Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-11-2015, 08:43 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(10-11-2015 07:57 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(10-11-2015 05:48 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  You don't even get the basic argument, much less know about any of them. Your bullshit is a strawman. No one says they were "expecting a non-historical" messiah. Just more of your usual nonsense.

Regardless if anyone in your view claims said this or not, a conclusion that involves a small sect of jews who expected and imagine a non-historical messiah, would be absurd one.

Well since no one is even talking about that possibility, it's utterly irrelevant. YOU made it up. Carrier never says that. Price never says that. It's a figment of your imagination.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
11-11-2015, 08:27 AM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(10-11-2015 08:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(10-11-2015 07:57 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Regardless if anyone in your view claims said this or not, a conclusion that involves a small sect of jews who expected and imagine a non-historical messiah, would be absurd one.

Well since no one is even talking about that possibility, it's utterly irrelevant. YOU made it up. Carrier never says that. Price never says that. It's a figment of your imagination.

I believe I said it. Consider

It is one of the ways cults start.

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
11-11-2015, 01:06 PM (This post was last modified: 11-11-2015 02:21 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(11-11-2015 08:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-11-2015 08:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Well since no one is even talking about that possibility, it's utterly irrelevant. YOU made it up. Carrier never says that. Price never says that. It's a figment of your imagination.

I believe I said it. Consider

It is one of the ways cults start.

Ya know, come to think of it, I was wrong. Philo of Alexandria did (possibly) think if the messiah in non-historical terms ... I think Carrier talks about a cosmic battle (between the Earth and the sun, or the Earth and the moon), in which the messiah defeats the devil or evil (??) or something.
So I was wrong, and Tommy-boy is also. There is good evidence that at least Philo and his people thought of the messiah as a non-historical *person*.
http://vridar.org/2010/07/29/philos-spir...-personal/

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
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
11-11-2015, 10:58 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
The Egyptians had a Messiah figure who was Horus: https://elpidiovaldes.wordpress.com/2012...ity-scene/

I can't understand why anyone would think that the writing of someone like Philo would tell us what the religion of his day was actually like. He was employed in some way to write what he did. The nature of religious writing is to influence people. I don't think, somehow that when he wrote about the Logos he was explaining the way people in Egypt, historically, had viewed god or their religion. No one but a few could read, they had no books, no access to writing materials and the medium of writing was a series of pictures depicting some kind of event.

Religions has to have evolved naturally from some other source than writings of theologians. It has to have come from naturally occurring phenomena. A good example is the ice lingam of Amarath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarnath_Temple

Ancient peoples saw the "heavens" as the sky and the "metaphysical" world, the word which is behind the real world as the night sky. Modern academics overthink, over analyze religious writings and we get, as a result, a skewed view of what ancient people thought about the world. They either had no religion at all, or their religion has to have come from some source other than the written word. My view is that it comes from stars and their movements. The largest "man" in the sky is the constellation Orion (Aryan). He rises at night, drives the darkness away, has a phallus and carries a cross on his back. The predominant image in Turkey which isn't Islamic but is in every home, office and on jewellery is the "Nazar" which is the Evil Eye and it is the eye of Horus. It's everywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazar_(amulet)

The eye of Horus is the moon. It is said that he loses his eye but it is replaced. This is simply the waxing and waning of the moon which is said to be Horus' left eye while the sun is his right eye.

Orion is the soul of Horus http://www.zitman.org/websites/egypt-ima...god-horus/ and the cult of Horus was one of two major cults in Egypt until it was merged by the Pharoah with the cult of Ra.

The notion of "God" being a big man in the heavens can only, imho, have emerged from the observation of this star sign at night and it has a "messianic" aspect to it, returning as it does each night, climbing to the top of the sky/dome which ancients would have thought was a real dome over them. This event becomes more pronounced at Christmas time when the figure dominates the southern sky, particarly here in Jesus land where I am. The skies are so clear here that it is impossible not to see it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2015, 11:05 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(11-11-2015 10:58 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  The Egyptians had a Messiah figure who was Horus: https://elpidiovaldes.wordpress.com/2012...ity-scene/

I can't understand why anyone would think that the writing of someone like Philo would tell us what the religion of his day was actually like. He was employed in some way to write what he did. The nature of religious writing is to influence people. I don't think, somehow that when he wrote about the Logos he was explaining the way people in Egypt, historically, had viewed god or their religion. No one but a few could read, they had no books, no access to writing materials and the medium of writing was a series of pictures depicting some kind of event.

Religions has to have evolved naturally from some other source than writings of theologians. It has to have come from naturally occurring phenomena. A good example is the ice lingam of Amarath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amarnath_Temple

Ancient peoples saw the "heavens" as the sky and the "metaphysical" world, the word which is behind the real world as the night sky. Modern academics overthink, over analyze religious writings and we get, as a result, a skewed view of what ancient people thought about the world. They either had no religion at all, or their religion has to have come from some source other than the written word. My view is that it comes from stars and their movements. The largest "man" in the sky is the constellation Orion (Aryan). He rises at night, drives the darkness away, has a phallus and carries a cross on his back. The predominant image in Turkey which isn't Islamic but is in every home, office and on jewellery is the "Nazar" which is the Evil Eye and it is the eye of Horus. It's everywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazar_(amulet)

The eye of Horus is the moon. It is said that he loses his eye but it is replaced. This is simply the waxing and waning of the moon which is said to be Horus' left eye while the sun is his right eye.

Orion is the soul of Horus http://www.zitman.org/websites/egypt-ima...god-horus/ and the cult of Horus was one of two major cults in Egypt until it was merged by the Pharoah with the cult of Ra.

The notion of "God" being a big man in the heavens can only, imho, have emerged from the observation of this star sign at night and it has a "messianic" aspect to it, returning as it does each night, climbing to the top of the sky/dome which ancients would have thought was a real dome over them. This event becomes more pronounced at Christmas time when the figure dominates the southern sky, particarly here in Jesus land where I am. The skies are so clear here that it is impossible not to see it.

Oh come on. THAT's the best you can do ? Really ?
There HAS to be more fake dots to connect together in there than that.
You're slipping db.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
11-11-2015, 11:13 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(11-11-2015 10:58 PM)Deltabravo Wrote:  Modern academics over think

Bwahahahahaha. As opposed to you who just makes up shit from thin air.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
11-11-2015, 11:58 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
And you find some esoteric nonsense about what one man thought a few thousand years ago...and that explains everything, does it?

You should come and live in the Near East and actually look around and study real life. The religion which is around me, which sacrifices goats, doesn't allow eating pork, has a "cantor" bellowing out every few hours didn't come out of a book by Philo.

Ancient goat herders, farmers and peasants didn't read Philo. They didn't rely on peer reviewed papers to get their religion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-11-2015, 11:59 PM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(11-11-2015 08:27 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-11-2015 08:43 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Well since no one is even talking about that possibility, it's utterly irrelevant. YOU made it up. Carrier never says that. Price never says that. It's a figment of your imagination.

I believe I said it. Consider

It is one of the ways cults start.

I notice all those flags in your signature, Chas. Are you some kind of white supremacist? Because that is what it looks like.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2015, 12:04 AM (This post was last modified: 12-11-2015 12:08 AM by Deltabravo.)
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
And isn't modern Judaism really a variant on racial supremacism tracing as it does it's roots back to the Aryan homeland of Ur of the Chaldees and claiming sole descent from God and Adam?

How does one square that.

After all "seminal" and "germinal" are just different spellings of the same word. Semen, germ. Geman, Semite. Same thing.

I think it was a Caesar who named the Germans that because he believed they were the "original" people of All Men, the "Alemaigne".

What I find repulsive is a people dragging the rest of us into barbaric wars all over some idiotic misconception that they are better than everyone else.

Because, of course, it is a fact that the top people on the planet are actually the Welsh and they just like singing, as I have previously demonstrated.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-11-2015, 12:18 AM
RE: Supposed "evidence" for jesus.
(12-11-2015 12:04 AM)Deltabravo Wrote:  And isn't modern Judaism really a variant on racial supremacism tracing as it does it's roots back to the Aryan homeland of Ur of the Chaldees and claiming sole descent from God and Adam?

How does one square that.

After all "seminal" and "germinal" are just different spellings of the same word. Semen, germ. Geman, Semite. Same thing.

I think it was a Caesar who named the Germans that because he believed they were the "original" people of All Men, the "Alemaigne".

What I find repulsive is a people dragging the rest of us into barbaric wars all over some idiotic misconception that they are better than everyone else.

Because, of course, it is a fact that the top people on the planet are actually the Welsh and they just like singing, as I have previously demonstrated.


The truth will out and eventually we will realize that the Hebrews worshipped Orion and that is where we get our monotheistic idea of a "Man God" in heaven, the sky. Then, we will have to accept that all these ancient religions are bullshit and studying them in any seriousness is pure stupidity and should denote someone as a pompous egotistical buffoon.

And then maybe we will all realize that morality is about how you treat other people, not about digging up ancient texts and trying to find out who Isaiah or Moses were or whether or not Jesus was a myth, a wandering Buddhist monk or a couple of Syrian twins.

Where BB fails is that he takes this all seriously, can't distance himself sufficiently from the blinding radiance of his own glowing ego, can't objectively look at different theories of religion without it provoking an explosion of expletives and seems to be bent on putting some kind of new "meaning" into the Old Testament, which frankly nobody gives a shit about.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: