God to Jesus. I just condemned the human race. Now go die to save them.

[hortysir]

You have given out too much Reputation in the last 24 hours, try again later

See what I was saying about hate, a while back?

I was going to Neg you for the Hitler shit

 

[JimBowie1958]

This is not cash.
It is a human life.

Your analogy sucks as bad as your morals.

Regards
DL

Its the 'human life' of an immortal being who is omnicient and perfectly loving.

Your ability to analyze sux as does your objectivity.

Immortals can die. LOL.

Good analyzing there pal.

Regards
DL

In our faith we define 'death' as seperation of the spirit from the body. In the case of Christ, He existed prior to His taking human form, so His eternal spirit not only survived death but His death itself transcends time and is present in each mass.

You might try attempting to grasp the point of view of those you discuss things with before running your mouth.

 

[JimBowie1958]

He was still murdered and his body killed.

He died, yes, but look at how quickly he died.
He GAVE His life.

Jesus said----------my father who SENT me.

Thomas Paine, in Age of Reason, wrote:
If I owe a person money, and cannot pay him, and he threatens to put me in prison, another person can take the debt upon himself, and pay it for me. But if I have committed a crime, every circumstance of the case is changed. Moral justice cannot take the innocent for the guilty even if the innocent would offer itself. To suppose justice to do this, is to destroy the principle of its existence, which is the thing itself. It is then no longer justice. It is indiscriminate revenge.

This single reflection will show that the doctrine of redemption is founded on a mere pecuniary idea corresponding to that of a debt which another person might pay; and as this pecuniary idea corresponds again with the system of second redemptions, obtained through the means of money given to the church for pardons, the probability is that the same persons fabricated both the one and the other of those theories; and that, in truth, there is no such thing as redemption; that it is fabulous; and that man stands in the same relative condition with his Maker he ever did stand, since man existed; and that it is his greatest consolation to think so.

Paine presumes that the criminal is capable of paying the cost of the crime, but human beings cannot pay the price of their sin, which is etrnal seperation from God. And so Christ allowed Himself to be seperated for a time so that our debt was paid.

Paine's thinking is bound to temporal factors, but when seen from the eternal perspective, Christ did what He did for His own greater glory, His own love for us, and for the hope that we will turn from our sinful lives and serve God as we were designed to do. There is nothing immoral about that, in fact it is the highest exrepression of morality.

So not only is the killing of an innocent man immoral, but it shows that the redemption allegory being used is that of a financial debt. Which is an interesting parallel to the practice of purchasing 'pardons'.

Nothing happened to Jesus that He did not willfully allow to happen.

Free will to me is the ability to make a choice without coercion.

And that is your problem as that is not a workable definition of free will from a Christian perspective.

And it is unworkable from the most basic analysis anyway, since all choices have consequences, hence by your reasoning a free will choice is impossible if one has any comprehension of those consequences. The only free will possible would only come from abysmal and absolute ignorance.

No noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

Your arrogance is simply breathtaking, lol.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You read through a lens starkly with preconceptions.

God has His justifications that I don't have to ask Him for.
.

Hitler's S S said the same of Hitler.
Some likely cried for the Jews.

Regards
DL

Your assinine comparison of God to Hitler is evidence of your contempt for Christianity and Abrahamic religion as a whole.

But you will eventually pay the price for your arrogant iconoclasm as natural consequences will pile up and mke your life utterly miserable, though you might wear a plastic smile like Hugh Heffner does.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Note to GreatasIam

According to Matthew's--A man is saved if he believes in the words of Christ and praise the father.

This can be interpretted as follows---Jesus did not need to die in order for you, I or anyone else to be saved.

So why was Jesus executed?
Jesus was executed for teaching a message that was heretical in terms of Judaism. Considering that he(or better yet, his followers) claimed Jesus was a teacher(rabbi), messiah and, using the book of John --god, the Jews judged Jesus under the Laws of Leviticus which demanded his execution.

In short, Jesus died for bringing the christian message of salvation to the masses. Thus this is what is meant by "Jesus died for your sins"

Exactly, which is why in one instance He stated that He didn't come to replace the law, but rather to expand upon it. Currently at that time, the only ones who had a decent understanding of who God was were the Jews, but God wanted to have EVERYONE understand who He was, so He sent Yeshua to take the message to everyone else.

