Cathedra, Time Only Passes, Upheld, Collapse

All posts prior to 16-04-05 have been archived here.
KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:46 am

snuff wrote:Yep cos I was fuckin disgusted by the lyrics to that song... what happened there was a NATURAL disaster, not something that happened because they have different beliefs


What?...don't claim that you fruit. Our song doesn't mean that at all.
You should come to me and question what the song means before yelling it from the roof tops.

User avatar
PertHJ
Inventor of 'LOAL'
Posts: 19687
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 8:53 pm
Location: Milano

Postby PertHJ » Fri Apr 15, 2005 9:58 am

admitidly I did read those lyrics as

"you ask us for help but you don't believe in our christian god so sux to be you you brought this upon yourself"

and I'm your mate - Ive known you for years, I know you are a really nice guy, and I still read the lyrics like that.

so I think the lyrics are a bit of a worry.

I really don't wanna get into this argument coz you and steph etc are great mates and its cool that we are mates even though we probably disagree strongly with about 90% of each others views.
http://hungjurynz.bandcamp.com/
http://www.discogs.com/user/pertHJ

Drinking beers, hell yeah!! Smoking dope, KICK TO THROAT!!

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 11:34 am

Hey Rupert. Yea, we do disagree on heaps, but whos cares right? We are all different. Oh yea....here's a correct summary of that song...since I wrote it and all..

"They pray and pray to their idols day in, day out, and yet when tragedy strikes, and their gods make no show, I find it sad that all they do is return to those same idols again".....

But that's not what the song is about. It is more aimed at Christians. Because all those people over their are doing is turning to the one thing they know...their religion is their life. They don't know any other way. And the question the song is putting to Christians is...."what do we turn to in times of turmoil?....is it God?"

So that's that. The song in no way claims that they somehow caused the tsunami...I'm not that cold.

User avatar
Can I get an Amen
Posts: 169
Joined: Fri Jan 14, 2005 2:27 pm
Location: At the Altar
Contact:

Postby Can I get an Amen » Fri Apr 15, 2005 1:42 pm

Can I invoice you for the time I have wasted reading this bollocks

Ph!1
Posts: 23848
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 9:05 am

Postby Ph!1 » Fri Apr 15, 2005 3:08 pm

KapitiShem wrote:"They pray and pray to their idols day in, day out, and yet when tragedy strikes, and their gods make no show, I find it sad that all they do is return to those same idols again"....

HELLO!
when did yahweh ever show up to help anyone you fucking tool of evil?

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:01 pm

Wax wrote:when did yahweh ever show up to help anyone


Heard of the parting of the red sea?...you know...Moses.
Ezekiel called down fire from heaven and God answered...read that?

If you read the bible (which I guess you won't) you'll see tones of times. And if your gonna say "what about more recent times"....

I have heard soooo many stories of people getting healed...with medical proof.

But you don't even care right?

User avatar
nicholas hammond
Posts: 2220
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:29 pm
Location: f u
Contact:

Postby nicholas hammond » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:29 pm

anything thats not from the bible?
did you read this thread? did you read
But...your logic is utter twaddle. The Bible has never been proved flase? Ever heard of a little thing called the burden of proof?

You don't proof propositions false. You prove them correct.

It is possible that the Bible is not false does not equate to it is necessary that the Bible is true.

His analogy stands. You cannot prove a conclusion with reference to the conclusion in one of the premises. That is circular reasoning. You cannot prove the truth of the Bible with reference to Biblical scripture, as your opponent will not accept that the premise is true unless he accepts that the conclusion is true, and if he accepts the conclusion already, then why would you make an argument?


that in particular? read it again

especially
It is possible that the Bible is not false does not equate to it is necessary that the Bible is true.


that bit.

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:57 pm

The truth of the bible has been proven by historians.

People believe a theory that was thought up by one man, which has so many flaws (evolution)....and yet they cannot believe a book which was written by over 40 different authors, over the space of 4000 years, and inspired by God (as it says) which has no flaws.

It takes more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Tonnes of people on punkas rave on about how brainwashed Christians are....but yet they so easily embrace an idea which is taught in the public school system.

Science proves itself wrong time and time again. Science cannot prove the bible wrong....but it has given proof towards it's truth time and time again

User avatar
nicholas hammond
Posts: 2220
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:29 pm
Location: f u
Contact:

Postby nicholas hammond » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:04 pm

i dont believe in evolution.

how has the truth of the bible been proven? i think you mean.. SOME aspects of the bible have been proven. how come the bible hasnt been updated for 2000 odd years?

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:10 pm

captain dracula wrote:how come the bible hasnt been updated for 2000 odd years?

HAHAHAHHA

You said you were a Christian?!?!...Maybe you should read your bible dude. Mainly the last four verses of it.

Ph!1
Posts: 23848
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 9:05 am

Postby Ph!1 » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:51 pm

KapitiShem wrote:
Wax wrote:when did yahweh ever show up to help anyone


Heard of the parting of the red sea?...you know...Moses.
Ezekiel called down fire from heaven and God answered...read that?

If you read the bible (which I guess you won't) you'll see tones of times. And if your gonna say "what about more recent times"....

I have heard soooo many stories of people getting healed...with medical proof.

But you don't even care right?


il care if you can prove the bible is fact...aha :roll:
if you showed me conlusive evidence of faith healing (which you could not possibly have) il care, mind you your religion had thousands of people burnt alive for doing just that.

now, i have to say, you idiot, do you seriously think stories from the bible are proof of your invisble magical and all powerful god?
especially when he did all this stuff for his small group of followers thousands of years ago, why doesnt he do anything anymore?

arent modern christians as important as the 'chosen people' of old?
has his power waned in his old age?
does he just not care?

i have read the bible, ALOT, i was brought up christian, but left that shit behind when i was old enuff to think for myself.
i still read it from time to time, altho recently ive been reading the book of mormon as that is much funnier(theres your bible update cap drac)

its so easy to see dodgy thinking and well, stupidity in others, and not so easy yourself

i dont mean this as an insult, but i see some fucked up reasoning on your behalf, you really got some thinking to do bro, several years worth of.

simon
Posts: 2675
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 10:09 am
Location: auckland

Postby simon » Fri Apr 15, 2005 7:52 pm

Arent you the kid who said to lil Richy that edge kids wernt 'true' edge because they wernt christian?


Eh??? I never said that.... Boy, do rumours get around these days.... :roll:

Although I did say Josh Bain from Cord Willis was one of the best 'core' vocalists in NZ....

xSimonx
The Ost wrote:
toothbrush wrote:are you like a walking advert for steinlager or something?


I think "sitting" and "the endorsement of euthanasia by community consensus" were the terms you were looking for.

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 8:35 pm

Wax wrote:il care if you can prove the bible is fact

Na...you know you wouldn't.

Wax wrote:if you showed me conlusive evidence of faith healing (which you could not possibly have)

I work at a Christian Tv company, so I see healings all the time. www.tbn.org - you can stream it from their (Some shows to watch would be Dr Mark Chirona, Benny Hinn, 700 Club, Dr Marangu).

Wax wrote:your religion had thousands of people burnt alive for doing just that.

People have done a lot of wrong things in the name of religion, and in the name of God - doesn't mean they were doing as God wanted then to.

Wax wrote:he did all this stuff for his small group of followers thousands of years ago, why doesnt he do anything anymore?...
.....has his power waned in his old age?
does he just not care?

"God is the same yesterday, today and forever"

Ph!1
Posts: 23848
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 9:05 am

Postby Ph!1 » Fri Apr 15, 2005 8:45 pm

:lol: lol

benny hinn? ahahahah

in one thread you tell someone not to assume what you believe, but you go ahead and assume, somewhat stupidly, that i wouldnt care if the bible was for real, even after i stated the contrary..

:roll: moron.

KapitiShem
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:40 am
Location: Kapiti
Contact:

Postby KapitiShem » Fri Apr 15, 2005 8:54 pm

There already is so much proof, and you don't believe it to be true.
Your words are proof enough for me to asume you don't care. If you did care, you wouldn't mock the same person who is atleast making an attempt to give you proof.

