Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
24-10-2013, 02:10 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(23-10-2013 02:53 PM)morondog Wrote:  And where people only have Caesar for a reference they are careful to mention that fact, as in, for example druidic customs - most of the knowledge of them comes from what Caesar wrote as his legions were running around Gaul dismantling the local religion...

It's illogical to dispute the existence of Caesar, too much *other* evidence, impossible to fabricate, points to him.

With the Bible, there *are* other gospels, which I'm sure would make uncomfortable reading for you, given that they contain yet *more* magical thinking, but apart from scriptures written by believers sometimes many centuries after the events they purport to describe, there's nothing else (as far as I know from my reading, if you know better please enlighten me).

I've READ lost gospels and the apocrypha. They don't make me uncomfortable. See my threads elsewhere refuting them.

If it's illogical to dispute Caesar's existence, it's likewise illogical to dispute the historical Jesus. Why then, do you do so?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
24-10-2013, 02:12 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(24-10-2013 02:03 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  But a balanced view says that in 1) Caesar's case et al, you have panegyric accounts and 2) modern translations of the Bible rely almost wholly on texts so old monastaries hadn't yet been created...

I ain't an expert. But your reasoning seems lousy. How do you address the point that they are not contemporaneous with the events they describe and are written by people with a vested interest ? You *cannot* just take them at face value as you would like to.

And *you're* not an expert either so spare me your bullshit of 'a balanced view'.

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
03-11-2013, 09:52 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(10-10-2013 10:22 AM)PersephoneK Wrote:  But anyway, I was using Carrier to debunk Atwill, not that Jesus existed.


I don't think you can use Richard Carrier for anything. I made a short comment on his blog, and it immediately became apparent that he knows nothing about biblical history. Here are some extracts from his reply for you:


>>Carrier says:
>>No mention is made of any arms being taken (onto the Mount of Olives).
Has Dr Carrier ever read the New Testament? Jesus ordered swords to be purchased in Luke 22:36. They were delivered to Jesus in Luke 22:38. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives in Luke 22:39. And those same swords were used on the Mount of Olives in 22:50 to cut off an ear. So why does Prof Richard Carrier not know of this?

>>Carrier says:
>>Jesus is not the high priest in any Gospel narrative.
Yet Hebrews 7 details how and why Jesus became High Priest. The explanation is complex, because Jesus was not a Levite and needed an excuse, but luckily Hebrews 3:1 and 8:1 give a summary. The first of these says: “Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus” That sounds like a High Priest to me.

>>Carrier says:
>>There is no revolt in the Gospels.
Yet Mark 15:7 says, quote:
“And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made revolution with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.”
In what way is that not a revolution?

>>Carrier says:
>>Barabbas was the leader of the revolt, not the
>>Gospel Jesus. And Barabbas ... is not crucified.
It appears that Richard Carrier does not know that Barabbas was also called Jesus; and that the Koran, the Talmud and the Gospel of Barnabas all say there was a switch of characters, and so Jesus was not crucified.

>>Carrier says:
>>The only Jesus the Talmudic rabbis know about died
>>before the Romans arrived in Judaea.
In addition to the quotes already given in Chapter IX, the Jewish Encyclopaedia says:
“the pseudonym ‘Balaam’ is given to Jesus in Sanh. 106b and Giṭ. 57a”
So Jesus is to be found in the Talmud, under the name ‘Yeshu the Nazarene’ and under the pseudonym ‘Balaam’. Why does Richard Carrier not know of this?

>>Carrier says:
>>The Vulgate Cycle misidentifies Vespasian as the son of Titus.
If this was not so sad, it would be funny. Here is a professor of history who does not know that the Vulgate Cycle has the opposite naming convention for the Flavian emperors, to that given by modern scholarship. (Because Vespasian and Titus have exactly the same names - Titus Flavius Vespasianus Augustus - they can be easily confused). Please see the book King Jesus for details.

>>Carrier says:
>>The Vulgate Cycle (calls) Vespasian a leper rather than the emperor.
It would appear that Richard Carrier does not know that lepros (a leper) refers to someone with scales (of a fish). Thus Vespasian (ie: Titus) was being identified as a supporter of Christianity, because the symbol of Christianity was and is the fish (the Christian Ichthus).

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664


Can you imagine any historian being quite so vacuous, that he does not know that swords were were bought for and used by Jesus followers on the Mount of Olives? And Richard Carrier sets himself up an an authority on the historicity of Jesus?

Ralph
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 07:09 PM
Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(24-10-2013 02:10 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(23-10-2013 02:53 PM)morondog Wrote:  And where people only have Caesar for a reference they are careful to mention that fact, as in, for example druidic customs - most of the knowledge of them comes from what Caesar wrote as his legions were running around Gaul dismantling the local religion...

It's illogical to dispute the existence of Caesar, too much *other* evidence, impossible to fabricate, points to him.

With the Bible, there *are* other gospels, which I'm sure would make uncomfortable reading for you, given that they contain yet *more* magical thinking, but apart from scriptures written by believers sometimes many centuries after the events they purport to describe, there's nothing else (as far as I know from my reading, if you know better please enlighten me).

I've READ lost gospels and the apocrypha. They don't make me uncomfortable. See my threads elsewhere refuting them.

If it's illogical to dispute Caesar's existence, it's likewise illogical to dispute the historical Jesus. Why then, do you do so?

Caesar wrote books, Jesus did not.

"Laissez nous faire!"

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor will I ever ask another man to live for mine."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-11-2013, 10:47 PM (This post was last modified: 03-11-2013 11:40 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(24-10-2013 02:10 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  If it's illogical to dispute Caesar's existence, it's likewise illogical to dispute the historical Jesus. Why then, do you do so?


LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!

We have contemporary attestation of Caesar; both from his allies, his enemies, and neutral observers. We have Caesar's own words, 'The Civil Wars', a classic of Latin literature. We have statues and coinage that not only corroborate his image, but date to the same time as his rule. Not only that, but if he didn't exist, history would be different. If Caesar had not crossed the Rubicon with his army and ended the Civil War, he would have never been Emperor of Rome.


Do we have anything close to this for Jesus? Not even fucking close. Nope. The earliest writing are Paul's letters, and they are entirely compatible with a spiritual celestial Jesus that never actually existed here on Earth. All that was required for Christianity to flourish was the idea, the belief, in Jesus.

Jesus didn't actually have to exist as is claimed in order to explain anything.


Try again PJ, your shit still smells.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like EvolutionKills's post
03-11-2013, 11:34 PM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
There seems to be no other accounts of a historic jesus outside the church, perhaps Jesus was nothing more than the personification of the christian mythologies, something to aspire to, to emulate. Clearly to do that would be blasphemy to try to take his teachings at heart would be blasphemy according to the current dogma, you can't take the qualities of a god. Don't you see? You are believing in your own metaphors, literal interpretations will only bring strife in your life. Look at the world of today, why must there be so much hatred between religions? Everyone thinks they are the one true religion all the others are damnations. All the people outside of religion our demonised. This is no way to live life.

"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
04-11-2013, 02:54 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(03-11-2013 09:52 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  
(10-10-2013 10:22 AM)PersephoneK Wrote:  But anyway, I was using Carrier to debunk Atwill, not that Jesus existed.


I don't think you can use Richard Carrier for anything. I made a short comment on his blog, and it immediately became apparent that he knows nothing about biblical history. Here are some extracts from his reply for you:


>>Carrier says:
>>No mention is made of any arms being taken (onto the Mount of Olives).
Has Dr Carrier ever read the New Testament? Jesus ordered swords to be purchased in Luke 22:36. They were delivered to Jesus in Luke 22:38. Jesus went to the Mount of Olives in Luke 22:39. And those same swords were used on the Mount of Olives in 22:50 to cut off an ear. So why does Prof Richard Carrier not know of this?

>>Carrier says:
>>Jesus is not the high priest in any Gospel narrative.
Yet Hebrews 7 details how and why Jesus became High Priest. The explanation is complex, because Jesus was not a Levite and needed an excuse, but luckily Hebrews 3:1 and 8:1 give a summary. The first of these says: “Consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus” That sounds like a High Priest to me.

>>Carrier says:
>>There is no revolt in the Gospels.
Yet Mark 15:7 says, quote:
“And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made revolution with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection.”
In what way is that not a revolution?

>>Carrier says:
>>Barabbas was the leader of the revolt, not the
>>Gospel Jesus. And Barabbas ... is not crucified.
It appears that Richard Carrier does not know that Barabbas was also called Jesus; and that the Koran, the Talmud and the Gospel of Barnabas all say there was a switch of characters, and so Jesus was not crucified.

>>Carrier says:
>>The only Jesus the Talmudic rabbis know about died
>>before the Romans arrived in Judaea.
In addition to the quotes already given in Chapter IX, the Jewish Encyclopaedia says:
“the pseudonym ‘Balaam’ is given to Jesus in Sanh. 106b and Giṭ. 57a”
So Jesus is to be found in the Talmud, under the name ‘Yeshu the Nazarene’ and under the pseudonym ‘Balaam’. Why does Richard Carrier not know of this?

>>Carrier says:
>>The Vulgate Cycle misidentifies Vespasian as the son of Titus.
If this was not so sad, it would be funny. Here is a professor of history who does not know that the Vulgate Cycle has the opposite naming convention for the Flavian emperors, to that given by modern scholarship. (Because Vespasian and Titus have exactly the same names - Titus Flavius Vespasianus Augustus - they can be easily confused). Please see the book King Jesus for details.

>>Carrier says:
>>The Vulgate Cycle (calls) Vespasian a leper rather than the emperor.
It would appear that Richard Carrier does not know that lepros (a leper) refers to someone with scales (of a fish). Thus Vespasian (ie: Titus) was being identified as a supporter of Christianity, because the symbol of Christianity was and is the fish (the Christian Ichthus).

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4664


Can you imagine any historian being quite so vacuous, that he does not know that swords were were bought for and used by Jesus followers on the Mount of Olives? And Richard Carrier sets himself up an an authority on the historicity of Jesus?

Ralph

Did you reply to him on his blog ? Mind linking to the conversation ?

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
[+] 2 users Like morondog's post
04-11-2013, 02:57 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(04-11-2013 02:54 AM)morondog Wrote:  Did you reply to him on his blog ? Mind linking to the conversation ?


I'd like to see that too, Carrier doesn't appear to be afraid to respond to serious inquiries.

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 05:48 AM
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(03-11-2013 07:09 PM)Crimson Flyboy Wrote:  Caesar wrote books, Jesus did not.


On the contrary, he probably did.

One of the greatest books missing from history is "The history of the kings of Judaea" by Justus of Tiberius. It is likely that this is either James Justus (brother of Jesus) or perhaps Jesus Justus (Jesus).

As a King of the Jews, and a tekton (a Freemason), it is highly likely that Jesus did indeed write a diary or biography of his life.


Ralph
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-11-2013, 06:00 AM (This post was last modified: 04-11-2013 06:04 AM by ralphellis.)
RE: Story of Jesus Christ now proven to be a fabrication
(04-11-2013 02:54 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(03-11-2013 09:52 AM)ralphellis Wrote:  I don't think you can use Richard Carrier for anything. I made a short comment on his blog, and it immediately became apparent that he knows nothing about biblical history. Here are some extracts from his reply for you:

Ralph

Did you reply to him on his blog ? Mind linking to the conversation ?


Yes, but he banned me from his site, for pointing out his errors.

This is becoming a trend in modern so-called scholarship, as I have been banned from eight academic sites thus far. And this is not for being abusive, I just say, "sorry, you have this and that wrong" - and ** pow ** you are banned.

And they are pretty foul-mouthed too, these so called 'academics'. Here was another of my many blogsite bans:
http://oi42.tinypic.com/w0gfg3.jpg
This is Joel Watts, who writes for Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joel-l-wat...80458.html
Nice guy...

How has academia got itself to the position where it cannot debate anything, or have its errors corrected?

I have a conspiratorial theory for this. Although all these scholars are all linked to the Jesus-Myth project, one of these so-called scholars, Daniel McClellan, turned out to be a fundamentalist Mormon. The Joel Watts mentioned above is a fundamentalist Christian. While Richard Carrier quotes extensively from the Book of Mormon, as if that has any relevance in the historicity of Jesus.

Just sayin'...

Ralph
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: