather on for example the tradition of the Christian church and artistic illustrations.

Does this tend to support Acharya S's identification of the "crucifixion" with other mythic examples of gods with outstretched arms?

The biblical Jesus is a fairy tale.

aa5874 · 06-25-2010, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mars Man

When I have a bit more time, I'd hope to get back here more fully, yet thought it might be productive to clarify that I am more fundamentally taking the position that there was a Jewish male whose name was Yeshua, who was active in formulating some sub-cult within peripheral Jewish belief system. I have no qualms with the understanding of embellishment (as you have demonstrated with those 10 points, aa5874)

Every one understands that people can take any position that they choose.

The NEXT STEP is to provide the sources of antiquity that can support whatever position you take.

All you have done in order to HIDE your failure to produce any sources is to ASSUME the historicity of Jesus and then, as by magic, declare that there were embellishments about your ASSUMED Jesus.

Why did you FIRST assume Jesus did exist?

Why is not Jesus a story that was merely believed to be true?

You have not yet given your POINTS for your proposal that they were embellishments.

I have given you 10 points to support my position that the Jesus story was far more compatible with BELIEF than actual history.

Please give your points before you leave or I will think that you have NO points.

stephan huller · 06-25-2010, 11:20 PM

Bless Not,

There's a difference between a fairy tale and a musterion. One should be careful to draw distinctions here. Or as LaRochefoucauld once noted:

Le vrai moyen d'être trompé, c'est de se croire plus fin que les autres.[Maxim 127]

BlessNot · 06-26-2010, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Bless Not,

There's a difference between a fairy tale and a musterion. One should be careful to draw distinctions here. Or as LaRochefoucauld once noted:

Le vrai moyen d'être trompé, c'est de se croire plus fin que les autres.[Maxim 127]

Any intelligent person is able to separate truth from fiction. That's what you have with the story of the Biblical Jesus. Do you really believe his mother became impregnated by a ghost? An obvious fairy tale. Wake up to reality dude.

>

<

aa5874 · 06-26-2010, 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlessNot

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Bless Not,

There's a difference between a fairy tale and a musterion. One should be careful to draw distinctions here. Or as LaRochefoucauld once noted:

Le vrai moyen d'être trompé, c'est de se croire plus fin que les autres.[Maxim 127]

Any intelligent person is able to separate truth from fiction. That's what you have with the story of the Biblical Jesus. Do you really believe his mother became impregnated by a ghost? An obvious fairy tale. Wake up to reality dude.

>

<

It would seem some still do not understand that the Jesus story is a fairy tale about a crucified product of a ghost of god that used to walk on water.

The SPECIFIC GRAVITY of the body of Jesus was the similar to OXYGEN, Carbon Dioxide or the GAS used in the BLIMPS when he ascended through the clouds.

Littlejohn · 06-26-2010, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlessNot

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Bless Not,

There's a difference between a fairy tale and a musterion. One should be careful to draw distinctions here. Or as LaRochefoucauld once noted:

Le vrai moyen d'être trompé, c'est de se croire plus fin que les autres.[Maxim 127]
.

Any intelligent person is able to separate truth from fiction. That's what you have with the story of the Biblical Jesus. Do you really believe his mother became impregnated by a ghost? An obvious fairy tale. Wake up to reality dude.
.

Totally agree! ... Everything must be dealt with a minimum of "grano salis" .. The fact that counterfeiters have mixed together truth with hallucinating lies, does not mean that everything is to throw to the 'nettles'!... It is need endeavor, through extensive research and comparisons of data collected, to separate truth from lies ...

Only then it becomes really a service to history and, above all, thus only it is possible to put the faithful in front of solid elements of reflection, so that they can freely decide whether to continue to believe or not to an institution guilty of more than 18 centuries of hallucinating deceptions against humanity, which still today suffers of anachronistic consequences!

Greetings

Littlejohn

.

aa5874 · 06-26-2010, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlessNot

Any intelligent person is able to separate truth from fiction. That's what you have with the story of the Biblical Jesus. Do you really believe his mother became impregnated by a ghost? An obvious fairy tale. Wake up to reality dude.
.

Totally agree! ... Everything must be dealt with a minimum of "grano salis" .. The fact that counterfeiters have mixed together truth with hallucinating lies, does not mean that everything is to throw to the 'nettles'!... It is need endeavor, through extensive research and comparisons of data collected, to separate truth from lies ...

Well, please state exactly what you know NOW about Jesus that must not be thrown out.

Perhaps millions of people for the last 1900 years have SIFTED through the available evidence and have come up EMPTY-HANDED.

In your extensive research what sources of antiquity outside of the "counterfeiters" mentioned Jesus of Nazareth? What sources external of the "counterfeiters" claimed Jesus did live in Galilee for about thirty years, was worshiped as a God and given a name that SURPASSED the Roman Emperors before the Fall of the Temple and that the every Roman citizen including the Emperors Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero should BOW to him?

It would appear to me that the Jesus story was entirely fabricated with respect to Jesus, his disciples and the Pauline writers since no historical sources of antiquity outside of the "counterfeiters" accounted for them.

Those who are DUPED still believe just like those believers of antiquity who wrote that Jesus was TRULY the offspring of a Ghost of God, actually walked on the sea, transfigured, resurrected and then FLOATED (ascended) or something to an unknown part of space.

arnoldo · 06-26-2010, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by Littlejohn

Totally agree! ... Everything must be dealt with a minimum of "grano salis" .. The fact that counterfeiters have mixed together truth with hallucinating lies, does not mean that everything is to throw to the 'nettles'!... It is need endeavor, through extensive research and comparisons of data collected, to separate truth from lies ...

Well, please state exactly what you know NOW about Jesus that must not be thrown out.

Perhaps millions of people for the last 1900 years have SIFTED through the available evidence and have come up EMPTY-HANDED.

In your extensive research what sources of antiquity outside of the "counterfeiters" mentioned Jesus of Nazareth? What sources external of the "counterfeiters" claimed Jesus did live in Galilee for about thirty years, was worshiped as a God and given a name that SURPASSED the Roman Emperors before the Fall of the Temple and that the every Roman citizen including the Emperors Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero should BOW to him?

It would appear to me that the Jesus story was entirely fabricated with respect to Jesus, his disciples and the Pauline writers since no historical sources of antiquity outside of the "counterfeiters" accounted for them.

Those who are DUPED still believe just like those believers of antiquity who wrote that Jesus was TRULY the offspring of a Ghost of God, actually walked on the sea, transfigured, resurrected and then FLOATED (ascended) or something to an unknown part of space.

The attribution of supernatural attributes to person(s) does not automatically equal myth. For example, Alexander the Great was attributed to being the offspring of Zeus.

Quote:

According to the ancient Greek historian Plutarch, Olympias, on the eve of the consummation of her marriage to Philip, dreamed that her womb was struck by a thunder bolt, causing a flame that spread "far and wide" before dying away. Some time after the wedding, Philip was said to have seen himself, in a dream, sealing up his wife's womb with a seal upon which was engraved the image of a lion.[2] Plutarch offers a variety of interpretations of these dreams: that Olympia was pregnant before her marriage, indicated by the sealing of her womb; or that Alexander's father was Zeus. Ancient commentators were divided as to whether the ambitious Olympias promulgated the story of Alexander's divine parentage, some claiming she told Alexander, others that she dismissed the suggestion as impious.[2]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great

aa5874 · 06-26-2010, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arnoldo

The attribution of supernatural attributes to person(s) does not automatically equal myth. For example, Alexander the Great was attributed to being the offspring of Zeus....

Are you claiming that Jesus of Nazareth has already been established as an historical person like Alexander the Great?

It must be obvious that the claim that Alexander the Great was the offspring of Zeus was NOT the deciding factor for his historicity.

You must know that no historian of antiquity wrote one thing of Jesus of Nazareth. Not even that he was from Nazareth or that there was a city called Nazareth.

But, Josephus who lived in Galilee wrote about Alexander the Great.

See Antiquities of the Jews XVI.

Now please answer me.

Please state exactly what you know NOW about Jesus that must not be thrown out?

I did not ask you anything about Alexander the Great.

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

06-25-2010, 09:30 PM	#11
Mars Man Regular Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Aida, Matsumoto, Japan Posts: 129	When I have a bit more time, I'd hope to get back here more fully, yet thought it might be productive to clarify that I am more fundamentally taking the position that there was a Jewish male whose name was Yeshua, who was active in formulating some sub-cult within peripheral Jewish belief system. I have no qualms with the understanding of embellishment (as you have demonstrated with those 10 points, aa5874)

06-25-2010, 11:20 PM	#14
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Bless Not, There's a difference between a fairy tale and a musterion. One should be careful to draw distinctions here. Or as LaRochefoucauld once noted: Le vrai moyen d'être trompé, c'est de se croire plus fin que les autres.[Maxim 127]

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.