aa5874

The Bible says Jesus was Fathered by a Ghost--that is Mythology.

It does NOT say Jesus was fathered by a human being.

The Bible is a compilation of Mythological stories about God and his Son Jesus.

What is so difficult to understand that the Greeks and Romans believed in Myth Gods and Sons of Gods??

Perseus the Son of the myth God Jupiter was born of a virgin. See Dialogue with Trypho.

Littlejohn

"..The Bible says Jesus was Fathered by a Ghost--that is Mythology..."


The mother of Jesus was a Virgin: this was WELL KNOWN to all jerusalemites (ie the inhabitants of Jerusalem), Mary's contemporaries and of her family of origin (a very rich family).

However, NEVER she affirmed to have had the two twins (Jesus and Judas Thomas) by the 'Holy Spirit', hallucinating as stupefying invention of the counterfeiter fathers who founded the catho-christianity, since his fellow citizens of Jerusalem knew exactly how she came to conceive the twins: through a Roman legionnaire, while she practiced the activity of prostitute. (not by chance, into Talmud we found that 'Miriam, the mother of Ben Stada, had sex with MANY MEN!')

It was the same Jesus who, outside Palestine - where no one again knew him - among the many lies that he said, in order to gain charisma among the credulous devotees who were fascinated by his 'magic arts' (illusory arts and 'sideshow' tricks learned in Egypt), also affirmed that the mother, a Virgin, was impregnated by a GOD of the GREEK-ROMAN PANTHEON!... So, NOT by the 'Holy Spirit', but by a God!


Littlejohn S

.

Sheshbazzar

Ἰησοῦν Num 27:18, Deut 18:15-19, Deut 34:9

+ Ἰησοῦν Hag 2:4,

+ Ἰησοῦν Zech 3:1-8

+ Ἰησοῦν Zech 6:11

+ Ἰησοῦν Zech 6:12
__________________________________________________ ______
Ἰησοῦν Matt 1:1, 1:21 & 25, Lu 1:31 & 2:21, Ἰησοῦν John 1:17

Its really the old mythology of Ἰησοῦν, that 'successor' appointed by 'Moses' to lead Yahweh's people to the 'Promised Land', and whom would be their גאל 'go'al' price paying kinsman 'redeemer', and responsible 'sin bearer', and the divine whipping boy for the whole House of Israel. (Jhn 5:46+Num 27:19)

Ἰησοῦν keeps popping up again and again as being the name of Yahweh's chosen Deliverer, High Priest and King.
An old Jewish mythology that was finally 'fleshed' out in the distorted 'Jebus Christ' mythology, to be retold to the whole world for generations into perpetuity.

But of course this is not 'THE END' to that story, because it is still being played out, with the fulfillment of Malachi 3:16-18 only coming at the end.

Littlejohn

"..Jebus Christ' mythology.."


This is pure dogmatism: irrational and fanatical as dogmatism of fideists! ... It is NOT the truth that you want to search, but only groped to prove, against all logic, that Jesus never existed ... Why? ... At thing all this aims?....


Littlejohn S

.

Sheshbazzar

I simply traced the christian Bible character Ἰησοῦν ὁ Χριστός back to its mythical beginnings, and its progressive development in the Biblical texts that resulted in the queer Ἰησοῦν ὁ Χριστός mythology of the so called 'New Testament'.

Everything about this character was cribbed from The LXX, including the perverted Greek name.
Not a man, not a god, nothing but an old tale swiped from the scrolls of the Jews.

A paper man fabricated on paper, to serve the paper legends of a paper god, ...and principally the greed of men.

I didn't make up this jackass mythical character's name. The HELLenists did that themselves some 2500 years ago, and as the record shows, the rest of the Ἰησοῦν ὁ Χριστός jackass story. Pronounce it as you will.

sotto voce

Greedy fruitcakes, eh.

:wave2:

Sheshbazzar

Actually I'm just being nice. I do have somewhat stronger terms to describe these whore-mongering, murdering, lying, thieves.

Littlejohn

What would be for you 'the evidence or credible sources'? ... An ancient document which accounts, word after word, as the events took place 20 centuries ago? ... Maybe even certified by a notary of the time?.......

Documents of this kind are certainly existed, at least until the middle of the fourth century (see Celsus, Porphyry, Hièrocles, etc..), then those who had an interest in keeping hidden the historical truth, destroyed or however did disappear these documents 'embarrassing', absolutely incompatible with the lies of the clergy who founded the catho-christianity, given the hallucinating difference between the historical Jesus and the Jesus of 'faith'.

Today of such a truth remain only 'crumbs': data scattered here and there in the GLOBAL literature, ie inclusive of ALL the sources, whether Christian or not, which may provide useful data, which are 'diluted' in very large number of texts .

It takes years and years of research and studies in order to retrieve this data from the sources that contain them, the which must first be identified: something that is not easy at all, since almost always clues that lead to them are 'encrypted', in the sense that they do not seem relate whit the character Jesus of Nazareth, but toward other characters. (if such evidences had been 'in clear', the sources addressed by them, NEVER would came down to us!)

At this point everyone can realize that the inability or unwillingness to spend the time searching for such clues (I same conduct my researches for over 16 years now), may push people more 'frustrated' to draw absurd theories, such as the one mythicist, precisely ', in the vain hope of explaining what it is absolutely impossible to explain with such theories, if not falling out into ridiculous! (*)

The following is a list of sources that testify to the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth.

1. pagan literature (Tacitus, Suetonius, Celsus, Porphyry, Hièrocles, Porphyry, Julian the Apostate, Lucian of Samosata, etc.);

2. Jewish literature;

3. rabbinic literature (Talmud and Toledoth Yeschu);

4. Gnostic literature (over 70 Gnostic sects with the center the figure of Jesus of Nazareth and all antagonistic to Catholicism);

5. Koranic literature;

6. Arabic literature in general;

7. Manichaean literature;

8. Mandaean literature.

All of these sources should be 'thrown to the winds' to allow you to continue to support the absurd mythicist theory?...

As a result, the testimony about Jesus and his mother Mary found in the Talmud and in Toledoth Yeschu, the Jews of the Diaspora suffered ghastly persecution on the part of satanic priests of the 'holy' Catholic inquisition.

Their books, INCLUDING THE SAME BIBLES, were systematically destroyed THROUGH pyres, on which often together the books were also burned their owners. Nevertheless, the rabbis regularly rebuilt what satanic catholics of the time did destroy, bringing in the new books all that was present in the texts destroyed, including news (embarrassing for the forger clergy) about Jesus and his mother!

If the jewish Jesus, who lived in Palestine 20 centuries ago, had never existed, then the rabbis would NEVER reported the news concerning Jesus in their SACRED texts (such as the Talmud, for example) and would had been the first to belie the catho-christian counterfeiters, if Jesus had been really a character of pure invention!...

At this point, I think, only a fool could argue that in the first century of our era it was possible to build a cult around a Jew ever existed, when even the most stupid of the Jews of the time would have been able to refute them! ... Not Littlejohn affirm it 'ad-hoc', because it is in the LOGIC of things!

If the counterfeiters of 19 centuries ago (II century of our era) wanted to build their worship around a character ever esisitito, they would go looking for him in the Far East, so that no one would be able to belie them easily and miserably.

Remember, once again, that is one thing to argue that the catho-christian worship was built by cynic counterfeiters, who sank with 'eagerly' the hands in pagan mythologies of the time (an aspect with which I totally agree), another thing, instead, is to argue that Jesus never existed and that the character that represents it was syncretically built starting by pre-existing mythological models.

To prove that the catho-christian cult and its 'sacred' literature are a shocking historical false, there is no need to deny to the bitter end the historicity of Jesus: a thing absurd and meaningless!... Who blindly pursues such a path, it must necessarily have a purpose ...


______________________________________

(*) - today more than 90% of the new works of a religious nature, concerning the figure of Jesus of Nazareth, are written by authors who do not put at all in doubt the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. These authors constitute the official erudition, the which is totally indifferent to the theory miticista, given its extreme improbability.


Littlejohn S

.

Sheshbazzar

Let us see how familiar you are with, and what it is that you believe about the content of the Bible.

Pray tell Littlejohn, (or anyone else) who is this Ἰησοῦν ?

Do you believe that the above statement is a solid historical fact, and this was how the name Ἰησοῦν really originated?

Or is it simply a highly imaginative STORY that was once written in an ancient Jewish sectarian 'just so' improvised 'national history' religious propaganda document?

Do you believe that the above Biblical statement is a solid historical fact, that in actual history, the invisable Elohim of the Jews ever actually spoke these words to anyone ?
That a historical Moses ever actually said and did all of those things the Bible states he both said and did ?

Or are they rather not simply writers compositions in an imaginative religious STORY to be found in an ancient Jewish sectararian 'just so' improvised 'national history' religious propaganda document?

Do you believe that the above Biblical statements are reports of solid historical facts, that these things ever literally and actually took place within any historical setting ?

Or are they rather not simply writers compositions in an highly imaginative STORY found within an ancient Jewish sectarian 'just so' religious propaganda document ?


.

Sheshbazzar

Need to add, I did not quote from the Greek just to show off. I did it for accuracy of quotation, and to avoid that inevitable fucking around with that particular Biblical name, Ἰησοῦν, that conventionally occurs within all so called christian 'translations' and 'Versions'.

There flat out never was any character or person known by the name 'Jesus' or 'Jesus Christ' in the 1st century, or until both the spelling and pronunciation became corrupted into Angelo Anglish English.
"You shall call his name JESUS" is one of the biggest religious lies that has ever been foisted off unto humanity.

Screw christian 'convention', let's get down to the FACTS. And stick with them.




.