If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-11-2014, 09:47 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:44 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:40 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  AND its interesting that YOU DONT LaughatLaughatLaughat

Look I can make funny faces too! Smile LaughatLaughatLaughat

NOT BAD AT ALL!!! Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:48 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:47 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:44 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  Look I can make funny faces too! Smile LaughatLaughatLaughat

NOT BAD AT ALL!!!

Aww thank you Girl_nails Blush

Dodgy

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:50 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 07:18 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  ]And this totally isn't a Ptolemy coin featuring the profile of Alexander with an elephant scalp, celebrating their totally non-existent successful campaign in India.

Coins are not evidence for a person’s existence, as shown by coins of Athena. If they can be used as evidence for the existence of Alexander, they can be used as evidence for the existence of Athena. You’re operating on some serious confirmation bias. You tried initially to suggest other collaborating aspects would have made her existence likely , like her being considered a queen of athens, and then your ass walked away from that line of reasonings like the plague, you cowardly son of a bitch, lol. I like how you keep your cards close, afraid of what they likely will reveal.


Quote:Totally not a bust of Ptolemy, Pharaoh of Egypt, general and bodyguard to Alexander the Great, King of Macedonia.}

And these are totally not pictures of Jesus, or Paul:

https://www.google.com/search?q=pictures...CAYQ_AUoAQ


And these are totally not statues of Greek Gods:

https://www.google.com/search?q=greek+go...91&bih=591
Since statues are not reliable evidence for a persons existence, since statues are made all the time for non-existent individuals. You can’t cherry pick the evidence.

Quote:Why is it likely false? You makes claims without backing up your assumptions with reasons or evidence.

Because we have no primary sources, it’s likely these were destroyed on purpose to cover it up. If they were so accessible that all these writers referenced them, where are they now? People make the same argument for the Gospels that they were referencing other earlier sources, sources written originally written in aramaic, being that certain passages are written in aramaic, and some only make sense when translated to Aramaic rather than read in greek. As Ehrman likes to claim: ““In addition to Mark, we have Q, M (which is possibly made of multiple sources), L (also possibly multiple sources), two or more passion narratives, a signs source, two discourse sources, the kernel (or original) Gospel behind the Gospel of Thomas, and possibly others. ”

Of course none of these supposed documents exist today since we don’t have them we can safely say they didn’t exist, just like since we don’t have these supposed original accounts of alexander, than we can safely say they didn’t exist either.

Quote:No, people attempting to make false equivocations to further their own ends are being dishonest. You entirely ignore the separate contexts and the other archaeological primary source for Alexander of Macedonia, sources of evidence that are entirely missing for any supposed Jesus of Nazareth.

The archeological evidence doesn’t point to the existence of Alexander, because the same shit exists for pagan dieties, or pagan god-kings, lol.You can’t use it in support the existence of Alexander, anymore so than you can use it for the existence e of Zeus. Logic fail, 101.

You also want to lay claim to Alexander's existence because certain occurrences are attributed to him, attribution is not evidence for a person existence, because they can always be miss-attributions, or read as attributions to mythological god-kings, sort of like how Christians attribute certain events and occurrences to Yahweh.

Quote:Also let's not forget that Athena was a goddess and lived atop Mt. Olympus with the other gods. She lacks the foundation in history and the archaeologicalevidence of an actual historical person with exaggerated deeds like Alexander, or the characteristics of purposeful euhemerization like Romulus and other purely mythical figures.

Again this reasoning doesn’t work. The writers of the gospels all placed Jesus in history, as a jewish teacher, in the first century, believed to be the messiah, who died under Pilate, in fact Tacitus mentions Jesus execution under Pilate (in fact his only reference to Pilate), clearly show that even he believed Jesus was a historical person. And we all know from mythicist, that just because everybody believed he was a historical person, told stories of him as such, spoke of meeting his brother, the death of his brother, this doesn’t lend support to the person actually existing. Ain’t that right?

Your suggestion that Athena existence would be compelling if she was believed to have been an actual historical person, fails again, for the same reason it’s fails for Jesus. Duh.

Quote:What reasoning?

The one that gets erased when you find yourself in comprising and contradictory position. I’m sure no one else sees it, but you and I clearly do, lol. You tried to claim that if Athena was referenced as a queen of Athens, given attributes that are almost exclusively used for historical persons this, lived at a certain point in history, rather than on Mt. Olympus this would suggest her existence was likely. And once you realized the predicament you put your self into, you ran away scared. Hence your comment “what reasoning”. lol.

Quote:Sources? And where those appearances tied to an actual, physical, mortal Athena, couched in actual history with matching archaeological evidence?

“Pausanias, Description of Greece 1. 24. 5 :
"[The Parthenon :] As you enter the temple [of Athena] that they name the Parthenon, all the sculptures you see on what is called the pediment refer to the birth of Athena,”

The assisting of Perseus in his quest to slay the Gorgon and the Argonauts in their quest for the Golden Fleece;
The assisting of Herakles with his twelve labours;
The weaving contest with Arakhne who was transformed by the goddess into a spider;
The blinding of Teiresias for viewing her naked in the bath;
The Judgement of Paris in which she competed with Hera and Aphrodite for the prize of the golden apple;
The Trojan War where she sided with the Greeks in battle, but attacked their ships with a storm when they failed to punish Oilean Ajax for violating her Trojan shrine.
http://www.theoi.com/Olympios/Athena.html

We have archaeological evidence confirming her birth, we even have coins and sculptures of her as well.

In fact we even know of a alexander myth at the time, who was also crucial figure in the Trojan war, and the son of a king, who has a miraculous birth, who was also known as Alexander:

"Paris (Ancient Greek: Πάρις), also known as Alexander (Ἀλέξανδρος, Aléxandros),[1] the son of Priam, king of Troy, appears in a number of Greek legends. Probably the best-known was his elopement with Helen, queen of Sparta, this being one of the immediate causes of the Trojan War. Later in the war, he fatally wounds Achilles in the heel with an arrow, as foretold by Achilles's mother, Thetis."

Alexander was likely a euhemerization of Paris, and we know this was much have been a prevalent thing to do, since even the Jewish writers.

[quote]The Gospels were written anonymously, the histories containing Alexander were not.

Well Luke was written anonymously, but still the histories containing Alexander are based primarily on a supposed work attributed to one of his supposed generals hundreds of years after the fact. We do not have the original source, by this supposed general. It could have been a work attributed to him, the same way the gospels were attributed to various disciples. Even if we assume there was a primary source, this primary source would have been written by one of Alexander/Paris’s followers, and was likely a mythological account, using Paris as the basis, and euhemized, just like Jesus, who based on a mythical Yeshuas of 1st century platonism.

Quote:The Gospels were faith literature, written by believers for believers, while the source about Alexander were not.

What ever literature we have of alexander, was based primarily on a source by one of his disciples, they were no different in the regard as the Gospels, and then some later individuals using the gospels to reconstruct a supposed historical Jesus.

Quote:The source we do have for Alexander often cite, claim, and name primary sources, that themselves are attested to by other non-dependent sources.

It doesn’t work, the same reason that even though we know there were several different pre gospel sources, all confirming a historical Jesus, all painting similar portraits of him, originally written in aramaic, the Q, M, L, and various oral traditions, don’t support the existence of Jesus.

Quote:One of those primary source was Alexander's General, Ptolemy.

In fact he’s the only primary source for much of everything that we supposedly have for Alexander, and his writings conveniently are no longer available. The lack of this supposed writing, leaves all the other accounts as hearsay, since none we have no eye witness accounts of his life, all the evidence at best is circumstantial.

Quote:Alexander's General, Ptolemy. , He isn't just some illiterate unknown Galilean fisherman, he was a Pharaoh of Egypt you ignoramus.

We do not have this account, we only have hearsay about this account, and it likely wasn’t even written by him, but as stated previously a story circulating from one of many god-king cults, the ones that worshipped Paris, who was believed to be a preexisting king, who also existed in a platonic other realm like Jesus, and led many wars in heaven.

Quote:Except that those Josephus passages are interpolations and later Christian forgeries that don't appear in the earliest copies, which we know because earlier church fathers (like Origin) complain that Josephus said nothing about Jesus! So there is that you dumbass…

The passage regarding James is not considered an interpolation, but is considered authentic by the majority of scholars. And no you nitwit Origin stated Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Messiah, lol, not that he didn’t believe there was a Jesus. In fact Origen explicitly speaks of Josephus referencing the death of Jesus’s brother James! You sir are an idiot.
Quote:Mere belief in an Alexander the Great, without him actually having existed, not only fails to explain the evidence we do have, but also raises more questions than it answers.

Same could be said of Jesus, but there were mystery cults at the time, who believed in Paris/Alexander the god king, who fought wars but all this took place in a platonic other realm, just like Jesus crucifixion under pontiffs pilate, in fact it was believed these two belonged in the same space. Alexander may ever have been the one to kill Jesus, but this was later changed to Pilate. Many of the actual victories of Athens were attributed to Paris, i.e that the divine spirit led them to these conquest and made them triumphant. Later these accounts were euphemized and the name was modified to Alexander the Great.

Quote:but some obscure and unknown religious zealot who has a cult attached to him that doesn't expand until centuries after his supposed life and death, is not historically dependent.

Yet we know the time frame of the various events, when this cult arose, in the same period of their leaders existence, in fact we even have accounts of Paul who spoke of meeting his brother, and other disciples, and Josephus and Origen both referencing his brother’s death. Like Jesus, Alexander was placed in history seemingly from conception, but these stories were made to look this way by a plot by later adherent to the Paris-Mystery Cult to add a degree of realism to their accounts, they may even have likely invited a figure to act as his general, to write a supposed first hand account of him.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:53 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
Quote:Our Hitch... who may be in hell... well we hope yer not..
Bellowed be thy name
til the Christians kingdom come, they will be done
may we stamp religion from the world forever
Lead us not into reason
But deliver us from the facts
For thine is the my shrine, my hope, and my glory
Amen

That's actually pretty good. I'm gonna post it in the poetry section.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:55 PM (This post was last modified: 05-11-2014 10:54 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:29 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:14 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  99 % of the world once thought the world was flat, deary.

Ahhh so you think 90 percent of the world is infantile for believing in God and youre the superior one... what if you knew we thought you were the "intellectually dishonest ones"? ...90 percent of the world.

Youre more frantic to attack Christianity than a Christian is to convert yer ass lol. You live and breathe for atheism and have no life outside of it... in short your Atheism has become your religion. You are more fervent than any muslim or Christian. Frothing at the mouth in your hatred LMAO.

Bow to Christopher Hitchens your messiah Tongue
Throw a little money to his institutionalized foundation Tongue

Quote:Our Hitch... who may be in hell... well we hope yer not..
Bellowed be thy name
til the Christians kingdom come, they will be done
may we stamp religion from the world forever
Lead us not into reason
But deliver us from the facts
For thine is the my shrine, my hope, and my glory
Amen

Well actually, I could care less. I never said I was "superior" you fucking (Christian) LIAR. ("Judge not, lest ye be judged" ... sound familiar ? "If I have not charity I am but a clanging symbol" ... sound familiar ? )
I know more about your cult than you do.

Mr. Hitchens did many amazing things, but I have no gods. He could have used a scripture scholar, like GWG or someone who specialized in Ancient Near Eastern Literature, (as could many of the other popular atheists, like Sam Harris could), but I am not so arrogant as to tell them what to do. I am a grad student (but Igtheist) in an Ivy League Biblical Studies program, in my off-time. Many of my professors have privately confided in me, they are also non-believers. I would never even think of "outing" them. They know they can trust me. They can "out" themselves (Tomasia ... you reading this ?) I move in and out of Christian culture very comfortably, (as much as that might annoy my very good friends here). One of my aunts was a famous nun-educator-college president, who started a college for disadvantaged women, and tapped my uncles to fund it. Her nun friends are my family, as much as my real family is. I RESPECT people who disagree with me WHO CAN USE reason and an educated thought train to back them up. Calling people morons" (as you do) is just a sign of insecurity. Your ignorance is astounding, and you embarrass yourself with every post. You are an immature idiot, and an embarrassment to humanity, and most of all to sincere educated Christians who never in their wildest dreams, or worst days, behave as you do.

Fuck yourself. I'm done here.
Have a deluded life.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:57 PM (This post was last modified: 05-11-2014 10:02 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:35 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  No I'm mocking your religion LaughatLaughatLaughatLaughatLaughat

Mock it all you like, but I am saved and you are not. ... enjoy your time in hell bitch, I'm sure you'll get used to it eventually.










#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:58 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:46 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:42 PM)grizzlysnake Wrote:  Looks like your still running the course, okay. Keep playing the game, I don't really mind, your getting some great posts back and that's while I'm still reading this thread. Any theists with doubts looking over your posts should scare them enough not wanting to turn out like the way you present yourself. They also get good information from everyone else, a win win actually.

Hmmm... That's funny... I'v been told by readers here I'm teaching them how to fk up an atheist. I'll take that Smile

so how ya doing? Got any help for your buddies in the one on ones with me? They both could use it about now for real Wink

I don't mind you collaborating with them at all... as long as they do the posting... and as long as you answer those questions waiting for them Wink

But how bout those stats... 20,000 for Jesus and 3 for Alexander by 1100 AD?
Isnt that IMPRESSIVE? LaughatLaughatLaughat
Yeah, you know I didn't write anything like that, but that's nothing new from you. You been doing that all over the place. The condescending smiles is a nice touch thoughSmile
I'm doing pretty good though, thanks for asking. Debating though, it's not my scene. People take things way to seriously and they view it actually as an attack when your actually only attacking the ideas not the person. They are kinda inseparable you know? Every believing individual has their own definition of god and what it means to them. Often its not necessarily what their particular religion or denominations say it is. You get this weird, "its a relationship" with god or Jesus, even though they are the same. Jesus is more accessible since he was mortal, easier to relate to. They need that, I think I could understand that. So the question "Why?" is much more important to me.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-11-2014, 09:59 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:57 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:35 PM)Wolfbitn Wrote:  No I'm mocking your religion LaughatLaughatLaughatLaughatLaughat

Mock it all you like, but I am saved and you are not. ... bitch.




I like this version better Tongue



I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Smercury44's post
05-11-2014, 10:00 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 09:59 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:57 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Mock it all you like, but I am saved and you are not. ... bitch.




I like this version better Tongue



They're all good. Big Grin

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
05-11-2014, 10:01 PM
RE: If you believe Alexander the Great existed, then why not Jesus?
(05-11-2014 10:00 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(05-11-2014 09:59 PM)Smercury44 Wrote:  I like this version better Tongue



They're all good. Big Grin

Yes

I hope that the world turns, and things get better. But what I hope most of all is that you understand what I mean when I tell you that, even though I do not know you, and even though I may never meet you, laugh with you, cry with you, or kiss you, I love you. With all my heart, I love you. - V for Vendetta
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: