If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-11-2014, 03:50 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:41 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  But you still believe Alexander existed though his evidence is FLIMSEY compared to the evidence for Jesus Smile

Youre an intellectually dishonest moron... you could at least admit the truth and admit Jesus was a historical figure even if you DONT believe He is God.

What would be the point?

One single person living or not living a long time ago who may or may not have contributed to history in some way. So?

Why so insistent that someone who may have indeed been an amalgam of several people, living at a time when verbal history was collected and homogenized into a running vocabulary of the contemporary goings on?

It would be fascinating to have a read through of a newspaper from such a time but, it would have little relevance for today. Shy

A new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move to higher levels. ~ Albert Einstein
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like kim's post
04-11-2014, 03:51 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:47 PM)cjlr Wrote:  
(04-11-2014 03:34 PM)morondog Wrote:  I will disagree. He was one man who irrevocably changed the course of history of the whole world through his own genius. But there is clear evidence. Archaeology, ancient texts, everything lines up and confirms it. No one takes the ancient texts at face value, it's always a question of how much do you believe or not, was the author trying to write propaganda, those sorts of questions.

OP asks why not the same for Jesus. I'd say *Jesus* is the one for whom it doesn't really matter if he did or didn't exist. He's already a semi or wholly mythical figure. The religion based around his existence is of interest because they're batshit insane, but the religion could have easily started whether or not the actual man existed.

Indeed. The conquest of the Greek cities was led by somebody. The military invasion of the Persian empire was led by somebody. The diadochoi rose to positions of power and influence under somebody. The cross-cultural contact was initiated by somebody. The name and face they stamped on coins, wrote in histories, dedicated on temples, eulogised in epigrams and carved in statue came from somewhere. All these things happened, or else the entirety of history is a fabrication.

Although one can turn batshit insane up to eleven by way of alternate historiography, it rather fails to be compelling.

Perhaps a relevant question is, if so-and-so hadn't existed, what would change? Without someone doing the deeds which demonstrably occurred during the lifetime of the purported Alexander, history would be unrecognisable.

Without the actual, physical existence of Jesus? Nothing. Nothing would be any different; the early church leaders would still have founded their cult and theology on revelation from a mystical being.

Wrong again moron... THE CHURCH is physical evidence of Jesus, as is documentation 10 years remove form His life, and tens of thousands more in the same allotted time for Alexanders documentation Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 03:53 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:46 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  YOU are very loved and desired. YOU don't have to run from the truth or be afraid any more ever. YOU will never be alone again.

You like talking to yourself? Sad...

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
04-11-2014, 03:53 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:50 PM)kim Wrote:  
(04-11-2014 03:41 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  But you still believe Alexander existed though his evidence is FLIMSEY compared to the evidence for Jesus Smile

Youre an intellectually dishonest moron... you could at least admit the truth and admit Jesus was a historical figure even if you DONT believe He is God.

What would be the point?

One single person living or not living a long time ago who may or may not have contributed to history in some way. So?

Why so insistent that someone who may have indeed been an amalgam of several people, living at a time when verbal history was collected and homogenized into a running vocabulary of the contemporary goings on?

It would be fascinating to have a read through of a newspaper from such a time but, it would have little relevance for today. Shy

Why lie about His existence as you guys insist on doing? Why the double standard with Alexander the great?

Its only because of your bias, and a biased science is not science AT ALL... and studying HISTORY IS a science based on observation of documentation, eyewitness testimony and etc..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 03:55 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:46 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Now THIS is for the OP

YOU are very loved and desired. YOU don't have to run from the truth or be afraid any more ever. YOU will never be alone again.

When you planned out your strategy for creating a sock puppet of someone who was wavering in their faith, using it to pretend that you had support even though its posts are written in your own style and then trying to make us believe that we had lost a new member, did it all play out better in your head?

If there's one thing that this forum is accustomed to, its sock puppets and theist trolls pretending to be something that they aren't.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
04-11-2014, 03:55 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:53 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(04-11-2014 03:46 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  YOU are very loved and desired. YOU don't have to run from the truth or be afraid any more ever. YOU will never be alone again.

You like talking to yourself? Sad...

LMAO... is the admin here going to keep letting you idiots look like morons or are they going to inform you that you ARE morons and WRONG?

I frankly don't care which... im loving this Smile

.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 03:56 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:55 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(04-11-2014 03:46 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Now THIS is for the OP

YOU are very loved and desired. YOU don't have to run from the truth or be afraid any more ever. YOU will never be alone again.

When you planned out your strategy for creating a sock puppet of someone who was wavering in their faith, using it to pretend that you had support even though its posts are written in your own style and then trying to make us believe that we had lost a new member, did it all play out better in your head?

If there's one thing that this forum is accustomed to, its sock puppets and theist trolls pretending to be something that they aren't.

Aaaand theres THE moron... lmao

Admin??? Do you like your people here looking this paranoid, delusional and just plain stupid? Its ok by me... or you can tell them the truth and ease their paranoia Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2014, 03:57 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:41 PM)kim Wrote:  An interesting trivial side note: Alexander was homosexual... which isn't a big deal, either.

Bi if anything; he had wives, kept concubines, and fathered children.

Ancient sources say he was a bit reserved in all physical relationships, and make no specific reference to homosexuality (even in contemporaneous terms).

(04-11-2014 03:41 PM)kim Wrote:  I think many of the people who want Jesus to have actually existed, also want him to be the way they want him to be. Many of those same people might even overlook the parts of the bible which portray him coarsely.

Some people see only what they want to see and only how they want to see it... and often they only want others to see that as well. Shy

There's a reason early modern Christian artifacts from Kongo depict Kongolese Jesus and those from Japan depict Japanese Jesus.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
04-11-2014, 03:59 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:51 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  Wrong again moron... THE CHURCH is physical evidence of Jesus...

Which church?

There are thousands.

(04-11-2014 03:51 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  , as is documentation 10 years remove form His life...

You previously claimed a date of 50 CE for the earliest possible authorship of the earliest Christian writings.

Those of us who have mastered subtraction would see that 50 - 33 > 10. I guess that doesn't include you?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
04-11-2014, 03:59 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(04-11-2014 03:51 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(04-11-2014 03:47 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Indeed. The conquest of the Greek cities was led by somebody. The military invasion of the Persian empire was led by somebody. The diadochoi rose to positions of power and influence under somebody. The cross-cultural contact was initiated by somebody. The name and face they stamped on coins, wrote in histories, dedicated on temples, eulogised in epigrams and carved in statue came from somewhere. All these things happened, or else the entirety of history is a fabrication.

Although one can turn batshit insane up to eleven by way of alternate historiography, it rather fails to be compelling.

Perhaps a relevant question is, if so-and-so hadn't existed, what would change? Without someone doing the deeds which demonstrably occurred during the lifetime of the purported Alexander, history would be unrecognisable.

Without the actual, physical existence of Jesus? Nothing. Nothing would be any different; the early church leaders would still have founded their cult and theology on revelation from a mystical being.

Wrong again moron... THE CHURCH is physical evidence of Jesus, as is documentation 10 years remove form His life, and tens of thousands more in the same allotted time for Alexanders documentation Smile

You keep claiming that. What tens of thousands? Tens of thousands of what?

And serious scholars really do disagree with you on the dates and credibility of the 'documentation'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: