Where is Jesus?

[The Omnissiunt One]

You said that only a few things were added to the NT. This fairly major thing was added. That was my point.

[Quest of knowledge]

Jesus Serrano Dominguez lives in Barcelona with his wife. I know it because he is my cousin. All Christians should pay him tithe and I should get a commission for promoting my cousin.

The other Jesus is fake. The reason the believers are not called Jesuits as opposed to Christians is because the name Jesus did not even exists at the time of the development of Christianity. The name Jesus is the Spanish misspelling of the Greek “Iesous” and the Latin “Iesus” versions which in turn are bad misspellings of the Hebrew name Yahshua, which in English translates as Joshua. In case anyone has not heard of the Spanish Inquisition which lasted 350 years, it is what shaped Christianity as we know it and that is why the name Jesus and not Yahshua is the popular name of the supposed leader of the Christians. Christian scholars themselves know some of this as can be checked in http://www.plim.org/JesusOrigin.htm

The name Christ from the Greek Χριστός (pronounced Kristόs in English) tells the tale of the origin of Christianity. It started in Greece and it is a Greco-Roman invention. It tried to marry the various faiths of the Roman Empire into one religion, but it failed because of the dietary restrictions of the Jews. The gospels were written in Greek by Greeks and for Greeks. The rest of the new testament is obviously for Greeks. The names of some of the books say who they were for -- the people of Thessalonica, Corinth, Galatea, etc. The writers put the setting for Jesus in Palestine because it was considered a remote enough place that no ordinary Greek or Roman would know about it. This is the same technique that fiction writers use for books and movies.

The story of the crucifixion does not make sense because if Jesus/Iesus/ Iesous/Yahshua was important enough for the Romans to have changed their crucifixion procedure for him, it would have been recorded as Roman history. If he wasn’t, the crucifixion would have been routine and the description of it in the Gospels is entirely wrong.

At some level, I feel silly proving that Jesus did not exist because there is no proof that he did and no reason to prove that he didn’t. It is like proving that Superman did not exist. On the other hand, I was once a poor manipulated child who converted many good people to a life of intellectual, emotional, psychological, and physical depravation, and perhaps this will enlighten some to free themselves from that life. I know this would have helped me at the time.

[ib.me.ub]

Not talking metaphorically here ie in my heart etc. Is he in heaven? Is that where Yahweh is? Is it a supernatural realm? If the answers are yes then how was he raised bodily and therefore materially into an immaterial realm with no time nor space for a material body to exist?

He is in people's minds!

[chatpilot]

@Godschild who wrote: "You have no idea what the originals had to say, you do not have any idea whether or not the originals were signed by the very writers they are attributed to."

That is hilarious but it's true nonetheless, you have no idea what the original documents said either. Instead you have been spoon fed the version you have now by a church with an agenda, whose goal it was to dominate whole empires and civilizations and implant their superstitions to those foreign lands that they conquered. I know that the authors of the gospels did not sign write nor sign those books because from the beginning they were presented as anonymous works as most books in the bible have. The names attributed to them did not occur till the middle of the second century. It was common practice to use the name of someone of reknown to give authority and authenticity to their works. This is common knowledge you should get your head out of the bible and do some more external research before you try to refute facts basing yourself on faith. By the way there is nothing logical about your logic.

[Minimalist]

Explain please how you know that the copies we have today are not like the originals.

Because we have different versions of these texts in whole or in part which show that they evolved ( I know you guys hate that word...tough!) over time and to suit the political needs of the church.

Different versions by who. That response does not answer my question if we do not have the originals then how do you know what we have now isn't the same as the originals. You can't.

What difference does it make? Your fucking gospels were not written by the people they were attributed to in the first place. The fact that legions of nameless scribes were busily copying down differing versions of this bullshit is sufficient to show that what we have today is NOT ORIGINAL.

---

So I dont see your point...

The point is that this shit...far from being the wholly inerrant word of god was written and edited by MEN to suit their own agendas.

---

Here you go, C-P.

I was too tired to go find this for you last night but it is a pretty blistering shot at the xtian lunacy about their godboy being as well attested as Julius Caesar. Use it in good health.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/exist.html

Evidence that Confirms the Existence of Caesar is Legion

– in stark contrast to the utter dearth of evidence for Jesus!



Unlike the mythical Jesus Christ, we know what Caesar looked like and we have a complete history of his life. In turn, general, orator, historian, statesman and lawgiver. We have words written by Caesar himself and words written by both his friends and his enemies. Artifacts confirm his life and death, as do his successors. Caesar established a style of government – and a calendar – which endured for centuries.