Matter of fact, when Yeshua was leaving Jerusalem to go see the man with demons that He cast into the pigs that went over a cliff, He was spotted by another Jew who recognized who He was and Yeshua told him to be quiet. However..........after He'd cast the demons out of the man (who was a Gentile, i.e. non Jewish) He told the man to go forth and tell everyone what God had done for him via Yeshua.

The main reason Yeshua was crucified is because of a backroom deal between the Jewish leaders and the Roman rule. The Jews wanted Him gone because He was stirring up the people, and the Romans wanted Him gone because the viewed Him as a threat.

The reason Judas hung himself in front of Caphias' tomb? Because Caphias had turned Yeshua over to the Romans when Judas was told that he wouldn't be, and defiling Caphias' family tomb was a way to exact revenge.

No..............Yeshua didn't come for the Jews, they already had a relationship with God (and as a matter of fact, Yeshua was Jewish), but rather He came here for the Gentiles (i.e. everyone else).

Matter of fact, there was talk among the disciples for a while as to whether or not they would require new followers to convert to Judaism.

Jesus had many opportunities to stop the process that led to His crucifixion.

He died for the simple reason that He came to this plane to do exactly that from the start.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Atheist cannot know what believers call the unfathomable God.
Only believers can delude themselves into believing that the unfathomable can be fathomed.

I am not an atheist BTW. I just have Godhead with morals.

The Dragon in My Garage - YouTube

Regards
DL

What is God's name?

To give the Godhead a name is to idol worship.

Lol, you obviously take yourself way too seriously.

 

[koshergrl]

Actually, he takes God seriously.

And that's okay.

 

[ERGO]

It is not merely Christ, divine son of God, that is an article of faith, but also the so-called "Jesus of history". A liturgy of carefully crafted "proofs", a hallowed parade of alleged witnesses, and a handful of dogmatically interpreted writings are the sacraments of this faith.

But what better explains a thousand different Jesuses than the single word: fiction

Was Jesus, like Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, a real historical figure to whom legends and myths became attached? Or, rather, like Huckleberry Finn or Sherlock Holmes a purely fictional character, passed off as a genuine personage or later historicized by other hands?

Perhaps the choice is not quite so clear cut: a person (perhaps several) were certainly in the mind of Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when they constructed their heroes. Twain drew inspiration from his own life. Doyle modeled much of the character of his detective on his own professor of medicine, a Dr Joseph Bell. Did that make Sherlock Holmes any less of a fiction? (Interestingly, Holmes's trademark “deerstalker” hat is never mentioned in Doyle's stories and the drop-step pipe was the contribution of actor William Gillette years later. That's how myths grow.)

With Jesus, most people feel more comfortable with the 'historical kernel' approach. It is intuitively satisfying to think that someone was behind the towering legend. We do, after all, have Christianity, and it is hard to give credence to the idea that someone "just made-up" Jesus Christ and then managed to convince anyone else to believe that he had lived and died. In fact, one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most people do.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Actually, he takes God seriously.

And that's okay.

Where is the evidence of that? Or do you accept it on faith?

 

[JimBowie1958]

It is not merely Christ, divine son of God, that is an article of faith, but also the so-called "Jesus of history". A liturgy of carefully crafted "proofs", a hallowed parade of alleged witnesses, and a handful of dogmatically interpreted writings are the sacraments of this faith.

But what better explains a thousand different Jesuses than the single word: fiction

Was Jesus, like Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, a real historical figure to whom legends and myths became attached? Or, rather, like Huckleberry Finn or Sherlock Holmes a purely fictional character, passed off as a genuine personage or later historicized by other hands?

Perhaps the choice is not quite so clear cut: a person (perhaps several) were certainly in the mind of Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when they constructed their heroes. Twain drew inspiration from his own life. Doyle modeled much of the character of his detective on his own professor of medicine, a Dr Joseph Bell. Did that make Sherlock Holmes any less of a fiction? (Interestingly, Holmes's trademark “deerstalker” hat is never mentioned in Doyle's stories and the drop-step pipe was the contribution of actor William Gillette years later. That's how myths grow.)

With Jesus, most people feel more comfortable with the 'historical kernel' approach. It is intuitively satisfying to think that someone was behind the towering legend. We do, after all, have Christianity, and it is hard to give credence to the idea that someone "just made-up" Jesus Christ and then managed to convince anyone else to believe that he had lived and died. In fact, one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most people do.

Lol, that is so absurd.

More was written about Christ in the ancient times than of any other person in history.

He was witnessed by thousands, even by His enemies centuries later carried the stories of His magical deeds. His own followers willingly went to their deaths beccause they were so certain of what they had personally witnessed.

