The Jesus Story

[Centrism'sVoice]

I've committed adultery and I can tell you, you don't have to be stoned, but it makes it more fun if you are.

Stoned as in...rocks thrown at you till you die.

Jamie

Why would anyone want to have sex while someone threw rocks at them? That's just weird.

Well, it DOES give a whole new meaning to the expression "get your rocks off."

 

[Avatar4321]

hmmm....i had been a born again for some 20 years plus. i am very familiar with the bible, having read it through four times, as well as studied it in bible study and on my own, and along with commentary. i have closed my mind to nothing. and please spare me your sermons. i have heard some fantastic ones. i do not need nor do i want your sermons, but i am sure you feel you must justify your beliefs and appease your desert god and tell me of the good news. i know it, and have rejected it.

four times? that's it?

You may reject it, but dont pretend that makes you superior to anyone. Dont pretend t hat gives you some superior knowledge. Experience has told me that people reject the Gospel because they dont understand it. Your misrepresentations demonstrate that.

And I would hardly go out and claim that born agains have a vast understanding of the Gospel. Some do. others are more ignorant than alot of people they try to teach.

you claim i complained continually that they (the jews) were stupid and lack intellectual prowess. you will kindly cite that? have a care lest you bear false witness. your words here are your only witness, and they, coupled with your attitude, can drive others from your god or bring them closer. we aren't stupid nor are we sheep. watch your words that they ring true.

I have no need to falsely witness. Your original post states as much. Your condescension even more so.

And you are right, your attitude does cause people to accept or reject your words. Arrogance and condescension arent exactly going to win you friends. Mocking people is not going to make people respect you.

lets see. because someone told me. yes, they did. i have read the pliney source. that primary source told me, as well as the tacitus source,(another primary source) and the josephus source, etc. anything else you want to know? and just to digress ( something i am prone to) the bede is the only source that has easter as a pagan holliday, and he learned of that from an old german woman. one source. just threw that in to illustrate my effort to stay balanced. ( i am a pagan, btw, and reject the notion that easter is a pagan holiday, at least by that name "easter"). [edit to clarify. i went LOOKING for the sources that supposedly talked of your jesus. i read them. so what you suppose is totally wrong]

So again you continue to make arguments from silence and think you have a strong case? Arguments from silence are some of the weakest arguments out there.

As for your personal faith, it doesnt matter to me. I am going to point out nonsensical argumetns whether you agree with my faith or whether you practice another one. My concern is truth.

arguments from silence might be weak, but lacking credible proof and making assumptions based on faith are weaker yet. otherwise, your post, while appealing in a humble way, is chock full of argumentative fallacies.

What more credible proof do I need for my beliefs than the Holy Spirit's witness? What can be more credible than the voice of God?

I am trying to convince more people to stop believing what others say and actually go to the source. Because if you want to know the things of God, then God is the only one who can teach you. You could read the Bible a million times and still learn more about God and Heaven in a five minute conversation with God.

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

I should note that hell is now freezing over. I actually agree with Chris....

However, my reasons for believing rest in my own witness from God and not from the eye witness accounts of others. I would presume that many have had the Spirit speak to them and not realized the real source of their faith.

I understand the lack of belief, but what I will never understand is the decision that you cant learn any more than you already know. As if there is no possibility. You dont even try to look at things from a believers perspective and yet you wonder why you cant concieve of God or Christ.

There's a fundamental (no pun intended) problem with this argument, Avvy. It's analogous to a pot smoker saying that you have to look at things from the perspective of a smoker to learn about marijuana. Which of course is impossible if you don't smoke it yourself. In reality, there are many ways we can study the psycoactive effects of a drug. So, by the same token, it's disingenuous to pretend that others can't learn about Christianity without believing in Jesus as the Christ-savior. What I and many other people actually believe about Jesus is what archeology can tell us about him (unfortunately almost nothing right now). On everything else I reserve judgment. It's ridiculous to conclude that those who hold this view are somehow inherently evil.

 

[Chris]

On what evidence?

Eye witness testimony.

these "eyewitnesses" were deposed? their character vouched for? where are their depositions? and what are their names?

ALL of the first four gospels were written by men who never met your jesus. there ARE no eyewitnesses.

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

 

[Chris]

So, wasn't mary raped? Did anyone check her hymen before she gave birth to jesus? Who picked that name anyway? jesus, isn't that spanish?

Jesus' name in Aramaic is Eshua.

Eshua was what Jesus' was called in those days.

 

[AllieBaba]

So, wasn't mary raped? Did anyone check her hymen before she gave birth to jesus? Who picked that name anyway? jesus, isn't that spanish?

"The Bible does not specificallyl state that Joseph waited until after Jesus was born to have sex with his wife Mary. The scholar who said this is making a very reasonable guess/speculation. The Bible does not specifically say "Joseph waited to have sexual relationship with his wife until after the birth of Jesus. However, I think that most or even nearly all serious Bible students would reach this same conclusion. First of all, we know that Joseph even considered annuling the marriage with Mary when he found out she was pregnant (Matthew 1:18-19). I think we can assume that Mary was already well into her pregnancy at this time. In addition, the way Luke describes the situation, Mary was "pledged to be married to" Joseph. This means that to have intimate relations would have been adultery. It is almost inconcievable that either Joseph or Mary would have consented to sin in this way while she carried the miraculous baby inside her. In addition, Isaiah 7:15 is a prophecy that "The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel." This prophecy implies that Mary was not only a virgin when Jesus was conceived, but also when he was born.

So, no, the Bible does not state in clear words that Mary was a virgin when Jesus was born, but this is a very reasonable inference from the facts we know. Perhaps the commentator you read slightly overstated his case. I do not think you need to worry yourself all that much about this issue as we simply do not know. When God does not tell us something, it is generally because we do not need to know, but I believe you can quite reasonable assume that Jesus was born of a woman who was still a virgin."
https://www.evidenceforchristianity.org/index.php?option=com_custom_content&task=view&id=4882

 

[Ralph]

The word is "cuckolded," and Mary more likely committed adultery, but other than that, this account is probably fairly accurate.

This sounds very much like all Darwinian Cultist life story and their world......as all therein live in world existing only between their ears in SUBJECTIVE imagination and theory. I most enjoy all their presentations of projected TRUTH and their SpongeBob like sentence enhancers. It would appear that all such individuals have trouble staying in touch with OBJECTIVE REALITY.

Ever notice how all the truths of the human secular natural ideology use such scientific terms as PROBABLY, from the ideology of Philosophical Theory pretending to be physical science to the social elite that propagate a false message of EQUALITY by demanding to keep all peoples segregated into different sub cultures, races, communities, genders and sexual orientation by telling each group thereof how SPECIAL and unique they are as they must remain loyal to their individual heritage......making it far easier to manipulate ALL by declaring CLASS WARFARE in order to grab power at the expense of those they profess to be helping....always pitting each group against one another..and never propagating national pride nor unity.

All such ideologies that deal in SPECULATION of OPINION while demanding such be blindly accepted as TRUTH.....begin their bigoted diatribe by presenting their imagined rhetoric with such noble sentence enhancers.....proving the OBJECTIVE TRUTH thereof, as....PROBABLY, MOST LIKELY, INDICATES, SUGGESTS, POINTS TO, IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, CALCULATED,...etc. Amusing.

Simply tune in any presentation of DARWINIAN CULTISM on the history channel......their PHILOSOPHY is projected into the classrooms of our children as ACTUAL proven facts of empirical findings. But the TRUTH can be found in the narratives that accompany all such programing...especially that which addresses pre-history topics. I once viewed a program with my youngest son that was suggested viewing by his teacher...the topic was the discovery of a T-Rex somewhere in the western part of the US. The program lasted 49 minutes......in that short expanse of time.....THESE sentence enhancers were used 143 times....but yet, this program was touted as TRUTHFUL and EDUCATIONAL as it was entitled.......THE TRUTH ABOUT DINOSAURS. Indeed...this truthful presentation, expressing itself as EMPIRICAL....used these very EMPIRICAL descriptive terms of absolution....over 2 per minute in proving just how SCIENTIFIC this presentation was in its SO CALLED TRUTH...about Dinosaurs.

I pointed this out to my child.......and he made a list of these words and used them on his REPORT. I was called by the school principal after my son's instructor complained about the undermining of her teaching duties....the very first thing I was asked....or rather charged with....was being a religious fanatic, simply because I pointed out the truth about the indoctrination process. It did not help matters when I laughed in the lady's face....as I found it very amusing, as my child was exposed to open bigotry simply because he presented TRUTH on a report that was suggested for extra credit.

 

[Reason]

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

Have no other religions died for their belief, including small cults?

 

[Chris]

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

Have no other religions died for their belief, including small cults?

