Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

It's time once more to hit the "The bible is the absolute truth" bunch in the balls.


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> It's time once more to hit the "The bible is the absolute truth" bunch in the balls. Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
It's time once more to hit the "The bible is the a... - 12/22/2017 11:03:31 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
First some historic facts concerning the birth of Jesus:

According to Luke:

2 In those days Caesar Augustus issued a decree that a census should be taken of the entire Roman world. 2 (This was the first census that took place while[a] Quirinius was governor of Syria.) 3 And everyone went to their own town to register.

4 So Joseph also went up from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to Judea, to Bethlehem the town of David, because he belonged to the house and line of David. 5 He went there to register with Mary, who was pledged to be married to him and was expecting a child. 6 While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born, 7 and she gave birth to her firstborn, a son. She wrapped him in cloths and placed him in a manger, because there was no guest room available for them.

Well, here is the rub:

1) Any tax levied by Caesar Augustus would have been on Roman citizens, not everyone in the empire.
2) Joseph would not have had to go back to Bethlehem from Nazareth, because he was not a Roman citizen, thus not under the edict for the tax, his taxes would have been paid to the governor of the region.
3) Luke claims that the tax took place when Quirinius was governor of Syria, and this was between AD 6 and 7.
4) And it happened during the rule of King Herod....

Hey people guess what, Herod died in 4BC!

So there is no way that the account of Luke is even possible, unless of course Herod was some undead zombie or something.

And that does not even address the fact that, according to Christians, Jesus was born in December and shepherds were in the fields tending their flocks, since no shepherd would have his flocks in the fields in the holy land in December, it gets down right cold at night in the December desert.

And of course we have an undead king ordering the massacre of the innocents in Bethlehem to kill the would be king of the Jews.

Oh, yes, the king of the Jews, not king of the Christians, Jesus was a Jew. So he looked a lot like the other Semitic people of the region, you know the ones, they became Muslims.

So he did not have flowing hair, blue eyes like all those great pictures in churches around the world.

Oh, there is no, I mean absolutely zero evidence of the massacre of the innocents.

Then there is the fact that the four gospels contradict themselves on his birth in the first place.

So, all you folks that are claiming the bible is the truth, it would be great if the new testament actually agreed with itself.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI
Profile   Post #: 1
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 11:23:15 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
That's just the tip of the iceberg: fire up the calculator app on your PC and compare the dimensions of Solomon's temple to its volume (in Judges, I think), which don't match.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 2
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 11:26:32 AM   
MrRodgers


Posts: 10540
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline
I've read material and watched programs, several, that claim that a man named Jesus...never existed. In all of recorded Roman history, the name Jesus Christ was never written.

Some life-long scholars tell us that the Romans wrote the bible to rule with a velvet glove rather than an iron fist.

It began in 70 AD some 40 years after the alleged life of christ, making it much 'easier' to get the prediction up until then, correct. Then the bible never directly quotes a man named Jesus.

And yes, the 'story' of Jesus was easily plagiarized from several other similar historical figures all enjoying the same life and suffering betrayal and execution...all also the arising from the dead.

Christianity thus, had a very long and shaky start.

_____________________________

You can be a murderous tyrant and the world will remember you fondly but fuck one horse and you will be a horse fucker for all eternity. Catherine the Great

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.
J K Galbraith

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 3
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 11:27:54 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

Well, let me help you out, Jif.

I just scanned the beginning of your post, but here's just one miss to start with:

There are SIX DIFFERENT "Herod"s in the NT.





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 4
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 11:31:36 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I've read material and watched programs, several, that claim that a man named Jesus...never existed. In all of recorded Roman history, the name Jesus Christ was never written.

That wasn't the name he used in the census, though. Read the tail end of a few of the Gospels (spoiler: he gets crucified) and pay close attention to why they wrote what was written on the banner over his head.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to MrRodgers)
Profile   Post #: 5
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 12:09:16 PM   
WinsomeDefiance


Posts: 6719
Joined: 8/7/2007
Status: offline
Well, I think it refers to Herod Antipos (so?) but it could have been his father who ruled between something like 3 or 4 bc and 2?ad? I haven't taught Sunday school or Vacation Bible school in many decades so my memory is foggy. There were numerous Herods that ruled however.