You are a fool.

 

[ERGO]

It is not merely Christ, divine son of God, that is an article of faith, but also the so-called "Jesus of history". A liturgy of carefully crafted "proofs", a hallowed parade of alleged witnesses, and a handful of dogmatically interpreted writings are the sacraments of this faith.

But what better explains a thousand different Jesuses than the single word: fiction

Was Jesus, like Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, a real historical figure to whom legends and myths became attached? Or, rather, like Huckleberry Finn or Sherlock Holmes a purely fictional character, passed off as a genuine personage or later historicized by other hands?

Perhaps the choice is not quite so clear cut: a person (perhaps several) were certainly in the mind of Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when they constructed their heroes. Twain drew inspiration from his own life. Doyle modeled much of the character of his detective on his own professor of medicine, a Dr Joseph Bell. Did that make Sherlock Holmes any less of a fiction? (Interestingly, Holmes's trademark “deerstalker” hat is never mentioned in Doyle's stories and the drop-step pipe was the contribution of actor William Gillette years later. That's how myths grow.)

With Jesus, most people feel more comfortable with the 'historical kernel' approach. It is intuitively satisfying to think that someone was behind the towering legend. We do, after all, have Christianity, and it is hard to give credence to the idea that someone "just made-up" Jesus Christ and then managed to convince anyone else to believe that he had lived and died. In fact, one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most people do.

Lol, that is so absurd.

More was written about Christ in the ancient times than of any other person in history.

He was witnessed by thousands, even by His enemies centuries later carried the stories of His magical deeds. His own followers willingly went to their deaths beccause they were so certain of what they had personally witnessed.

You are a fool.

Was there a Jesus? Of course there was a Jesus, there were many!

The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise known as Yehoshua (Yeshua) bin Nun (‘Jesus of the fish&#8217. Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Iesous in Greek, source of the English spelling) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves&#8217 probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others.

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of early Jesuses includes:

Jesus ben Sirach. This Jesus was reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka 'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'), part of Old Testament Apocrypha. Ben Sirach, writing in Greek about 180 BC, brought together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.

Jesus ben Pandira. A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 BC), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently, this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophecy and agitation which upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree – and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded the Essene sect.

Jesus ben Ananias. Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He prophesied rather vaguely:

"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people."

– Josephus, Wars 6.3.

Arrested and flogged by the Romans, Jesus ben Ananias was released as nothing more dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock hurled by a Roman catapult.

Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias ("the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people" – Josephus, Life 12.66). When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.

Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John, sons of Susa&#8217. It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.

Jesus ben Thebuth. A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.

Like I said one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most do.

 

[JimBowie1958]

It is not merely Christ, divine son of God, that is an article of faith, but also the so-called "Jesus of history". A liturgy of carefully crafted "proofs", a hallowed parade of alleged witnesses, and a handful of dogmatically interpreted writings are the sacraments of this faith.

But what better explains a thousand different Jesuses than the single word: fiction

Was Jesus, like Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, a real historical figure to whom legends and myths became attached? Or, rather, like Huckleberry Finn or Sherlock Holmes a purely fictional character, passed off as a genuine personage or later historicized by other hands?

Perhaps the choice is not quite so clear cut: a person (perhaps several) were certainly in the mind of Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when they constructed their heroes. Twain drew inspiration from his own life. Doyle modeled much of the character of his detective on his own professor of medicine, a Dr Joseph Bell. Did that make Sherlock Holmes any less of a fiction? (Interestingly, Holmes's trademark “deerstalker” hat is never mentioned in Doyle's stories and the drop-step pipe was the contribution of actor William Gillette years later. That's how myths grow.)

With Jesus, most people feel more comfortable with the 'historical kernel' approach. It is intuitively satisfying to think that someone was behind the towering legend. We do, after all, have Christianity, and it is hard to give credence to the idea that someone "just made-up" Jesus Christ and then managed to convince anyone else to believe that he had lived and died. In fact, one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most people do.

Lol, that is so absurd.

More was written about Christ in the ancient times than of any other person in history.

He was witnessed by thousands, even by His enemies centuries later carried the stories of His magical deeds. His own followers willingly went to their deaths beccause they were so certain of what they had personally witnessed.

You are a fool.

Was there a Jesus? Of course there was a Jesus many!

The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise known as Yehoshua (Yeshua) bin Nun (‘Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Iesous in Greek, source of the English spelling) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’) probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others.

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of early Jesuses includes:

Jesus ben Sirach. This Jesus was reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka 'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'), part of Old Testament Apocrypha. Ben Sirach, writing in Greek about 180 BC, brought together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.

Jesus ben Pandira. A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 BC), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently, this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophecy and agitation which upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree – and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded the Essene sect.

Jesus ben Ananias. Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He prophesied rather vaguely:

"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people."

– Josephus, Wars 6.3.

Arrested and flogged by the Romans, Jesus ben Ananias was released as nothing more dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock hurled by a Roman catapult.

Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias ("the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people" – Josephus, Life 12.66). When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.

Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John, sons of Susa’). It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.

Jesus ben Thebuth. A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.

Like I said one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most do.

Lol, you talk yourself into circles.

Only ONE Jesus established a chhurch and inspired His followers with a message that caused such ferver that they kamikazied the entire ancient world carrying that message.

Just because you are too dense to see through your own bullshit proves nothing other than that you are dense.

 

[ERGO]

Jesus of Nazareth?

When you look for historical confirmation of this hometown of a god...surprise, surprise! no other source confirms that the place even existed in the 1st century AD.

• Nazareth is not mentioned even once in the entire Old Testament. The Book of Joshua (19.10,16) – in what it claims is the process of settlement by the tribe of Zebulon in the area – records twelve towns and six villages and yet omits any 'Nazareth' from its list.

• The Talmud, although it names 63 Galilean towns, knows nothing of Nazareth, nor does early rabbinic literature.

• St Paul knows nothing of 'Nazareth'. Rabbi Solly's epistles (real and fake) mention Jesus 221 times, Nazareth not at all.

• No ancient historian or geographer mentions Nazareth. It is first noted at the beginning of the 4th century.


None of this would matter of course if, rather like at the nearby 'pagan' city of Sepphoris, we could stroll through the ruins of 1st century bath houses, villas, theatres etc. Yet no such ruins exist.

In short order, Christian apologists fall over themselves to explain 'But of course, no one had heard of Nazareth, we're talking of a REALLY small place.' By semantic downsizing, city becomes TOWN, town becomes VILLAGE, and village becomes 'OBSCURE HAMLET'.

Yet if we are speaking of such an obscure hamlet the 'Jesus of Nazareth' story begins to fall apart.

For example, the whole 'rejection in his homeland' story requires at a minimum a synagogue in which the godman can 'blaspheme.' Where was the synagogue in this tiny bucolic hamlet? Why was it not obvious to the first pilgrims like Helena, it would, after all, have been far more pertinent to her hero than a well? In reality, such a small, rustic community could never have afforded its own holy scrolls, let alone a dedicated building to house them. As peasant farmers almost certainly they would have been illiterate to a man.

 

[ERGO]

Lol, that is so absurd.

More was written about Christ in the ancient times than of any other person in history.

He was witnessed by thousands, even by His enemies centuries later carried the stories of His magical deeds. His own followers willingly went to their deaths beccause they were so certain of what they had personally witnessed.

You are a fool.

Was there a Jesus? Of course there was a Jesus many!

The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise known as Yehoshua (Yeshua) bin Nun (‘Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Iesous in Greek, source of the English spelling) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’) probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others.

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of early Jesuses includes:

Jesus ben Sirach. This Jesus was reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka 'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'), part of Old Testament Apocrypha. Ben Sirach, writing in Greek about 180 BC, brought together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.

Jesus ben Pandira. A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 BC), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently, this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophecy and agitation which upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree – and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded the Essene sect.

Jesus ben Ananias. Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He prophesied rather vaguely:

"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people."

– Josephus, Wars 6.3.

Arrested and flogged by the Romans, Jesus ben Ananias was released as nothing more dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock hurled by a Roman catapult.

Jesus ben Saphat. In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias ("the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people" – Josephus, Life 12.66). When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.

Jesus ben Gamala. During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John, sons of Susa’). It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.

Jesus ben Thebuth. A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.

Like I said one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most do.

Lol, you talk yourself into circles.

Only ONE Jesus established a chhurch and inspired His followers with a message that caused such ferver that they kamikazied the entire ancient world carrying that message.

Just because you are too dense to see through your own bullshit proves nothing other than that you are dense.

Nice, Unable to refute this information, which no doubt is unintelligible to you for reasons of your indoctrinated preconceived notions of Christianity...so you resort to childish sophomoric ad hominem.


A

 

[JimBowie1958]

Jesus of Nazareth?

When you look for historical confirmation of this hometown of a god...surprise, surprise! no other source confirms that the place even existed in the 1st century AD.

• Nazareth is not mentioned even once in the entire Old Testament. The Book of Joshua (19.10,16) – in what it claims is the process of settlement by the tribe of Zebulon in the area – records twelve towns and six villages and yet omits any 'Nazareth' from its list.

• The Talmud, although it names 63 Galilean towns, knows nothing of Nazareth, nor does early rabbinic literature.

• St Paul knows nothing of 'Nazareth'. Rabbi Solly's epistles (real and fake) mention Jesus 221 times, Nazareth not at all.

• No ancient historian or geographer mentions Nazareth. It is first noted at the beginning of the 4th century.


None of this would matter of course if, rather like at the nearby 'pagan' city of Sepphoris, we could stroll through the ruins of 1st century bath houses, villas, theatres etc. Yet no such ruins exist.

In short order, Christian apologists fall over themselves to explain 'But of course, no one had heard of Nazareth, we're talking of a REALLY small place.' By semantic downsizing, city becomes TOWN, town becomes VILLAGE, and village becomes 'OBSCURE HAMLET'.

Yet if we are speaking of such an obscure hamlet the 'Jesus of Nazareth' story begins to fall apart.

For example, the whole 'rejection in his homeland' story requires at a minimum a synagogue in which the godman can 'blaspheme.' Where was the synagogue in this tiny bucolic hamlet? Why was it not obvious to the first pilgrims like Helena, it would, after all, have been far more pertinent to her hero than a well? In reality, such a small, rustic community could never have afforded its own holy scrolls, let alone a dedicated building to house them. As peasant farmers almost certainly they would have been illiterate to a man.

Lol, now Nazareth didnt exist!

Whats next, Rome didnt exist too?

ROFLMAO

 

[JimBowie1958]

Nice, Unable to refute this information, which no doubt is unintelligible to you for reasons of your indoctrinated preconceived notions of Christianity...so you resort to childish sophomoric ad hominem.


A

Hah, refute your information that denies themost obvious facts from the ancient world?

You might as well try to convince the world that the Jews run the world and the British Royal family are a bunch of shape changing lizards.

I dont have to refute idiocy; it refutes itself.

 

[JimBowie1958]

SSSHHHH no one tell ERGO...

Nazareth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archaeological research revealed a funerary and cult center at Kfar HaHoresh, about two miles (3 km) from current Nazareth, dating back roughly 9000 years (to what is known as the Pre-Pottery Neolithic B era).[27] The remains of some 65 individuals were found, buried under huge horizontal headstone structures, some of which consisted of up to 3 tons of locally-produced white plaster. Decorated human skulls uncovered there have led archaeologists to believe that Kfar HaHoresh was a major cult centre in that remote era.[28]

In 1620 the Catholic Church purchased an area in the Nazareth basin measuring approx. 100 × 150 m (328.08 ft × 492.13 ft) on the side of the hill known as the Nebi Sa'in. This "Venerated Area" underwent extensive excavation in 1955-65 by the Franciscan priest Belarmino Bagatti, "Director of Christian Archaeology." Fr. Bagatti uncovered pottery dating from the Middle Bronze Age (2200 to 1500 BC) and ceramics, silos and grinding mills from the Iron Age (1500 to 586 BC), pointing to substantial settlement in the Nazareth basin at that time. However, lack of archaeological evidence from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when many towns in the area were destroyed by the Assyrians.

According to the Gospel of Luke, Nazareth was the home village of Mary and also the site of the Annunciation (when Mary was told by the Angel Gabriel that she would have Jesus as her son). In the Gospel of Matthew, Joseph and Mary resettled in Nazareth after fleeing to Egypt from their home in Bethlehem. The hometown of Joseph was Bethlehem.[Mt. 1:18-2:23] The differences and possible contradictions between these two accounts of the nativity of Jesus are part of the Synoptic Problem. Nazareth was also where Jesus grew up from some point in his childhood. However, some modern scholars argue that Nazareth was also the birth place of Jesus.[29]





The Basilica Of Annunciation
James Strange, an American archaeologist, notes: “Nazareth is not mentioned in ancient Jewish sources earlier than the third century AD. This likely reflects its lack of prominence both in Galilee and in Judaea.”[30] Strange originally speculated that the population of Nazareth at the time of Christ to be "roughly 1,600 to 2,000 people", but later, in a subsequent publication, at “a maximum of about 480.”[31] In 2009 Israeli archaeologist Yardenna Alexandre excavated archaeological remains in Nazareth that might date to the time of Jesus in the early Roman period. Alexandre told reporters, "The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth."[32]...

A tablet at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, dating to 50 AD, was sent from Nazareth to Paris in 1878. It contains an inscription known as the "Ordinance of Caesar" that outlines the penalty of death for those who violate tombs or graves. However, it is suspected that this inscription came to Nazareth from somewhere else (possibly Sepphoris). Bagatti writes: “we are not certain that it was found in Nazareth, even though it came from Nazareth to Paris. At Nazareth there lived various vendors of antiquities who got ancient material from several places.”[37] C. Kopp is more definite: "It must be accepted with certainty that [the Ordinance of Caesar]… was brought to the Nazareth market by outside merchants."[38] Princeton University archaeologist Jack Finegan describes additional archaeological evidence related to settlement in the Nazareth basin during the Bronze and Iron Ages, and states that "Nazareth was a strongly Jewish settlement in the Roman period.".[39]

Epiphanius writes in the Panarion (c. 375 AD)[40] of Joseph of Tiberias, a wealthy Roman Jew who converted to Christianity in the time of Constantine. He claimed that he had built churches in Sepphoris and other towns that were inhabited only by Jews.[41] Nazareth is mentioned, though the exact meaning is not clear.[42] It was thus concluded that a small church which encompassed a cave complex was located in Nazareth in the early 4th century,"[43] although the town was Jewish until the 7th century AD.[44]

Although mentioned in the New Testament gospels, there are no extant non-biblical references to Nazareth until around 200 AD, when Sextus Julius Africanus, cited by Eusebius (Church History 1.7.14), speaks of “Nazara” as a village in "Judea" and locates it near an as-yet unidentified “Cochaba.”[45] In the same passage Africanus writes of desposunoi - relatives of Jesus - who he claims kept the records of their descent with great care. A few authors have argued that the absence of 1st and 2nd century AD textual references to Nazareth suggest the town may not have been inhabited in Jesus' day.[46] Proponents of this hypothesis have buttressed their case with linguistic, literary and archaeological interpretations,[47] though such views have been called "archaeologically unsupportable".[48]

 

[GreatestIam]

Its the 'human life' of an immortal being who is omnicient and perfectly loving.

Your ability to analyze sux as does your objectivity.

Immortals can die. LOL.

Good analyzing there pal.

Regards
DL

In our faith we define 'death' as seperation of the spirit from the body. In the case of Christ, He existed prior to His taking human form, so His eternal spirit not only survived death but His death itself transcends time and is present in each mass.

You might try attempting to grasp the point of view of those you discuss things with before running your mouth.

Your ilk only have one POV.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDbesQQi9yc]The Dragon in My Garage - YouTube[/ame]

Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

It is not merely Christ, divine son of God, that is an article of faith, but also the so-called "Jesus of history". A liturgy of carefully crafted "proofs", a hallowed parade of alleged witnesses, and a handful of dogmatically interpreted writings are the sacraments of this faith.

But what better explains a thousand different Jesuses than the single word: fiction

Was Jesus, like Alexander the Great or Julius Caesar, a real historical figure to whom legends and myths became attached? Or, rather, like Huckleberry Finn or Sherlock Holmes a purely fictional character, passed off as a genuine personage or later historicized by other hands?

Perhaps the choice is not quite so clear cut: a person (perhaps several) were certainly in the mind of Mark Twain and Sir Arthur Conan Doyle when they constructed their heroes. Twain drew inspiration from his own life. Doyle modeled much of the character of his detective on his own professor of medicine, a Dr Joseph Bell. Did that make Sherlock Holmes any less of a fiction? (Interestingly, Holmes's trademark “deerstalker” hat is never mentioned in Doyle's stories and the drop-step pipe was the contribution of actor William Gillette years later. That's how myths grow.)

With Jesus, most people feel more comfortable with the 'historical kernel' approach. It is intuitively satisfying to think that someone was behind the towering legend. We do, after all, have Christianity, and it is hard to give credence to the idea that someone "just made-up" Jesus Christ and then managed to convince anyone else to believe that he had lived and died. In fact, one can reach the conclusion that "there must have been a Jesus" without any research at all, which of course is what most people do.

Well put.

Have you seen this?



Regards
DL

 

[GreatestIam]

Actually, he takes God seriously.

And that's okay.

You see 20/20.

Regards
DL