Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Chili · 02-24-2012, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi Apostate Abe,

You may have forgotten that Jesus is only half human. Does that mean that we can be sure that he half existed?

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Logical

It seems like a forgone conclusion among serious scholars that Moses did not exist. There is some doubt about Jesus. But I've always been under the impression that everyone agrees that Muhammad was a historical figure.

Comments?

The arguments against a historical Muhammad would be about the same as the arguments against a historical Jesus: absence of impartial witnesses, evidence derived exclusively from witnesses of religious tradition, and the extraordinary claims of those traditions.

But Muhammad almost certainly existed for the same reason that Jesus almost certainly existed: whenever a cult adheres to a reputedly-human founder of the cult, then that person existed, in all cases that we know about. There are no known cases where the reputedly-human founder of the cult existed only as myth.

The people who advance the theory that Muhammad never existed are the same people who ideologically oppose the traditional beliefs of the religion. Again, a strong parallel is drawn to the Jesus-minimalists and Christianity. The rest of us need to take seriously the patterns of history, because probability depends largely on plausibility.

I thought he was half God and half man and not human at all, or at least was not supposed to be human at all.

Chili · 02-24-2012, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Grog

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Yes. Do you have an objection? To review, I said: "...whenever a cult adheres to a reputedly-human founder of the cult, then that person existed, in all cases that we know about. There are no known cases where the reputedly-human founder of the cult existed only as myth."

Well...

except in 3 major cases, Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism that rule of thumb is questioned.

I do grant L. Ron Hubbard and would add Joseph Smith as two verifiable human-founders, though.

If Muhammad's being was regarded as fictitious or seriously contested on pragmatic grounds than there should at least exist in circulation historical examples of dissenters (or even a party of rebels) that openly (or covertly, for that matter) challenged Muhammad's existence from roughly around the time period of his origin (give or take a century or two)/(e.g "rogue", or "suppressed" hadith literature elements), or even cross-cultural remnants and/or artifacts that would seem to suggest (otherwise). Instead, we possess a "purported letter sent by Muhammad to Heraclius, emperor of Byzantium", as well as other letters sent to regarded Heads-of-State.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhamma...Heads-of-State

It would be exceedingly difficult, and perhaps relatively counter-intuitive to maintain the physical existence of Jesus based on traditional Islamic sources. Theoretically, Jesus the Christ was raised bodily to heaven, therefore, substantial evidence for Jesus should, in actuality, disprove the very being of the Messiah (unless, you happen to adhere to the Ahmadiyya perspective and/or heterodox Muslim research suggesting the existence of an Eastern Jesus Christ/Saint Issar that traveled to Tibet and was eventually buried at Kashmir at the age of 120 years). Compounding this issue (further) is the Muslim claim, that as an ascetic, Jesus the Christ, possessed two material items, namely, a comb and a jug:

"Jesus, the Messiah, (pbuh) used to take nothing with him but a comb and a jug. The he saw a man combing his beard with his fingers, so he threw away the comb; and he saw another man drinking from a river with the palms of his hands, so he threw away the jug." [A non-specific hadith concerning Jesus Christ]

Likewise, there are currently no legitimate reasons to dispute the existence of Siddhārtha Gautama, based on traditional sources. He was not an obscure figure, but a well-known Prince from a supposedly noble lineage. The Buddha's father was King Śuddhodana (the leader of Sheikha clan) whose capital was Kapeel.

Yes but Jesus was not the Messiah, but insurrectionist who needed to die to set Christ free, and so from the cross told Mary who was standing at the foot of the cross: "Woman, there is your son" and said to the disciple standing beside her "there is your mother."

So no, Jesus was not bodily raised to heaven, and in fact in Matthew hell came crashing down on him. He was taken up in Luke that praises will go on in the Church Triumphant so that heaven may be known here on earth. They so propose destiny for both, in Matthew and in Luke.

Chili · 02-24-2012, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

[Compounding this issue (further) is the Muslim claim, that as an ascetic, Jesus the Christ, possessed two material items, namely, a comb and a jug:

"Jesus, the Messiah, (pbuh) used to take nothing with him but a comb and a jug. The he saw a man combing his beard with his fingers, so he threw away the comb; and he saw another man drinking from a river with the palms of his hands, so he threw away the jug." [A non-specific hadith concerning Jesus Christ]

So they made a Bhikkhu out of him and that sounds like 'bar-talk' to me. Likely meant as an insult coming from a Holy Book.

Quote:

Likewise, there are currently no legitimate reasons to dispute the existence of Siddhārtha Gautama, based on traditional sources. He was not an obscure figure, but a well-known Prince from a supposedly noble lineage. The Buddha's father was King Śuddhodana (the leader of Sheikha clan) whose capital was Kapeel.

Our Joseph was just a man too, and he was an upright carpenter and sheep rancher too with 12 shepherds on the go.

Pamela Spencer · 02-24-2012, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

[Compounding this issue (further) is the Muslim claim, that as an ascetic, Jesus the Christ, possessed two material items, namely, a comb and a jug:

"Jesus, the Messiah, (pbuh) used to take nothing with him but a comb and a jug. The he saw a man combing his beard with his fingers, so he threw away the comb; and he saw another man drinking from a river with the palms of his hands, so he threw away the jug." [A non-specific hadith concerning Jesus Christ]

So they made a Bhikkhu out of him and that sounds like 'bar-talk' to me. Likely meant as an insult coming from a Holy Book.

Hadiths are man-made narrations that are occasionally believed to be divinely inspired (e.g Hadith Qudsi). They do not constitute a "Holy Book", per say. Some narrations are of a syncretic nature and may be derived from (or perhaps, correlate with) Judaic or Gnostic sources. Gnostics often portrayed Jesus Christ as a Bhikku of sorts.

Pamela Spencer · 02-24-2012, 09:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

If Muhammad's being was regarded as fictitious or seriously contested on pragmatic grounds than there should at least exist in circulation historical examples of dissenters (or even a party of rebels) that openly (or covertly, for that matter) challenged Muhammad's existence from roughly around the time period of his origin (give or take a century or two)/(e.g "rogue", or "suppressed" hadith literature elements), or even cross-cultural remnants and/or artifacts that would seem to suggest (otherwise). Instead, we possess a "purported letter sent by Muhammad to Heraclius, emperor of Byzantium", as well as other letters sent to regarded Heads-of-State.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhamma...Heads-of-State

It would be exceedingly difficult, and perhaps relatively counter-intuitive to maintain the physical existence of Jesus based on traditional Islamic sources. Theoretically, Jesus the Christ was raised bodily to heaven, therefore, substantial evidence for Jesus should, in actuality, disprove the very being of the Messiah (unless, you happen to adhere to the Ahmadiyya perspective and/or heterodox Muslim research suggesting the existence of an Eastern Jesus Christ/Saint Issar that traveled to Tibet and was eventually buried at Kashmir at the age of 120 years). Compounding this issue (further) is the Muslim claim, that as an ascetic, Jesus the Christ, possessed two material items, namely, a comb and a jug:

"Jesus, the Messiah, (pbuh) used to take nothing with him but a comb and a jug. The he saw a man combing his beard with his fingers, so he threw away the comb; and he saw another man drinking from a river with the palms of his hands, so he threw away the jug." [A non-specific hadith concerning Jesus Christ]

Likewise, there are currently no legitimate reasons to dispute the existence of Siddhārtha Gautama, based on traditional sources. He was not an obscure figure, but a well-known Prince from a supposedly noble lineage. The Buddha's father was King Śuddhodana (the leader of Sheikha clan) whose capital was Kapeel.

Yes but Jesus was not the Messiah, but insurrectionist who needed to die to set Christ free, and so from the cross told Mary who was standing at the foot of the cross: "Woman, there is your son" and said to the disciple standing beside her "there is your mother."

Jesus did not fulfill his role as the Davidian Messiah that was expected of him by the Jewish people. Islamically, his anointed role as initiator of the Kingdom of Heaven, and Universal Messiah, is reserved for him during his Second Coming, where he is expected to fulfill the role of Second Adam/ Perfected Adam/ (the Adamic Archetype) or Insaan Kamil (i.e Perfect Man).

Since Jesus did not initially consummate his role as the Messiah, the Jews were inclined to reject him. However, some scholars claim that the Jews will gather around the figure known as "the Mahdi" (the Guide) and accept him as their Maschiach due to his "rule according to the Judgement of David and Solomon", supposed mastery of the Hebrew language, and potential lineage that derives from the line of Isaac. According to traditions, he is expected to uncover an unadulterated Torah scroll from Antioch.

Chili · 02-24-2012, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

[Compounding this issue (further) is the Muslim claim, that as an ascetic, Jesus the Christ, possessed two material items, namely, a comb and a jug:

"Jesus, the Messiah, (pbuh) used to take nothing with him but a comb and a jug. The he saw a man combing his beard with his fingers, so he threw away the comb; and he saw another man drinking from a river with the palms of his hands, so he threw away the jug." [A non-specific hadith concerning Jesus Christ]

So they made a Bhikkhu out of him and that sounds like 'bar-talk' to me. Likely meant as an insult coming from a Holy Book.

Hadiths are man-made narrations that are occasionally believed to be divinely inspired (e.g Hadith Qudsi). They do not constitute a "Holy Book", per say. Some narrations are of a syncretic nature and may be derived from (or perhaps, correlate with) Judaic or Gnostic sources. Gnostics often portrayed Jesus Christ as a Bhikku of sorts.

It's OK, just joking, and yes, the Gnostics were believers and not gnostic. To make this clear let me say that a gnostic is a Freeman and does not belong to an -ism and that puts then right next to sinners in the pew, or sheep the Jews called them, I think = no Saints for sure, but just a relgious sect of arrogant believers, perhaps.

Chili · 02-24-2012, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

Jesus did not fulfill his role as the Davidian Messiah that was expected of him by the Jewish people. Islamically, his anointed role as initiator of the Kingdom of Heaven, and Universal Messiah, is reserved for him during his Second Coming, where he is expected to fulfill the role of Second Adam/ Perfected Adam/ (the Adamic Archetype) or Insaan Kamil (i.e Perfect Man).

Since Jesus did not initially consummate his role as the Messiah, the Jews were inclined to reject him. However, some scholars claim that the Jews will gather around the figure known as "the Mahdi" (the Guide) and accept him as their Maschiach due to his "rule according to the Judgement of David and Solomon", supposed mastery of the Hebrew language, and potential lineage that derives from the line of Isaac. According to traditions, he is expected to uncover an unadulterated Torah scroll from Antioch.

Well that all sounds very nice but the first Adam was an illusion and the second was empowered illusion who called himself king so the Jews would crucify him To note here is that the second Adam needed the Jews to do away with the first Adam as they were the ones who had created him and lead him astray along the Pishon and Gihon where pleasure and pain was the name of the game. This is where the gold was said to be good and so the second Adam needed the Jews to change his mind on this and for that he needed to be die . . . and so they complied and ordered him to be crucified by the head of state (faculty of reasdon) who actually did see no fault with the man, but handed him over upon their persistent demand. To this then Jesus said "[thank you all] It is finished" and then introduced John as the Son of Man now fully Man in the Image of God (and certainly not the old Jewish ideal as his lineage goes past all al their historical greats right back past Adam to God (Lk.3:38).

So no, the second Adam may be archetypal but he is just to coccoon that must be left behind. In fact, I think we stepped on him to put Mary up high and crowned her Queen of Heaven and Earth, which then is capitalized as the New Heaven and Earth where the sea is no longer, and so walking on water is the name of the game and the true beauty of gold is in our ability to just potlatch it in Rome so we can.

If the Jews denied this Jesus they are waiting for the second coming, you say? I thought Christ moved to Rome and Jesus would come back as archetypal hero (second Adam to redeem the first Adam and so set the Man free).

Chili · 02-24-2012, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pamela Spencer

However, some scholars claim that the Jews will gather around the figure known as "the Mahdi" (the Guide) and accept him as their Maschiach due to his "rule according to the Judgement of David and Solomon", supposed mastery of the Hebrew language, and potential lineage that derives from the line of Isaac. According to traditions, he is expected to uncover an unadulterated Torah scroll from Antioch.

Mastery of the Hebrew language rieks with arrogance as Jesus came for the poor, and also when the banquet was called. Language has nothting to do with it as that is all by convention and that is precisely what leads humans astray, . . . no matter how complicated they managed to make it.

PhilosopherJay · 02-24-2012, 11:04 PM

Hi ApostateAbe,

From Wikipedia, Marcionism, "the Christology of the Marcionites is thought to have been primarily Docetic, denying the human nature of Christ."

From Plutarch's Life of Theseus

Quote:

The lineage of Theseus, by his father's side, ascends as high as to Erechtheus and the first inhabitants of Attica. By his mother's side he was descended of Pelops. For Pelops was the most powerful of all the kings of Peloponnesus, not so much by the greatness of his riches as the multitude of his children, having married many daughters to chief men, and put many sons in places of command in the towns round about him. One of whom named Pittheus, grandfather to Theseus, was governor of the small city of the Troezenians, and had the repute of a man of the greatest knowledge and wisdom of his time...
When Aethra was delivered of a son, some say that he was immediately named Theseus, from the tokens which his father had put @ under the stone; others that he received his name afterwards at Athens, when Aegeus acknowledged him for his son. He was brought up under his grandfather Pittheus, and had a tutor and attendant set over him named Connidas, to whom the Athenians, even to this time, the day before the feast that is dedicated to Theseus, sacrifice a ram, giving this honor to his memory upon much juster grounds than to Silanio and Parrhasius, for making pictures and statues of Theseus. There being then a custom for the Grecian youth, upon their first coming to man's estate, to go to Delphi and offer first-fruits of their hair to the god, Theseus also went thither, and a place there to this day is yet named Thesea, as it is said, from him.

Theseus was considered fully a human man and a religious cult did develop around him in ancient Greece. There is no evidence that he actually existed. From New World Encyclopedia:

Quote:

Though the topic has prompted some debate,[11] it appears that the cult of Theseus played an important role in Hellenistic religiosity. While the ancient Greeks did distinguish between heroes and gods (with the former category referring to deceased humans), this did not enjoin them from constructing shrines and temples to these former worthies. Theseus, as the founding hero of the Athenian deme, received particular attention, with an impressive heroa (hero temple) dedicated to him and containing his purported remains.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

Quote:

Originally Posted by ApostateAbe

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhilosopherJay

Hi Apostate Abe,

You may have forgotten that Jesus is only half human. Does that mean that we can be sure that he half existed?

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

I would say that would still count. However, no Christians I know in either antiquity nor modernity would believe that Jesus is half human. Christians typically define Jesus as both fully-God and fully-man, which is the Christology of the Nicene Creed.

Net2004 · 02-25-2012, 04:16 AM

MUHammad had a mother and father
Muhammad is not a miracle producing prophet.
Muhammad says in the Qur'aan that he is ONLY a man .
there are some muslims today who believe that muhammad was originally extra terrestrial or noor which preexisted all creation . the noor muhammad incarnated into the FLESH muhammad and walked the earth. but no suchIDEA exists in early islam which ties muhamamd to time and place and the Qur'aan clearly says MUHAMMAD is ONLY a man .

Inama ana basharun mithlukum

Only I a man like you

02-25-2012, 04:16 AM	#70
Net2004 Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: U.K Posts: 217	... MUHammad had a mother and father Muhammad is not a miracle producing prophet. Muhammad says in the Qur'aan that he is ONLY a man . there are some muslims today who believe that muhammad was originally extra terrestrial or noor which preexisted all creation . the noor muhammad incarnated into the FLESH muhammad and walked the earth. but no suchIDEA exists in early islam which ties muhamamd to time and place and the Qur'aan clearly says MUHAMMAD is ONLY a man . Inama ana basharun mithlukum Only I a man like you

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

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.