[chatpilot]

Thanks Min but it is not necessary, I am aware of that site but when it comes to xtians you have to accept that their intellects have been hampered by dogma and years of indoctrination. Arguing with them is usually pointless since their precious book of lies is the only thing that they listen to. Any and all facts that contradict their book of lies leads them to question begging and circular reasoning to no end.

[solja247]

Thanks Min but it is not necessary, I am aware of that site but when it comes to xtians you have to accept that their intellects have been hampered by dogma and years of indoctrination. Arguing with them is usually pointless since their precious book of lies is the only thing that they listen to. Any and all facts that contradict their book of lies leads them to question begging and circular reasoning to no end.

Since you and all the other atheists here are so learned on this topic in a couple of months time (I am rather busy at the moment) I challenge you to an official debate and anyone else for that matter.

You are ready to accept the fact that the book of the dead is real (although we have never found one) yet, you have the audacity to create a pseudo-theory about the origins of Jesus, while there is a large amount of evidence for His existence and resurrection.

Please be consistent, if you want to reject Jesus as being a real man. reject Plato and Homer as well. Dont chop and choose.

---

You said that only a few things were added to the NT. This fairly major thing was added. That was my point.

I fail to see how this story is a major thing. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

[chatpilot]

I am dying to see this so called evidence for the existence of Jesus.

[Minimalist]

You are ready to accept the fact that the book of the dead is real (although we have never found one) yet, you have the audacity to create a pseudo-theory about the origins of Jesus, while there is a large amount of evidence for His existence and resurrection.

WTF are you talking about?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_the_Dead

The "Book of the Dead" is the usual name given to the ancient Egyptian funerary text called the "Spells of Coming (or Going) Forth By Day." The Book of the Dead was intended to assist the deceased in the afterlife and comprised a collection of hymns, spells and instructions to allow the deceased to pass through obstacles in the afterlife. The Book of the Dead was most commonly written on a papyrus scroll and placed in the coffin or burial chamber of the deceased.[2]

The Book of the Dead was the product of a long process of evolution starting with the Pyramid Texts of the Old Kingdom through the Coffin Texts of the Middle Kingdom. About one third of the chapters in the Book of the Dead are derived from the earlier Coffin Texts.[3] The Book of the Dead itself was adapted into The Book of Breathings in the Late Period, but remained popular in its own right until the Roman period.

What did your fucking jesus ever write?

[Quest of knowledge]

Since you and all the other atheists here are so learned on this topic in a couple of months time (I am rather busy at the moment) I challenge you to an official debate and anyone else for that matter.

You are ready to accept the fact that the book of the dead is real (although we have never found one) yet, you have the audacity to create a pseudo-theory about the origins of Jesus, while there is a large amount of evidence for His existence and resurrection.

Please be consistent, if you want to reject Jesus as being a real man. reject Plato and Homer as well. Dont chop and choose.

---

You said that only a few things were added to the NT. This fairly major thing was added. That was my point.

I fail to see how this story is a major thing. Perhaps you can enlighten me?

I think you are trying to build a vehicle with a hammer. You use the word scholar, but I don’t think you know what it means. You appear to use arguments voided of logic. You appear to start with the premise, “what my religious leaders have told me is true. How can I prove it?” The reason you cannot prove it is not your lack of knowledge. The reason you cannot prove it is that none of it is true. Your lack of knowledge is what prevents you from understanding that religion is a tool to control and profit, not what prevents you from being able to demonstrate the veracity of the story.

These are the same arguments I had when I was six years old and told my friends that Santa Claus is not real. They smiled all knowing and said, “you don’t know anything”. I just waited.

I don’t think you participate in the forum because you want to learn any thing. That is unfortunate because I found many participants very knowledgeable and intelligent, and you could learn a lot. I think you participate in the forum hoping to convert some and to “challenge” your believes so you come out “stronger”.

The first thing I would recommend is to study history and learn the difference between history and stories. That would allow you to check religious claims against reality. Greek mythology, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and other religions are stories because they are not based on what happened in the real past, but in the minds of their creators. Their creators are the people who created the stories from imagination.

History, on the other hand, is written from witnesses accounts, and it can be checked and argued like the news. The difference between the news and history is how long ago it took place. The events of WW II where news from 1939 until 1945. The news of the past are now history.

The news in North Korea will differ from the news in the US, but the events are reported by both with their obvious biases. You can always tell what probably happen by filtering who wrote it. The US will always report that the US is right and North Korea that they are right. Different historians offer, likewise, differing accounts of events, and the reasons for the events, but you can always get to the truth by filtering the biases.

Too complicated?