User avatar
nicholas hammond
Posts: 2220
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:29 pm
Location: f u
Contact:

Postby nicholas hammond » Fri Apr 15, 2005 8:55 pm

where is the proof though? seriously, something that proves the bible to be true so that he can believe those phrases?

Ph!1
Posts: 23848
Joined: Mon Sep 02, 2002 9:05 am

Postby Ph!1 » Fri Apr 15, 2005 9:05 pm

KapitiShem wrote:There already is so much proof, and you don't believe it to be true.
Your words are proof enough for me to asume you don't care. If you did care, you wouldn't mock the same person who is at least making an attempt to give you proof.


if thats an honest attempt then dude, i dunno about you ay, that was pretty piss poor, ive had some pretty convincing discussions with some very intelligent people, and one thing that they have always had to concede me is that there is no proof

christian religion is all about 'faith' if you have 'faith' then you will know, 'faith is proof' 'once you have faith you dont need proof' 'have faith, and jesus will show you the way'

basically, it boils down to "we have no proof, but if you believe it without proof, then it will be as if it was proven"

you must believe in order to believe..

its a paradox mate... :roll:

Any Day Now
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Lower Fucking Hutt
Contact:

Postby Any Day Now » Fri Apr 15, 2005 10:13 pm

IT'S US!!! WE'RE GOD!!

User avatar
slaughter
C.U.N.T.
Posts: 7639
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 4:23 pm

Postby slaughter » Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:47 am

KapitiShem wrote:God is outside of time...He created time...but to try and imagine life with the boundaries of time is just way to crazy for our little brains to comprehend aye.


this almost made me go have a choke wank. so hot right now.

its no use wax, when one has been godded so much as this guy theres no turning back.

expect for maybe drugs.

the bible is a shit book.
ImageImageImageImageImage
dclxvi wrote:i recently bought myself a bottle of canadian club, now i have a hole in a door to fix, and a broken lock to replace

deeble
Posts: 182
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2002 8:02 pm

Postby deeble » Thu Apr 21, 2005 12:07 pm

This is the stupidist topic of debate i have seen on these forums of late. Kapti shem, be quiet...you aren't doing christinaity any favours by having stupid debates over things you obviously haven't considered and studied yourself. It's a bit like the creation science stuff i've read at some churches, trying to argue against a theory they don't understand and the only reason they are arguing against it is because of some sort of insecurity with dealing with another world view. And as if making points on a message board to try and change people's mind is going to work...wipe the dust from you feet and leave.

My opinion on all this stuff is that the only belief you can have that is truly sound in terms of philosphy and science is to be an agnostic. To say there is no God is illogical, because it effectivily believes in no beggining or cause of something. Likewise to say there is a God seems hard to explain, ie what created God, where is God in the world today...etc. This leaves the most philosophically acceptable option of belief being...."we just don't know".

