Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 07-13-2008, 08:44 AM

HJers have been using a passage found in Galations to claim that Jesus was just human, since Paul claimed he met the Lord's brother, but on examining the passage I found this argument to be pathetic and absurd.

Galations 1.19

Quote:

But other apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

In the first place to use Paul words to claim Jesus was just human destroys Paul's entire conversion, revelations and ministry.

Paul claimed that he was deliberately blinded by a bright light from Jesus in heaven who spoke to him and gave him instructions.

Now, if Jesus was just human, Paul's conversion story is the product of a madman, a conman or a delusional, possibly all three.

Paul claimed Jesus ROSE from the dead and ascended to heaven, if Jesus was just human, then Paul's resurrection and ascension stories are the product of a fraudster, a lunatic or a hallucinator, possibly a combination of all.

Paul claimed he received revelations from Jesus, even the words of Jesus in the Last Supper was revealed to him, but if Jesus was just human, Paul's revelation story is the product of madness, deception or sleep deprivation, possibly all three.

Eusebius in Church History claimed Paul was martyred, now if Jesus was just human, Paul would have died believing in his own deception, believing his own lies about Jesus being raised from the dead and giving him revelations.

So, if Galations 1.19 is used to claim Jesus was human, Paul WAS indeed a MADMAN, A CONMAN and DELUSIONAL who conned himself into his own death.

aa5874 · 08-04-2008, 11:09 AM

After reading Church History along with other Church writings I have come to realise that Jesus, the disciples and Paul are fiction.

The Church had no real history as described by Eusebius, at least up to Nero.

Eusebius produced only EAR-witnesses, that is, letters and second hand information that have not been substantiated outside of apologetic sources.

Eusebius appears to be confused. There were two Johns, two Peters called Cephas, more than one James, Saul is also called Paul. The book of Hebrews is cannonised yet no-one knows who wrote it. Justin Martyr did not mention any book called Hebrews.

Eusebius appear not know when the Synoptics were written and who wrote them. He appear not to know all who wrote the Epistles and when they were written.

Paul claimed he and his congregation had the gifts of the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues, yet no-other person after "Paul" claimed to be able to speak in tongues. Justin, Clement, Ignatius, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen or Eusebius did not claim they could speak in tongues , it would appear that speaking in tongues CEASED the day Paul died.

But, one of the most alarming and disturbing problem after reading Church History, is that it would appear that the Church, Eusebius or some other body or person had the ability to interpolate documents, without hindrance, which, with the interpolations would be publish and distributed as original and authentic.

Antiquities of the Jews is an example of this massive problem. The passage at "AJ 18.3.3" is regarded as not authentic, yet Antiquities of the Jews has been published with this interpolation for hundreds of years.

If "AJ18.3.3" was an error of a copyist, this error should have been recognised almost immediately and corrected. As soon as people would have read the passage, it would have been known instantly that there was an error, yet for hundreds of years, even today, the passage remains as if authentic.

Now what else have been modified, changed, interpolated, fabricated from whole cloth and invented just to distort history and who had the means to guarantee that whatever they claimed was history, true or not, written or oral, that it would be publish, distributed or repeated as true and authentic?

mountainman · 08-04-2008, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

After reading Church History along with other Church writings I have come to realise that Jesus, the disciples and Paul are fiction.

The Church had no real history as described by Eusebius, at least up to Nero.

...[trimmed a little] ...

Now what else have been modified, changed, interpolated, fabricated from whole cloth and invented just to distort history and who had the means to guarantee that whatever they claimed was history, true or not, written or oral, that it would be publish, distributed or repeated as true and authentic?

You mention creation of fiction and the modifications after the event but there is another aspect, that is the purposeful destruction of the literature which had been written by all accounts during the operiod of christian origins but which was NOT WHOLEHEARTEDLY PRESERVED ....

We need to explain the apochrypha and why it was deemed heretic. What do the apochryphal new testement writings reveal that was so damaging that these had to be suppressed, and hunted down and destroyed as "works of the disciples of the devil (perhaps Arius)"?

List of Apocrypha c.491 CE

Quote:

Chapter 5 - Decretum Gelasianum
LIKEWISE A LIST OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS

firstly we confess that the Synod of Sirmium called together by Constantius Caesar the son of Constantine through the Prefect Taurus is damned then and now and for ever.
the Itinerary in the name of Peter the apostle, which is called the nine books of the holy Clement apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Andrew apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Thomas apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Peter apocryphal
the Acts in the name of the apostle Philip apocryphal
the Gospel in the name of Mathias apocryphal
the Gospel in the name of Barnabas apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of James the younger apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of the apostle Peter apocryphum
the Gospel in the name of Thomas which the Manichaeans use apocryphum
the Gospels in the name of Bartholomew apocrypha
the Gospels in the name of Andrew apocrypha
the Gospels which Lucianus forged apocrypha
the Gospels which Hesychius forged apocrypha
the book on the infancy of the saviour apocryphus
the book of the nativity of the saviour and of Mary or the midwife apocryphus
the book which is called by the name of the Shepherd apocryphus
all the books which Leucius the disciple of the devil made apocryphi
the book which is called the Foundation apocryphus
the book which is called the Treasure apocryphus
the book of the daughters of Adam Leptogeneseos apocryphus
the cento on Christ put together in Virgilian verses apocryphum
the book which is called the Acts of Thecla and Paul apocryphus
the book which is called Nepos's apocryphus
the books of Proverbs written by heretics and prefixed with the name of holy Sixtus apocryphus
the Revelation which is called Paul's apocrypha
the Revelation which is called Thomas's apocrypha
the Revelation which is called Stephen's apocrypha
the book which is called the Assumption of holy Mary apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Adam apocryphus
the book about Og the giant of whom the heretics assert that after the deluge he fought with the dragon apocryphus
the book which is called the Testament of Job apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Origen apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of holy Cyprian apocryphus
the book which is called the Repentance of Jamne and Mambre apocryphus
the book which is called the Lots of the apostles apocryphus
the book which is called the grave-plate (?) of the apostles apocryphus
the book which is called the canons of the apostles apocryphus
the book Physiologus written by heretics and prefixed with the name of blessed Ambrose apocryphus
the History of Eusebius Pamphilii apocrypha
the works of Tertullian apocrypha
the works of Lactantius also known as Firmianus apocrypha
the works of Africanus apocrypha
the works of Postumianus and Gallus apocrypha
the works of Montanus, Priscilla and Maximilla apocrypha
the works of Faustus the Manichaean apocrypha
the works of Commodian apocrypha
the works of the other Clement, of Alexandria apocrypha
the works of Thascius Cyprianus apocrypha
the works of Arnobius apocrypha
the works of Tichonius apocrypha
the works of Cassian the Gallic priest apocrypha
the works of Victorinus of Pettau apocrypha
the works of Faustus of Riez in Gaul apocrypha
the works of Frumentius Caecus apocrypha
the cento on Christ stitched together from verses of Virgil apocryphum
the Letter from Jesus to Abgar apocrypha
the Letter of Abgar to Jesus apocrypha
the Passion of Cyricus and Julitta apocrypha
the Passion of Georgius apocrypha
the writing which is called the Interdiction of Solomon apocrypha
all amulets which are compiled not in the name of the angels as they pretend but are written in the names of great demons apocrypha
These and those similar ones, which

Simon Magus,
Nicolaus,
Cerinthus,
Marcion,
Basilides,
Ebion,
Paul of Samosata,
Photinus and Bonosus, who suffered from similar error, also
Montanus with his obscene followers,
Apollinaris,
Valentinus the Manichaean,
Faustus the African,
Sabellius,
Arius,
Macedonius,
Eunomius,
Novatus,
Sabbatius,
Calistus,
Donatus,
Eustasius,
Jovianus,
Pelagius,
Julian of Eclanum,
Caelestius,
Maximian,
Priscillian from Spain,
Nestorius of Constantinople,
Maximus the Cynic,
Lampetius,
Dioscorus,
Eutyches,
Peter and the other Peter, of whom one disgraced Alexandria and the other Antioch,
Acacius of Constantinople with his associates,

and what also all disciples of heresy and of the heretics and schismatics,
whose names we have scarcely preserved, have taught or compiled, we acknowledge is to be not merely rejected but eliminated from the whole Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church and with their authors and the followers of its authors to be damned in the inextricable shackles of anathema forever.

Best wishes,

Pete

aa5874 · 08-04-2008, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

You mention creation of fiction and the modifications after the event but there is another aspect, that is the purposeful destruction of the literature which had been written by all accounts during the operiod of christian origins but which was NOT WHOLEHEARTEDLY PRESERVED ....

We need to explain the apochrypha and why it was deemed heretic. What do the apochryphal new testement writings reveal that was so damaging that these had to be suppressed, and hunted down and destroyed as "works of the disciples of the devil (perhaps Arius)"?

The writings that have been left unburned with or without interpolations or wholly fabricated have the clues to solve the apparent fraud.

And we have the "fingerprints" of Eusebius.

We just need a match.

Ben C Smith · 08-04-2008, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The writings that have been left unburned with or without interpolations or wholly fabricated have the clues to solve the apparent fraud.

And we have the "fingerprints" of Eusebius.

We just need a match.

Why? So you can help Pete burn whatever writings are left?

Ben.

aa5874 · 08-04-2008, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The writings that have been left unburned with or without interpolations or wholly fabricated have the clues to solve the apparent fraud.

And we have the "fingerprints" of Eusebius.

We just need a match.

Why? So you can help Pete burn whatever writings are left?

Ben.

Ladies and gentlemen, I present Exhibit 1.

kiwimac · 08-05-2008, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotsmanmatt1

Are angels supposed to be beings that are readily seen, identifiable and accessible by humans? If not, what consequences does that have for your substantiation of #1?

Is the alleged event reported as a natural occurrence such as would be heard of it in that time period or it reported as a supernatural event that we wouldn't expect to be heard of in that time period? If the latter, then what consequences would that have on your subtantiation?

Same response on this as with #1.

I have already answered your questions. See Luke 1.30-31 & 34-35. You are just repeating the same questions over and over.

So your evidence is that you have not met an Angel? Or the Holy Spirit? I have never met you, prove to me that you are not simply a figment of my fevered imagination. You have, of course, attempted to 'queer the pitch' (as we say in the Cricket playing world) by insisting that apologetical information cannot be accepted. That you are entitled to do but you cannot then say there is no proof, what you should say rather is that there is only some proof you, personally, will accept.

aa5874 · 08-05-2008, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiwimac

So your evidence is that you have not met an Angel? Or the Holy Spirit? I have never met you, prove to me that you are not simply a figment of my fevered imagination.

I have never met anyone like Homer's Achilles, the son of a human and a god. I don't think I will ever meet Jesus, the son of a human and a god.

As soon as I meet some-one who is the offspring of an human and a god, I will recant and admit I was wrong about Achilles and Jesus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiwimac

You have, of course, attempted to 'queer the pitch' (as we say in the Cricket playing world) by insisting that apologetical information cannot be accepted. That you are entitled to do but you cannot then say there is no proof, what you should say rather is that there is only some proof you, personally, will accept.

Well, my "cricket" analogy would be a NO-BALL. A ball is bowled, and it is rejected as part of the OVER, yet it has increased the score of the opponent.

The authors of the NT and the Church writers bowled, it would appear, all NO-BALLS. 2000 years have passed and it is not OVER yet.

mountainman · 08-05-2008, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kiwimac

You have, of course, attempted to 'queer the pitch' (as we say in the Cricket playing world) by insisting that apologetical information cannot be accepted.