That was not the question.

The question was, Were there eye witnesses?

 

[Reason]

No direct eyewitness testimony has been found. Only writings off persons whose identities cannot be confirmed. Why is it that no witnesses are found for this

Matthew 27:52-53
52The tombs were opened, and many bodies of the saints who had (A)fallen asleep were raised;

53and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered (B)the holy city and appeared to many.


Why did only one person take notice if the dead were walking about? No, evidently there were not eyewitnesses-at least none who noticed so many dead people walking around the city. Was only the writer of Matthew paying attention?

 

[Reason]

My question remains valid, by the way,, since you appeal to their martyrdom and their beliefs as supposedly making them true. Now, answer my question.

 

[Chris]

My question remains valid, by the way,, since you appeal to their martyrdom and their beliefs as supposedly making them true. Now, answer my question.

Eye witness testimony is evidence, not proof.

And there is plenty of it, as well as the writings of Josephus.

If it happened today, there would be cell phone video.

But it happened 2,000 years ago, so technology was a little limited.

 

[vincubus]

four times? that's it? well, i admit i over read the book. it doesn't take too many through readings to get the gist of the story. i am sorry that you had to read it through so many more times before the plot sank in. of couirse, once the gist is understood, then one undertakes a more in depth study of the bible.

You may reject it, but dont pretend that makes you superior to anyone. Dont pretend t hat gives you some superior knowledge.

actually, it does give me superior knowledge. your implication is that not rejecting the bible gives superior knowledge?




Experience has told me that people reject the Gospel because they dont understand it. Your misrepresentations demonstrate that. i see. so you are implying that you DO understand it? lets see. your god supposedly inspired the bible, or the books of the bible. that means if you understand them, then you are saying you are your god. of couirse, you could argue that you understand it better than say....me. then i would wonder how it is that you could claim this, and your response would be you were led to this by the holy spirit (forgetting that i too was a born again and had the holy spirit guiding me). if that is the case, then you worship a weak and puny god, since the holy spirit cannot teach other than via the bible. so, then if we remove the bible, then there is no standard by which one group of ppl can beat up on another group of ppl. smile, NOW you are getting it. that is exactly what your jesus had in mind.

experience has told me that those who say that those who reject the bible dont understand it because that calls into question their position, and that, of course, is an egotistical position

And I would hardly go out and claim that born agains have a vast understanding of the Gospel. Some do. others are more ignorant than alot of people they try to teach. i consider many christian, born again and not, to be ignorant. again, this statement of yours trumpets your ego. i am seeing the pattern.

Quote:
you claim i complained continually that they (the jews) were stupid and lack intellectual prowess. you will kindly cite that? have a care lest you bear false witness. your words here are your only witness, and they, coupled with your attitude, can drive others from your god or bring them closer. we aren't stupid nor are we sheep. watch your words that they ring true.

I have no need to falsely witness. Your original post states as much. Your condescension even more so.
in other words, you overstepped, and cannot back up your claim that i mentioned in the above quote. so you bear false witness, and then realize you were wrong, and instead of admitting you are wrong as an adult christian would do, you perpetuate your bearing false witness, and try miserably to derail my question. i am definately seeing the pattern stronger now.


And you are right,

i know. thanks for the needless validation

your attitude does cause people to accept or reject your words. Arrogance and condescension arent exactly going to win you friends. you assume i wish to win friends. i do not. friends are a drag on my time, intellect and emotions. they are, more often than not, petty tyrants that require me to tow their line. but, since you know your arrogance and condescension is off-putting, why do you engage in it? a mistake is only a mistake if you persist in that act. so stop.

Mocking people is not going to make people respect you. oh, i am not mocking you. i am just pointing out how you mock yourself. dont blame me. i respect me. that is enough.


As for your personal faith, it doesnt matter to me. I am going to point out nonsensical argumetns whether you agree with my faith or whether you practice another one. My concern is truth. my personal faith matters to me. are you that egotistical that you think i care what You think of my faith. again, the pattern....as far as non-sensical arguments, you mean like a man god that has roots in older cultures walking on water, raising the dead and being birthed by the magical jack and the beanstalk-like seed spilled by your god? yeah, so you understand why i point out these things to you and others.

but, to make you right, lets try something. lets assume that you need corrective lenses. so throw them away ( your faith has made you well. remember that passage?) and pray (as paul said, without ceasing) and as your jesus said, ask and it shall be given, knock and the door shall be open, that your vision will be restored to 20-20. after all, if a sparrow falls..... and when your vision fails to become 20/20, then we will talk more of the nonsense you and others like you perpetuate (yes, i know the "out" that sometimes the answer is no. someone forgot to tell that to your jesus. can a house divided against itself stand?).

otherwise, your post, while appealing in a humble way, is chock full of argumentative fallacies.

 

[vincubus]

Eye witness testimony.

these "eyewitnesses" were deposed? their character vouched for? where are their depositions? and what are their names?

ALL of the first four gospels were written by men who never met your jesus. there ARE no eyewitnesses.

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

again, where are the depositions? who were these "witnesses"? none of the gospel writers knew your jesus. many novels cite the names of others.

 

[Wize Owl]

I've heard that Jesus was gay? Can anyone prove he wasn't?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

everyone knew it....this was the Word that passed through the area, then on to the entire world.

it was, ''the GOOD NEWS'' at the time....the good news that HE is RISEN, was what began the entire movement of Christianity! There were no New Testimate Bibles right after his death? It was passed on by those who witnessed it...HE IS risen!!! He spent 40 days i believe, Risen from the dead, but walking here on Earth after his Crucifixion.... (some groups didm't witness nor believe it, but STILL viewed Him as a great Prophet)

To seriously believe that Jesus was simply the son of a girl that was raped by a roman soldier which was common at the time, and nothing more, that went on to change the ENTIRE WORLD, from his death onward, from our calendar to billions of followers still 2000 years later, is simply.... purposefully being disingenuously ignorant for anyone with a braincell or two imho....

There is MORE than enough proof that Jesus wasn't merely a common bastard of a roman soldier rapist...

I am not saying it is proof of His Deity, but it CERTAINLY is NOT proof that He wasn't.... and was merely a frequently common bastard of a roman soldier....don't ya think?

care

changed the whole world? oh? buddha, who existed before your jesus did, also changed the whole world. oh wait. only his part, just as your jesus changed the western part. note the similarities between the words of your jesus and those of buddha. did i mention buddha came before your jesus? i wouild imagine that someone so powerful as buddha would also be a son of your god then. no?

lets get back to the changed the whole world thingy. i am glad that greed, murder, corruption, and other such negative behaviours are now eradicated because yoru jesus changed the world. oh, wait. they are still around us

Buddha was a fat little fuck who couldn't hack it in gym class so the sports teams all kicked his ass and pussified him for life.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

these "eyewitnesses" were deposed? their character vouched for? where are their depositions? and what are their names?

ALL of the first four gospels were written by men who never met your jesus. there ARE no eyewitnesses.

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

again, where are the depositions? who were these "witnesses"? none of the gospel writers knew your jesus. many novels cite the names of others.

Nag Hammadi.

Shut the fuck up and read for a few months then come back and well, continue to shut the fuck up

 

[CrusaderFrank]

these "eyewitnesses" were deposed? their character vouched for? where are their depositions? and what are their names?

ALL of the first four gospels were written by men who never met your jesus. there ARE no eyewitnesses.

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

again, where are the depositions? who were these "witnesses"? none of the gospel writers knew your jesus. many novels cite the names of others.

Ever hear of "James the Just"?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Buddah learned to live on only 6 birdseeds a day because everyone took his lunch money...fucking pussy

 

[AllieBaba]

these "eyewitnesses" were deposed? their character vouched for? where are their depositions? and what are their names?

ALL of the first four gospels were written by men who never met your jesus. there ARE no eyewitnesses.

There were eye witnesses. You just don't want to accept them. That is your problem.

11 of the 12 disciples were martryed for their beliefs.

That is how strong their belief was.

again, where are the depositions? who were these "witnesses"? none of the gospel writers knew your jesus. many novels cite the names of others.

"Novels"?????

Well by golly, go with the novels. I'm sure they'll still be accurate and looked to as the word of god in 2000 years.

The depositions existed in the form of the public testimony of the people who knew Jesus, and ultimately were killed brutally for spreading his word. NOBODY CHALLENGED THEM because so many people also witnessed the events. Nobody challenged the truth of what the apostles said because EVERYONE HAD SEEN.

People didn't keep diaries, there were no newspapers or Youtube. If that's what you're waiting for, you'll be waiting till the second coming for your proof. Josephus recorded Jesus' life and referred to his miracles, and though he wasn't a Christian there's nothing in his writings which show any skepticism.