Atheist who is having a crisis of faith

[Jehanne]

I guess I just don't understand why the Jews made up all that shit in the old testament to begin with. Maybe it was a solar eclipse, I don't know the info was kinda shaky and from very off websites that I don't really trust but, the fact that they think he was born during a solar eclipse b/c of facts or perceived info in the bible and josephus was talking about a son who was born at a simliar time and there was a solar eclipse. The old testament says that the days will be dark during while he's up there on that fucking cross, that's not just some vague prophecy, that's like saying I'm going to get some tabasco from Rita tomorrow, now that's exact, and eclipses don't have happen everyday like rain. Why diid the OT make up the messiah and then not believe in him when he came? Also have you studied the martydorm of the apostles, now we only have a few nonbiblical sources and yes that fuck Josephus is one of them. He says that Jesus' brother was martyred, why would he lie? B/c martydorm  is kinda strange, to say you saw him rise from the dead, not just dying for an idea but a lie, ppl don't lie, they do die for religion, but lies, just curious if this is making you question your faith , the fact that the eclipse literally happened when he was on that cross and that two secular historians say it happened, are we now going down the road  that their lying, and even NASA? does it bother you he had an eclipse at birth supposedly and at death, or you gonna chalk that up to chance to?

Eclipses, both solar & lunar, can be traced back in time for tens of thousands of years (if not more); what are your sources?  By the way, no modern scholar accepts the idea, "But, they died for Jesus and their faith..." nonsense.  The Romans did not persecute Christians per se, at least until much later after the death of Jesus, and even then, such persecutions were episodic throughout the Empire.

[emilsein]

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others. One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221. In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report. Africanus asserts: 'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

[Succubus]

His status constantly says 'Reading Thread...'

Not once that I could see was he was 'responding to...'

He's typed this bollocks prior to registering and this shit is copy pasta.

Don't expect any feedback from this numpty.

So if history has been revised for the Christians then why did they do so little to convince us of it? There's very few secular sources that even mention Christ, why not stack the deck? Wouldn't you just forge the hell out of everything and make claims of dead historians who can't say which is which? So you think all of it's a myth or been changed and exaagerated? WHy did Thalius say there was an event that went dark that day? Is Josephus fake? Why didn't they steck the deck and go even more out of their way to prove the so called Jesus myth? Oh and btw, thanks everybody, this has really been eyeopening and I even stopped jacking off for this, big big deal to me. I'm trying to break through  the matrix

You have just proved my points, copy paste it is.

[madog]

I read in the Miami Hearld NASA confirmed the solar eclipse, 

From the article you refer too  ... try reading it   miami herald

Quote ....

One of those total solar eclipses even falls in the year 33 on March 19. However, the path of totality of that eclipse — the path of the moon’s shadow as it speeds across the Earth’s surface — was nowhere near Jerusalem. Instead, it was near Antarctica.

The path of another total solar eclipse, on March 9 in the year 34, hardly came closer. Its path of totality crossed oceans near Australia. Neither eclipse would have done much to darken the skies of Judea.

[emilsein]

Good eye man! I didn't even notice that, my mind is spinning this morning. I've been up all night researching crucifix darkness and it's mostly nonsense and I'm not even sure there's a real claim any secular historian or non-christian said it, the wikipedia is making stupid claims about solar eclipses when that don't even relate. God! I am such an intellectual but at times I feel slightly retarded.

[Brian37]

"Circa AD 52, Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time.  This work itself has been lost and only fragments of it exist in the citations of others.  One such scholar who knew and spoke of it was Julius Africanus, who wrote about AD 221.  In speaking of Jesus’ crucifixion and the darkness that covered the land during this event, Africanus found a reference in the writings of Thallus that dealt with this cosmic report.  Africanus asserts:  'On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down.  This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun.'"1

You are a broken record.

NOBODY, not Christians, not Jews, not Buddhists, not Hindus, NOBODY, back then had any modern science. Nobody back then knew the age of the universe. Nobody back then knew the age of the planet. Nobody back then knew earth had 5 mass extinction events. Nobody back then knew what protons/neutrons/electrons were. Nobody back then knew what pulsar or black hole was. NOBODY.

And again, YOU are not the only religion with followers that try to retrofit modern science to prop up old mythology.

[emilsein]

So if history has been revised for the Christians then why did they do so little to convince us of it? There's very few secular sources that even mention Christ, why not stack the deck? Wouldn't you just forge the hell out of everything and make claims of dead historians who can't say which is which? So you think all of it's a myth or been changed and exaagerated? WHy did Thalius say there was an event that went dark that day? Is Josephus fake? Why didn't they steck the deck and go even more out of their way to prove the so called Jesus myth? Oh and btw, thanks everybody, this has really been eyeopening and I even stopped jacking off for this, big big deal to me. I'm trying to break through the matrix

---

I get that you're calling it myth but most scholars believe that those sources are fair and accurate. It's not a certain the Church influenced it. And they say there was darkness that day.

[Succubus]

Good eye man! I didn't even notice that, my mind is spinning this morning. I've been up all night researching crucifix darkness and it's mostly nonsense and I'm not even sure there's a real claim any secular historian or non-christian said it, the wikipedia is making stupid claims about solar eclipses when that don't even relate. God! I am such an intellectual but at times I feel slightly retarded.

Next time get someone else to do it.

[Brian37]

So if history has been revised for the Christians then why did they do so little to convince us of it? There's very few secular sources that even mention Christ, why not stack the deck? Wouldn't you just forge the hell out of everything and make claims of dead historians who can't say which is which? So you think all of it's a myth or been changed and exaagerated? WHy did Thalius say there was an event that went dark that day? Is Josephus fake? Why didn't they steck the deck and go even more out of their way to prove the so called Jesus myth? Oh and btw, thanks everybody, this has really been eyeopening and I even stopped jacking off for this, big big deal to me. I'm trying to break through  the matrix

In religion, AND NOT JUST CHRISTIANITY, but worldwide, humans have used the "after the fact" tactic in their writings to promote a story. 

One can watch a movie of Superman flying around very real cities, but humans still do not fly like that. 

Religious retrofitting works the same way. Pepper a writing with real people and real places after the fact still would not make the fantastic claims true.  Josephus was way after the fact, not a contemporary. And it still remains that babies ARE NOT born without a second set of DNA and humans do not survive rigor mortis if you were to murder a human in the manor the death myth would imply.

Even with Buddhism. In the west at least, there is a false romantic idea that it is a philosophy and not a religion. But if one does research on the history of the oldest claims of Buddha, depending on the "historian" you still see that those claims are in close proximity to ancient India and include many of the same concepts of Hinduism, like Karma and reincarnation. And even the Buddhist mythology had him born from royalty in Queen Maya, whom was told by the divine world that she would give birth to a boy who would bring wisdom to the world. And his birth from Queen Maya had him born out of her side instead of real natural birth through the vagina.

Point is, religions are NOT SCIENCE, they are simply the social norms people buy and sell and like.

[emilsein]

Thallus wrote a history of the eastern Mediterranean world since the Trojan War. Thallus wrote his regional history in about AD 52.6 Although his original writings have been lost, he is specifically quoted by Julius Africanus, a renowned third century historian. Africanus states, ‘Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness as an eclipse of the sun—unreasonably as it seems to me.’ Apparently, Thallus attempted to ascribe a naturalistic explanation to the darkness during the crucifixion. So Thallus must've lived in the area at the time, right? So he's writing from memory