Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 5, 2021, 2:09 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Imagine this...
#61
RE: Imagine this...
Hook, line, and sinker Christians believe the author of Luke to be Paul's doctor.  All because of Colossians 4:14.  It just has to be the same Luke.
Reply
#62
RE: Imagine this...
(May 5, 2021 at 9:53 am)Drich Wrote:
(May 4, 2021 at 3:54 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote: Which of the historical jesi do you believe in?

None of them worked any miracles.
says who?
Words, that's who.

They're looking for a man - not a god.  The term exclusively refers to a man - not a god.  Historical jesus, not legendary jesus or mythical christ.

Quote:
Quote: Only one of them can be The Guy.  
jesus of the gospels. remember luke was a secular historian till he was conscripted. so the book of luke is technically a secular account. he was not chosen by jesus and technically not a disciple of christ but a student of paul. (which is why we know the book of luke was written first and closer to the time of christ than most believe.
Jesus of the gospels is legendary, christ is mythical.  Luke wasn't a historian of any kind.

Quote:
Quote:If jesus was a composite character, he's not historical, you see.  
didn't say he was composit.. the other secular historians obviously have a varying degree of understanding of christ and simply wrote what THEY PERSONALLY understood to be true. Christ was a large and complex person and ad many facets to him. it is not surprising that a common man 2000 years ago did not see the big picture spelled out in the bible. how could they it took several apostoles to compile what we know of christ. and to expect a man 2000 years ago who primary qualification is he could read and write to understand the nature of god with out god holding his hand (like he did with luke/which seemingly invalidates his secular status automatically) what we have is the best a finite mind could produce depending on how close a given historian was to jesus
Christ is both mythical and composite - ergo not even a candidate for any historical jesus.
Quote:
Quote: Every single historical jesus candidate would be, if any of them existed, the single best argument against the religion of christianity that could be offered.  Some random jew who bitched about the world as it was and died, achieving nothing.

You sure you don't throw your chips in with some mythical christ, instead?  Remember, big guys listening.
all in.
Exactly.  You do not believe that any historical jesus existed.  You believe in a mythical christ to the exclusion of any contrapositive claim about a historic man. That's why none of their research buttresses your superstitions. None of those guys, is your guy. You're looking for a god - they're talking about a man.
It's bad for the rest of the world when americans are paid so little they can only afford chocolate mined by child slaves and clothes made in overseas sweatshops. - Robyn Pennacchia
Reply
#63
RE: Imagine this...
(May 4, 2021 at 3:49 pm)Drich Wrote: and like it or not in the official writing of josephus, jesus is mention as well in 4 other historical documents written by period historians:
https://dowym.com/voices/5-secular-non-b...-ministry/

Of the five writers:

1) Tacitus was writing about 80-100 years after Jesus' alleged death and not about Jesus either but a group which as far as we can tell were called Chrestians or followers of Chrestus (the oldest extant copy has a clear rubbing out of the e in "Chrestianos" and insterting of an i to make it "Christianos". So no, not a reference to Jesus, maybe a reference to christians, though not likely.

2) The Babylonian Talmud was written after 200CE when christianity was an established religion in direct competition to judaism. It mentioning Jesus has no bearing on whether Jesus was a historical figure, no more than books refuting the Hellenic religion are a proof of Zeus' existence. Also, as a religious document, it is not "secular".

3) Josephus, see above. We know he didn't write about Jesus and we can pretty much point out who inserted the references to Jesus in Josephus' works; Eusebius in c 325CE.

4) There is no evidence that Mara ben-Serapion wrote about Jesus. That is simply a post-hoc justification by christian apologists to give a fake legitimacy to their mythology. And the fact that he was talking about a Jewish king that was murdered by necessity precludes him talking about Jesus.

5) Pliny wasn't talking about Jesus, he was talking about a crazy cult known as christians who were causing trouble for the good governance of the provence he was Pro-Consul. Not evidence for Jesus, no more than Bergoglio in Rome today is.

So Drippy your link is nought for five. How does it feel to be constantly shown to be a luddite know-nothing mountebank?
As a species, we are fucked. To the next generation, I offer my inadequate apologies.
Reply
#64
RE: Imagine this...
The historical jesus has the worst...groupies...ever. They wouldn't recognize him in a crowd, and if they ever met him, they'd insist he signed someone else's album.
It's bad for the rest of the world when americans are paid so little they can only afford chocolate mined by child slaves and clothes made in overseas sweatshops. - Robyn Pennacchia
Reply
#65
RE: Imagine this...
(May 6, 2021 at 10:41 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:
(May 5, 2021 at 9:53 am)Drich Wrote: says who?
Words, that's who.
who's words? unlike most of you, written words have no intrinsic value (internal value/value on their own) what gives words value is who spoke them and how they measure to the truth.
Quote:They're looking for a man - not a god.  The term exclusively refers to a man - not a god.  Historical jesus, not legendary jesus or mythical christ.
again another very distinct difference between our thought processes. i do not allow myself to cut out historically documented events just because they do not fit my narrative. take the document or leave it. i can not cherry pick what i want to believe.


Quote:Jesus of the gospels is legendary, christ is mythical.  Luke wasn't a historian of any kind.
my short minded brother there wasn't a university of historical record keeping a 1st century historian must graduate from to be considered a proper historian. what made a 1st century writer a historian was the subject matter he wrote about. if he recorded events or researched and recorded events he was deemed a historian. luke fits this bill like it or not. what's more his non affiliation with the church in the book of Luke makes that record a secular account.

Quote:Christ is both mythical and composite - ergo not even a candidate for any historical jesus.
that's not true.. again i provided a list of period correct historians who all establish christ as a living breathing man who lived in the time and place the bible describes. like it or not, Christ is an establish person in that time period more so than any other living figure in that time or place,aside from the emperor of rome. Real/non biased historian can not deny Christ. not without calling every other person who was said to be alive in that same time and place. as there is more written by christ than those who you take for granted were there.

Quote:Exactly.  You do not believe that any historical jesus existed.  You believe in a mythical christ to the exclusion of any contrapositive claim about a historic man.  That's why none of their research buttresses your superstitions.  None of those guys, is your guy.  You're looking for a god - they're talking about a man.
you just making wild accusations at this point trying to red herring off topic.. when ever you collect yourself and want to have a real discussion then please address the topic in a way that reflects the things i have said.
Reply
#66
RE: Imagine this...
Hey drick, if your brother short minded, does that make you lilliputian minded?
Reply
#67
RE: Imagine this...
Christ was an idea.  Philo of Alexandria, a Hellenized Jew, wrote of the Stoic concept of Logos:  “For the Father of the universe has caused him to spring up as the eldest son."  Philo wrote this around the time the Gospel of Thomas says Jesus made clay birds and brought them to life.

The idea of a son of God caught on.  Soon, there was fan fiction.  Then dudes saying, I'm dude.  The Gospel of John completes the line.
Reply
#68
RE: Imagine this...
(May 11, 2021 at 4:12 pm)Drich Wrote: again another very distinct difference between our thought processes. i do not allow myself to cut out historically documented events just because they do not fit my narrative. take the document or leave it. i can not cherry pick what i want to believe.
Good for you - but what you believe in isn't any of the historical jesi.  

Quote:my short minded brother there wasn't a university of historical record keeping a 1st century historian must graduate from to be considered a proper historian. what made a 1st century writer a historian was the subject matter he wrote about. if he recorded events or researched and recorded events he was deemed a historian. luke fits this bill like it or not. what's more his non affiliation with the church in the book of Luke makes that record a secular account.
No, he doesn't....and no....nothing in magic book is a secular account.  Words - again.

Quote:that's not true.. again i provided a list of period correct historians who all establish christ as a living breathing man who lived in the time and place the bible describes. like it or not, Christ is an establish person in that time period more so than any other living figure in that time or place,aside from the emperor of rome. Real/non biased historian can not deny Christ. not without calling every other person who was said to be alive in that same time and place. as there is more written by christ than those who you take for granted were there.
Entirely true, go look it up for yourself.  No real unbiased historian™ has a thing to fucking say about christ as history.  This, even though plenty of them do believe that jesus was christ.  The rest is the same garbage you've peddled before and been corrected on - I see no reason to re-correct you.  

Quote:you just making wild accusations at this point trying to red herring off topic.. when ever you collect yourself and want to have a real discussion then please address the topic in a way that reflects the things i have said.
You don't believe in any historical jesus.  You think those accounts of a man who lived and died and was forgotten like any other are both false, and heretical. Your disagreements with words, historians, and history...aren't disagreements with me. I'm a little bit surprised that you gave such little care to the historicity of jesus that you didn't know this stuff already. Seems like it might be important - even though you strenuously disagree with everything the subject matter contains. OTOH, it's often the case that people are embarrassed by the progenitor of their cult, I suppose. Preferring legend and myth to the uncomfortable humanity of a real person.

The historical jesus, put simply, is the notion - based on the criterion of embarrassment - that a man was baptized by john and crucified by rome. That's it. That's all. That's the whole enchilada. That's the historical jesus that historians are nearly (lol) universally agreed on. Where was he born? Not a clue. Where did he live? Not a clue. What was his name? Not a clue. What was he crucified for? Not a clue. What did he have to say..about anything? Not a clue. Did he have disciples? Not a clue. Did they continue on after his death? Not a clue.
It's bad for the rest of the world when americans are paid so little they can only afford chocolate mined by child slaves and clothes made in overseas sweatshops. - Robyn Pennacchia
Reply
#69
RE: Imagine this...
(May 12, 2021 at 3:30 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote:
(May 11, 2021 at 4:12 pm)Drich Wrote: again another very distinct difference between our thought processes. i do not allow myself to cut out historically documented events just because they do not fit my narrative. take the document or leave it. i can not cherry pick what i want to believe.
Good for you - but what you believe in isn't any of the historical jesi.  
i assume you mean jesus not that im trying to be a spelling nazi, not not aware of a jesi in the role of a jesus.. that said yes i do, just not your version of the historical jesus. and again what makes your version of the historical jesus right?

Quote:my short minded brother there wasn't a university of historical record keeping a 1st century historian must graduate from to be considered a proper historian. what made a 1st century writer a historian was the subject matter he wrote about. if he recorded events or researched and recorded events he was deemed a historian. luke fits this bill like it or not. what's more his non affiliation with the church in the book of Luke makes that record a secular account.
Quote:No, he doesn't....and no....nothing in magic book is a secular account.  Words - again.
again yes he does.. and yes... and luke account was written hundreds of year before as a standalone historical account before the bible/magic book was compiled. As again luke at the time of authorship was not a follower/christian affiliated with the church or those events. he was sent by his master a none christian to document and send back a report of what went down with Jesus.
Quote:Entirely true, go look it up for yourself.  No real unbiased historian™ has a thing to fucking say about christ as history. 
like it or not my guy luke and everyone else who documented a gospel that wasn't there did so as a scribe or from a point of documenting history. you only dismiss them because they were later assimilated into the bible.. that is dishonest assessment. take the civil war.. let say between the washington news paper that came out weekly and the atlanta new paper that came out bi weekly every single major even minor events of the civil war was documented. then 100 years later (more like 300 years later) all those papers were compiled alone with personal letter from both sides, into one exhaustive collection of books on the civil war.. then say someone may want to make the argument that the civil war was fought because the south wanted to own slaves.. but this book does not full agree with this idea, so this whole book is dismissed as souther propaganda, because it contains news paper clippings and letters from southern soldiers which clearly have to be full indoctrinated and can be dismissed without review. this is what you are doing with the bible. you are taking primary source material out of the context in which it was written, and forcing it to align itself with ritual from a completely different religion. one you have deemed foolish and or immoral tainting everything in the book.

It's flat intellectual dishonesty to dismiss the whole bible and everyone's individual work as religious. theses are the people who havent any interest in truth only an easy intellectual way out without looking at or considering anything that might threaten their prejudice narrative or sense of superority.

Quote:This, even though plenty of them do believe that jesus was christ.  The rest is the same garbage you've peddled before and been corrected on - I see no reason to re-correct you.  
see above.. "seeking easy way out with out thought or effort." just a move to dismiss point to your own sense of superiority.
aside from being pure lazy, this does not work here sport.
try something else. or roll over and go back to sleep.

Quote:You don't believe in any historical jesus.  You think those accounts of a man who lived and died and was forgotten like any other are both false, and heretical.  Your disagreements with words, historians, and history...aren't disagreements with me.  I'm a little bit surprised that you gave such little care to the historicity of jesus that you didn't know this stuff already.  Seems like it might be important - even though you strenuously disagree with everything the subject matter contains.  OTOH, it's often the case that people are embarrassed by the progenitor of their cult, I suppose.  Preferring legend and myth to the uncomfortable humanity of a real person.

The historical jesus, put simply, is the notion - based on the criterion of embarrassment - that a man was baptized by john and crucified by rome.  That's it. That's all.  That's the whole enchilada.  That's the historical jesus that historians are nearly (lol) universally agreed on.  Where was he born?  Not a clue.  Where did he live? Not a clue.  What was his name?  Not a clue.  What was he crucified for?  Not a clue.  What did he have to say..about anything?  Not a clue.  Did he have disciples?  Not a clue.  Did they continue on after his death?  Not a clue.
Jerkoff
again, once you look at first person records, the historical jesus fills out to the gospel specifications. again not letting you dismiss the accounts of luke and mark just because you say so/just because you are not intellectually honest to admit that those two by all rights were non affiliated historians/scribes. so suck it up, move on or your welcome to try again. this time we will need some citations. not just the fact that their work was included in the bible 300 years after or some biased bull shite commentary by some contemporary hater. Rather we need to see primary sourced material that shows luke and mark to be a shill for the church/conspired to be included in a religious book of magic. (your standard of proof not mine just holding you to it as what is good for the goose is also good for the atheist)
Reply
#70
RE: Imagine this...
Trouble is, there ARE no ‘first person records’ of an historical Jesus. There are no contemporary mentions of an historical Jesus.

None.

Boru
‘Let me never fall into the vulgar mistake of dreaming that I am persecuted whenever I am contradicted.’ Ralph Waldo Emerson
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  How do Christians imagine 2nd coming of Jesus? Fake Messiah 39 1828 September 15, 2020 at 11:01 am
Last Post: Rhizomorph13
  Something I want you to imagine Lemonvariable72 68 14407 September 30, 2013 at 11:51 am
Last Post: Tonus
  Imagine a spiritual age, where the world never ends Castle 34 10339 June 14, 2011 at 11:39 pm
Last Post: Rhizomorph13



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)