His name probably wasn't Jesus, more likely he was referred to as Jesuah (Hebrew for Savior, delivered - if I recall correctly).

One of the reasons for my -for lack of a better phrase- crisis of faith, was the discrepancies found in the Bible; this, after being raised to believe that the Bible was THE infallible word of God and was written BY God. Among other reasons.

I still believe strongly in not being a stumbling block for others, so I tend to not argue faith or religion.

There are valuable truths in the works of many spiritual texts, but I tend to believe anything made by man (which might include gods and religion) will be fallible.

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 6
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 12:13:15 PM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
There's a persistent rumour among bible scholars and historians that the reason some gospels made it into the new testament and some were banished to the apocrypha was because they picked out the four gospels that contradicted each other the least when the bible was being compiled.

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to WinsomeDefiance)
Profile   Post #: 7
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 12:26:23 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


Well, let me help you out, Jif.

I just scanned the beginning of your post, but here's just one miss to start with:

There are SIX DIFFERENT "Herod"s in the NT.






And none were king when this particular census was ordered, and specifically, the one that allegedly ordered the massacre of the innocents was already dead.

And again, since Joseph was not a Roman, the census and subsequent tax did not apply to him anyway.

You see, under Roman law, you either had to be born to a Roman family, or made a citizen by decree of the Emperor, or by petition of the Roman governor of the region you were living in, and that was a reward for doing something impressive for the Empire, you know, turn in a rebel leader, save a Roman's life etc.


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

I've read material and watched programs, several, that claim that a man named Jesus...never existed. In all of recorded Roman history, the name Jesus Christ was never written.

Some life-long scholars tell us that the Romans wrote the bible to rule with a velvet glove rather than an iron fist.

It began in 70 AD some 40 years after the alleged life of christ, making it much 'easier' to get the prediction up until then, correct. Then the bible never directly quotes a man named Jesus.

And yes, the 'story' of Jesus was easily plagiarized from several other similar historical figures all enjoying the same life and suffering betrayal and execution...all also the arising from the dead.

Christianity thus, had a very long and shaky start.



The only problem with using Roman records is that the Romans did not consider the people living in the territories Roman, so they did not count.

However, the Jewish historian Josephus did refer to Jesus in two accounts of his historic writings.

quote:

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.


quote:

But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as lawbreakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.


But these accounts bring up some interesting questions concerning Jesus and the crucifixion.

The Romans were great practitioners of this torture, and with the exception of the account of Jesus, men lasted for up to a week crucified.

Secondly, the Romans would not let a crucified person be removed from the crosses until their bodies had decayed to the point of no longer being able to actually hang on the cross, as a way to shame the dead.

Finally, Jesus was taken before the Roman governor for punishment, who would have had no authority over religious criminals, that was left to the Jewish priests to decide, and the punishment for the crime of heresy was stoning.

Now, contrary to popular rightest myth, there is a large group of both Muslims and Jews that believe Jesus actually existed, but was not the actual son of god, but a prophet.

(Remember) when the angels said, “O Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him (God), whose name is the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, revered in this world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (to God). He will speak to the people from his cradle and as a man, and he is of the righteous.” She said, “My Lord, how can I have a child when no mortal has touched me?” He said, “So (it will be). God creates what He wills. If He decrees a thing, He says to it only, ‘Be!’ and it is.” (Quran, 3:45-47)

The case of Jesus with God is like the case of Adam. He created him from dust, and then He said to him, “Be!” and he came into being. (Quran, 3:59)

“I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. I make for you the shape of a bird out of clay, I breathe into it, and it becomes a bird by God’s permission. I heal the blind from birth and the leper. And I bring the dead to life by God’s permission. And I tell you what you eat and what you store in your houses....” (Quran, 3:49)

But then there is one enigmatic verse:

...They said, “We killed the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, the messenger of God.” They did not kill him, nor did they crucify him, but the likeness of him was put on another man (and they killed that man)... (Quran, 4:157)

Which is the basis for the prophet to declare that "the children of the book" are the chosen of Allah.

The children of the book being Jews, Christians and Muslims.





_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 8
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 12:27:53 PM   
WinsomeDefiance


Posts: 6719
Joined: 8/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

There's a persistent rumour among bible scholars and historians that the reason some gospels made it into the new testament and some were banished to the apocrypha was because they picked out the four gospels that contradicted each other the least when the bible was being compiled.


Yes, I have seen documentaries about this, and a paper or two. There have been some very interesting theories posited by theologians , biblical scholars, etymologists etc. I spent a lot of time studying other faiths, spiritual paths. Perhaps to fill the void of my religious upbringing? The history of how the different faiths evolved is very interesting. Truthfully, much of the NT Bible seems to be taken from earlier religions and molded to work with the pagan holidays and rituals.

Anyway, I almost died a couple months ago and it shook me up. Once again I'm back to wondering if there is a hereafter and with my mother dying a year on Jan 3, I don't know if I simply want there to something beyond this experience we call life or if I believe at all in it.

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 9
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 1:21:05 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And none were king when this particular census was ordered, and specifically, the one that allegedly ordered the massacre of the innocents was already dead.


Herod the Great (ruled 37-4 B.C.)
Herod Archelaus (ruled 4 B.C.-A.D. 6)

Which one wasn't in power when Jesus was born?



quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And again, since Joseph was not a Roman, the census and subsequent tax did not apply to him anyway.



For purposes of taxes, conquered populations were often considered "citizens". It's one of the ways Rome increased their power (money) base.

But please, by all means, carry on with your God-hating slant on truth. It's becoming amusing.





_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 10
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 2:43:04 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And none were king when this particular census was ordered, and specifically, the one that allegedly ordered the massacre of the innocents was already dead.


Herod the Great (ruled 37-4 B.C.)
Herod Archelaus (ruled 4 B.C.-A.D. 6)

Which one wasn't in power when Jesus was born?



quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
And again, since Joseph was not a Roman, the census and subsequent tax did not apply to him anyway.



For purposes of taxes, conquered populations were often considered "citizens". It's one of the ways Rome increased their power (money) base.

But please, by all means, carry on with your God-hating slant on truth. It's becoming amusing.







The taxation of the non-Roman conquered peoples was left to the governors, or vassal Kings who sent tributes to Rome, or did you forget that one of the Disciples was a tax collector?

And once more, Joseph would not have been forced to travel to Bethlehem to be taxed, he could have stayed in Nazareth and paid the tax collector there. In point of historic fact, there never was a census/tax decree made in the Empire with such a condition.

Finally, this is about the simple fact that Christians push the idea that the account in the Bible is the absolute final authority on the history of Jesus (or the history of the world and it only being 6000 years old.)

And, finally, since Christians seem to want to believe that they are the only ones that believed that Jesus actually lived, it is time they woke up and smelled the coffee.

General Jewish thoughts on Jesus is that he was a man, a great teacher, executed by the Romans for being a Jewish nationalist and raising the possibility of a revolt among the Jews.

In point of fact the only real change that Jesus preached, was the fact that the faith was for both Jews and gentiles.

And face reality, the gospels themselves were not written by his contemporaries, but some 35 to fifty years after his death. And, while the gospels and the books of the New Testament were decreed by Constantine, there were a number of gospels that were left out, known as the Gnostic gospels, for the simple reason that they did not hold the same philosophy as the accepted gospels, or have you forgotten the discovery of the Nag Hammadi scrolls in Egypt?

And where did I say I was god hating?

FYI, you should see some of the stuff I have written about the book of Mormon and their continued belief that one of the lost tribes of Israel settled in America, despite the fact that no actual scientific evidence supports the claim. DNA haploid markers do not disappear with time or generations, they may mutate, but the genetic trace of the original marker is still there and still able to be traced. There is no Semitic DNA found in the natives of the Americas older than the time of Columbus, but the core haploid marker is Asian, specifically from Mongolia and Siberia.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to DaddySatyr)
Profile   Post #: 11
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 3:00:27 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
please let me help you with your blowhardiness?

in the largest broadest sense, let me put it to you this way. given intelligent people have been intensely studying the bible for a couple thousand years, do you think somehow you have some keen insight to it that all the millions of priests, nuns, pastors, theologians, monks, professors, and even lay people have somehow missed? or that your points have never been raised before? in other words, in the choice between them somehow getting it wrong, and you getting it wrong, which sounds like the more true statement??

ultimately that should suffice and so given that, one would think youd be a bit more humble in your declarations.

but more specifically:

jesus was not born at "year 0" so to speak. his birth is often understood as 4 BC, making herod the great, NOT a dead king during the time of the slaughter of the innocents.

(given that huge faux pas, its a matter of grace that anyone should believe or even address anything else you've written)

https://www.gotquestions.org/what-year-was-Jesus-born.html

as far as there not being any evidence of that, these three sites give a good explanation.

http://tektonics.org/qt/slaughtinn.php
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_the_Innocents
http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2009/12/08/The-Slaughter-of-the-Innocents-Historical-Fact-or-Legendary-Fiction.aspx

as far as taxation, I see Michael addressed that but to add on.

quote:

Whether you were male or female, rich or poor, white, brown or black, Christian, Jew, Roman or Barbarian, if you “belonged” to Rome, you had to pay taxes to Rome


https://earlychurchhistory.org/daily-life/taxes-in-ancient-roman-world/

the whole of luke 20-26 implies people other than your "strictly" roman citizens paid taxes.

I have a bible dictionary that says " when Judea was placed under procurators, the financial system of the empire was introduced...there were levied: 1. tribute of the soil...2. a poll tax...a tax on personal property. 3 export and import duties.

in terms of "citizenship" I have a bible almanac that says "rome also consolidated the empire by granting roman citizenship to certain non-romans...under rome's tolerant laws, a person could hold dual citizenship.

the apostle paul was both jew AND roman citizen and he avails himself of that numerous times throughout the NT.

as if that isn't enough:

your point about jesus in being born in December has absolutely nothing to do with the bible and yes, most Christians understand that's not an exact date and that it has to do with the early church making church life more palatable for pagans. so your statement on that isn't even true.

your point about blond hair blue jesus also has absolutely nothing to do with the bible.

and im not aware of any gospel contradiction concerning jesus birth. please refer to my second and third paragraphs at the top of this post.

and I notice, as always with you, you either refuse or simply cannot reference your points. they just simply appear and everyone is supposed to, excuse the pun, accept them as gospel.

in short, your scholarship sucks.

now---please don't respond with 18 different things that are beside the point.

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 12/22/2017 3:32:26 PM >

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 12
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 3:33:13 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
call this the providence of god. just stumbled across it without really looking for it:

"Is Luke Wrong About the Time of Jesus' Birth?"

quote:

Thanks so much for writing. This apparent mistake in Luke's timeline has been raised many times over the years as proof of the fallibility of the Biblical accounts. I think upon closer examination, you will find that it really doesn't hold up [that is, the "proof of fallibility].

for the whole account, here ya go:

http://www.comereason.org/roman-census.asp



< Message edited by bounty44 -- 12/22/2017 3:34:17 PM >

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 13
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 7:31:07 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
for anyone interested in a large handful of very detailed reading:

http://www3.telus.net/trbrooks/firstcensus.htm

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 14
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 8:22:59 PM   
Marini


Posts: 3629
Joined: 2/14/2010
Status: offline
I am sure many here are enjoying the holiday season!

Merry Christmas to all!!!!




_____________________________

As always, To EACH their Own.
"And as we let our own light shine, we unconsciously give other people permission to do the same. "
Nelson Mandela
Life-long Democrat, not happy at all with Democratic Party.
NOT a Republican/Moderate and free agent

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 15
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/22/2017 9:58:58 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
Funny how 'Christian' attempts to debunk historic fact flies in the face of facts.

My point is not denying the divinity of Jesus, but the fact that the accounts are in error. All four gospels contradict each other.

Not to mention the fact that no shepherd who knew his stuff would have his sheep in the fields over night at this time of year, but that was Constantine.

Now, if you look at astronomic records, of say, the Chinese, you get an interesting change in the timeline, again something Christians dont even consider.

Okay, the Chinese recorded a 'new star' around 10 AD, (probably a super nova) which is the only new star recorded anywhere by anyone even close to the time of Christ.

This also goes along with some observations from non Roman astronomical observations from the middle east, which appeared in the constellation that showed a King to be born somewhere.