however, i choose to take a punt because of what personally makes sense to me and say that there is a God. It seems totally crazy to me that the world would exist without some sort of power or entity that oversees the world and created it. If there is no God, then i would rather be dead because in a sense that is what i am, merely some sort of non exisitent being in relatavist world...i could be a thought and my life and these hands typing could not exist afterall. This idea has scared me and seemed completely illogical since i was a child. I most certainly believe in a God from what i see everyday in the world, from my own personal experience and from the observations of others and most humans. The question for me is who is that God and what does he do. The gospel of Jesus Christ personally sums up God best for me and absolutely believe that Jesus Christ, God the Father and the Holy Spirit form the God that seems logical to me. Jesus makes peronal sense to me. Some of this belief rests on facts and ideas...for example, the knowledge that Jesus definitly existed and walked the earth, the rapid spread of christianity. However a certain part of my belief involves things that can't be nessecally proven absolutely..like the stories and testimonys of other christians, healings and events where God seems to have shown a physical presence, and things like the resurrection. And then a cetain part goes down to a level of pure philosphy and faith....
with the whole creation evolution argument i don't see a point to it. the story of creation in genesis 1&2 is not a scientifc one. It is a philosophical and spiritual story which has more power than anything scientific, because of it's universal nature. For example, if 4000 years ago whoever wrote genesis started with "in the begining there was an explosion and blah blah...then these chemical elements fused together to make a single celled organism and God intended this process to occur..." it would have no currency for most of history. Most people couldn't give a shit how the earth is created they want to know why! A peasant farming in isreal 2000 years ago wouldn't have much of an interest in the science, that provides them very little of which to understand their own situation. However when the creation story is interpreted properly it has universal appeal as literature to all people. It explains that there is a God behind creation, that he created everything and created humans in a way that reveals part of his own emotions, character and image and our eventual downfall. This makes sense to all people over history.
basically i can't see the point in arguing over this stuff on the internet, very few people are willing to let down their guards to really see what the other side is saying. it all does come down to faith, not plain blind faith (there are some guides to help us believe what we do), but a true trust in something you can't completely quantify, make out or understand is required. this can't be argued, i believe people really need to investigate or have an interest in it themselves to understand it, not a combatitive attidute.
this was probably really confused and didn't make any sense and i'll probably change my mind on my way of explaining what i believe but anyway considering my own frailties and doubts and lack of intelligence. i don't intend to argue it or vigarously defend it, you can probably put massive wholes in what i said anyway.

User avatar
PertHJ
Inventor of 'LOAL'
Posts: 19687
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 8:53 pm
Location: Milano

Postby PertHJ » Thu Apr 21, 2005 1:28 pm

KapitiShem wrote:The truth of the bible has been proven by historians.

People believe a theory that was thought up by one man, which has so many flaws (evolution)....and yet they cannot believe a book which was written by over 40 different authors, over the space of 4000 years, and inspired by God (as it says) which has no flaws.

It takes more faith to believe in evolution than in God. Tonnes of people on punkas rave on about how brainwashed Christians are....but yet they so easily embrace an idea which is taught in the public school system.

Science proves itself wrong time and time again. Science cannot prove the bible wrong....but it has given proof towards it's truth time and time again


Yeah you are right the thruth of the bible has been 'proven' by historians.....lots of them have shown that lots (if not all) was made up by Constantine and his cronies.

how does it take more faith to believe in evolution than god? Ive been subjected to both ideas most of my life and evolution is a winner for me (although I think it's quite possible to believe in BOTH)

[sarcasm]40 authurs over 4000 years!!! wow that must be REALLY acurate.[/sarcasm]

yeah science prooves its self wrong, that's how knew ideas are formed. Scientists are continually questioning each other and thats why knew discoveries are found.

And I'm not entirely sure how you can bag science so much coz without it you wouldn't be playing your bass guitar or using your computer to access the internet and post on punkas. You probably wouldn't even be alive without science progress made in medical science.
http://hungjurynz.bandcamp.com/
http://www.discogs.com/user/pertHJ

Drinking beers, hell yeah!! Smoking dope, KICK TO THROAT!!

Any Day Now
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Lower Fucking Hutt
Contact:

Postby Any Day Now » Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:44 pm

The Origins of Christianity and
the Quest for the Historical Jesus Christ
by Acharya S
Introduction

Around the world over the centuries, much has been written about religion, its meaning, its relevance and contribution to humanity. In the West particularly, sizable tomes have been composed speculating upon the nature and historical background of the main character of Western religions, Jesus Christ. Many have tried to dig into the precious few clues as to Jesus's identity and come up with a biographical sketch that either bolsters faith or reveals a more human side of this godman to which we can all relate. Obviously, considering the time and energy spent on them, the subjects of Christianity and its legendary founder are very important to the Western mind and culture.
The Controversy

Despite all of this literature continuously being cranked out and the significance of the issue, in the public at large there is a serious lack of formal and broad education regarding religion and mythology, and most individuals are highly uninformed in this area. Concerning the issue of Christianity, for example, the majority of people are taught in most schools and churches that Jesus Christ was an actual historical figure and that the only controversy regarding him is that some people accept him as the Son of God and the Messiah, while others do not. However, whereas this is the raging debate most evident in this field today, it is not the most important. Shocking as it may seem to the general populace, the most enduring and profound controversy in this subject is whether or not a person named Jesus Christ ever really existed.

Although this debate may not be evident from publications readily found in popular bookstores1, when one examines this issue closely, one will find a tremendous volume of literature that demonstrates, logically and intelligently, time and again that Jesus Christ is a mythological character along the same lines as the Greek, Roman, Egyptian, Sumerian, Phoenician, Indian or other godmen, who are all presently accepted as myths rather than historical figures2. Delving deeply into this large body of work, one uncovers evidence that the Jesus character is based upon much older myths and heroes from around the globe. One discovers that this story is not, therefore, a historical representation of a Jewish rebel carpenter who had physical incarnation in the Levant 2,000 years ago. In other words, it has been demonstrated continually for centuries that this character, Jesus Christ, was invented and did not depict a real person who was either the "son of God" or was "evemeristically" made into a superhuman by enthusiastic followers3.
History and Positions of the Debate

This controversy has existed from the very beginning, and the writings of the "Church Fathers" themselves reveal that they were constantly forced by the pagan intelligentsia to defend what the non-Christians and other Christians ("heretics")4 alike saw as a preposterous and fabricated yarn with absolutely no evidence of it ever having taken place in history. As Rev. Robert Taylor says, "And from the apostolic age downwards, in a never interrupted succession, but never so strongly and emphatically as in the most primitive times, was the existence of Christ as a man most strenuously denied."5 Emperor Julian, who, coming after the reign of the fanatical and murderous "good Christian" Constantine, returned rights to pagan worshippers, stated, "If anyone should wish to know the truth with respect to you Christians, he will find your impiety to be made up partly of the Jewish audacity, and partly of the indifference and confusion of the Gentiles, and that you have put together not the best, but the worst characteristics of them both."6 According to these learned dissenters, the New Testament could rightly be called, "Gospel Fictions."7

A century ago, mythicist Albert Churchward said, "The canonical gospels can be shown to be a collection of sayings from the Egyptian Mythos and Eschatology."8 In Forgery in Christianity, Joseph Wheless states, "The gospels are all priestly forgeries over a century after their pretended dates."9 Those who concocted some of the hundreds of "alternative" gospels and epistles that were being kicked about during the first several centuries C.E. have even admitted that they had forged the documents.10 Forgery during the first centuries of the Church's existence was admittedly rampant, so common in fact that a new phrase was coined to describe it: "pious fraud."11 Such prevarication is confessed to repeatedly in the Catholic Encyclopedia.12 Some of the "great" church fathers, such as Eusebius13, were determined by their own peers to be unbelievable liars who regularly wrote their own fictions of what "the Lord" said and did during "his" alleged sojourn upon the earth.14
The Proof

The assertion that Jesus Christ is a myth can be proved not only through the works of dissenters and "pagans" who knew the truth - and who were viciously refuted or murdered for their battle against the Christian priests and "Church Fathers" fooling the masses with their fictions - but also through the very statements of the Christians themselves, who continuously disclose that they knew Jesus Christ was a myth founded upon more ancient deities located throughout the known ancient world. In fact, Pope Leo X, privy to the truth because of his high rank, made this curious declaration, "What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!"15 (Emphasis added.) As Wheless says, "The proofs of my indictment are marvellously easy."
The Gnostics

From their own admissions, the early Christians were incessantly under criticism by scholars of great repute who were impugned as "heathens" by their Christian adversaries. This group included many Gnostics, who strenuously objected to the carnalization of their deity, as the Christians can be shown to have taken many of the characteristics of their god and godman from the Gnostics, meaning "Ones who know," a loose designation applied to members of a variety of esoteric schools and brotherhoods. The refutations of the Christians against the Gnostics reveal that the Christian godman was an insult to the Gnostics, who held that their god could never take human form.16
Biblical Sources

It is very telling that the earliest Christian documents, the Epistles attributed to "Paul," never discuss a historical background of Jesus but deal exclusively with a spiritual being who was known to all gnostic sects for hundreds to thousands of years. The few "historical" references to an actual life of Jesus cited in the Epistles are demonstrably interpolations and forgeries, as are, according to Wheless, the Epistles themselves, as they were not written by "Paul."17 Aside from the brief reference to Pontius Pilate at 1 Timothy 6:13, an epistle dated ben Yehoshua to 144 CE and thus not written by Paul, the Pauline literature (as pointed out by Edouard Dujardin) "does not refer to Pilate18, or the Romans, or Caiaphas, or the Sanhedrin, or Herod19, or Judas, or the holy women, or any person in the gospel account of the Passion, and that it also never makes any allusion to them; lastly, that it mentions absolutely none of the events of the Passion, either directly or by way of allusion."20 Dujardin additionally relates that other early "Christian" writings such as Revelation do not mention any historical details or drama.21 Mangasarian notes that Paul also never quotes from Jesus's purported sermons and speeches, parables and prayers, nor does he mention Jesus's supernatural birth or any of his alleged wonders and miracles, all which one would presume would be very important to his followers, had such exploits and sayings been known prior to "Paul."22

Turning to the gospels themselves, which were composed between 170-180 C.E.22a, their pretended authors, the apostles, give sparse histories and genealogies of Jesus that contradict each other and themselves in numerous places. The birthdate of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times. His birth and childhood are not mentioned in "Mark," and although he is claimed in "Matthew" and "Luke" to have been "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill prophecy."23 He is said in the first three (Synoptic) gospels to have taught for one year before he died, while in "John" the number is three years. "Matthew" relates that Jesus delivered "The Sermon on the Mount"24 before "the multitudes," while "Luke" says it was a private talk given only to the disciples. The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each other, and no one states how old he was when he died.25 Wheless says, "The so-called 'canonical' books of the New Testament, as of the Old, are a mess of contradictions and confusions of text, to the present estimate of 150,000 and more 'variant readings,' as is well known and admitted."26 In addition, of the dozens of gospels, ones that were once considered canonical or genuine were later rejected as "apocryphal" or spurious, and vice versa. So much for the "infallible Word of God" and "infallible" Church! The confusion exists because the Christian plagiarists over the centuries were attempting to amalgamate and fuse practically every myth, fairytale, legend, doctrine or bit of wisdom they could pilfer from the innumerable different mystery religions and philosophies that existed at the time. In doing so, they forged, interpolated, mutilated, changed, and rewrote these texts for centuries.27
Non-Biblical Sources

Basically, there are no non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any known historian of the time during and after Jesus's purported advent. Walker says, "No literate person of his own time mentioned him in any known writing." Eminent Hellenistic Jewish historian and philosopher Philo (20 B.C.E.-50 C.E.), alive at the purported time of Jesus, makes no mention of him. Nor do any of the some 40 other historians who wrote during the first one to two centuries of the Common Era. "Enough of the writings of [these] authors . . . remain to form a library. Yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ."28 Their silence is deafening testimony against the historicizers.

In the entire works of the Jewish historian Josephus, which constitute many volumes, there are only two paragraphs that purport to refer to Jesus. Although much has been made of these "references," they have been dismissed by all scholars and even by Christian apologists as forgeries, as have been those referring to John the Baptist and James, "brother" of Jesus. Bishop Warburton labeled the Josephus interpolation regarding Jesus as "a rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too."29 Wheless notes that, "The first mention ever made of this passage, and its text, are in the Church History of that 'very dishonest writer,' Bishop Eusebius, in the fourth century. . . CE [Catholic Encyclopedia] admits . . . the above cited passage was not known to Origen and the earlier patristic writers." Wheless, a lawyer, and Taylor, a minister, agree that it was Eusebius himself who forged the passage.

Regarding the letter to Trajan supposedly written by Pliny the Younger, which is one of the pitifully few "references" to Jesus or Christianity held up by Christians as evidence of the existence of Jesus, there is but one word that is applicable - "Christian" - and that has been demonstrated to be spurious, as is also suspected of the entire letter. Concerning the passage in the works of the historian Tacitus, who did not live during the purported time of Jesus but was born two decades after his purported death, this is also considered by competent scholars as an interpolation and forgery.30 Christian defenders also like to hold up the passage in Suetonius that refers to someone named "Chrestus" or "Chresto" as reference to their Savior; however, while some have speculated that there was a Roman man of that name at that time, the name "Chrestus" or "Chrestos," meaning "useful," was frequently held by freed slaves. Others opine that this passage is also an interpolation.

As these references and their constant regurgitation by Christian apologists, Dr. Alvin Boyd Kuhn says:

"The average Christian minister who has not read outside the pale of accredited Church authorities will impart to any parishioner making the inquiry the information that no event in history iis better attested by witness than the occurences in the Gospel narrative of Christ's life. He will go over the usual citation of the historians who mention Jesus and the letters claiming to have been written about him. When the credulous questioner, putting trust in the intelligence and good faith of his pastor, gets this answer, he goes away assured on the point of the veracity of the Gospel story. The pastor does not qualify his data with the information that the practice of forgery, fictionizing and fable was rampant in the early Church. In the simple interest of truth, then, it is important to examine the body of alleged testimony from secular history and see what credibility and authority it possess.

"First, as to the historians whose works record the existence of Jesus, the list comprises but four. They are Pliny, Tacitus, Suetonius and Josephus. There are short paragraphs in the works of each of these, two in Josephus. The total quantity of this material is given by Harry Elmer Barnes in The Twilight of Christianity as some twenty-four lines. It may total a little more, perhaps twice that amount. This meager testimony constitutes the body or mass of the evidence of 'one of the best attested events in history.' Even if it could be accepted as indisputably authentic and reliable, it would be faltering support for an event that has dominated the thought of half the world for eighteen centuries.

"But what is the standing of this witness? Not even Catholic scholars of importance have dissented from a general agreement of academic investigators that these passages, one and all, must by put down as forgeries and interpolations by partisan Christian scribes who wished zealously to array the authority of these historians behind the historicity of the Gospel life of Jesus. A sum total of forty or fifty lines from secular history supporting the existence of Jesus of Nazareth, and they completely discredited!"30a

Of these "references," Dujardin says, "But even if they are authentic, and were derived from earlier sources, they would not carry us back earlier than the period in which the gospel legend took form, and so could attest only the legend of Jesus, and not his historicity." In any case, these scarce and brief "references" to a man who supposedly shook up the world can hardly be held up as proof of his existence, and it is absurd that the purported historicity of the entire Christian religion is founded upon them.31 As it is said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof"; yet, no proof of any kind for the historicity of Jesus has ever existed or is forthcoming.
The Characters

It is evident that there was no single historical person upon whom the Christian religion was founded, and that "Jesus Christ" is a compilation of legends, heroes, gods and godmen. There is not adequate room here to go into detail about each god or godman that contributed to the formation of the Jewish Jesus character; suffice it to say that there is plenty of documentation to show that this issue is not a question of "faith" or "belief." The truth is that during the era this character supposedly lived there was an extensive library at Alexandria and an incredibly nimble brotherhood network that stretched from Europe to China, and this information network had access to numerous manuscripts that told the same narrative portrayed in the New Testament with different place names and ethnicity for the characters. In actuality, the legend of Jesus nearly identically parallels the story of Krishna, for example, even in detail, as was presented by noted mythologist and scholar Gerald Massey over 100 years ago, as well as by Rev. Robert Taylor 160 years ago, among others.32 The Krishna tale as told in the Hindu Vedas has been dated to at least as far back as 1400 B.C.E.33 The same can be said of the well-woven Horus mythos, which also is practically identical, in detail, to the Jesus story, but which predates the Christian version by thousands of years.