Apologetic information has no place in the field of ancient history, sorry but the year is 2008 and the human race has been down that rabbit hole for far too long now. Dont you know that your mann Jesus has been bowled out of the first century? We cannot find evidence for either Jesus or his followers in the entire first century.

Quote:

That you are entitled to do but you cannot then say there is no proof, what you should say rather is that there is only some proof you, personally, will accept.

Ancient history is a recognised academic field which has a plethora of sub academic fields which are tributary to it including archaeology, carbon dating technologies, magnetic resononance imagery, etc. It is a generally recognised fact in the field of ancient history that there is no valid evidence for your man jesus from the field of the evidence available from the first century of the common era. Apologists need to learn to live with the increasing perspicacity in the field of ancient history.

Best wishes,

Pete

mountainman · 08-05-2008, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ben C Smith

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

The writings that have been left unburned with or without interpolations or wholly fabricated have the clues to solve the apparent fraud.

And we have the "fingerprints" of Eusebius.

We just need a match.

Why? So you can help Pete burn whatever writings are left?

Ben.

According to my historical research it was Constantine who first got out the box of matches during the council of Nicaea in order to burn the written petitions prepared by the attendees whom he had summoned to attend his military supremacist council ---- in the presence of those attendees/petitioners. Hello? Hello? What was the Boss thinking?

But of course he cannot be perceived to be a maleovolent despot who burns the writings of the current crop of fourth century academicians, can he? Who was Porphyry? So why did the Boss burn the writings of the recognised leader of the academic world at that time? Hello? Hello? A despot is a despot, even if he sponsored christianity. (The question of course is whether he actually invented it).

I fail to understand how the academics here fail to understand what it may have been like at that time in the fourth century. Is George Bush allowed to burn the writings of contemporary academics? What if you were that contemporary academic? How would you feel? (We will leave aside the edicts for executions in addition to the burning for the moment).

Things went down hill from that moment.
Knowledge Burning by the 4th Century Christians

Best wishes,

Pete

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

08-04-2008, 11:09 AM	#1092
aa5874 Contributor Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: the fringe of the caribbean Posts: 18,988	After reading Church History along with other Church writings I have come to realise that Jesus, the disciples and Paul are fiction. The Church had no real history as described by Eusebius, at least up to Nero. Eusebius produced only EAR-witnesses, that is, letters and second hand information that have not been substantiated outside of apologetic sources. Eusebius appears to be confused. There were two Johns, two Peters called Cephas, more than one James, Saul is also called Paul. The book of Hebrews is cannonised yet no-one knows who wrote it. Justin Martyr did not mention any book called Hebrews. Eusebius appear not know when the Synoptics were written and who wrote them. He appear not to know all who wrote the Epistles and when they were written. Paul claimed he and his congregation had the gifts of the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues, yet no-other person after "Paul" claimed to be able to speak in tongues. Justin, Clement, Ignatius, Theophilus, Athenagoras, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen or Eusebius did not claim they could speak in tongues , it would appear that speaking in tongues CEASED the day Paul died. But, one of the most alarming and disturbing problem after reading Church History, is that it would appear that the Church, Eusebius or some other body or person had the ability to interpolate documents, without hindrance, which, with the interpolations would be publish and distributed as original and authentic. Antiquities of the Jews is an example of this massive problem. The passage at "AJ 18.3.3" is regarded as not authentic, yet Antiquities of the Jews has been published with this interpolation for hundreds of years. If "AJ18.3.3" was an error of a copyist, this error should have been recognised almost immediately and corrected. As soon as people would have read the passage, it would have been known instantly that there was an error, yet for hundreds of years, even today, the passage remains as if authentic. Now what else have been modified, changed, interpolated, fabricated from whole cloth and invented just to distort history and who had the means to guarantee that whatever they claimed was history, true or not, written or oral, that it would be publish, distributed or repeated as true and authentic?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.