And since the gospels were written a number of years after Jesus was crucified, it is entirely possible that since there were no contemporary written accounts to go by, somebody messed up.

For evidence of this possibility, consider that digital recordings of hearing and other 'official' events have been had inaccuracies, hence the reason to keep the original recording.

So if you move the birth of Jesus back to around 10 AD, then you have him born during the reign of Herod.

Of course, if you take the time of his birth by the astronomical observations, you have to throw out December and move it to sometime in mid spring, or the time of the year when most ewes give birth, which makes sense when you consider the shepherds.

But there is still the problem of Joseph having to go to Bethlehem. No Roman tax decree had that condition.

And the only reason that the birth of Jesus had to be in Bethlehem was to fulfill the literal interpretation of Hebrew prophecy. Which, strangely enough, was not required by Jews, who followed the images of the prophecy.

And while many historians dispute the existence of King David, there is more than enough circumstantial evidence that he was a real king of Judea.

And finally, the gospels are Greek translations from Aramaic oral traditions, which does not directly translate. The Greek 'city of David' could have easily been from the Aramaic for "house of David' meaning the bloodline of David.

So the line in Luke "born to you this day, in the city of David' could have actually been "born to you this day in the house of David" meaning a descendant of King David, which if the genealogies given for both Joseph and Mary makes this doubly so.

Which would make Jesus the heir of the true royal bloodline of David, on both paternal and maternal (and considering the generations of separation, the Atheist contention that Jesus would, by this idea, be the product of incest is bullshit.)

And looking at King David, he was blessed of God, chosen of God, anointed in the name of God, and told that his line would produce a messiah, not the Messiah.

And to dispute a few other Christian written in stone thoughts on Jesus.

Christians insist Jesus was unmarried.

Fine, except that the gospels clearly have him teaching in synagogues, unmarried men couldn't do that, in fact it was against Mosaic Law and punishable by stoning.

Being stoned to death would end his teaching fast.

And there is gospel evidence to support this, his first miracle.

At the wedding, Mary, his mother commanded the servants to do as Jesus told them, which means she was the mother of the groom, that is the only way she would be able to tell the servants to do anything.

So? Just who was getting married.

From everything in the gospels, Jesus had a brother James, who was younger. Again the law of Moses comes into play, a younger son cannot be married before a living older brother.

FYI, the idea of Jesus being unmarried and celibate came out from the Catholic church after a scandal involving a married Pope, with a number of mistresses and who owned a few bordellos.

And of course, to get the priests and everyone to go along with this, there had to be a damn good reason, hence Jesus was unmarried and never knew a woman.

Lets thank the church my mother raised me in for really messing with a damn strong message.

I mean would his sacrifice on the cross been less if he had been married and a father?

And no, I am not going into the bullshit of the da Vinci code. The priory of Zion was proven a hoax back in the late 60's by the guy that brought it back to the modern age, in order to pull some scam over the French government.

And the only text disputing his crucifixion is in the Quran, we can chalk that one up to a big, but unlikely maybe.

But the misconception of the heresy of which Jesus was accused of lingers. All of his teachings was based on the fact that all men were the children of god, including Romans, and all should follow the one faith, which at the time was Judaism.

He never actually preached the revolt against Roman law, a real change in the practice of Judaism, except the inclusion of gentiles, which at the time was heresy.

Remember, "render to Caesar that which is Caesar's and render unto god that which is god's"

Which brings me to the most important point. The old testament refers to two Messiahs, not one. The first is to bring the word of God to all men, the second to establish the kingdom of God on earth.

The old testament goes into specifics on the nature of the first, including being born into the house of David. It is equally specific on the coming of the second, which Jesus referred to as coming as a thief in the night, no one would know when it was to happen.

Jesus was the son of God and Son of man, born of a virgin.

The messiah to come is not going to be born of a woman, but be truly divine, immortal. Jesus was not immortal.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to Marini)
Profile   Post #: 16
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/23/2017 4:57:26 AM   
WhoreMods


Posts: 10691
Joined: 5/6/2016
Status: offline
Constantine did consider at least some of that, unless it was Jovian rather than him who made a point of destroying the holy land's records for that particular census.
I thought it was generally accepted that his birthdate was given as December to co-opt the pagan festival of Saturnalia? That would mean that the birth details will have pasted in by whoever Constantine paid to assemble the New Testament quite probably without due care and attention. (That said, in Mark's gospel at least, he definitely acts like a Capricorn...)

_____________________________

On the level and looking for a square deal.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 17
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/23/2017 11:02:58 AM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline
The problem I encounter with the "The bible is the absolute truth" crowd is that if it is not written in the bible, then it not the truth.

Luke's account uses two different men to set the time of his birth, the fact that one of those had died a number of years earlier seems to make no difference to any of them.

However, when considering the star of Jesus, there is an historic record that is incontestable. The astrologers of the middle east recorded a new star, the chinese recorded a new star, but both accounts move the time line back a number of years, there fore Christians refuse to accept the 'altered' timeline, many going so far as to say that science is attempting to disprove the existence of god.

The thing is that history is not a science. Checking written historic accounts and observations have nothing to do with science.

Christian astronomers have long been looking for the star of Jesus, and those people are in agreement that there are two possibilities, a comet or a super nova.

A comet would reappear regularly, and were considered portents of some great event, but since orbital mechanics is pretty much set in stone...

However, a 'new' star seems to indicate that it was a rare event, something previously not seen by the naked eye.

A supernova fits the bill. One night there is nothing, the next there is a new star, that fades over time.

The only record of such an event moves the timeline back to the reign of Herod.

Then you have the issue of the date, Constantine decriminalized Christianity, which is a far cry from making it the one religion of the Empire, nor did he become a Christian until he was on his death bed. Pretty much hedging his bets, since the polytheistic religion of the Empire still had more followers than Christianity.

And yes, the good Emperor did have the basic principles of the faith agreed on, and commissioned the first bible, and considering the written accounts were varied, much of the gospels were probably taken from various sources and edited to fit the needs of the new church. And, the guy who put it all together threw out anything that did not fit the bill, hence the 'forbidden' gospels.

The early church had a nasty history of eliminating groups that did not follow the accepted dogma as established at Nicea.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to WhoreMods)
Profile   Post #: 18
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/23/2017 3:55:14 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
The Bible is a collection of writings by bearded fruitcakes thousands of years ago who were much keener to keep themselves alive by writing what the nearest overlord, who had power over their lives and deaths, wanted to see, than writing the truth. It's a forelorn task to look into the Bible for what *actually happened*. That simply isn't what the Bible is about.

These days, and for me, it seems almost pointless to pick out bits of the Bible in search of what is or is not true about any aspect of Christianity, Christmas included. Christianity as we know it isn't what's in the Bible. It's what Christian priests have *said* Christianity is. The Christmas story that we all know and ... well, love, put up with, deplore, whatever ... is what key church-leaders have told us it is, through the ages.

I'm really not that cynical about the standard Christian Christmas message, nonetheless - if that message is 'Peace on Earth and good will to all men'. It's just that the Right Wing, especially in the USA, has pushed so *fucking* hard for it to be pretty much the opposite - roughly, 'War on Earth; hatred and death to all men who don't agree with what we Right Wing American Christians see as just and moral'.

Still, that's just right wing American Christians. They apparently don't have the slightest understanding of what the rest of the world's Christians think of them, nor do they even care.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 19
RE: It's time once more to hit the "The bible is t... - 12/23/2017 5:50:52 PM   
Milesnmiles


Posts: 1349
Joined: 12/28/2013
Status: offline
I really don't feel like getting into it but please.
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
...
All four gospels contradict each other.
They don't contradict each other, they are four different accounts of the same events and can be put together to make well rounded picture of what took place. Even police will tell you, if four witness tell them what they saw the stories will all be different but often each will have information the others did not mention and in fact if all the stories are exactly the same they become suspicious.
quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
Not to mention the fact that no shepherd who knew his stuff would have his sheep in the fields over night at this time of year, but that was Constantine.
...
Here instead of going by what the Bible actually say about the birth of Jesus you are going by what you have been told. Jesus was not born on the 25 of December, he more likely was born around the 1st or 2nd of October and shepherds could have been in the fields with their sheep at that time.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 20
Page:   [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> It's time once more to hit the "The bible is the absolute truth" bunch in the balls. Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109