The Jesus story incorporated elements from the tales of other deities recorded in this widespread area, such as many of the following world saviors and "sons of God," most or all of whom predate the Christian myth, and a number of whom were crucified or executed.33a

* Adad of Assyria
* Adonis, Apollo, Heracles ("Hercules") and Zeus of Greece
* Alcides of Thebes
* Attis of Phrygia
* Baal of Phoenicia
* Bali of Afghanistan
* Beddru of Japan
* Buddha of India
* Crite of Chaldea
* Deva Tat of Siam
* Hesus of the Druids
* Horus, Osiris, and Serapis of Egypt, whose long-haired, bearded appearance was adopted for the Christ character34
* Indra of Tibet/India
* Jao of Nepal
* Krishna of India
* Mikado of the Sintoos
* Mithra of Persia
* Odin of the Scandinavians
* Prometheus of Caucasus/Greece
* Quetzalcoatl of Mexico
* Salivahana of Bermuda
* Tammuz of Syria (who was, in a typical mythmaking move, later turned into the disciple Thomas35)
* Thor of the Gauls
* Universal Monarch of the Sibyls36
* Wittoba of the Bilingonese
* Xamolxis of Thrace
* Zarathustra/Zoroaster of Persia
* Zoar of the Bonzes





All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration and we are ALL one concioussness experiencing itself subjectively. There is NO SUCH THING as death, life is ONLY a dream, AND WE ARE THE IMAGINATION OF OURSELVES

Matt
Site Admin
Posts: 10638
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 7:15 pm
Location: Palmerston North
Contact:

Postby Matt » Thu Apr 21, 2005 2:54 pm

Did you just quote Bill Hicks? Haha!

Any Day Now
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Lower Fucking Hutt
Contact:

Postby Any Day Now » Thu Apr 21, 2005 3:05 pm

hahah yeaaaaaaaaah.


its relevant.......................

User avatar
sophiee
Posts: 1452
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 6:48 pm
Location: PNHC
Contact:

Postby sophiee » Sat Apr 23, 2005 8:25 pm

i REALLY dont want to get into this, BUT i have one question....

christians believe that jesus is going to return right? well, what i want to know is, if some man stood somewhere public and yelled out 'i am jesus christ' would ANYONE believe him??????? i really think not and this is where i raise the point that although christians are 'waiting' for jesus to return, if someone did claim to be him NO one would believe him.

so that draws us to the conclusion that christians will continue to claim that jesus is returning however, if jesus does return, no one will believe him and he will be considered mental.

yep.

Any Day Now
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Lower Fucking Hutt
Contact:

Postby Any Day Now » Sat Apr 23, 2005 10:37 pm

[quote="Papercut Suicide"if jesus does return, he will be considered metal[/quote]

selbstmord
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:14 pm

Postby selbstmord » Sun Apr 24, 2005 6:53 pm

The future teaches you to be alone
The present to be afraid and cold
So if I can shoot rabbits
Then I can shoot fascists

Bullets for your brain today
But we'll forget it all again
Monuments put from pen to paper
Turns me into a gutless wonder

And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
Will be next
Will be next
Will be next

Gravity keeps my head down
Or is it maybe shame
At being so young and being so vain

Holes in your head today
But I'm a pacifist
I've walked La Ramblas
But not with real intent

And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
Will be next
Will be next
Will be next
Will be next

And on the street tonight an old man plays
With newspaper cuttings of his glory days

And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
And if you tolerate this
Then your children will be next
Will be next
Will be next
Will be next

Any Day Now
Posts: 2740
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Lower Fucking Hutt
Contact:

Postby Any Day Now » Sun Apr 24, 2005 7:25 pm

hahah isnt that manic street preachers?

User avatar
sophiee
Posts: 1452
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2002 6:48 pm
Location: PNHC
Contact:

Postby sophiee » Sun Apr 24, 2005 10:47 pm

Any Day Now wrote:"if jesus does return, he will be considered metal"


:D well done!

fingers
SDC
Posts: 5122
Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2002 7:04 pm
Location: 04

Postby fingers » Thu Apr 28, 2005 12:11 pm

booooooohoooo hoooooo bitches.

:cry:


Return to “All archived posts prior to 16-04-05”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests