Did Jesus Die?
This film investigates the variety of stories surrounding the New Testament account of the crucifixion, death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, by interviewing historians, theologians and historical researchers. This exploration of the latest theories about what really happened to Jesus 2000 years ago uncovers some surprising possibilities.
At the heart of the mystery is the suspicion that Jesus might not actually have died on the cross. The film concludes that it was perfectly possible to survive crucifixion in the 1st Century - there are records of people who did. But if Jesus survived, what happened to him afterwards?
One of the most remarkable stories concerns the charismatic preacher Jus Asaf (Leader of the Healed) who arrived in Kashmir in around 30 AD. Just before he died at the age of 80, Jus Asaf claimed that he was in fact Jesus Christ and the programme shows his tomb, next to which are his carved footprints which bear the scars of crucifixion.
Who the hell is Jesus?
The real Christian are not use the cross
Kinda strange how the know how the earth is made and know everything about Jesus but yet the have no idea how build the pyramids makes you thing how humans are brainwashed by religion
If you do not believe what the bible says, you cannot call yourself a Christian. If Christ didn't die for mankind then what hope do we have.
NONE!
One thing has nothing to do to the other. The church has created God, heaven and hell, in order to force people to obey them...by fear of going to hell. LOL
How come 20 century man can make analysis of 2000 yearsago What rubbish analysis done by BBC
how can you teach the bible and not believe in it you are not men of god you can not bring men to god how can you teach the word of god if you dont believe i am a believer in god and that Jesus rose from the dead look closer to your heart and see if you are real to your self my prayers go out to toyou
God is a creation of the church. Full stop. The bible is based in papers written 400 years after the events have taken place. Plus, there are more than 50 gospels but only 4 can help the church to brain wash people.
Marc, you say that The Gospels are used to brainwash people... part of what Jesus Christ was here to do was tell people that they didn't NEED the leaders of the church to mediate a relationship with God for them. Jesus BRIDGES that gap for us by paying the price for our sins. No outside leadership needed from that minute forward, pal. Only his. And he is a FORGIVING God. Jesus sets us FREE from the bondage of SIN (hate, pride, greed, etc). You can be saved and still do sinful things. That doesn't nullify what Christ has done for you when you accept him as lord and savior. Jesus sets us FREE! Just goes to show that you have LESS THAN ZERO idea what you're talking about. Educate yourself before you speak about things you have no clue about. Don't lead others away from a chance at true SALVATION. God bless you, buddy.
This controversy has existed from the very beginning, and the writings of the Church fathers themselves reveal that they were constantly forced by the Pagan intelligentsia to defend what the non-Christians
and other Christians ("heretics") alike saw as a preposterous and fabricated yarn with absolutely no evidence of it
ever having taken place in history.
"The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel (a staunch skeptic turned Christian by the research he did for that very book).... THEN come back and talk to me about no evidence. The entirety of the book is comprised of interviews with people with FAR more education than you and I. Do yourself a FAVOR. God bless you!
In the early days of Christianity,Christians were divided...those who believed that the phyisical body of Christ had risen and those who believed (mostly now air brushed out ) it was his spiritual body(spirit materialization) In my view the early church backed the wrong side ( Phyisical resurrection ) What is the point of Jesus phyisical body in the next world ? It was his spirt (Etheric body) that materialized... In the next life we will live in spirit (not a phyisical one), its a duplicate on a finer vibration.Jesus was demonstrating this to the various witness's,this was a wonderful demonstration of survival on the part of Jesus.To reiterate...It was a Spiritual Materialisation not a Phyisical Resurrection.
That's precisely what it was. I totaly agree with you!
Jesus and many other "gods" are men that became kings that became gods just like stories become legends and legends become myths.
To me, Jesus Christ is just the Judaism version of what others had done prior. Each person out doing the prior
Same goes with the bible (old and new)
religion was created by the rich so that the poor would not rise up and kill them.
The God and Allah freaks are the most evilest people on this planet..Imagines there is no God and Allah freaks in this world, there will peace... peace for gay and lesbian..
do u lot bleave in jesus? and god? pmsl.........
Did anyone catch that when they were talking about Jesus death they completely missed the fact that they STABBED him, I wanted to pull my hair out of my head because they missed this crucial point of the death. Water and blood flowed from his side, which if you do your research, usually means your dead/heart exploded (specifically your Aorta). They conveniently missed that part in John 19:34. Just saying, I wish they would have discussed it instead of brushing over it. oh, and 15 years guy read Mathew 24:36 and explain that ;)
Jesus did not die; but He was raised to God's sight. But he will be sent back to earth in the End Times. And He is on earth now and we will be able to see him within 15 years.
@Meral C. Özyurt
i have a feeling i am going to regret this. but how did you come up with the 15 years?
u r a muslim, rn't u ?
actually the story of the quran about the raised Jesus before crucifixion is not historical, it's only a belief without any evidence except for the quran itself.
There r some of the most famous historians who talked about the crucifixion and here is a list of their names :
1- Thallos
2- Tacitus
3- Lucia of Samosata
4- Pliny the younger
5- Mara bar Serapion
6- Celsus
7- Suetonius
and all of those were not Christians, u can search for them if like.
@Peter Sameh
how many of these people were alive at the time of Jesus death? or is this more second hand (or third or fourth...) account of supposed events?
you see where the problem is??? humans are the problem , who are you to put a date to Jesus coming , he told us that he will be coming like a thief in the night...........do you know when a thief will come to your house?? I don't think so..........no one know when the second coming will come ...........but Jesus said there will lots of sign
Christ, i wanted to repeat someone's question here, because i googled the question, and it led me back here where i was trying to find the answer anyway:
does anyone remember the doc, where it suggested that jesus was the son of cleopatra and marcus aurelius?
Marcus Aurelius is impossible..he was one of the last Roman emperor´s (26. April 121 in Rom; † 17. März 180)...if you meant Mark Antony..he had no son with Cleopatra, at least none that is known..i´ll give you that..the son you might refer to is Cesarion, son of Cleopatra an Caesar, born 47 BC, and was later send, after Ocatavian won the war, to India by his mother but was later executed in Rome ..hope I was able to help ..
Cheers
Dr. Miceal Ledwith
Yes,...respectfully.
It is possible to understand the words in the Bible that describe the death of "Jesus" in a different way then is common.
I understand the importance of avoiding "verse mining" but to avoid it here is impractical. I've mined the other verses and i am using the ones that I have to get to the point quickly.
1- The Bible says that "everything hid would be REVEALED" and we should be careful what we were hearing (what "measure" we were using)
2- It also says "In that day (the day of "judgement") when the son of man is REVEALED"
3- It also says "I am the vine and you are the branches"
4- It also says "My body (the "vine of which we are all branches) is the temple To be raised again the third day"
5- It also says Be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day with the lord is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise".
6- also, "I live by the father and the father hath sent me."
7- also, "No man comes to the father but through me"
8- also when "Jesus" explained the parable of the soils he referred to the word "thorns" as "deceit of riches and cares of this life"
With these verse in mind we may consider the following concerning the description of the death of "Jesus" on the cross:
The "cross, which is an intersection of two structural elements represents passage through physical existence detecting two diametrically opposed motivations. This is our convicting consciences and our fear generating intellectual reasoning through which we engage our separate physical suffering detecting physical bodies. They are diametrically opposed in that responding to one involves ignoring the other. The nailing of the hands and feet is a reference to the fact that our works (hands) and our passage through physical existence (feet) are affected by the simultaneous detection of the two diametrically opposed motivations. In our initial nature we are most influenced by the lesser because our convicting consciences are in a low state of influence (The "preaching of "John", which "prepares the way"for "Jesus") When we are motivated by our physical bodies to make money our highest priority, the "crown of thorns"so to speak, our consciences grow weaker and weaker leaving us confident in our path through life, because we are no longer hearing the inner voice of the same which causes us question our path. Because love is traveling between our consciences gives life to them, (#6) like physical blood throughout the various parts of a physical body (#3), the withdraw of love leads to their death. This is "God" (i.e.-love) forsaking "Jesus" (our convicting consciences, #3) as we are driven by fear of physical suffering to protect our wealth(the crown of thorns) from the inconvenient demands of the love which flows between our hearts and the hearts of suffering people. This withdraw is also "the shedding of "blood" which pays for our sins, which is initially succumbing to the influence of our intellectual reasoning to avoid the influence of love to maintain the comfort of our physical bodies. The love that withdraws from people who are driven by their fear does not cease to exist but compresses stressfully into others who are compelled by their stronger consciences to embrace it's inconvenient influence. (To he that hath shall be given and he that hath little it shall be taken away)
As this increase in life-giving element produces convicting consciences of an increased motivation,as we move into the new millenium this is the "third day resurrection (#5) of Jesus' body ( our interrelating consciences, #4).
#7 is a reference to the fact that we cannot detect love in our physical senses, only through our sixth sense, our convicting consciences.
To see this interpretation involves a significant conviction of conscience to admit that we are fear driven to avoid a positive response to the suffering of others to protect our wealth.
It also involves fixing a figurative meaning to the following words:
Jesus-our conscience
Hands- our works
Feet- passage through the physical
Thorns- deceit of riches and cares of this life
God- love
cross- Simultaneous detection of two diametrically opposed motivations.
If one maintains these definitions in other passages where these words are used and considers the stories as figurative references to the interrelationship between out mechanical reasoning and our convicting consciences, they will begin to suspect a figurative meaning for other words that in time they will discover that they also are used with complete consistency. Consider the figurative definition for the word "thorns" used in the Genesis account of Adam and Eve and ask yourself what "Ground" might mean.
There are of course may interpretations of the Bible but since this is different I thought it worth mentioning.
@gsjikwblao
Quirinius was not a governor of Syria until AD 6 herod died 4 BC. so impossible for both to happen at same time. you may be right that i don't fully understand your points, but i feel you don't understand mine.i will try one last time. an interpretation weather it turns out to be right or wrong is still not proof. and next it is "Occam's razor" and i am familiar with the statement." achems razor" is a commenter on this site. either way you misquote the theory it actually states "when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better" this doesn't apply to you and i since our theories (used loosely) make different predictions
Thank you for your intelligent response to my comment.
I agree with all that you said. The Bible does not give the dates that establish the contradiction but I believe the ones you found are accurate.
This kind of thing is what compels a person who finds the replacement of this world with another a very attractive possibility, to abandon the view that the Bible is an account of physical events that occurred long ago and consider that it may have another purpose other then a history lesson. This would be a person with a significant conviction of conscience who would search a book that has these contradictions but continues only on the basis of a "new world approaching". To discover the necessity of figurative meanings to eliminate contradiction is not by itself significant. But to discover that to extend these meanings to every passage where these words are used, that a new interpretation emerges, whereby the Bible is telling us of the process by which the human race is evolving from a base-level convicting conscience to one of increased motivation, that is significant.
Thus we have a significant conviction of conscience driving the intellect to discover that this is the very development that the Bible, a very old book that warns of hidden things to be revealed, has been telling us but we had to wait for it to happen before the discovery could be made (Luke 4:16-21 + Matt. 11:2-6 + John 13:6-7)
Since the dates of the two governors do not coincide, if this is a history lesson it is not a very good one. But if this is part of a story that is telling us of the emergence of increased sensitivity conscience (the birth of "Jesus") then we can understand that it is a reference to the fact that when this occurs, that intellectual reasoning , or individual perspective would be prevailing.
All rulers in the roman empire are figurative references to the opposing nature of intellectual reasoning ("Satan") in reaction to our convicting consciences (Jesus). The story of Herod killing "John the baptist" (Base-level conscience) because he swore the "oath" (bound in rigid belief) in the presence of them which "sat at meat"(the influence of like-minded people) with him, is very illuminating. "Marriage" which is an "oath" also means "bound in rigid belief" and the " child" that danced for Herod represents the consummation of the "marriage" or a person who is so sure of what they believe that they cannot consider anything that threatens their belief system.
It is also significant to note that Quirinius was a ruler in Syria which is an abbreviation for Assyria, which along with Egypt and Babylon are figurative references to the destructive nature of intellectual reasoning on our convicting consciences when our convicting consciences are in a low-lying state of influence. (the captivities)
Yes, "Occam's razor" does not apply.
@gsjikwblao
i will step away from this discussion now i feel we will soon start repeating ourselves and that we both stated our positions. on a final note is is nice for a change to have a "religious" debate with someone that doesn't fall into a bunch of personal attacks or name calling (speaking about myself as much as the people i debate this topic with) . we will have to agree to disagree
Your explanation makes better sense for me as an understanding of my questions and doubts that lingered after reading some parts of the bible. I agree those who don't agree either already made up their mind or haven't read the bible with an open heart or mind.
Thank you for this! :) I couldn't agree more...
@over the edge
It is a fact that the Bible has an interpretation that lacks contradiction.
When read as an historic account of physical events that occurred long ago, the Bible is clearly contradictory. The contradiction is spread fairly thin and it is not unusual to gloss over it and concentrate on what seems to be the intended interpretation. Many people who do this will lay claim to salvation that seems to others to make little sense. They may even be people who have little regard for the suffering of others. A person with a significant conviction of conscience is far more likely to notice this then a person who is selfish and indifferent. For a person who has a powerful conviction of conscience, the contradiction retained in these convenient interpretations is comforting, because they are the evidence that they are not true. But such a person, for the same reason, would gravitate towards the Bible because it claims the removal of this "world" and it's replacement with another.
Rather then to discard the Bible altogether, such a person may notice a structure that occurs throughout the volume. This is trains of identical words used by different writers (phrases), sometimes in relating the same story and other times in completely different stories. This structure also involves different writers relating the same story suddenly installing completely different details whereby both accounts cannot be reconciled. If the Bible is to lack contradiction, they must somehow be saying the same thing.
This can be accomplished by fixing figurative meanings to certain words that are always applied consistently throughout the whole of the volume. For example, the word "feet" means "passage through the physical". There is not one example in the Bible where this word maintains the definition that a dictionary would provide. The same is true for about a dozen other words. It is not necessary to apply these figurative meanings to eliminate contradiction in every passage where they are used, only in some. But by extending these figurative definitions to all passages where they are used, a new interpretation emerges whereby the Bible is no longer describing physical events of long ago, But is describing the motivational dynamics that spawned the creation event 13.7 billion years ago that also lie at the foundation of all human experience in their every day interaction with each other. This is the diametrically opposed nature of the motivating capacity of our convicting consciences and the processing of information through our other five physical senses from the individual perspective of our separate physical bodies.
Starting with the first four figurative meanings that the Bible gives us directly, they lead to the others and the best path to follow is dictated by the exact verbal agreement (what theologians call "The synoptic problem"). This verbal agreement was installed into the Bible to facilitate the emergence of the true interpretation (a "road map" so to speak) and the contradictions forces the fixing of the figurative meanings. They are necessary to have a text that is without contradiction.
If we were to consider our conviction of conscience to be like the volume control on a radio, we could understand this: When the volume is turned up we think one way and when the volume is turned down we think another way.
We are all engaged in a process, effected through our interaction with each other, whereby the volume is being turned up in some as it is being turned down in others.
According to the Bible and the field of human psychology, those in whom the volume is being turned down,will be motivated by their nature to see the new interpretation as false for the very same reason that an alcoholic will deny his addiction. This will only be accomplished by avoiding a critical study of the book that documents this interpretation of the Bible.
Those who absorb the reasoning in the book "The third Measure of Meal" will know that the new interpretation of the Bible is not the product of a personal agenda and could not be explained as coincidence because it explains so much that cannot be explained in any other way and it is verifiable in our common experience in life. It also explains in a ultimate fundamental reason why the universe is so old, vast and complex and identifies it's fundamental purpose.
@gsjikwblao
your response contains no proof only an explanation of an interpretation. now we can go back and forth and most likely get nowhere. if you have proof i will look at it and comment on it. but i am not interested in exchanging opinions and unverified interpretations.
I agree with you that going "back and forth" will most likely get us nowhere. Going back and forth is what people do who have already made up their minds and so see no need to listen to the other person. I suspect that you are not looking for "proof because you have already decided this matter and are certain that proof does not exist. I am not sure this is your perspective but i have reason to suspect it. The reason I suspect this is because You obviously have not read the "Third Measure of Meal" to have established in your understanding that the interpretation that eliminates all contradiction does in fact exist. For me to lay out the reasoning of this book would be to write it word for word on this thread and that would be impractical. So what I did in my comment was to give a brief outline pointing to the support that exists in the scientific community.
This is in the field of human psychology. It supports the process by which the interpretation is discovered that I described in the second and third paragraphs of my comment. This concept is also addressed in the Bible's new interpretation which you would know if you read the book. The new interpretation is governed by the application of common phrases (the synoptic problem) and contradiction when read as an historic account of physical events that occurred long ago. This process eliminates personal interpretation. But again, if you want proof that this is true, I would have to write the entire book into this comment.
Remember that if it is important to you to establish that this is not true, you will be able to do so because if you could not the interpretation would be false. This is because an integrated part of the new interpretation states that this is the case. This concept is fully supported by established fact in the field of human psychology. It is referenced in the Bible in a figurative language that must be applied if contradiction is to be eliminated with the phrase "The fear of man bringeth a snare"
@gsjikwblao
you are right i haven't read the book. i have read some excerpts online tho and i am unimpressed. you assume i am not interested in proof because i have already made my mind up. you are wrong while i am an atheist i am not so closed minded as to be unable to have my mind changed. but i go where the most evidence points, and so far the most evidence supports my position. you keep bringing up "interpretations" weather these are right or not are not proof. the bible is flawed, has no definitive proof of the author(s) , and gets facts wrong.(luke and matthew disagree on who was in charge during the birth) luke states the birth took place while Quirinius was governor and matthew states Herod was in charge (both cannot be right). these two (of many) examples are stated as fact in the bible not moral stories therefore not open to interpretation. if you base the interpretations on a book not supported by facts the interpretations are also flawed. again i ask for proof and by that i mean something that can be verified and has facts to back it up.
Thank you for your intelligent response to my comment. It is obvious to me that you are looking at the Bible and I am enjoying our conversation.
I would like to say that I am not assuming you have already made up your mind. The word I used was "suspect" because you did not consider my statement that the science of human psychology supports the manner in which a person can be driven past contradictory and convenient interpretations. What is revealed in the new interpretation is the evolution of our convicting consciences from an initial base-level state to a state of increased influence. That such a process would cause a person to reject an obvious interpretation that we cling to because it is convenient to our nature, and discover a new interpretation that is not so convenient, is fully supported by established fact in the field of human psychology. It is significant to note that it is through the elimination of contradiction that this interpretation emerges. If you believe that this could be coincidence, Your thinking would be contrary to the scientific precept called "Achem's Razor" which states that the simplest explanation tends to be the right one.
Either the interpretation of the Bible that avoids contradiction, that science says could emerge from reasoning that is driven by an increased conviction of conscience by first rejecting convenient (to our initial nature) surface interpretations and yet also remain in critical study of a book claiming removal of this world and it's replacement with another world is true, (very attractive to an increased sensitivity conscience) or the whole thing is just coincidence. In light of the interpretation itself which, by eliminating contradiction the only way it can be, is telling us about how the human race evolves from a base-level convicting conscience to one of increased sensitivity, and the scientific fact that such a development would drive the intellect past interpretations that are convenient to our present nature, to consider this coincidence is contrary to Achems Razor.
The very thing that spawns the discovery, is the very thing the discovery is about! and this "spawning" is supported by established fact in the field of human psychology!
When theologians read and understand "The Third Measure of Meal" (easy for someone who knows the Bible and is aware of it's mysteries) they will say that it eliminates the synoptic problem and all the contradiction that had been falsely perceived by what psychologists will state was driven by facilitation of our psychological agenda.
Inasmuch as love is a binding motivation, we can also understand that it is also an illuminating one. Thus, a necessary diametrically opposed motivation would not only be division-Justifying, it would also have to be deceptive. The vast size, age and complexity of physical existence, perceived from the individual perspective of the separate physical bodies into which our consciousness is anchored, is in perfect facilitation of this requirement by providing us with an alternate path of understanding, an un-enlightening, mechanical one until the evolutionary movement from a base-level convicting conscience to one of increased influence, driving the intellect to notice this fundamental pattern.
If cosmologists cannot find a mathematically based "first cause" It may be because mathematics did not exist on the other side of the creation event.The mathematical order of everything from the creation forward provides the necessary alternate path of understanding, A mechanical, deceptive one to function in diametric opposition to the illuminating nature of love which generates our conviction of conscience.
You are correct to point out that there is contradiction in the Bible.Perhaps you were not listening to me again because I said that this was put into the Bible on purpose to force the application of figurative meanings to eliminate the contradiction which would otherwise remain. It is significant to note that this is the only way to eliminate it. It is also significant to note that the Bible itself warns us to be careful what we think we are hearing and what measure (our hearts or our heads) we are using to hear what we are hearing. It also says that the reason for this is because everything hid would be revealed and everything kept secret would come abroad and be known.
However the example of contradiction that you gave is not a good one because Quirinius, mentioned in Luke was governor of Syria, an area of Mesopotamia, some distance to the north of Galilee where, at the same time, Herod was governor. The two passages are describing two different people.
Again, the fact that I had to point out a second time the functioning reason for the contradiction in surface interpretations suggests that you are not listening to me. This PROVES NOTHING but it suggests that you are protecting an important belief system that you are already bound to. This is referenced in the new interpretation with the statement "And woe unto them that are with child and to them that give suck in those days"
But if you can point out a legitimate contradiction in surface interpretation, I will try to resolve it with the figurative meanings that are used consistently throughout the Bible. I will not change any of these to "force" the elimination of the contradiction. You can find your own but the two different reasons for Peter to want to make three tabernacles and the two different deaths of Judas Iscariot are good ones. The contradictions in the conditions of salvation are most likely the best because eliminating them reveals "Jesus" to be a figurative reference to our convicting consciences.
@Achems Razor
The comment was repeated to different people who made comments significant to mine to bring mine to their attention . I know that they are notified when this is done. I did not intend all three for one person. If I do this again you may ignore the comments not directed to you. Is this against the rules? Are you the police? Or just a concerned citizen who wants to be. If I do this again does this make me a target for harassment? Why did you use the word "warning"?
@gsjikwblao,
Please do not repeat "consider my comment" all over the place.
Consider that your comment is considered.
I don't know what's going on, but you made me laugh.
@s.r my friend no one either in this programme or in this discission denies jesus was a real man. There are books and material out there though that explain where jesus went before he came back to palestine to do his ministry. And before you say oh there just works of fiction or just books...............i ask you this:- what is the bible? The only tangable evidence in the whole bible. i.e. evidence that theres proof of, is that jesus is a real man. The gospels dont even agree on several issues. They all contradict each other. My friend i so want to believe in God but you really have to look at this and say....would God let 9/11 happen, would God let little kids be molested or murdered or indeed anyone murdered. I'm sorry but that's not (at least for me) part of some great divine path He has for us. It is my belief that the bible was written by a group of intellectual men for political and religious gain. And again before you argue my point. Think about the times they lived in when the bible was written. To be frank, and i'm sorry to say this, but the bible is the cause of most of the violence in the world today which is a sad thing and brings me back to my earlier point...........what sort of God would allow this? M.L.F.
Conventional interpretations of the Bible paint rosy pictures of God to people who are driven by the fear of our initial nature. At the time of change from a base-level convicting conscience to one of greater influence, we are driven past these to an interpretation that lacks all the contradiction that you mentioned. The elimination of this contradiction, which was purpose- built into the Bible, is accomplished through the application of figurative meanings for a handful of words which the text itself provides.
Briefly stated the true interpretation, which could not emerge until the movement from a base-level convicting conscience to one of increased motivation, is as follows:
13.7 billion years ago a motivating force that we call "love" generated physical existence to facilitate a necessary diametrically opposed motivation. This was necessary because Love, being a drawing force, could not function as such without something to draw upon. Through a long and complex process of what scientists call "causation", also necessary, the process finally produced a race of conscious beings immersed in the influence of the individual perspective of the separate physical bodies to which their intelligence is anchored. This motivation is in diametric opposition to our convicting consciences (a unifying perspective) and as our convicting consciences grow in influence, they subdue the fear generating intellectual reasoning which they war against. This process also drives the intellect to discover the true interpretation of the Bible which makes predictions that can be verified through experiment . The exact verbal agreement of the "synoptic problem" is mechanically critical to the emergence of the true interpretation as are the differences in otherwise identical stories related by different writers.
Inasmuch as love is a binding motivation, we can also understand that it is also an illuminating one. Thus we can understand that a diametrically opposed motivation would not only be division-justifying, but also deceptive. This is accomplished by the assumption, born of the processing of information through our five physical senses, that we are clearly separate entities. This is in diametric opposition to what we are being told by our convicting consciences which are telling us that we are not separate.
A considerable amount of detail concerning this matter, verifiable in the scientific method, is contained in the new interpretation of the Bible that the Bible itself warned would be revealed. This is documented in the book "The Third Measure of Meal". Despite it's title, this book reveals the Bible as a scientific document detailing exactly how the human race evolves from an initial, destructive nature to one of understanding and stability.
are you stating an opinion or do you have proof for these claims?
the devil will do anything to mislead you to turn you away from god! jesus was a real human being on earth this is fact, there is proof. its your choice on how you look at him. all the religions acknowledge him. he was the only sinless man, and he died on the cross the cross so we can get into heaven! have faith people. what do you have to loose?
'he died on the cross the cross so we can get into heaven!'
cool, so I don't have to believe or be nice, he took care of it already!
If any one come across this book called "Jesus lived in India" please read it. I don't think this book is available anywhere in Europe or America. Make you understand a lot.
Jesus as a buddhist? Hilarious. Imagine them teaching that, or even mentioning that as a serious possibility, in a bible college.
Read Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's 1899 groundbreaking treatise he wrote named and published in Urdu as 'Masih Hindustan me' translated now in several languages. It's English version being 'Jesus in India'
Christianity right from the very begining got corupted. People have been updated and revising new and improved versions right from the early days. Theres some wild theories out there in this doc. But there are possibilities of how it could of happened. But all in all there are too many codradictions in the Holy Bible.
Please consider my statement above.
To search for the truth is normal, it only goes to show that you wanna know more about him because he matters to your life. : )
or maybe you're just looking for the truth by going through all available information in order to come to an objective conclusion of your own about a particular topic.. no need to get all warm and fuzzy..
To search for the truth is normal, it only goes to show that you wanna know more about him because he matters to your life. : )
Amen, without the shedding of blood were all cursed.the wholepoint was it was Jesus/Yeshua's purpose to clense our sins with his own blood.He is the Lord and our Father he is also the force through which we were even created - Genesis 1,26 "let us create man" Father the spirit and the Word (Yeshua) and the bible describes the Word as God. the bible also tells us that Yahweh tells us in no uncertain terms that their is, and will only ever be 1 God. in my eyes Yaweh is the physical representation of the spirit, Yeshua is the human version of the father(Yahweh), three different representations or forms of the same God. if you believe the bible as an accurate account, then didnt Yeshua/Jesus tell us he was the Alpha and the Omega,the first and last - the exact same thing Yahweh says in the old testament, he alsodescribes his self as the only saviour of the human race, again so does Yahweh in the old testament. doesnt Yahweh translate as Lord, which all of the apostle use as a term for Yeshua/Jesus. does this make any sense to anyone?
No, makes no sense to me at all!! You talk as if what you are saying is real. Its just a bloody book of books you are spouting all this nonsense from.
Please consider my statement above.
@gsjikwblao:
You statement is considered.
Maybe if the bible was actually the word of god instead of men, so no it makes no sense. kinda retarded to live by a book written 2000 years ago by a bunch of blood thirsty bigots greedy for wealth and power, who dont actually live the way jesus told them to.
In what way were the disciples of Jesus "blood thirsty bigots greedy for wealth and power"?
In what way did they not "actually live the way jesus told them to"?
The very word "Christian" was actually invented by the enemies of Christianity, and was meant to be derogatory. What the word essentially does is REFUTE your claims here. Because the term "Christianity" means "Little Christs" or "Christ-likes".
Given the amount of evil that is written in the new testament, I wonder if jesus was around in today's times, would we perhaps take his body off the cross this time, wrap him in a white sheet and bury him at sea. This fairy tale really has to end...
Happy to see the truth emerge after so many millions were brutally killed to cover the sin they themselves dished out to the world. Christianity is terrorism.
Jesus actually died twice:
Once on the cross.
Once on the internet.
Cya J-dog!
Bible is the same as Mein Kumpf - - - a political testament, intended to put "fear of god" in to men, and bend them in to submission, religion is the poison of the soul, and tragedy of humanity. Jesus was one of many Jews the so called prophets, saviours, call them what you want IF he even lived . . .
Muslims do not believe Jesus died.
Muslims believe God made Jesus ascend to Heaven and a look-a-like took his place.
Muslims also believe that God will send Jesus to come back to earth one day and reign. This will be the beginning of the end.
Peace be with you. :)
"Muslims do not believe..."
"Muslims believe..."
"Muslims also believe..."
why?
That's why the Muslim Jesus is not Jesus at all. Without Jesus' actual death and resurrection, then Jesus was "worthless" in his role as the propitiation for our sins. Yes, Jesus will return to "reign," but certainly not as the Muslims believe he will.
how will Jesus (even in death) wash away the sins of his followers?
Top_Quark Good quesiton. The blood of Christ paying for our sins the whole heart of the the true Christian Gospel. Jesus was the payment for our sin (he took the death penalty for us), and his blood is applied to our lives (symbolically) by faith alone when you ask God to forgive you and accept Jesus' sacrifice as payment for your own wrongdoings personally.
Good question from @Top_Quark:
If there was a Jesus, before he was conceived, through intercourse, "yes conceived" "no immaculate conception" as in your fairy tale. Laws of physics hold true!
What of all the people that died way' way' before your blood of Jesus thing?
Are they sh*t out of luck, or is he going to revive them and ask were their allegiance lies, if so, talk about manipulation! Would be a wet dream for politicians!
And then through the manipulation, take them all where? to your heaven? talk about overcrowding! wouldn't be enough "harps" to go around!
Would make the universe top heavy!
@C_and_N: I think there are good things to infer from the biblical stories as well. But still can’t get over the Sola fide (faith alone) principle; seems like the best bargain ever. No wonder the sale is still open and there are over two billion customers now.
And good point Razor, you’re one of those who know it’s all too good to be true.
yes because we all know that someone must die and there must be blood for forgiveness......
you realize you believe in human sacrifice? i know i know you will say jesus wasnt human, then it was just a big unnecessary farce.
Those are good questions. The answers are divinely simple, but not easily explained without background.
PAST ATONEMENT QUESTION
Mr. Razor: The people who lived before Jesus lived under strict "law". They were required to sacrifice animals for their sins that the committed during the year. However, the blood of bulls and rams, etc. cannot cleanse from sin; they are only a post-ponement until the day of atonement by Jesus.
Jesus death was himself taking our punishment for us (the death penalty for sin). Since he was sinless, he was the only one that could meet the requirements. Those that have died before the time of Jesus went to a place called "Sheol" or the grave, and at that time it had two compartment--one called "paradice" for the righteous like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the other a place of torment for the wicked. The story Jesus told of the rich man and Lazareth even showed they were close enough to see eachother, but could not cross from one to the other.
When Jesus died, all payment for sin past, present, and future was paid for. When the Bible says that Jesus decended into Hell for three days, He was never sent to torment, but went to the paradice section of Sheol where he proclaimed payment for sins had been accomplished. Remember he told the theif on the cross, "Today you will be with me in Paradice." In Paradice, all that were there that had lived righteous lives had access to faith in Jesus via his blood sacrifice for them. The post-ponement of their sins were then forgiven. So, in fact, you are correct; they did have the opportunity to receive Jesus at that time, and I'm sure there was a 100% atonement rate in Paradice.
Paradice no longer exists, as it's purpose is past. Heaven is now where souls go when they die and are found righteous having received Jesus while still living.
Blessings!
WAS JESUS DEATH "HUMAN SACRIFICE"?
Epic: You're right. I don't see Jesus death as "a human sacrifice" in the way you are saying. It was a sacrifice indeed, as it was for the forgiveness of sins, but your connotations are askuwed. Jesus died in my place (and in your place) as judgment for sin. It was a substitutionary death in a court of law. It was a one time event. We are now called to be "living sacrifices" for Christ, as payment for sin has been accomplished. Any human sacrifices now are not of God, but of the devil. Period. And that is what people think of when you say the words "human sacrifice" so that is why I'm opposed to that phrase in reference to Jesus' "sacrifice". You cannot compair darkness with light; the two are not the same.
Peace to you as well.
ISN'T "FAITH ALONE" TOO CHEAP?
Top_Quark: Faith alone is not easy. You make it sound cheap. True faith also produces actions following, or else it's not true faith. But, iF it's that easy, why aren't you one of the 2 billion that avail yourself of it? But in fact, not everyone that says they are "Christian" are. Going back to the "living sacrifice" idea of the Christian life, Paul said he had to "crucify" his fleshly desires daily. I'm sure we've all known Christians that were as evil as anyone, and such will neither fool God nor enter into his kingdom, but only those that actually do the will of God, and not just offer him lipservice.
Peace to you.
Charles B.
CONCEPTION OF CHRIST:
Mr. Razor: You believe Jesus was just a man so of course you don't believe in the virgin birth, I understand. But, if God created us to reproduce via sexual intercourse, then surely he knows how to start the process without it. The weight and curse of sin is passed on from father to child. By bypassing all men, Jesus was not under the curse of Adam, but was free to prove again that we can be sinless before God. He was human, but not under Adam's curse. That's why the vergin birth was necessary. It's simple, but very complicated, like trying to explain a six-sided snowflake--when no two out of coutless trillions are the same.
But in your defense, I would think that even most Christians don't even know the reasons behind what they believe or why Jesus was born of a virgin at the time.
Peace to you.
it was a human being gettiing killed in order to do some supernatural thing.
it is completely human sacrifice and it was during a time when sacrifice was very common so very easy to see the connection.
i dont really want to debate this since i know it is pointless. you believe in things that go against every known physical law and i do not. that is that.
This is the worst, silly and unproven documentary i have ever seen. Those scholars are stupid. They should sit down, think, and look the whole bible and make a conclusion.The should ask , did the old testament said anything about the resurrection of Jesus the Christ? .The Muslim believe that Jesus died, some believe Jesus died at the age of 80, He can't died in 6 hours and He had children so on are ridiculous statements. Just look these few scriptures.
Messiah to be born of a virgin: Prophesied – Isaiah 7:14; Fulfilled – Matthew 1:18-25
Messiah to be accursed and crucified: Prophesied – Deuteronomy 21:22-23, Psalm 22, Psalm 69:21; Fulfilled – Matthew 27:34-50; John 19:28-30, Galatians 3:13
Messiah to be raised from the dead: Prophesied – Psalm 16:10; Fulfilled – Acts 13:35-37
pffft noone cares what your dumb book says. Don't you dare use the word "unproven" against anyone.
Jesus was a man - like me, like anyone. Get over it.
Statement 1. "They should sit down, think, and look the whole bible and make a conclusion."
Response 1: They did. That's how real scholars make real conclusions. Obviously you have only read little bits (by the way, what you did is called "quote mining" and it is frowned upon even by theologists)
Statement 2.The (sic) should ask , did the old testament said (sic) anything about the resurrection of Jesus the Christ?"
Response 2: They did
And it didn't. A general statement about making sure you take down people you HANG not CRUCIFY, from a TREE not a CROSS, that are criminals who are EXECUTED because it is against gods way to let them hang there until decomposition, which refer to "anybody" as stated in the scripture (Deuteronomy 21:22-23) is clearly not a prediction. It is a general rule.
Nor is Psalm 22: surrounded by men, dogs, lions and bulls(metaphorical) insulting his (whose?) belief in god. They pierce his hands and feet (some think as a reference to nailing on the cross) *written by David from ancient sources*. Later it says "Deliver me from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.
Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save me from the horns of the wild oxen" Did Jesus consider his life that precious? Lots of piercing going on... But no nails or cross.
Nor is Psalm 69:21 "They put gall in my food and gave me vinegar for my thirst." - again a metaphorical reference to ridicule of his (whose) faith by others *written by David from ancient sources*. Ironically, the metaphor for suffering in this Psalm is drowning not crucifixion. Yes, Jesus was given vinegar on a stick while he was on the cross. However, It has been common to give vinegar instead of water to prisoners throughout history. So it is unreasonable to think that Jesus was the first person to be given vinegar as a form of punishment.
SO,
Taking one line out of a script without explaining its context doesn't show anything but your ability to cut, paste and create your own reality.
Example:
"May the nations be glad and sing for joy,
for you rule the peoples justly
and guide the nations of the earth." Psalm 67:4
PRAISE THE LORD !!!!!!!!!!!!!THE BIBLE PROPHESISED THE UNITED NATIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Watch it again before you embarrass yourself.
Maybe you wrote your opinion too long after you watched the documentary and completely forgot what happened. I guess waiting a long time is quite common. Kind of like waiting between 60 and 95 years to write about an execution of an important figure without any notes.
to answer "why did Jesus die so quickly?", they conveniently left out the fact that he also had a hole speared into his side. kind of shows you the objective/objectivity of this documentary's creator right there. also, the slight differences in the accounts of the different men are left there to show how events are perceived differently by different people. but the spirit and the meaning of the Word never changes or contradicts itself if taken in context.
whacko. Objectivity? "if taken in context?". You christians dont even know what it means.
You're so right! Exactly what I was going to say. How can a documentary about the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus ignore Jesus' piercing in the side?? Also, it ignores the foreshadowing of the crucifixion in Exodus and Jesus talking of rebuilding the temple in three days, and the importance of the Last Supper. This documentary is not objective. Its interesting but seriously ignores too much to be taken seriously...
To correct a factual inaccuracy of this documentary... Muslims do not believe that Jesus died on the cross... We believe someone with his appearance died and that he was taken up into Heaven - i.e. he didn't experience death (not yet)... Like much of modern-day Christian belief, I think Paul pulled a fast one, re-creating Christianity in the image of Roman - especially Mithraic - pagan creed with all that blood sacrifice, resurrection and trinity business.
How come Jesus isn't on the Diet Doctor Pepper "I exist" commercial?
minute 34:05 he said for 6 hours whee did he get it from?
there are diferent version of that
Muslims possibilities are also poovable
was really jesus on the cross?
minute 20:38 really rediculous
minute 11: 35 that s wrong the muslims don t believe that JESUS died where did you get it from?
4:157 And because they said, "We have killed the Messiah, Eisa the son of Maryam, the Messenger of Allah" they did not slay him nor did they crucify him, but a look-alike was created for them; and those who disagree concerning it are in doubt about it; they know nothing of it, except the following of assumptions; and without doubt, they did not kill him
CORAN
Ring around the rosie is a medafor too. The story of Jesus has ran it's course as a story, but is an actual medafor, of astronomy and zodiac symbolism using the sun not a son. Started and twisted in Dark Age times of trickery by dictators demanding societies to obey, so that they may command and control mass populations, everyone know this simply by reading what biblical scribes were commanded to write. Preacher$ have no idea or cannot see our world crumble as their cause,(?)they push religion like a drug. And they ignore mankinds actual pathway entering into our future. Humanity can kindly progress without such power structure church restrictions, using many ancient religion$ to do so. A shame the illogical Dark Age fallacies also enters into 2011, which no bible has any modern juristiction in it's text for modern day whatsoever. The day it was completed hunderds and hundreds of years ago, it was also closed that day. Look what it's done since it's on-going activity, and it's messages of hate, war, rape and slavery, masked with love and it's demands for you to obey in almost every paragraph. Isn't "Thou shall Not" etched into it's text? What's wrong with simply being a kind human being sharing the planet with the rest of the world? Perhaps money and greed the power structures demand of you is a bigger concern, then a medafor of one man who never existed in the first place. Those who get blinded by exaggerated stories, or make up their own, ignore every indication of where their life may actually be by now. Without the clutter of illogical beliefs, and throwing their faith into the emptyness of space is hard for a logical mind to grasp. Instead of where the focus truely must be, on humanity alone. Awaken to truth, it's within you, not told to you from illogical outside dark sorces. I'm not an expert, just awake with pure un-tampered with thought. I'm not repeating what I've been commanded to believe, or never use biblical ancient text to do so, how logical is that to misrepresent in 2011? Did every one of your ancestors die?
It was a good documentary until it started to propound the theories of the discredited Holy Blood and Holy Grail and Dan Brown's work of fiction, the Da Vinci code. The commentator conveniently ignored the fact that the the completion of the execution of the three individuals is described in great detail in John's Gospel, the two zealots who were crucified along with Jesus, had their legs broken to hasten their demise, and the apparently already Jesus had a spear driven through his heart to make sure that he was dead also. It should also be noted that as a prelude to his execution, Jesus had fasted for 40 days and was no doubt physically weak before he was beaten and scourged and then in a state of shock and weakness was forced to carry the cross to the site of execution where he was nailed to it and left to hang under a middle eastern sun. Isn't it conceivable that death would come sooner to him than to those who were executed with him? The commentator suggests that he was given an anaesthetic of some description that might have given the appearance of death. In the first three Gospels, it is said that he was offered wine or vinegar as a gesture of mocking. In John's Gospel however, Jesus indicates that he is thirsty and is a drink is offered to him by way of a sponge on the end of a stick. The Gospel says that when he taken it, he said "It is finished" and gave up his spirit. Even in this day and age of science and medicine there is no substance known to man that could induce unconsciousness this rapidly. The commentator then turns to the make-up of the spices and herbs that Joseph left with the body in the tomb, and asks why Aloe, which a healing herb, would be used on someone who is dead? Once again, he shows his ignorance. The Bible often uses the word Aloes in reference to a large tree, known in Hebrew as ahalim. But the ahalim is not the true aloe of the lily family, which has healing properties, instead, the Bible species had long lance-shaped leaves. The fragrant substance extracted from the wood of this plant was used to embalm the dead (John 19:39) and for perfume (Psa. 45:8; Prov. 7:17;. Song 4:14).
Of course, my argument will not persuade someone who does not have faith in these things, but it will take a lot more than the spurious arguments of this documentary to shake the faith that I hold so dear.
Did George Washington chop down the cherry tree? Most historians believe this to be a folk tale. This legend does not disprove the existence of Washington as an historical figure. Most of the Biblical stories start from an historical truth. Just as Washington had legends that grew around him over the next 200 years, how many more legends would have grown around what the Jews considered epic events in their history.
Science has shown that the ice ages are fact. That the last ice age ended quite abruptly is also shown to be fact. If all this ice melted in a very short time, there must have been incredible floods. Would the people who live at this time have not talked about it? Of course they would. There would have been all types of stories been told. Just because Noah didn't put all the animals in the entire world in a boat , does not mean that the great floods didn't happen. The geologic record shows that it did. The legends which grew out of the floods show how catastrophic these events were. Generations of story tellers very slowly changed the specific details.
That Jesus existed is probably true. That urban legends grew around a man that had left a strong impression on the people of those times is not only possible but almost unavoidable. The spreading of news surrounding Jesus would have been word of mouth. This would have confused the truth even more. Both hard line Christians and hard line atheists have to use a little common sense in their discussions and stop the anger and accusations.
You say: "Just because Noah didn't put all the animals in the entire world in a boat , does not mean that the great floods didn't happen.
How big of a boat do you think that would have taken, and where would he have found two of every animals????
If that story is to have a reality may be it hasn't happen yet and may be 2 of every animals is their DNA, which could fit in a much smaller box which would fit in a boat.
All sounds like alien story to me if it was in the past.
az
I hope I didn't give you the impression that I believe that Noah saved all the animals in the world because I don't. When I reread my statement I realized I wrote all the animals in the world when what I meant was that he put representatives of each species on the ark. The Bible states this and I don't believe it. This was part of the myths that evolved about the floods which must have happened at the end of the ice ages.
We have thousands of gullible people going to see faith healers today. This in spite of all the advances in science. If a faith healer lived two thousand years ago, he would probably have a bigger effect on the people that lived at those times. We can't be sure that Jesus actually lived but a Jesus type figure would have wowed a lot of people. He may have been more likable than Benny Hinn, too.
@Steve:
Jesus? exists all right! (give it a name) he comes up every morning and replenishes the Earth, he is the giver of light! The Son of God, which is the "SUN" God's Son the "SUN" "Anthropomorphized"! Among many other deities throughout the ages!
Did Jesus die? I've got a better question: If someone doesn't exist, can he die?
One would think if the focus strictly on humanity is greater then those focusing their faith into an empty hole in the sky. You would then think there would be a sence of greater kindness towards each other.
Any outside source other than humankind such as non existing entities embeded only in the minds of man- will only disrupt mans journey forward. Jesus stories are so plentiful considering no one took notes, (but perhaps the (doubting) Thomas Papers which have no mention of any miracle). Some dictators manipulated Jesus words(bible2)along the way for thier purposes of control. I'm no expert but Jesus as a human being born on earth indeed also died too, just like everyone else. Did Elvis Die?(coming soon)
@eire666:
Ah Contraire! thought it was hilarious how Vlatko (much deserved) blew him @Patrick, off the site,
Was actually happy to somehow instigate a religee's removal, not that I was really trying. (LOL)
@Hesus
Yes morality is a trait religion is a taught belief. I agree.
@Achems
Wow man u really got the bad end of the stick that fell off my tree. Sorry brotha. Sorry about that!
Hear about them recreating a cancer cells beginning? We're getting close!
Two words, stem cells.
One could even/either regenerate or create Body Parts and anatomy! Too bad us in the states have all this tape to get through.
Stem cells.
That's a miracle.
Wonder where Randy is. Hopefully he's in Asia somewhere...S.E.....and getting some of those to help fix his whole mess.
I'm just sayin. Off topic. My bad.
@Patrick:
Ha,Ha, your a funny guy! as with most religee's. Never give up right? Or are you just trolling?
"Known for a fact that your Jesus did exist"??
You still never gave any Empirical evidence to the affirmative, have you? Except the beliefs instilled from your bibles. We are just supposed to take your word for it, just because you said so, right?
Talk about psychological counselling!
Reject what the herd says. When people die, we don't see them alive any more. Nowhere in time has that ever changed, for anyone. Supernatural silliness is technology unexplained, and repeated lies told so many times they simply believe it a truth without question. It wasn't called the Dark Ages for nothing and it's never going to aid mans journey into the future. Re-think it again if you think someone was walking along with Jesus taking notes 2000 years ago. Being told what to believe? Question every attempt they use to further enslave you. Awaken and pay respect to our fore-fathers warnings of deceptions made long ago.
You should really look up the term "pathological narcissism" and "delusion" in a good psychiatric reference.
A delusion is "a false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite? what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary".
By your assertions, Socrates did not exist, nor did Ghengis Khan, Muhammed, Buddha, or any other number of historic figures. Egad, I wish some of you would seek psychological counseling! To say someone didn't exist when it is known for a fact that he did. Wow.....talk about delusion.
so if everybody thinks something is real it is? So you mean the earth has been flat and the planets moved around us... and by the way no historian of these days talked about someone named jesus do you think they should have i'm being sceptic me too
he didnt die because he didnt exist
Poor family relations and why we are distancing ourselves from communal way of life is more a question of how we developed as a society. Living amongst large numbers of people communal life gives way to individualism for sake of privacy and the fact that we have a limit to how many relationships we can sustain.
With expanding knowledge and endless array of ideas, exchange of culture... It is inevitable that we will change. Most changes will come with new generations.
For your offspring to have the same convictions/traditions as yourself it requires rigid and dogmatic society where there is no place for individualism. It also requires that you live cut off from rest of the world and in a small community.
But even in large cities where people see themselves as individuals whilst living in a society that is by comparison much more complex they thrive and get along with family members.
Instead of trying desperately to conform everyone to the same pattern to avoid conflict it would be better to be accepting. Morality is separate from religion and is not rigid but rather changes with our consciousness the true mortar of society.
Eireannach666
Your argument is a two-edged sword. By the same measure, an atheist should not be allowed to teach their child scorn of religion.
A parent should, and must, teach their children their traditions and beliefs. It is how the human race has survived thusfar. Family, tribal, and communiy identity are the mortar of society. If, when a child is exposed to new information, they change their belief system to a new one, it should be when they reach the majority, and are able to work through the problem with the experience that comes from maturity. To do otherwise is to sow discord within the family unit. In order to get a community to work, it is best if the community has similar beliefs and traditions.
Look at the Amish; they have maintained their identity and traditions, yet they do not make war nor subjugate those around them. Do they have their problems? Yes. Is it the fault of their belief system? No. Yet they have survived. To force them to abandon their beliefs is to destroy their community and their identity. Is this right? Do we have the right to destroy their worldview, to force them into the 21st century, to abandon their beliefs. Why? They do not seek our destruction, rather, they seek to isolate themselves from our secular world. Is this so bad?
What I am saying is children should be taught by their parents. If, as a matter of course they learn to discard those beliefs and traditions, so be it. To do otherwise is to teach the son to hate the father, and a greater evil I cannot think of.
To add;
I'm not any kind of "ist" unless a meist is a category? You're the "ist" my fried and that's what is the truth. And also engineering is a science and I have a degree in it! So yet again Hail Science the Great! And his father Logic H. Reason!
Horns.
Patrick
No that's not what I said. I don't care if a person teaches a child their history or any other fact they can prove. Just don't scare them into religious submission before they've see the other side because you do harm to that child by damaging their outlook on everything else. These kids are so scared of hell their afraid to question or hear any alliterative. In fact they'll just learn it to pass a test and throw it away as the devils brew. Teach a kid what you can prove and let them decide based on all the evidence we have what to believe. I know from experience it works better and they are more productive and open to other races and other types of lifestyles. More tolerant and understanding. More knowledge thirsty, truth seeking and more rational individuals.
Plus when they start asking why and when and how , I hope you are showing them both sides as in your highly unlikely side and showing them all the facts I presented as well. Kids will make the right decision usually as long as there isn't someone in their wear telling or scaring them into saying what they are told. To conform is to deny individuality for yourself. Can't be yourself if your bound to conform with a religion. You are them an not yourself. You are religion and not an individual. What a waste I say.
So eireannach666,
the traditions and teachings, like say, how to survive, shouldn't be taught to children. We should send them all to your "school" to be "taught" the right way to think.
Some call that indoctrination, instilling into someone a doctrine.
If there is no god, what is the point of reaching higher and higher? It will do no good. Man will end, and badly.
So why even bother teaching anything? Why don't we just take our kids out into the woods and dump them off once they can walk. We don't want to influence their thinking with language, or music, or art....
but no, you want to indoctrinate them with what you believe, and remove the parent, the tribe, the community out of it.
Isn't it strange that you take all the writings of the apostles and cast them aside, then say they wrote nothing, and nothing was written about them? Wow, impressive.
It was confusing even in the early church. Much of the Eastern Church was caught up chasing away "heresies" such as the Paulites. These guys basically only had what Paul had written to guide them, dumping most of the Bible. The Western church was chasing Cathars and the Magdalene cult.
And save us your fantasies about how science is going to save us. They are just fantasies. It won't be scientists. It will be (if we are capable of saving ourselves) Engineers. Engineers don't care about what is truth, only what works.
I don't know why atheists keep trying to fix something that isn't broken.
and how do the engineers invent new technology? while praying ? no... by studying the laws discovered by science... atheist are just trying to fix the illogic thing that's called god, imagination is good but don't push too hard when you create your "friends"
@ eireannach
wonder how long before the word jesux gets censored... very good posts.
@Achems
LOL I have literally nothing else to do! So I guess we can rehash a discussion I've had before even on here. But I really like this dude Humphreys he's got me to read a lot of books and had me laughing to myself while he showed the road to seeing a lot more facts than I ever thought were out there to support the claims of the nojesux story. I mean its almost overwhelming and some highly respectable entities have done a lot of work on this issue. Which makes it easy for us because they've done all the work really we just got to get it into our hands.
I think my other one is in moderation. And I did so well on staying out of there.
Why would you spend so much time reading, writing(as here) and brewing over the fact that you are convinced Jesus never existed?
Are you putting together a doc on "Jesus, protagonist of the oldest novel"?
Looks more like a study than an simple interest.
az
Ok last one for now.
I suppose you'd also like to know about what I said about prove the deciples and why do I say the apostles were either not who they were said to be,did not play any role or perhaps just made up completely. Possibly all or a combination of all three.
The apostles should be twelve of the most famous people in history. I mean just as famous as anyone alive or ever lived. We should be able to tell about these guys in school.
Supposedly they were the dream team, best of the best of the lowest class and hand picked by jesux to witness his amazing deeds, learn his teachings, and take the good news of his kingdom to all. That's why its really surprising that we know next to nothing about them. We can't even be sure of their names. The gospels list a collection of more than twenty names for the so-called twelve disciples. It should be apparent that if the twelve were actual historical figures, with such an important role in the foundation and growth of the church, it would be impossible to have such wild confusion over the basic question of who they really were. Heck, for seven of the twelve, our only early source, the gospels, say nothing about them at all. They are just names on a list.
Isn't it a odd that such holy and chosen men, infused with the holy spirit and given powers to heal the sick and cast out demons, wrote nothing, or had nothing written for them or about them? Or stranger yet that men chosen to be eye-witnesses to the mighty deeds of jesux, wrote no eye-witness statements, left no sermons, no memoirs, no letters, no teachings, no pithy words of encouragement?
All that we have about "the twelve" are conflicting legends and fantastic stories from a much later date, tall stories about where they went, what they did and most especially how they died. Their deaths, it seems, have been recorded in loving and lurid detail. And it is the graphic deaths of the disciples that solves the riddle. We've all heard the apologetic claim: "Would they have died for a lie? Therefore the story of jesux must be true."
Everyone is aware how useful to a cause a dead martyr can be, even if he's a fiction. In the case of jesux, the twelve are a fiction, a necessary entourage for a sun god, passing through the twelve constellations of the zodiac. Just like other saviour gods, jesux had to have his entourage, his crew, his chosen,his worthy , blaaah. The truth is, the alleged suffering and cruel fate of his original apostles, the twelve earned their martyr's crown .They were made to inspire generations to die and kill in gods/jesux name!
The pictures are painted so one may see the church as the victimized innocents. Rather it has been the christians who have bathed their faith in the blood of others.
There is NO corroborating evidence for the existence of the twelve apostles and absolutely NO evidence for the variety of deaths they supposedly experienced. The bible itself actually mentions the death of only two apostles, a James who was put to death by Herod Agrippa and the nasty Judas Iscariot who gets several deaths because he's the bad guy. Its all legend and tradition, dreamed up by conflicting and beaten up evidence to wholesale fabrication of the non-existent.
This is going to be a fun read so let me share a few fun facts with you. I love a good horror story!
Let's start with my man Peter (aka Simon, Cephas). "Beheaded by Nero?" No, not really. This legend was dreamed up by the mid-2nd century pope Anicetus (156-166) when he became locked in a conflict with the venerable Polycarp of Smyrna. Polycarp had tried to win the argument (over the dating of Easter) by insisting that he spoke with the authority of the apostle John. In response, Anicetus staked a claim to Peter, and Peter, "Prince of the Apostles", trumps John. 2nd century texts known as the "Clementines" had made Peter the "first Bishop of Rome" and 3rd century invention gave him a 25-year pontificate – which made it a tad tricky for him to have died at the hands of Nero but, hey, this is "tradition."3rd century Church Father Origen dreamed up a colourful flourish: Peter, feeling himself unworthy to be crucified the same way as his Lord, chose option 'B' – crucifixion upside down!
James, son of Zebedee (James the Greater?) Acts 12.1,2 says simply:
"Now about that time Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the church. And he killed James the brother of John with the sword."Later legend adds the truly extraordinary nonsense that the Roman officer guarding James converted on the spot and elected to be beheaded beside him! Even later fabrication has James traipsing around northern Spain before he dashes back to Judaea for martyrdom.
John, son of Zebedee.
This guy has to be kept alive long enough to take care of Mary, lead the church in Ephesus, write the Book of Revelation and write his own gospel. He even survives being boiled in oil and is given a natural death! Actually, John bar Zebedee disappears from the yarn in Acts at the same time his brother James is more dramatically removed from the story. The last reference to John is also verse 12.2. From Acts 12.12 onward we are dealing with another John "whose surname was Mark" – a lightweight character who nonetheless is credited with authorship of the first gospel. The impending demotion of the thunder brothers is actually prefigured in Mark's gospel (and is embellished in Matthew, where Mrs Zebedee does the talking). The boys ask for front seats in the hereafter. JC is having none of it:"And James and John, the sons of Zebedee, come unto him, saying, Master, we would that thou shouldest do for us whatsoever we shall desire. And he said unto them, What would ye that I should do for you? They said unto him, Grant unto us that we may sit, one on thy right hand, and the other on thy left hand, in thy glory. "Jesux said unto them ... to sit on my right hand and on my left hand is not mine to give; but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared. And when the ten heard it, they began to be much displeased with James and John." – Mark 10:35-41.Thus while the earthly career of jesux features prominently brothers James and John, "the sons of thunder" (Mark 3.7), the story of the early church features a new James, "the brother of jesux", and a new John, a sidekick to Paul and Barnabas (see below). We know little about either, although the death of James bar Damneus (Josephus, Antiquities 20.9) provides a basis for the colourful martyrdom of brother James beloved of Christian apologists.
Andrew, brother of Peter. Andrew had a wonderful career covering everywhere from Scythia to Greece, from Asia Minor to Thrace. This guy, it seems, took option 'C' on the crucifixion menu: on an x-shaped cross. Apparently this allowed him to continue preaching for 2 days.
Bartholomew (Nathanael) What a traveller – India, Persia, Armenia, Ethiopia and southern Arabia! Miraculously he managed to get himself crucified (flayed alive and beheaded!) in both India and Armenia. Pretty impressive stuff. Even when dead his bits got about: a church in Rome claimed most of his corpse but 11th century Canterbury did a roaring trade with his arm! His emblem is the flaying knife. Cool.
Matthew (Levi son of Alphaeus)
This guy has to be kept alive long enough to write his gospel – at least 20 years after the supposed death of christ. Credited with 15 years in Jerusalem, then missions to Persia and Ethiopia and, of course, martyrdom in both places. According to Medieval iconography he worn spectacles, the better to count his tax money. If Matthew, aka Levi, is a son of Alphaeus (Mark 2.14) then presumably he is also the brother of James son of Alphaeus (Mark 3.18)? And yet we are told the lesser James is a son of Mary, sister of the Blessed Virgin and wife of Cleophas (John 19.25). In which case, the evangelist Matthew is a cousin of jesux himself!
James son of Alphaeus (James the Less – or is James the jus)
This is movie worthy if you like gore as I do; Thrown down over 100 feet from the pinnacle of the Temple by "scribes and Pharisees", he actually survived only to be stoned, have his brains dashed out with a fuller’s club and have his body "sawn asunder" (freakin awesome)– all this at the age of 90!Of course which is which I don't know with these two. May be the same, James the Less and James the brother of jesux (an identification made by Jerome and later Catholics) all this mayhem belongs with the righteous James and the fate of the lesser James is unknown. Maybe being sawed in half causes the confusion, too gory?
Jude/Thaddeus /Lebbaeus /Daddaeus
Either a serious clubbing or crucifixion in the city of Edessa or Persia. Apparently he had no fan base, guessing because his name sounded too much like Judas. Jude the apostle is often conflated with Jude the brother of Jesus and also with Jude the writer of the epistle of Jude (pay attention, there will be a test). Yet Jude (the letter writer) identifies himself as the brother of James and as a servant of jesux, not his brother (Jude 1.1). He also speaks of the apostles in the past tense, not as if he was one of them (verse 17), so he cannot be identified as one of "the twelve" either.
Simon. Crucifixion thousands of miles away in Britain. He also managed to preach in Africa. Quite an act to follow.
Mark (John Mark).
Though neither Clement of Alexandria (?153-215), nor Origen of Alexandria (182-251) seem to have noticed, Eusebius of Caesarea (c.263-339) relays the news that the apostle Mark had been "first bishop" of Alexandria and had suffered martyrdom in the "eighth year of Nero." This would have been 61 AD – rendering the apostle dead before the death of Peter whose memoirs Mark supposedly wrote up as the Gospel of Mark. "Dragged to death", or maybe not. His bones – well, someone's bones – turned up in 9th century Venice.
Luke."Hanged on an olive tree." Or, "lived to the age of 84 and died unmarried." Body parts claimed by both Padua and Constantinople.
Paul."Beheaded by Nero." No, not really, but legend tells us he shared the same fate as Peter, even dying on the same day. Pious romances scribbled between the 2nd and 4th centuries – Acts of Paul, the Apocalypse of Paul, the Martyrdom of Paul and the Acts of Paul and Thecla – provide all the fabulous nonsense you could ever wish for.
And of course poor Judas the snitch. He had died so many times in so many ways. Just depends on who's telling it and where you are in the world.
We can do more but let's not take up the space on Vlatkos site.
Another bunch of poo to walk around when in the yard of religion. Better have your work boots on when you go down this way because your gonna step in the sh** for sure.
Sources:
Kenneth "the man" Humphreys
The Good Bible – in all its Goodly Versions
Thomas Sheehan, The First Coming (Crucible, 1986)
David Farmer, Oxford Dictionary of Saints (OUP,1997)
Bruce Metzger, Michael Coogan (Eds) The Oxford Companion to the Bible (OUP, 1993)
Edward Gibbon, The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire (1799)
Michael Walsh, Roots of Christianity (Grafton, 1986)
Robin Lane Fox, The Unauthorized Version (Penguin, 1991)
Helen Ellerbe, The Dark Side of Christian History (Morningstar & Lark, 1995)
@eire666
Seems you have spent some time on this, left no stones unturned, excellent work!
Hail to science!
Horns!
Also I'd like to add this and another to the discussion. Now mind you that I source my info if you'd like to contest the reliability of what I am posting so the same sources above apply hear on out and I will add to in accordance to what I post and to whom I quote or reference.
Some people think that the Shroud of Turin is physical evidence for the existence of Jesus. However, scientific analysis shows that the Shroud is a forgery. It depicts a man two inches taller in front than he is in back, its “blood” is actually the pigment red ochre, and it's carbon-dated to 1260-1390 CE (consistent with when it was first “discovered”). It's also ludicrous to think that the Shroud was kept hidden for over 1200 years until the crusaders came to the Middle East, looking for souvenirs to take home (like most tourists). Some enterprising forger likely made a bundle.
It isn't so uncommon for people to believe bs stories, and even kill or die for them or for their religion. Look at Jonestown, Heaven's Gate, the Solar Temple, 9/11, suicide bombers, and the almost countless wars and slaughters based completely on religion.
Because many minds are infected with religion from birth from day one, they don't like to question religion. Religion causes people to accept irrational ideas with little or no evidence. If I were to say giving me money makes you immortal
,You would either laugh or want a little proof. But, a very old book says that 2000 years ago some guy was born with a ghost as his father and a virgin as his mother; this guy did miracles, was killed, came back to life, and rose bodily up to heaven and billions of people accept it and never question.
So, let's look at the evidence we have. From the earliest christian epistle authors such as Paul, we have little to indicate that jesux was a real person. And, we have strong evidence that to them he was just a spiritual sky god, constructed from earlier myths. From the later and unknown writers of the gospels, we have a story that grew over time, with more fantastical events added as the story was told just like a myth or that game broken telephone you play in grade school, you know where it changes the more its retold. None of the gospel authors even claimed to have met jesux. They say so and so was there and so was she but never I saw or I witnessed . From the historians of the first century we have nothing. Nothing.
Just for fun let's look at the others that took and also came before/during jesux.
Other religions and myths of the time, and the (non-orthodox) competing versions of christianity, many of their texts and references to them were not copied or were destroyed by faithful christians (especially during fourth and fifth centuries where the burned almost every text that was non christian compatible). Once a christian sect gained absolute political power under Constantine in the fourth century, opposers were threatened by death, prison, or dispossession in order to get them to play ball.
Just like some religions from Greece, Persia, Egypt and still other places and is in no way origanal ,unique,or first to spout claims as such. There were more than a dozen other deities and saviors (Mithras, Osiris/Serapis, Inanna/Ishtar, Horus, Perseus, Bacchus, Attis, Hermes, Adonis, Hercules/Heracles, Tammuz, Asclepius, and Prometheus) who were resurrected after violent deaths. Many of these gods had their births announced by stars, had a virgin mother and divine father (or other miraculous birth), or had rulers try to off or take them out as infants. The two main christian holidays were incorporated from earlier pagan rituals and festivals. Easter (near the spring equinox, and with its fertility symbols of rabbits and eggs) was named after the pagan Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre. christmas was formerly the Roman festival Saturnalia (for the god Saturn), and more than a dozen gods were born on December 25 (the old winter solstice, when the sun is “reborn” and starts rising in the sky) — jesux, Mithras, Zeus/Jupiter, Horus, Attis, Dionysus, Adonis, Tammuz, Hercules/Heracles, Perseus, Bacchus, Apollo, Helios, and Sol Invictus.
Mithras had the most similarities to jesux. Mithras was born in very humble circumstances with shepherds watching, had twelve disciples (as in twelve signs of the zodiac), raised the dead, was often depicted with a halo, and was known as “The Light of the World” and “The Good Shepherd.” After he died, he joined a god to judge the souls of the dead. Thru him sinners could be reborn into eternal life. Because Mithras was a sun god, he was worshipped on Sundays. His followers had ritual meals of bread and wine, which represented his flesh and blood. It's not surprising that Mithraism died out as christianity spread. And hopefully history will due the same to the religions of today. They plague us as the others plagued our ancestors and free thinkers of old.
Added Sources;
Historians and authors:
Rene Salm
Kenneth Humphreys. (Love this guy!)
Dan Barker,
David Fitzgerald
Robert M Price
Dennis McKinsey,
And their wonderful web pages (the ones that have one anyways)in which I have spent just killing time, thanks for the useful knowledge!
Hail s)cience! Lol.
Horns!
Ok since man made religion and we are all born atheist. Religion just being taught and installed by parents based on their own beliefs, never allowing no time for a child to see all sides and choose what's right based on fact,which should be considered abuse and criminal brain washing.)But in any matter the proof fall upon the religious to prove their claims since they are the ones making them and enforcing them.
I will say honesty is the best policy so I say kudos. But the statements you make of "Wow" just prove that this is common knowledge and yet still people believe. I make a joke or to in order to lighten the mood. By no means should you take that as a lack of knowledge. I only chose john because he is the easiest and most humorous to me. Plus he is an easy example. We may further this discussion by now going from the common to the uncommonly known facts. Some you even argue in spite of the facts. Typical religee fashion.
All the sources you named ,outside of christian writings help to destroy the claims and any reliability based on the fact that all of these accounts come from authors who lived after the alleged life of jesux. Since they did not live during the time of the hypothetical jesux, none of their accounts serve as eyewitness evidence.
Josephus Flavius, the jewish historian, lived as the earliest non-christian who mentions a jesux. Although many scholars think that josephus' short accounts of jesux (in Antiquities) came from interpolations perpetrated by a later church father (most likely, Eusebius), Josephus' birth in 37 C.E. (well after the alleged crucifixion of jesux), puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E., after the first gospels got written! Therefore, even if his accounts about jesux came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay.
Pliny the Younger (born: 62 C.E.) His letter about the christians only shows that he got his information from christian believers themselves. Regardless, his birth date puts him out of range as an eyewitness account.
Tacitus, the Roman historian's birth year at 64 C.E., puts him well after the alleged life of jesux. He gives a brief mention of a "Christus" in his Annals (Book XV, Sec. 44), which he wrote around 109 C.E. He gives no source for his material. Although many have disputed the authenticity of Tacitus' mention of jesux, the very fact that his birth happened after the alleged jesux and wrote the Annals during the formation of christianity, shows that his writing can only provide us with hearsay accounts.
Suetonius, a Roman historian, born in 69 C.E., mentions a "Chrestus," a common name. Apologists assume that "Chrestus" means "christ" (a disputable claim). But even if Seutonius had meant "christ," it still says nothing about an earthly jesux. Just like all the others, Suetonius' birth occurred well after the purported jesux. Again, only hearsay.
Amazingly some religees use brief portions of the Talmud, (a collection of jewish civil a religious law, including commentaries on the Torah), as evidence for jesux. They claim that Yeshu in the Talmud refers to jesux. However, this Yeshu, according to scholars depicts a disciple of Jehoshua Ben-Perachia at least a century before the alleged jesux or it may refer to Yeshu ben Pandera, a teacher of the 2nd centuy CE. Regardless of how one interprets this, the Palestinian Talmud didn't come into existence until the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud between the 3rd and 6th century C.E., at least two centuries after the alleged crucifixion. At best its the equivalent to a jewish hercules and legendary super hero; it cannot possibly serve as evidence of jesux. You guys have used this so called "evidence" of jesux because they believe they represent the best outside sources.
All other sources (Christian and non-Christian) come from even less reliable sources, some of which include: Mara Bar-Serapion (circa 73 C.E.), Ignatius (50 - 98? C.E.), Polycarp (69 - 155 C.E.), Clement of Rome (? - circa 160 C.E.), Justin Martyr (100 - 165 C.E.), Lucian (circa 125 - 180 C.E.), Tertullian (160 - ? C.E.), Clement of Alexandria (? - 215 C.E.), Origen (185 - 232 C.E.), Hippolytus (? - 236 C.E.), and Cyprian (? - 254 C.E.). As you can see, all these people lived well after the alleged death of jesux. Not one can give an eyewitness account.
One should be ashamed of themselves when they try and deceive and or confuse while violating the rules of history by using after the fact ramblelings and unfounded claims by un-reliable sources as evidence for the event itself. Not one of these writers gives a source or backs up his claims with evidence . It doesn't matter what these people wrote about jesux, an author who writes after the fact and has no evidence or crrdible sources to support his claims can only give example of heresy. All these have come from pass along stories and tales from believers. And as we know from myth, superstition, and faith, beliefs do not require facts or evidence for their propagation and circulation. We have only speculation and tales of jesux existence, and nothing more.
The sources used to obtain this evidence and review include;
Briant, Pierre, "Alexander the Great: Man of Action Man of Spirit," Harry N. Abrams, 1996
Doherty, Earl, "The Jesus Puzzle," Canadian Humanist Publications, 1999
Flavius, Josephus (37 or 38-circa 101 C.E.), Antiquities
Gauvin, Marshall J., "Did Jesus Christ Really Live?"
Gould, Stephen Jay "Dinosaur in a Haystack," (Chapter 2), Harmony Books, New York, 1995
Graham, Henry Grey, Rev., "Where we got the Bible," B. Heder Book Company, 1960
Helms, Randel McCraw , "Who Wrote the Gospels?", Millennium Press
Irenaeus of Lyon (140?-202? C.E.), Against the Heresies
McKinsey, C. Dennis "The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy," Prometheus Books, 1995
Metzger, Bruce,"The Text of the New Testament-- Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration," Oxford University Press, 1968
Pagels, Elaine, "The Gnostic Gospels," Vintage Books, New York, 1979
Pagels, Elaine, "Adam, Eve, and the Serpent," Vintage Books, New York, 1888
Pagels, Elaine, "The Origin of Satan," Random House, New York, 1995
Price, Robert M.," Deconstructing Jesus," Prometheus Books, 2000
Pritchard, John Paul, "A Literary Approach to the New Testament," Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1972
Robertson, J.M. "Pagan Christs," Barnes & Noble Books, 1966
Romer, John, "Testament : The Bible and History," Henry Holt and Company,New York, 1988
Schonfield, Hugh Joseph, "A History of Biblical Literature," New American Library, 1962
Spong, Bishop Shelby, "Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism," HarperSanFrancisco, 1991
Tacitus (55?-117? C.E.), Annals
Wilson, Dorothy Frances, "The Gospel Sources, some results of modern scholarship," London, Student Christian Movement press, 1938
The Revell Bible Dictionary," Wynwood Press, New York, 1990
King James Bible, 1611
U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990
Various issues of Bible Review magazine, published by the Biblical Archaeology Society, Washington D.C
@eireannach666
Yes, religion is like a delusion. It is like a bad sci-fi flick that requires suspension of disbelief. Maybe people like me need to believe that there is purpose in life, else life has no purpose, no meaning. For those who have had personal religious experiences, no suspension of disbelief is required and no amount of arguing will change their minds. To call all religees delusional is an extremely subjective judgement.
Having seen things for my own eyes, I believe. I cannot convince you of what I saw or what I experienced, so I shall not bother. However, you do not seem evil to me, you seem intelligent, well read, and convinced in your beliefs. Bravo.
I, however, would rather have a psychotic believe in the punishment of eternal hell preventing him from committing murder, than to have him believe that there is no punishment, that the people he murders are only animals, and that there is no overriding morality behind his incarceration and execution. The fear of damnation has kept many from performing a number of evils in the world.
Is it population control? yes. is it wrong?...
You discount the literacy of the apostles, yet provide no proof except for the apostle John. wow.
You discount the virgin birth. many have and still do. wow.
"Not saying I belive he wasn’t an actually person but the argument for has little for the lack of evidence". By said standard, we cannot prove the existence of many known figures in history. That's ok. Many things written about Jesus are not in the bible. (again, Tacitus, Flavius Josephus).
I especially like your comment about "angel rape". That's funny. The belief in virgin birth is only discounted in this age. Do you have evidence that she had sex with someone before giving birth to Jesus? Somthing written during his time? Wow, have you been holding out on us? Do you have personal knowlege that she was raped by an angel?
Anyhow, I am only concerned with whether or not he existed, whether or not he was crucified and died. Having seen enough evidence, I believe the question is settled. What the real question is: Did he come back to life?
Please remember, most people are not as intelligent or educated as you, Kurt, or I. I do not speak to other believers about my doubts or about my beliefs or my discoveries, unless guided by "The Spirit". I know it sounds funny, but I can't explain it any other way. Unless I instinctively know they are ready to hear what I have to say, it would be unfair of me to shatter their entire world and traditions. This leads only to chaos and rebellion. Exempli Gratia: the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution. Too many people died, and for what? How can cold blooded murder be good?
my bad..
Ok Patrick
Nice attempt but no cigar for you my friend.
First acceptable proof would mean testable and verifiable proof.
And as you said you can't prove god so strike one for the god argument. Now I'm going to sjip around here as I'm pressed for time but I'm sure you'll keep up. But divinity I meant and assumed was implied, in the religious sense of perfection, spiritual , creator of all sense. Don't dodge the question. Strike two. Mary being a virgin,again dodge the question, you know what I mean. Conception through angel rape. Not having sex and becomeing pregnant. Its ridiculous. I'm sure humans have lost their abilitu to become asexual along time ago. The possibility, I'm sure was there when our species was far more new to the planet but ...yeah. And again you dodge the question of the bibles end time scenario with a change of topic and some attempts to b smartelic. But ok because I didn't expect an answer worth a da*: anyways.
The brothers of jesux? I asked about jesux. Not saying I belive he wasn't an actually person but the argument for has little for the lack of evidence. Heck I could say the grave of anybody was under my house but without a body and some excavation or at least some text that was written by someone with credibility. The bible is not credible. And if you'd like I can show you in your own bible , New and or Old Testament , where its accuracy is laughable. Not to mention the many,many contradictions it imposes upon itself.
The deciples were not illiterate you say? In luke it states John , the supposed author of more than one book of the bible even the most rediculous book of revelations, was in fact illiterate. What do ou think jesux hand picked his disciples? Because in your bible it says they were chance meetings. Or do we add this to the list of bs used to up the books reliability? Also most people then were not literate! Where did you come up with that. Most upperclass and/or royalty were perhaps mostly literate and not always but the lower classes were not writers nor readers. Maybe enough to help with communications in their trade but not on the impeccable scale needed to write the original texts.
As far as miracles go , you again you dodge the question again. (Are you on a dodgeball team or something?) You know what I meant! The raising of the dead, casting of demos etc.. Come on man don't dodge the questions just say you have and there is no logical or real answer. What is it with you religees not admitting that the stories are bs and no truth in these claims.
His crucifixion is documented again by un reliable sources and 99% 80 plus yrs after by pro-christian authors ,so again no credibility there.
And no not a puddle of mud but from the cooling down of the earth after the big bang and the many elements and molecules that hit,landed, and/or was apart of this earth along with the natural crossing of the such and the natural chemical process that go along with the meeting of such matters. All this you see on this planet was nothing more than a chance meeting of matterand anti-matters that would of happened somewhere in the universe eventually anyways. Perhaps it has or will again. It just happened here as well. Star stuff. Whe are not the center but rather the outer of the universe and it does not operate for or around us and anything we do. When our species is gone,evolution and natural selection will choose another to take our place. We will leave our print but that is all. Eventually our sun will die and the earth will be a lifeless ,cold chunk of frozen nothing. Assuming we are not obliterated by something natural. Which is NOT a prediction, it is a fact! It has and will happen again, its just a question of when.
Basically you answered as I thought you would so thanks for the attempt but I wish sometime one of you religees would just say ," you know what. I don't have, can't find, and perhaps there is no proof but I believe on sheer faith alone because it makes me feel good to believe in such things and supports me when I'm down. I need it because I'm too weak minded to deal or think that life is just what it is and we are nothing more than an animal just ike the rest."
*sigh
Oh well have fun with the delusion. Ill keep the facts to myself since you have it all figured out in your christ delusion. The bible and all like texts are evil to our species and the worship of a plague of knowledge and a diease to science.
Christ denied. In fact also gods and all religion. Its weak and ridiculous to rely on pure imagination to dictate how we live and what we do.
Later logic hater I gotta do some work.
I'm just talkin , Richard Dawkins.
Oh and One more time , Einstein.
Horns!
Well said sir ?
Hi Kurrrt:
yeah, that only works if you translate his name into Greek (Nero - Neron) and then get rid of a few letters. And the letters that are written are Xai Chi Stigma, which look nothing like NRN.
The number has become so common and so abused by movies, media, and whack jobs that its true meaning is lost.
Be wary of biblical "experts", especially freakoid numerologists.
Trifixion, Deicide, oh yeahh...
("forever I am bound by your conviction, trifixion- trifixion")...(Cannibal Corpse)
I was looking over the Roman Emperor Nero, his name in numbers was 666, (656?) anyway he was what the bible refers to as the origion of 666, it's been mistaken for some other beast, so be it -to those who don't even care either way, but 666 points to the authentic beast Nero. An evil sadistic dictating ruler you would love to hate. Wearing his mark was the issue back in the days of flat-earthers. I'm no expert, but 666 certainly was not ment to be brought into mans future. But as things get twisted, history has it's ways of getting washed away and revised in different foremats. No one ever decides to correct wrongs in historical biblical record. So it ends up the belief in which no one argues it's meaning today in modern day...
Gosh, I wish I spoke Gaelic. Too bad the English B*&^ards forced us to learn this ungainly tongue.
eireannach666
The whole 666 thing in America is a common tattoo on gang-bangers and others (including Neo Nazis) and is representative of rebellion against social norms, as that particular number is associated with the Beast found in the Book of Revelations. Am curious as to why you would "label" yourself as such. An Enemy of the Church?
You ask:
Show me evidence of;
1.god What would be acceptable proof? I might not be able to give you what you would consider acceptable proof.
2.jesux (I assume you mean Jesus (yeshua bar joseph) spoken of in the testimonies in the New Testament and written about by Flavius Josephus and Tacitus. His brother's tombs are well documented, as are the tombs of others in the Bible.
3.miricles Define what constitutes a miracle. ("The Miracle of Modern Medicine?")
4.divinity The desert(pr. dee-zert) or the concept?(The Romans believed that Caligula was devine.)(See the movie "Young Frankenstien", 'the worm...or the spaghetti?) ha ha. (See the movie: "Hitchhikers guide to the Universe")
Don't Panic.
5.creation in a week: Unprovable. geologic record and all other data (astronomical) indicate the Earth is ~4 Billion years old, the Universe being ~15 Billion years old. (See the movie, Inherit the Wind)
6.mary being a virgin at her age. Which age? What, are you from West Virginia?
7.of who wrote the bible: numerous authors. The first collected works for a "bible" as we understand it were compiled during and after the "Babylonian exile". Some texts have more than one author, (other writers who added to exigent texts), discovered by differences in style, word construction, word usage, etc. (e.g. Isaiah, Daniel, Genesis). As religious texts of the time were hand written by scribes, such "ammendments" would vary dependent on a number of factors. Different authors wrote of the same events differently (point of view) e.g. the differences between Kings and Chronicles. Spelling and grammar vary from author to author. It is believed that there may have been around five authors for the Book of Genesis, maybe more.
The New Testament consists of "gospels" and letters. Gospels are a testimony by a particular author, based on personal knowledge and anecdotal information from others. The letters are correspondences from one apostle or clergyman to another. Their religious import was such that many copies of the letter were made and distributed to a number of different churches in the area.
8.the crucifixion of jesux
testified to and written upon by a number of authors.
9.where the diciples got their literacy schooling and possibly proof they even existed as well. Again, the existence of tombs, etc. Jewish boys are required to read from the TORAH during their bar-mitzvah. There were a number of languages spoken in Judaea at the time; Aramaeic, Greek being the primary two. To be fluent in more than one language was not only common, but necessary, even today.
10.humans coming from ribs and dirt and not a ancestry of ape and algae. Midrash...the creation story. From where did the first bacterium emerge? spontaneously? or was it in a muddy pool? in a primordial clay?...you see where I'm going with this? Many believe that the Creation story should not be taken literally. (See the movie, Inherit the Wind)
11.any proof of an Armageddon being more than just another thin horoscopish resembling banter written by men or women who still thought the earth was flat and/or that the sun went around the earth.:
Armageddon is a place. Over the centuries, what was written about the place and its implications mutated the nameplace into a regular noun. (The end of the world, etc.)
The ancient city of Meggido sits upon a small mountain (more of a high hill) that overlooks the Jezreel valley. It is situated at a pass that goes through a mountain range that links the coastal plain with the Valley of Jezreel. Its hills are very very steep.
Numerous times over the eons conquering armies had to traverse this pass to go either North or South for conquest, including the Egyptians, the Hittites, the Assyrians, the Greeks, and the Romans. During Flavius Josephus' time, the Romans who were executing the punitive expedition first conquered Galilee (the Valley of Jezreel) then passed through this mountain pass to enter the Coastal Plain.
To put it bluntly, Megiddo (on Har (mount) megiddo) is strategic terrain.
It had been prophesied (religious(?) prediction) that during the End Times, a great battle between numerous forces will occur there. If one were to take the prophesy literally, hundreds of millions of soldiers will be annihilated.
Side note: I have been there. Was the US Batt North Camp LNO for the Multinational Force and Observers unit, Sinai, Egypt, and saw the terrain for myself while touring the area.
@Kurrrt
Hey Sabbath is cool, you should go listen to Deicide,and some 6 feet under!
But The Oz Man is always in good flavor with me!
Black Sabbath: "Looking through a hole in the sky"
(hint#1: Gods in your wallet hiding behind the president.)
(hint#2: Behind the courtroom judge, deciding your fate.)
(hint#3: Behind inoculations, and waiting in hell for you)
"We the People" died in 1933, when USA went bankrupt, which turned our nations society into US property. Embracing ancient words of enslavement written in the Dark Ages will destroy mans future, just like it did back then. These dark forces encourage man to embrace the Holy Bible. It's certainly your choice to allow biblical destruction and restriction to proceed or not. Whats it going to be a non existing entity or a 100% focus on humanity? There's no picking both. Awaken-evolve.
Wow , friend, you really have your way with the words Padhraic.
Well let me just say that your comment of the Irish Catholics is pretty funny. Did you not even consider my name or did you only see the three meaningless and powerless numerals and focus simply on that. As you obviously did the web site you posted. Not realizing the real reason of them either being there. I'd say you answered your own question with your reaction to three measely powerless numerals that brought out a reaction from you. Gangbanger? LOL yeah right. Just a bong of truth passer and proprietor.
Now ,caora an seo dhur,bhaoghalta. A bheil am pathadh ort? How about a nice tall glass of a little evidence to support your claims. I show you mine if you show me yours. Ok? Go.
Show me evidence of;
1.god
2.jesux
3.miricles
4.divinity
5.creation in a week
6.mary being a virgin at her age.
7.of who wrote the bible
8.the crucifixion of jesux
9.where the diciples got their literacy schooling and possibly proof they even existed as well.
10.humans coming from ribs and dirt and not a ancestry of ape and algae.
11.any proof of an Armageddon being more than just another thin horoscopish resembling banter written by men or women who still thought the earth was flat and/or that the sun went around the earth.
There is much more to discuss so let us be thorough but yet make haste. I don't want my ADHD to stray me away from a good catch. I'd hate to leave such great fun on the doorstep lifeless but still entertaining.
I offer you no quarrel braither Patrick, just a simple game of show and tell. You give me what extraordinary evidence you have supporting these extraordinary claims and ill show you my not so extraordinary proofs and evidences showing otherwise. No names just show your hand , ace. I call. Slainte.
I also am prepared for another hand if you have enough chips left on the table after this one.
Or we could analogize check mate?
Seriously let's start there and when you decide to not avoid the small task of putting your proof where your faith is, ill put my facts where my tested evidence remains.
I'm just sayin Carl Sagan and I guess your fishin like a christian?
I'm just kidding man, don't get mad just present your case counselor. I await your response.
Please consider my comment above.
Fair warning, refrain from putting "Please consider my comment above" everywhere, it is getting redundant!
Various religious belief and it's sourroundings does not seem like a gift for tomorrow. Today's the concern, being more of an advanced human then past historians. Isn't old belief systems which failed behind all new times? What sheds new light to enter our future is what man needs to become. To overcome what failed should be the main focus times over. The ability to awaken onto new understandings is not just about a silly title heald. Being a better human in a greater lifetime is what should be focused on. I'm no expert but, Is not groveling in historic record defining a failior to proceed foreword? Like in a maze, when the end trail fails a new path is seeked for a way out. Pull it together and focus ahead, for even in seperate groups the truth lies within all. Perhaps man needs to avoid outside evils such as entities in which have no existence. A logical belief in advancing humanity in todays modern life is the practice needed to evolve. Void of a fear in projected Gods and their commanding punishments. I'd think it be quite easy for all simply to erase just a mental thought of an invisable existence. What logical human being alive would believe and accept mental projections in a physical world? Those perhaps void of personal thought, followers. Step out of the religious box and take along hard look behind you at what it's done. It's not what Jesus would do, it's- what will you do.
@Patrick:
Got your dander up EH? There is nothing for me to protest about, as long as you keep your religion to yourself.
Yes, am an Atheist. Just because I or others do not believe in your abhorring God does not mean that because of that, I and others are not noble, just smarter! Did not know that believing in some kind of God was a prerequisite to being noble.
Purpose?? what other than to live in harmony with fellow man. Not pay allegiance to some jealous invisible entity every nano-second!
You say that your Jesus existed? show proof, some empirical evidence.
Religious prophesy? is this how you will power your religious starship? "Mana" from heaven maybe?
Methinks Achems Razor and eireannach666 protest too much.
"You are calling me negative, saying that I have a negative attitude? and then in the same breath you are calling the human race nothing but mold on the planet, do you figure that is positive??"
Are you atheist or not? Either man is noble and has purpose or he does not! If not, he is no better than a bacterium, or a mold spore.
As for my religious beliefs; what do you care what I believe
"Dooms day garbage has been around forever. Eventually yes it will come true since its been quite a while since the earths climate. Changed naturally and killed off a bunch of things. And its been a while since a meteor hit with enough force to wipe most living things out, but the fun part is , is that we are well over due and you can count on that. A natural not supernatural event is what we should be concerned with . Fact not fiction."
Geologically speaking, it has only been about 10,000 years. Less than the twinkling of an eye geologically speaking.
Why do you think you have the right to dictate my beliefs to me? Further, what makes you think I had to "google" nihilism and anarchism? What, you think I haven't been to college? Your arrogance is more of a stench than valid argument. Your historical revisionists are quite clever, trying to gloss over the activities of the anarchists and the more violent nihilists. What, you think you can lie to us? You're worse than an evangelist! We should rename you Jarvoe, the 50's child revival evangeist turned actor.
"And your text was written by nobody. Can’t even show me who wrote it,when, and where. Seconnd, there is not anything anyywhere to back up the claim of jesuxs crucifixion or that he even exsisted for that matter. Heck I’d say the Buddhists in the doc got more than the christ-belivers do! And its debatable at best. Plus the disciples were illiterate trades men." Paul an illiterate tradesman? Do you know anything about Jewish tradition and culture? Do you know about the Bar Mitzvah. Written by nobody? Why do you ignore evidence? How many times do we have to go over this? Your arrogant bigotry against religion invalidates your arguments. Insulting people does not justify a position.
Eire anarchist 666:
"You are quoted as stating atheism prophecies or something to that nature correct?" I assume from this sentence you were frothing at the mouth. Got your blood up, eh?
Scientists "prophesies" about Global Climate Change. Predictions of coming meteors that will destroy life on Earth. Predictions of killer viruses that will wipe out huge sections of the population. Because you think they are based on "the scientific method" (observation, hypothesis, experimentation, confirmation) you do not see the parallel to religious prophesy.
Please don't take what I write as to be taken literally. I use simile and analogy to compare and contrast an argument. You do know what a comparison/contrast essay is?
If you are attempting to get under my skin, my question is why? Why do you doubt the literal existence of an historical figure? You may not believe everything written about him, but he did indeed exist.
Methinks eireannach666 you should be more concerned with the rise of Irish Ultrareligious-Nationalism than with whether or not Jesus existed. They are beginning to seek the forced conversion or expulsion of non-catholics from Ireland. That would spell disaster for one such as you. Religion based Ultra-nationalism is on the rise all over the world. Apparently, it's the latest rage.
What's with the "666" anyhow? A rejection of religious conventions? It kind of labels you as a gangbanger.
@eire666:
Ah, come on man, wanted to give the religee's a taste of there own medicine, love to pound on their doors as they do ours and get them to be Atheists!!
Just joking of course, they seem to have no other recourse but to say that Atheists, evolutionists, is nothing more than religion, beliefs, me-thinks that the religee's are running out of things to say!
Just saying.
Oh and dude are you so blinded by your religion that you believe that site is a serious one? Its literally a joke and a quik money maker. Lol. Just think, if you've been looking at the whole world with those deprived delusional eyes! You really think that's a serious site? Boy you've miSsed a lot man if you missed that. Wow.
Dechristianize,and realize my brethren, preach on. Bman my sisters and brothas. Science loves you and praise logic. Can I get some reason in here. Wooo!
Ok first of all Paddy, atheism is not a religion , it is just how to classify a way one thinks. Atheism is the belief in no belief. Not one. Science is not a religious tool for an atheist it is a way of explaining how and why things are the way they are and their effects on the things around them as in accordance to us and everything else for that matter. The search for knowledge that never ends. Unlike religion where it ends and starts the same. In a mixture of fantasy and BS. Vlatko said it best." Man made to control the masses." Yes indeed. Still keeping the masses in check today.
Now nihilism indeed you know not the word,maybe you googled the definition but you understand not the system. Anarchism is not a government or lack there of it is a way of achieving the goal of no masters , no gods. Which is open to suggestion after that seeing as to the fact anarchism is never meant to last but only to be in place as result and as a bridge between. To tear down a system would be reckless if the system half worked, instead you must have some way of replacing it with a better one. So you still need order of some sort. Anarchy is a way for anarchists to achieve anarchism. Please sir ask me first before you assume as I see you do not know.
Now back on topic. You are quoted as stating atheism prophecies or something to that nature correct? Would you like to name them please and state what it is these prophecies say since a real atheist wouldn't do such a thing. Nor would they make a church or preach anything. Those people are greedy fools or clever pranksters and perhaps a combination of them all.
Science , real science , is the proof of what we know, the proof to send us looking and the evidence of where we've been ,are ,and more than likely are going. Is it perfect? No. Did it claim to be? No. Does it need to be? No. Does/did any god? Yes. So there is the difference. And science can change with our knowledge.it evolved as we do. God is still stuck in the bronze age. Maybe you should give him a call because he must have partied too hard with his unforgotten son and mised his alarm. Tell him schools in and 1st peroid is science and second he has math. Followed by a little chemestry and history, because he's missed a lot. Its time he stepped in and guided his children a little. Because what I see is not the work of divinity.
As far a provoing infinite! Wow man , good luck. Its infinite! How about we just prove that its not finite? Wait we've already figured that one.
And your text was written by nobody. Can't even show me who wrote it,when, and where. Seconnd, there is not anything anyywhere to back up the claim of jesuxs crucifixion or that he even exsisted for that matter. Heck I'd say the Buddhists in the doc got more than the christ-belivers do! And its debatable at best. Plus the disciples were illiterate trades men. Being literate at that time peroid was like going to college for 8yrs without a scholorship, these guys couldn't afford a banquet of fish and chips with a side of cheap wine for a small crowd so how was it they wrote these texts and in perfect Greek for that matter. And why all the inconsistencies? I mean Nazareth wasn't even a town at the time but rather a stone cemetary and the romans didn't do census by counting people, and I could go on for hours.but I won't. Ill quit while you quote a person who claimed to be swallowed and regergatated by a whale. Who's far fetched?
Dooms day garbage has been around forever. Eventually yes it will come true since its been quite a while since the earths climate. Changed naturally and killed off a bunch of things. And its been a while since a meteor hit with enough force to wipe most living things out, but the fun part is , is that we are well over due and you can count on that. A natural not supernatural event is what we should be concerned with . Fact not fiction.
Horns and a crown of thorns.
Slainte from the local neighborhood leprechaun.
"Star stuff"
-Carl Sagan
@Patrick:
What you are saying is that you actually believe in this so called "Rapture"? It is such a laughable fairy tail, almost as bad as the Mormons planet "Kolob". Or the Scientologists planet "Xenu".
Amazing that there is not a Superman religion, he has a good planet called "Krypton"
You say you do not understand the "Rapture" that you question your faith because of that? Well if this was the middle ages you know what would happen! Barbeque anyone?
You are calling me negative, saying that I have a negative attitude? and then in the same breath you are calling the human race nothing but mold on the planet, do you figure that is positive??
Well perhaps we are nothing but mold, but that goes to show you how ineffectual your so called invisible God is! is that the best that your invisible God can do, putting mold/viruses on the face of the Earth?
We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his mistakes! (Gene Roddenberry)
Now Achems Razor, that's such a negative attitude to have about "religee's". Unlike many many others in the "religee" group, I have read the Book of Jonah. (even translated it from the original Hebrew. God changes his mind.
Do you think I want what is in the prophesies to happen? Billions of humans will die! Unspeakable horror awaits those alive in these times.
It makes my heart ache to think of it. It is a contention I have with God, something I do not understand and causes me to question my faith in Him.
If we could just get off this rock, religee and aithee...It is a dream I have.
Alas, it looks as if it is only to be a dream. It seems we are predestined(genetically programmed) for self destruction.
At this time, we are like a mold consuming our planet like a piece of bread. If we don't send out our "spores" soon, we will be locked here to die, with nothing left to consume. It is best to send spores out at the prime of economic existence, not at the last. Everything on this planet is finite except our ability to consume and destroy, whether religee or atheiee.
Actually most of the religee's want to get off this rock without any spaceship, their all waiting for their "Rapture"
And no, not possible for religion and science to be compatible, like oil and water, they do not mix.
Is it possible to believe in God and still want to build starships? I do know that if we can't figure out a way to get off this rock, we're gonna have a bad ending. Seeing other star systems, visiting other planets there, possibly terra-forming them and colonizing them...sounds real cool.
What sucks are the Gravity thing and the whole E=MC ^2 thing, you know, relativity and the inability to travel faster than the speed of light. Big limiting factor (seems almost designed that way). oooops. Sorry, letting the ID thing slip in.
Anyway, what does this have to do with Jesus?
@Patrick:
Forgot to thank you for your site, am going to look into it, how else to give the religee's a run for there money,
Sounds good to me, "The Church of Atheism" can perform wedding ceremonies, marry people, build edifices to science, how about a functioning "Rocket Ship? a new plasma one that can shoot to the stars? Why we can even become "Gods" leave the mundane worries to whatever is left to the religee's on our home planet with there bronze age myths, and we can try to progress to at least becoming a "Class One civilization"
Heck I didn't know atheists had a church. Using faith within thier non religious belief system. And also the Church of State so long ago. Holy cow. Patrick (above who so logicly commented earlier) has indeed done well with his findings to date, which helps uncover a sense of mans truth of being. I have to kindly tip my hat to Patrick. (and also those with other views)
@Patrick:
Thats a twist, become a legally ordained minister of the church of Atheism. You mean I can be called "Father" (LOL)
Atheism as a religion?? means that since it is a religion can get tax benefits, Yes?
That means we can go pounding on doors to gain new converts.
I don't know sounds good to me EH? Break free all the trillions of dollars that goes into the religee's religions, and put the money into science for the benefit of mankind, where it should go in the first place! If only!!!
I found this one enjoyable. They were frank about the inconsistencies and tried reasoning them away. Better than blind faith :) hehe @ Ramzi's comment, 3 hours is a slight trade for a lifetime of billions being cursed eh, btw I'm snatching your amputee thoughts for the next holiday dinner religious session we always have after family dinners resulting in shouting matches about who is right until we all eat some more and just veg out into the couch.
I'm sorry, getting my comments mixed up. Last sentence was about "expelled, no intelligence allowed". But the two do have their links.
Bringing ancient script into our future and collecting hay to feed the donkey to get ready to go to work in the morning are both things of the past. I would think both of these ways of life would have evolved into a higher modern methods by now.
Lets just say a highly intelligent advanced race visits this planet, from the cosmos. And they approach you, and you tell them that you have a higher power. Then you light up a cigarette and tell them -"it's a one God, (puff) and is no where to be found, it's only inside of the minds of it's followers". What exactly do you expect them to think of you? I'm a simple human being, I have chose no title but that.(the planets ground crew) I see what things have become, humankind squatting in their own homes, etc. I'm not an expert of various religion, or solving enslavement, or non-religion, but my creators granted me thought. My choice is to be a member of humanity and wish not to be anything else but. Like everyone perhaps should. The selections of category others choose, well, so be it for them. To freely pick whatever helps select their proper path. I would like to believe life is about the growth of advancment void of bad choices. Power structures makes it a definite challenge.
What reason would there be for our ancient (biblical) past to stay to haunt? Because we all certainly were instructed of it's destructive wrath. There is clearly an undertaking of something dark working against humanity. Sadly the dark plan of religion is forcefully and purposely staged by baptism (before the age of consent), planted like a seed upon the unknowing youth. All their ancestors also had followed suit, and was not done by mistake. Those who are enlightened have no fear of simply killing illogical thought, and are onto new advancements. This video sheds a light and a shadow. Enjoy life to it's fullest, everyday.
eireannach
people like to label everything i guess... all the isims are just too complex for me to understand i like things simple.
@confused
Stop reading and believing in the doctrine of the ancients. You will be changing your name to delusional and you will be stuck in the past.
Atheism is not a religion and neither is nihilism or anarchism. I swear any label someone can turn into a religion. So what does that make me since I am. A bit of all three? A Nihilathearchist? Ok that's the new religion! Let's pick on them now,wait I am them! Nooo!
Confused:
RE the Quran and modern scientific discoveries:
The quotes from the Quran use translations of dubious nature and require an incredible amount of "interpretation" to stretch their meanings to include "scientific discoveries". The danger of relying on any religious text for scientific data is for the most part the religious texts are incorrect or too obscure or ambiguous to consider as proof of anything. Further, like prophesies of Nostradamus, they are only "discovered" to be in the text(when one reads between the lines and interprets the text) after the scientific discovery had been made. Nothing in the Quran lead to any scientific discoveries; further, I contend that trying to justify the Quran through science is theological dishonesty, and easily rebuffed by intellectuals.
I don't know much about atheism or any religious studies but when people die in modern day we certainly don't see them alive anymore. The ones who seeded this planet are most likely dis-satisfied with these God's that man invented for humanity. It seems to being a sence of a de-evolving method of control, accompanied by an evil/fear intent towards man. Why does mankind allow this old ancient measure of enslavement go this way forword into the future of mankind? The focus on man is taken away by all these silly non-existing entities. Restricting mans extreme abilities to advance. Has simple common sense ran astray?
Confused
atheism is like any other religion, having to prove themselves right and persecuting the competition. Look at the history of any religion, including Christianity and Islam and you will see that to be true.
There are no "scientific" discoveries mentioned in the Quran. Like the "scientific" discoveries found in the Bible, there is no substantive proof.
Atheists seek "redemption" and "salvation" through man and his agencies (government, science,..). Another appelation for it is "Secular Humanitarianism" and other such doctrines. Atheists see religion as superstition and religious institutions as a mean to control a population through the superstition and fear. While atheists do not believe in 'god', Deists believe in a devine being, but still follow the principles of secular humanitarianism in the areas of governance and science.
Atheism at its heart rejects the nobility of man, and reduces human existence to that of a smart ape.
u sound very depressed to me,by the way quran is not a book of science but a book of signs for a people who have knowledge and sorry to say i dont think u fall in that category,,here are some verses which i would ask u put infront of modern discoveries and ask urself that how cud a man without any study and modern equipment cud have said that before even grand grand and many times grand parents of ur graet scientists were even born..
Does man think that We Cannot assemble his bones? Nay, We are able
to put Together in perfect order The very TIPS OF hIS FINGERS(quran75,3-4) got it?or u missed it?u wont get it,here is the next one
That He did create In pairs – male and female, From a SEED when
lodged (In its place).” [Al-Qur’aan 53:45-46]
Was he not a drop of sperm emitted (In
lowly form)? “Then did he become A clinging clot; Then did (Allah)
make And fashion (him) In due proportion. “And of him He made Two
sexes, male And female.” [Al-Qur’aan 75:37-39]
It is talkin abt sex determination by male..next one
He created you in the wombs of your mothers, creation after creation, in a threefold gloom(or three layers) (Al-Qur’aan 39,6)
Do not the Unbelievers see that
the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one Unit of Creation),
before We clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing.
Will they not then believe?” [Al-Qur’aan 21:30] got it?no i dont think so dont worry here is the next one
It is He Who has Let
free the two bodies Of flowing water: One palatable and sweet, And the
other salty and bitter; Yet has He Made a barrier between them, And a
partition that is forbidden To be passed.” [Al-Qur’aan 25:53] its abt geography..
AND IT IS We who have created the universe with [Our creative] power; and, verily, it is We who are STEADILY
EXPANDING it[Al-Qur’aan 51:47],,that is too hard to digest
And He it is Who created the night and the day, and the sun and the moon. They float, each in an orbit [Al-Qur’aan 21:33]
Moreover, He Comprehended In His design the sky, And it had been
(as) SMOKE: He said to it And to the earth: ‘Come ye together, Willinglyor unwillingly.’ They said: ‘We do come (Together), in willing
obedience.’” [Al-Qur’aan 41:11]
there are more verses but i think its enough.
remember Quran is not a book of science,MUHAMMAD(peace and blessings be upon him) did not come to teach science.but it is quran who asks mankind to explore the universe it has been made subservient to u.and finally its not for u but still u can read it.
Behold! In the creation Of the heavens and the earth, And the
alternation Of Night and Day – There are indeed Signs For MEN OF
UNDERSTANDING.” [Al-Qur’aan 3:190]
last message was meant for sum1 else,
Sharique...where did you get that tripe? Probably some more islamic lie written by their false prophet, muhammed, cursed be his name.
Why is it that athiests always attack Islam & Christianity. They seem to be fine with buddisim, kabbala, scientology and other religions that dont believe in the same God. It also intrigues me what Truth has said about "masabeeh" some modern scientific discoveries are mentioned in the Quran. Can the athiests explain how that is so.
No, he never died!!!
Allah rose him up in the sky alive, and he will return near the day of resurrection to guide the deviated Christians towards the true path of Islam!
Actually, Chris, 1st century christian teachings and writings do talk a lot about resurrection. Regardless:
Everyone seems to get confused by the purpose, method, and outcome of Jesus' death. That's the perview of religion. As to whether he existed and was crucified is sufficiently recorded in various texts, none of which mention India.
Now are we discussing the documentary or arguing about the religion?
The human approach also involves an allowance for those who many not be enlightened. So be it, there may not be time to recruit amongst those who grovel in their victimhood. Is not being kind to your fellow man also a human approach? Have a good day, everyday...
Chris: Let those who need religion have their superstitions. I’d say it’s much more healthy a crutch than alcoholism or drug addiction.
what a load of B.S. :D
think (or smell) what u say
The oldest copies of scripture we have, also dont mention the resurection, it was added later by man, man messed up the scriptures to the point that first century Christians wouldn't even recognise today's bible teachings.
It's all about taking the human approach to everything on the world, there are uncivil people in our culture that are just as inhumane as those strapping on bombs in another. If a lot of them did strap on bombs then how come there are so dang many of them? Dwelling into past ancient books of any sort will, again I have to stress the point "not" solve today's modern and advanced issues. All controlling bibles linger within slavery and threats using fear. Like we need all that and in entering mans future! Our TV sets constantly project fear, drama, murder, gangs, horror, exploits sex, jails, court trials, and every-ones comfortable in all of it, our youth see it and grows into it's existence. Look down the TV listings at of those titles. well, you know as well as I do to get peoples attention they use their various methods to attract viewers, among the top of them is shock, fear, Sexual persuasion, vicious killings etc. And our children play games of murder as they follow in their adults path. There are ones higher above, what you believe to be influencing may be correct sir, also above wall street banking industry, etc. Strings are being pulled above all those we do known, by following the path to the top and if you live through the research is the only way to find out for yourself and see. Unknown to most in humanity, we deal with the "un-civilized of a culture of great magnitude" not out for our well being...
I'd rather bring up something else, then discuss those evil forces I wish never existed. Anyway all those who believe in a hell have consciously built one from one that never existed, that's the power man has. It's a sorry thing that such a powerful focus is going in the wrong direction away from himself, as religions multiply, the further and faster man draws focus from his evolving, farther away from himself. If man only knew his full potentials, without the great magnitude of deceptions in his path. We'd all be way cool.. Have a good 2010+
Kurrt
so from what I can gather, the Dark Forces are actually human entities (a.k.a. politicians, media, religious figures) influencing us and steering us in one direction or another.
With that said, how do we convince palistinians not to strap bombs to themselves? How do we convince Al-Qaeda that we don't want to take over Mecca? You should read some of the vitriolic rhetoric being spewed from less open countries. Countries like the U.S.A. and Canada are far from the norm. Go to Europe. From Ireland to Russia, ultranationalism is on the rise. Islamic countries such as Iran actually fund international terrorism and seek the death of a country that is far from their borders.
Go to websites sponsored by Islamic fundamentalists. You wont find dialogue or moderation, rather you see hate.
In our own way, we must evaluate documentaries, fictional films, and media information and determine their validity. Herein I have put forth my poor efforts to put forth some of the evidence I am aware of that refutes the premise of this movie.
Would that make the documentarian of this picture one of these Dark Forces? Is the movie trying to skew the beliefs of people based on a false premise? Is this evil? Does this not constitute a lie?
Does repeating a lie you have heard and believe to be true make you a liar? Or should we just let this documentary fall into the trash bin with all of pseudo-history, being no more true than the speculations in fictional movies such as The Omen, Angels and Demons, and the Da Vinci code. Is this documentary merely entertainment containing not one iota of truth? Thus, being merely entertainment, how can one consider it a documentary.
This last is my poor attempt to keep to the subject at hand.
Yes Patrick, you have very good points there sir, and yes again I agree there are unanswered questions out of reasonable doubts, of what created humanity to what it's became, and deception is starting to become a bit more clearer.
Dark forces yes. Not many can grasp the how and why and when and by who, so it's not going to be defined by me. The un-knowing will go on that way. What people laugh at is the best judge of their character, I'm not laughing because reality holds more secrets of the universe then most people comprehend, it's that shocking and horrible. Mankind's reality has been manipulated successfully in a direction of self destruct for dark reasons, the untold story can be seen by awakening to it. Ones can see through this veil of deception, by stepping out of them, and turning around and looking deep. Because those who planed this scenario are just as controlled as the plan they have for you. I will admit religion is a tool that if introduced to man that will and does keep humanity into a state where they cannot define who they themselves really are. And nothing works better then bibles, religion/government. The conscious focus within man is ignored and a focus on non-existing powers of mans made up God(s) in numbers is used to control mankind. The blindness to it shocks any illogical approach to advance as a race. Darkness we experience was introduced to man so long ago most of humanity unknowingly grew into such a self destructive path, and are now very comfortable within it.
I'm in a category in between all beliefs and simply walk among. There is a higher power I do know of it, and it's within man, (coalesced within us all, as one high power our creator has allowed, darker forces do everything possible not to allow man to know this energy that BECOMES only in numbers). The small part of mans creator is certainly within man. A simple trained focus in consciousness aimed towards man alone creates what the the meaning is to be one with the highest power, as a human race. Amazing doors will open if and when this takes place... A focus chosen outside of mankind was no mistake and done for reasons of many evils. Any outside of humanity Gods are not Gods at all. Asking outside of the human self man will not find truth, for the only authentic truth lies only within man himself. Any ancient text books instructing slavery will never be mans wellcome mat into the future. Why use the illogical so intimately? The focus taken away from these various illogical Gods and presented back into man, would make the ones who brought hell have no one to believe in their one God, it all works as one evil. Only until they are long gone will man peacefully advance. The most advanced human race known has no Gods or religions but, they do have what is within them, the most highest of conscious energy, it achieves goals of incredible accomplishments. and they are as human as you are. If you find man enslaving himself, you will definitely find a belief in a God behind it all. It has failed other worldly attempts using this method. We see unknown airships entering and exiting this planet with no effort, yet your earth rockets struggle with it. Do you think advanced ones who visit would want any involvement with what you have become to be, advanced ones already knew of the dark forces currently within earths human culture. Anyone can write their version of any belief in any variety of books. If you don't have a belief, simply pick out one of the many ways to claim a faith, if your not simply born into it. This is not a way a society is suppose to really operate within a generous planet of great provisions, and then into new advancement using old concepts. You know of only one world, so if outside forces have invaded with evil intent, you perhaps will have no idea how to accomplish to end their agendas, then shame on you for allowing any outside help. In other words focus the consciousness on yourself, then your fellow man, share only truth. Does man truthfully find any modern understandings in ancient non-existent entities written by scribes, paid by dictators and rulers of ancient slave era's? Look deeper behind the pope, and in earlier murdered popes. Look what religious money built for earnings, and where church money goes, and all what you recieve in return for your fruitful effort.
Historical ancient text may confuse what your eyes actually see happen in todays reality. Evolve in harmony wiith the planet, leave outside forces out of human progress. It's not about yesterday, it's about tomorrow. Maybe it's better to listen to what the others have to say about becoming human. But I'm no expert, but there is some who are.
human sacrifice is more valuble then animal sacrifice; GOD is the witness of this act.
Of course, God is the witness, and indeed Jesus died for you and me....he is your saviour today....he wants to save you...
Then why doesn't he do it?
Who the **** is Jesus?
Christ teachings are read in the bibles that came even before Christ himself, even more ancient and evil, even more controlling, each time becoming so much sweeter but keeping populations thinking of only the one who controls them, a one God. Pathetic preachers of today only can select pieces of reasonable script, and deal it like a drug to those who need know truth, but never get modern answers to any authentic truths for 2010. The Egyptian bible resembles the newest bible, but the new one is much sweeter then the old murderous bible which all have a place in it for human suffering, baby killing, rape, fear, tourcher, and at most the slavery of it is horrable. It's so important we need be reminded in 2010 and obey these same rules? Hows about just being good for goodness sakes, and leave behind the illogical dreamed up people places and things. Simply Become a kind human being following the laws of the universe, live life happy, and bring as many peaceful moments to each day as possible. Do this every day for the rest of your great life. Or spread illogical words of ancient historical script never writen by any God as dark forces close in, using God for a mask. Turn around the truth lies within the inner man. Don't look outside of mankind for any God, you will certainly catch hell.
This planet talks with many different tongs, like the one you have, billions, in it religions reside. Contradicting one another. In it war is created. It all was done on purpose. Human behavior is more understood by darker forces, forces humanity don't even know exists. Dark forces knows humanity better then humanity knows itself. And the controlling dark forces has began creating our behavior pattern a very long time ago, as of today it's caught up to mankind, and brought humanity to it's knees. Through religions. Riding along are the illogical governments forcing man into enslaving himself without his knowledge... Count yourself as one un-free follower, that's just if you hold any religion over your fellow man. Man can easily step away just as easy- or easier then following a invisible entity. A focus on mankind is ignored until one realizes it's importance, and becomes free to think within his own thoughts, and becomes more of a human being then he was, it's a part of what it means to evolve. When God leaves, the devil will surely follow...
Two hands working/ better then 300 clasped in prayer. Thanksgiving prayer; in which one sends a focus of conscious thanks and forgivness towards an unknown void above their rooftops. When the ones who need the conscious focus the most -are siting right next to you. I'm certain that the Dark forces kick back and enjoy the human density of that... Bibles restrict any advancment for mankind, and don't supply any methods or instructions to advance into new understandings and advanced culture. Perhaps because it's an ancient book of commands -foremated by rulers of their days? Actually because it's the ones who brought you a hell- are the exact same ones who make you believe in a one God. The ones in control at the very top of our nation do not believe in God.
A focus on the beauty and harmony of what creation supplies, a focus within all humanity as one in peace, will most likely bring it, and is within the human consciousness... Focus on an ancient bible, a book who dictators and rulers pieced together creating slavery-hate-murder- brings it, oh not to mention a focus on fear and a place called hell, for human suffering, brings it. So be it for those, find answers for 2011 in it. amen
Have you read about heaven? Or seen news of heaven on CNN, NBC, ABC, FOX, or BBCworld news? Or hell? Perhaps the non-existing does not make the news. When people die today we just do not see them alive any more... I haven't seen an angel in the sky, maybe there in heaven too... It took 125 years to re-write the second bible and had 40 authors. Dictators and rulers paid scribes using their methods during times of slavery, using fear to create their society to follow their and only their commands. The bible is a perfect example. Answers for modern day, nope, only methods of slavery, look around you.
Hey KURRRT
Have you ever heard of the Quellus(a theoretical text argued by serious scholars of the Bible)?
Or of the Gospel of Thomas(which reads much like a quellus)?
Though the Gospel of Thomas is considered heretical in the Roman Catholic Church, Those of us who aren't bound by papal authority can read it. This particular gospel reads like a text written by someone who was following Jesus around and writing some of the neat things he said. There are texts in there, though, that do not make a whole lot of sense, like the last couple of "quotes".
Further, the New Testament texts weren't written in Hebrew, but in Greek or Aramaic. The only time Hebrew was used in Roman Judaea was in the Temple or in synagogues, such as the
one found in Capernum. You might find the inscriptions on the columns rather facinating. During the time of Christ and during the first century, Greek was the common language of the eastern medeteranean. Latin was the official language of state.
The Old Testament was first translated in greek long before the time of Christ by seventy jewish scholars, the book thus copied and the foundation of our modern bible being called the Septuagint. It was begun in the 3rd Century BCE and completed over a hundred years before Jesus was born. Even then it was difficult to translate ancient Hebrew.
For those who wish to argue with me about the inerrancy of the Bible, I will not here try to convince you. Nor should you try to convince me otherwise, as we would be contending against each other, rather than striving for a common goal.
There is a tradition in Judaism of Midrash. These are morality stories and meant to fill in gaps. For instance there is an interesting midrash about Abraham and his father that was written to demonstrate why Abraham chose to worship YHWH. But I digress. By understanding the literary history of Judaism, one can appreciate the stories for what they are.
Does that make the story untrue? (As Pontius Pilate said "What is truth?") Is it really necessary to believe in the Creation story as literal? How is that relevant to salvation?
Now when are you atheists going to stop arguing about things YOU cannot prove and stop throwing stones?
I also keep hearing people refute the writings of authors like Josephus or Tacitus, yet provide no support of their discourse, dismissing without evidence writings they obviously have not read. Many during his life disagreed with what he had written about, especially his involvement with the Romans in A.D. 70(as he had made a death pact with his officers and did not follow through). I have yet to see a disputation from the time of Jesus as to whether or not Jesus existed. It is only from the last few centuries that his existence came into question, but not based on ANY evidence.
Further, Jesus' purpose was written about centuries before he was born. The Jews of his time EXPECTED him to come when he came, but wanted liberation from Rome, not salvation from Sin. At the time they received salvation through sacrifice and ritual and did not need a savior. Titus and Vespasian changed all that.
I'm sure you atheist want to keep yelling and screaming and insulting. Most atheists I have met, though, are actually quite intelligent. It takes a lot of guts to throw a whole belief system in the dumpster. Being intelligent, I would request that you provide some form of evidence(not in the form of speculation) of your assertions. I normally look such things up to confirm them. However, If you insist on being insulting, type away to your hearts content, for only one person will read through the post; the one who wrote it.
For those speculating that Christ's teachings came from india or some other local;
Christs teachings and christian practices find all their roots in jewish practices or are an amplification of jewish laws and doctrines, including some found in the Talmud.
To say he did not exist is not a valid argument, for on that basis we could not prove that anyone for whom we have no physical evidence of existence ever actually existed. There is a number of confirming texts that are extrabiblical. These texts also confirm the crucifixion.
Since many of the stories in the Bible are morality tales, one should not take them literally. Further, the ambiguity of ancient Hebrew gives rise to many interpretations. This is true of more modern religions, such as Islam.
Errors in the Bible abound, but that is okay, considering the nature of the texts. The errors are minor, but do prove that the bible is not infallible, anymore than the men who compiled it in Babylon, nor those who translated it into Greek. As with anything, word meanings change over time. Who can remember when the word "gay" did not mean homosexual?
It wasn't that long ago.
If we take New Testament accounts in the four gospels as affidavids of what had been witnessed, it can be understandable why there are differences and similarities in the texts, each being from a different viewpoint and most being compiled well after his death. This does not make the testimonies invalid. Extrabiblical texts (e.g. Nag Hammadi Codex) provide more confirmation of a real Jesus Christ.
A visit to Israel will expose a number of evidences of his existence, especially a trip to the ruins of Avdat, a Nabataean town on the edge of Maktesh Ramon. Here during Roman Imperial occupation existed a thriving community of christians, and ancient tombs of early church leaders.
Why would the Apostles, early church fathers, and the thousands who spread the word from Judaea risk death and persecution over someone who did not exist. In fact, they were all martyred for their belief which went against Roman Paganism and Jewish Tradition.
Insulting people, by the way, does not win arguments, only causes them to turn their back on you.
Was someone there taking notes everytime Jesus spoke? Did the 40 authors of the bible remember what Jesus said or perhaps did they add some of their own words? (in Hebrew) After a hundred years or so later scribes text-ed it into a second bible -keeping the story exactly the same? You can plainly see that they did not. The authentic Adam and Eve and the reptilian story true too? If no one was around, who wrote it and in what language could they have possibly been using to convey any truth whatsoever? Perhaps a pathetic preacher knows a select verse of a selected truth for unsettling ears. When today's novel's are directly ministered into churches, bible codes, Da Vance Codes, etc., could perhaps the bible be coined a novel too? Fiction. Not to say Jesus, Moses, and Noah were not real beings, just that their words were so diced up like a jig saw puzzle, which parts of them are authentic? Mankind uses only a bible for reference of origin? How pathetic is that? The truth we all need is a deep focus of consciousness within ourselves. No other outside of humanity sorce will any truth lie. The words Jesus was trying to bring across is a focus within humanity alone, as one. No ones father has anything to do with the envolving of mankind. Since historical rulers noticed their fundamental income gained from illogical outside sources (a one God) they ran with this monetary idea to enslave followers, also with an ability for them to control was now at hand. Churches which use extraordinary amounts of greed to achieve this goal for control use these evils which travels on the very same road mankind uses to avoid such evil intent. Until manknd sees this and rejects the fact that enslavement isn't an answer. This suffering with religion will remain. Supernatural silliness has to become just what it is. Mankind must awaken to truth and our origional focus back onto humanity alone, without Gods outside evil interference.
Muslims believe Jesus was not killed ,nor was he crucified.
see Holy_Quran(4:145,146)
God is not the focus of personality- individual thought process or benevolent creator separate from you. God is the combination of all it's parts into the composite of all. Each awareness is being blocked from being a part of that composite. Being told that means nothing at all. It is the realization that one self is a violable part of that composite that encompasses the totality of the being.
Bow to any one of the different outside God's brings only slavery, which you now further experience. Truth lies within each an every one of us, in no other place will any God be for humankind. Man appointed a one God for dark reasons, only open minds can see this as truth. Your appointed God wants a following focus on him, and does not want humanity to think outside his illogical rein of victim-hood. For selfish reasons of control. If the population focus was on only humanity, what would a God be used for then? You witness proof daily what good all Gods have done so far. Name something within reason? You cannot rely on an invisible figure of speech to solve mankind's material problems. But we together as one can. Through our consciousness together, void of controlling illogical Gods. Gods do everything they can possible to keep mankind from new understandings into new culture. Look were God or Gods have brought you to today, and further understand the real reason why they did it. Wake up.
One of the very first statements in this documentary was that those in seminary and theological schools studying Christianity do not believe Christ rose from the grave. I am in seminary and Christ rose from the grave. In the first 5 minutes the truth is blurred. This is not worth one's time. It will not help those who believe or those who don't because it lacks Truth and sadly enough any objectivity;this would require actually having intellectuals from both sides of the 'debate' present to offer evidence. Any believer who turns away because of these things never has experienced the grace of God and those who use this information to have a conversation with a Christian who is educated in the Word of God and the postmodern deconstructionism of the world, will be shown their lack of logical thinking. Christ is God and one day all will bow.
Thats helps the product retain heat.
Fear is a great way to get the simple and needy to believe anything. Just scare them to death and the promise comfort in what you preach. No where in me is the presence of god. And I don't need him or want him ar
ound. In the words of Glen Benton,"
Bast**d of the cross relentlessly. Strike fear preaching of his coming here
Scriptures, twisted words to provocate. Rapture from the lord your god so great!
He Fu**ed himself to save you. Put to death, masochist
For this his words berate truth. Agonized, prophecized
Revive the book of fiction. Blasphemy, gluttony,
to, decieve you and me. In battled disposition. Hang the bit** on the cross. Entitle his conviction. Blasphemous, lunatic. Your heart is full of hatred.
Bast**d, for your god you compromise. Do without, search the truth you'll never find. Scriptures offer little to relate. Laughter from the lord into your face.
You think your god will save who - I will see, just believe. You fool, not true, no thank you. An enemy of the cross
His word installs deception. Pray to god, not for me,for yourself, soon you'll see. You'll die for your religion. Holy sh**, pacifist. Untrue with choices given, nothing won,after you are dead
Describe the holy vision. Blacking out. Final breath. Meet with death. Nothingness.
The one God aims hate for his reasons, illogical or not. The bible is just a book, in which it demans some population control and does have it's evil intentions towards man. But yes it is also harsh for modern man to make silly growing limb claims towards cripples. God (which is mainly used as a figure of speech now a days) doesn't heal those who had their heads chopped off either. If your not good at science, religion is readly available. But this growing limb stuff is stuck in the middle somewhere. If God died for our sins , what did all those other millions die for? Nothing? Just how is dieing for sins felt by the rest of humanity in the first place? Jesus's death cannot be distributed through DNA if hes dead, correct? People die today we just don't see them alive any more,period. What about those millions who didn't know anything about a Jesus, unknowingly forgiven? Is forgiven a noun or a verb? Devine is something you take grapes from anyway. Once lies are believed by all -it's really time to regroup your thought, come on man it's 2010. It's open minds and evolve time. Have a great life and focus on mankind, not invisable entity's which is in no way a part of life & humanity.
Question: Why does God hate Amputees ??? Never in the Biblical stories, nor in Modern "Miracles" has any Amputee had his Cut limb MIRACULOUSLY Regrown, bones tissue and all.... Is that too difficult for the ALL MIGHTY ??!??!?! Maybe to achieve such act would consume a lot of his DIVINE energy ? or he just hates those with cut off limbs ???
Answer from a sane human : Because Simply Miracles and their Perpetrator i.e. GOD, DO NOT EXIST... In Recorded Bible, He tried all sort of things to make people believe, heal cripples, Cancer, Eye Sight, Push forward prophets, Visions, DESTROY CITIES, Turn people into SALT... All mentioned so called miracles have their counterpart SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS... Regrowing a Limb in one second, would truly and utterly be DIVINE... it never happened nor was mentioned, therefore, there is NOTHING DIVINE...
Answer from a Religious Sheep: You B@#$%&* Unbeliever, You will burn in hell for eternity, you will be raped by demons, and showered by Nuclear Fallout for the remaining of your life in hell... WHO are you to question God and his methods... I will pray for you tonight to be forgiven, but still I hope you rot in Hell....
God died for our sins (btw a God who dies for us, is THE MOST HYPOCRITE thing to do, if a God is DIVINE and ETERNAL... Dying in human form would merely be considered as kids play for him... so WHERE IS THE SACRIFICE !?!?!?!? a God enduring 3 hours of pain on the cross, and some whips on his back ?!?!?! and We consider this a SACRIFICE from a GOD!!)
I remember in my adolescent study of christianity, thinking how extraordinary Jesus' message was. It was so different from Jewish belief at the time. I thought it was evidence that he must have outside intervention, at the time i assumed God. But I later came to believe he was from a different area. This documentary presents a much more interesting and tightly fitting possibility.
Time has it's many different ways to distort human history, it's fallible, and seems out of our hands at the present. The focus today should be on ourselves.
Today we see what happens when other people and our loved ones pass away. They are not seen alive again after that. Truth being- any other story or tale is just illogical. Lets evolve into our future all together as one- and leave oddities remain just that.
The legend of Yus Asaf is known to the catholic church. He is the same as Saint Josaphat. Evidently, this figure was a saintly figure and was NOT Jesus Christ, as legend had him lived in India in the 3rd and 4th Century. It is interesting how anti-Christian ideology is ready to twist any historical figure or fable as the truth in order to dispel the persona known as Jesus Christ. Sorry, this Yus Asaf thing is not going to fly.
@epicurus your here too? for an atheist you sure watch alot of christian programs?or maybe you think you can fool christians more easily.How does it feel to be praised for your intellect when all you did was copy wikipedia verbatim.Evolutionary psychology.Punks like you make me sick never an original thought just regurgitate what big brother tells you too,Picking on spirituality?man you shouldn't mess with stuff you know nothing about.You have to have a soul to understand it.You also need an ability to understand what an ancient people would do with something abberant.How they would explain genetics,chemistry adam and eve are extensions of the sumerian and the civilization before them,epic of creation which being an evolutionary psychologist,you might be interested in.Oh and just a reminder not every scientific mistake made in the past was the fault of the church.Check your history,Copernicus was responsible for orbit boners and Newton was a devout christian.By the way I enjoyed the show not much new in it tho
Very interesting and provocative piece of work.
@Hossana:
With respect, but your god is not perfect, Your god made imperfect humans and then blames them for his mistakes!
Our brain is amazing organ and also a very adamant one.We all think we know everything and can analyse the best.As humans started to progress in training the brain with different things,started to thinks God is nothing. Every individual has a satisfaction capacity of their thoughts, understanding.One feels God does not exist and the other says should believe in God.
Those of you dont believe in God - All that you think is not just come to you.Think for a moment how ur brain works.Scientist still doing research on it. The one you created you need not answer you for every question u ask.
Those who talking about Bible versions and Jesus-
There are people who believe in Jesus and also read Bible, have some respect. Christian do not speak back it doesnt mean you can talk whatever you what.
If you do not understand about Christianity or Bible that means you have not taken steps to understand it.
All can not answer all your questions. All have different questions in life. If one didnt answer you it does not mean Bible is not worth.
God is not some nursey school poem to be undersdtood easily. He is beyond our understanding and need patience to understand n not forcing your own logical, scientific research of your foolish knowlegde.God is the source of wisdom.
God is God. All that we try to prove will always end in "maybe". God is not maybe .He is specific, perfect and beyond our understanding.
It is not out of anger I write but out of pity on the younger generation who forgets the one who created you ad speaks rubbish.
We know nothing so better dont judge and come to wrong conclusions about Jesus, Bible and Chritianity.
for those who want to know who i am... am a person believe in Bible.
The authority of the Bible lies in the fact of its inspiration. Some reasons to believe the Bible was inspired: -It claims to be God’s word -Jesus claimed it.-Unity of Bible -fulfilled prophecies -High moral teachings -Accuracy in historical data -beautiful literature -its indestructibility -Extent and relevancy of its themes Life-changing effect…..
You want to know who God is just ask God to show you. He will surely show if you want...( It is not funny...)
God bless....
If they can't get the Kennedy's death right in our lifetime, what makes anyone believe bloody details of a death story from 2000 years ago written in Hebrew?
@ eireannach666,
What do you make of the description of "blood and water" flowing out of the wound when Jesus' side was stabbed. Does this not sound like more than a mere stab?
Nonetheless, I stand by my original statement. It is misleading to not present the whole story, even if one disagrees with the conclusion.
@BBC - It's not that hard to understand what happened to Saul. A crisis of conscience is not unheard of, so it's quite possible Saul suffered such a crisis of conscience and had a mental breakdown as a result. A mental breakdown could easily result in him hallucinating a vision of Jesus Christ.
A vicious man who brutalized people and then went insane is not enough to convince me in the existence of the Christian god nor the divinity of Jesus of Nazareth.
I believe there was a man in the Middle East named Jesus of Nazareth who was a brilliant philosopher who had teachings quite similar to humanist beliefs. Why is that not enough? Why do you have to believe that he was some form of divine being and why do you continue to support an institution which has perverted his ideals and used them to justify everything from war to slavery to poverty to torture?
Any true believers of the words of Jesus of Nazareth would recognize the institution of the Christian church as a perversion of what they claim to teach.
Religion has to go, bible too. Science has came to terms with truth, and the religious shutter at the facts. Not enough time left to recruit a herd of brainwashed minds. Introduce the truth to those who urge to know truth. Also the levels of deceptions made against us by the dark controlling forces within our own. Developing a new selective Consciousness back with creation, this must be known by all humans and also void of any Gods. Religion must go in order to evolve into a greater culture. Instead of being appointed followers of so many religions is so silly, lets all drop the BS and become human beings- please- for Earths sake.
@Kristine
Well first , Millions of people live after being stabbed. Every hour in fact.
Second , the bible is a ridiculous idea of proof or consistency.
Third , relatively says is a bad way to base anything on. Thats how rumors spread over time. Ever done the experiment in grade school where everyone sits in a circle and the teacher whispers in one kids ear something and by the time it get around its not anywhere near the same as it was said in the beginning?
I'm all for the possibility that Jesus' story is historically different than the gospels record; however, this documentary is a little misleading.
First, it fails to address the passage in the gospels that mentions that Jesus' side was pierced when they found him dead (the sedation theory requires that the piercing account of the crucifixion be shown false.)
They also don't address the apostle Paul's claim that 500 verifiable (still living at time of his writing) witnesses saw Jesus resurrected. (1 Corinthians 15:6) Is there any evidence for or against this claim?
Finally, the documentary tries to imply that two different time-frames are recorded for the death, making it sound like Luke suggests a sixth hour death. Luke 23:44-46 is read aloud and one does not immediately notice the use of "..." In fact if one reads the entire verse, it says relatively the same thing as the other two gospel, mentioning the 6th hour cry-out and darkness to 9th hour.
Such a trickster that old time Jesus dude.
Modern day Chris Angel can most likely turn a blade of straw into sticky purple cronic, and light one end with a wet fish. Because perhaps he is an Angel?
Kurrrt
"...Gods are restricting what creation provides and are deeply in the way of progress and evolving into a new advanced culture..."
quoted for TRUTH!
JustSayGrow04/13/2010 at 03:33
Alcohol (beer) is a drug! Very debilitating one at that. More conditioning blazing through. Tell ya, the world would be a better place if he had turned straw to cannabis, than (allegedly) water to wine
Very funny. tehe keke.
I like cheese!
Why knock other religions when yours is just as silly. If you were and are told what to believe- you follow. If you lead people to believe what your told -you are a controller. Which is also repeating over and over a non-truth to keep the heard deadlocked into submission of guilt and fear of a fake place called hell. All the wonderful invisable things Jesus and God did this year are in your programed imagination of evils side of their truth. What would Jesus God and all the other Gods made up on this planet do if they were actually real? The same thing they did today? Nothing, nodda thing. These Gods are restricting what creation provides and are deeply in the way of progress and evolving into a new advanced culture. Suffering religious wrath will always be considered the believers Hell. Until it's gone.
@ truth
in spite of all the scientific facts that the quran supposedly claims, (muslims twist and turn the quran to fit sceince) Jesus is the only person that can save mankind for hell.
'for there is no name given to men by which we must be saved"Acts 4:12
as the bible says 'no name but the name of Jesus.
Truth, I just watched the hubble video in california science museum... It is amazing u shud see it! They say that after launching the advanced satelite that took pictures of all the galaxies and stars they discovered that the universe is expanding and will shrink later on which is mentioned in the quran! They also took a picture for the first time of all the stars and how they are shaped and interlinked ... In arabic that shape is 'masabeeh' which is mentioned in the quran ... Its purpose is also mentioned which they r still trying to figure out... They also declare in the end that earth in our universe is just too perfect to exist in such such universe... I am sorry but the more I see the more I believe especially that there is no way any human bieng could of known all this and written it at those times!
Believing, (before those who make that attempt) it's not actually knowing. No one individual knows the truth, it's divided within us all. It's in the collective consciousness -which no one seems to practice -holding on to a belief or a religion. As one would grab useless old un-advanced writings and just dictate, simply wont do it in 2010. Faith, once knowing it's true meaning- is a belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. Witnessed here are those who grovel in victimhood guessing all the answers they have are THE answers. These sharing attempts looks as only personal indivisual self beliefs. These falsehoods have all ready been replaced with new understandings. So, before you believe, and decide you know the truth, be sure of what you hope for -and certain of what you do not see.
"Seek not abroad, turn back into thyself, for the inner man dwells the truth" St. Augustine
"Who has created me, and it is He Who guides me; (78) "And it is He Who feeds me and gives me to drink (79) "And when I am ill, it is He who cures me; (80) "And Who will cause me to die, and then will bring me to life (again); (81) "And Who, I hope will forgive me my faults on the Day of Recompense, (the Day of Resurrection)," (82) My Lord! Bestow Hukm (religious knowledge, right judgement of the affairs and Prophethood) on me, and join me with the righteous, (83) And grant me an honourable mention in later generations. (84) And make me one of the inheritors of the Paradise of Delight. (85) And forgive my father, verily he is of the erring. (86) And disgrace me not on the Day when (all the creatures) will be resurrected; (87) The Day whereon neither wealth nor sons will avail, (88) Except him who brings to Allâh a clean heart [clean from Shirk (polytheism) and Nifâq (hypocrisy)]. (89) And Paradise will be brought near to the Muttaqûn (pious and righteous persons - see V.2:2). (90) And the (Hell) Fire will be placed in full view of the erring. (91) And it will be said to them: "Where are those (the false gods whom you used to set up as rivals with Allâh) that you used to worship. (92) "Instead of Allâh? Can they help you or (even) help themselves?" (93) Then they will be thrown on their faces into the (Fire), They and the Ghâwûn (devils, and those who were in error). (94) And the whole hosts of Iblîs (Satan) together. (95) They will say while contending therein, (96) By Allâh, we were truly in a manifest error, (97) When We held you (false gods) as equals (in worship) with the Lord of the 'Alamîn (mankind, jinn and all that exists); (98) And none has brought us into error except the Mujrimûn [Iblîs (Satan) and those of human beings who commit crimes, murderers, polytheists, oppressors], (99) Now we have no intercessors, (100) Nor a close friend (to help us). (101) (Alas!) If we only had a chance to return (to the world), we shall truly be among the believers! (102) Verily! In this is indeed a sign, yet most of them are not believers. (103) And verily, your Lord! He is truly the All-Mighty, the Most Merciful)) from kuran 19 - 26 , may GOD(II mean Allah) bless us all
i dont believe how shallow and ignorant ppl can be... oh well
Are we really finding spiritual sugnificants in the fact that thier are three layers to the birth sac.. Ha, Ha, Ha...(LOL) That is the wierdest thing I have ever heard and for some reason really funny at the same time. Hey, I got a special plant that is supposed to have five fingered leaves but guess what this one has mostly, three fingers!! Does that mean something? I'll let you know this fall.
P.S. Prey for the three fingered plant!!
i dont think u will go to hell .. you thinking that i am thinking that makes u the i###t
peace
Sorry 'truth', you have to understand, but I need to give up on this one. I'm tired of these discussions that go on for hundreds of comments with no point at all. You'll have to settle for me thinking you're a complete i**** and you thinking that I'll go to hell.
Sorry but cambell got it wrong "heaven, earth and hell" quran states that there is more to heaven, hell, earth, universe, solar system, 7 skies, earth internal core etc.. etc...
@ Hardy the quran states a lot of facts of science that were discovered recently after ions of study and technology...as I said earlier read the quran and then comment pls... Oh and please provide the other version of the quran as someone stated above (sorry but there is only one version)
LOL @Randy :-D
THREE whole membranes! Wow!
Still laughing...
BTW, if god is perfect, why would he even have a single 'truth' wrong inside his holy book? Does he like to mess with our minds, or what?!
@Hardy
OMG!!! I almost soiled myself laughing at that!!!
Holy, Batman!!! Funny guy...
Wow, that is so amazing. I'm truly impressed by a 50/50 chance!
Actually, we should replace the textbooks for the study of medicine in schools with the quran, because it's so filled with truths. I'd feel much safer with all that wisdom. Wow, three membranes! I can't get over all the knowledge that is raining in on me at the moment. Think about it - THREE membranes!
/sarcasmoff.
Yeah, but, Truth, you just have some medical knowledge and you are imposing that on this text. I read it and see a man who probably discected a women, (being a sick F**k), and talked about her internal organs...
Yuck, really.
As Joseph Cambpell said, (paraphrased), "...these books were written by men who thought the entire world was 900 square miles around the fertile delta... they thought the universe was a three layer cake... heaven, earth and hell..."
These were not bright men, not entirely sane men... you needn't listen to them...
please note that Mohammed couldnt read and the quran wasnt written in a single event but different events.
@ Hardy, what u mentioned is like a drop in the sea...
This is just about the womb and not embryonic changes: (i leave it to you to read more about other aspects)
- Verily, We have created man from mixed nutfah (nutfatul amshaj) in order to try him, so We made him hearer and seer. 76:2
- Neither your womb relations nor your children shall profit you 60:3
- Those who are bound by the womb are nearer to one another in the book 33:6 and 8:75
- And break your bonds of the womb 47:22
-Neither your womb relations nor your children shall profit you 60:3
Those who are bound by the womb are nearer to one another in the book 33:6 and 8:75
And break your bonds of the womb 47:22
-Thereafter We made him as a Nutfah in a qaraar makeyn 23:13
-Then We made the Nutfah into a 'alaqah, then We made the 'alaqah into a modgha, then We made the modgha into bones with flesh and then We brought it forth as another creation. So blessed be Allah, the Best of Creators 23:14
- Allah Created you in the womb of your mothers, one act of creation after another, in three veils of darkness 39:6
The three veils of darkness are understood as the abdominal wall, the uterine wall, and the membranes in which the uterus is enclosed. Interestingly enough each layer is itself made up of three layers. The abdominal wall is made up of three muscle layers, the external oblique sheet, the internal obblique muscle, and the transversus muscle. The uterus is made up of the epimetrium (which covers the womb) the myometerium (the muscle layer of the womb) and the endometerium (the inner layer). The embryonic sac is made up of three membranes, the amnion, the chorion and the decidua.
Eff,
You are a funny, funny dude! I dig your writing style!
Science has answered that age-old question about the chicken and the egg...
It was the egg!
Oh, and I forgot to say "Hello" to Vlatko and S.M.M...
Hello!
I'm still trying to figure out that age-old conundrum: "What came first...the chicken or the egg?"
I keep asking my 2-neighbours: Elvis and Jesus this question? and their stock reply is "You ain't nothin' but a hound dog..." Or else: "Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition."
They both however, seem pleased that I use the bible wisely as a door-stopper.
Time to fly... The Atheist bus just showed up at my doorstep....
Ha,Ha, I actually agree with @ S.M.M.: It would be worse than even being called a hippie!!
Well, Kurrrrrt, and Truth, I know I was harsh and I apologize, but I will say this:
I study everything. But I only "believe" in that which provides results. In other words, if it don't make me money, I don't believe in it! I may wonder about other stuff and meditate, contemplate, but I only "believe" in what I can cash in on. (lol)
Yeshua, Allah, Iblis, or any other boogey man, never paid me a dime, so...
Math, science... it gave me computers and databases and the ability to analyse data so... I believe in math and science.
A little advice for you.
No need comment or ask me personally about any religion, including yours. Because I DO NOT follow any of the religions.
The only thing I know about the historical accuracy of the Qur'an and Hadith concerning the life of Muhammad is highly suspect, for the contrary to Muslim claims that the Qur'an was dictated to Muhammad in a single miraculous event, there is ample historical and textual evidence that there were many different versions of the Qur'an- implying that the Muslim scripture under-went a process of historical development not unlike that of the New Testament.
It's just a comment sir. I'm not allowing anyone to tell me my information is wrong either. Because of where I received it, not how I received it by reading and following and believing in required marketed books. All human knowledge is fallible, all claims to ultimate or absolute truth questionable. Hypotheses should be taken as tentative, for even well-established principals may later be modified in the light of new evidence or more comprehensive explanations. You may very well follow information from what you believe is truth. So be it. I'm sorry I can't do that, I don't mean to be unkind towards what others believe, I'm very sorry if you feel discomfort in my comment. I am not like how you are. There are billions of people on this planet. Some who don't all think alike. Do have a great 2010, please, and thank you for sharing your belief.
@truth provide the quotes from the quran of any valuable scientific knowledge. i bet you that you are being dishonest with us or yourself.
You know that you need to reassess your life when Vlatko himself comes to tell you that you're wrong. :P
Ooops, sorry, I was confusing Truth with Kurrrrrrt.
It was Kurrrt that was talking about the Nepharhim...
But, Truth is just as silly.
@Hardy
Yes! I mean, the man is talking about giants walking the earth, but then says I am talking like a child...
@Truth
You are inserting your own conclusions into this silly text. Basically, the Quran is the same as The Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith did the same thing; he went out in private and said an angel appeared to him and wrote a new gospel...
Um... why does your god always need to talk to folks in private? Is it because these people are hucksters and con-men?
I think so.
Hey, all kinds of angels and demons talked to me last night, but I am not foolish enough to think that will start any new religions.
C'mon!
"And made the sun and the moon subservient. Each runs to a turns stated" (Al-Quran, part 13, Sura Al-Ra'ad (The Thunder)-13, verse 2)
"And He made the sun and the moon subservient for you which are constantly moving" (Al-Quran, part 13, Sura Ibraheem -14, verse 23)
And each (The moon, the sun) is floating in an orbit." (Al-Quran, part 23, Sura Yaseen -36, verse 140)
Yeah, that seems like solid science to me. I'm sorry, but your book fails.
@ Randy: Since you read the quran please tell me: How could a man in a cave at that time predict how the solar system works? How many planets there are that have just been discovered? what goes on in a mothers womb? How human biengs are created from sperm to death including the soul? How our planet rotates and is going to slow down? About every atom and living bieng? the quran by itself is a miracle. It stated recent scientific discoveries ions ago when it was created when cave men had no technology or advanced science of knowing and seeing these things. Please dont be ignorant... you are talking like a child. Actually a child would have better sense. You havnt read the quran.
God Bless You
Oh, and if any of you Islamic fundamentalists want to come after me. Please. Do.
I don't think any of you have come up against the Irish mob, yet. We don't kill. We hurt...
And, I have nothing to lose. Come get me.
You know how to get my IP address. And I know how to get yours. Let's dance, for the Towers.
@Truth
Um... I've read the Quran. Threw it away immediately after wards, but...
Sounded like the ramblings of a man who spent too much time in a cave, to me...
Although, some very interesting stories about Mary, the mother of Yeshua, and Mary the Magdeline, and Yeshua as a boy... that was fun.
RECITE! Whatever...
@ Kurt
Mohammed, Jesus, Budda are not the same. Mohammed is not a God! Jesus in Islam is not a God as well. They are prophets. Please read the Quran and let me know what your views are. Islam is not a religion it is a way of bieng. Your true self by nature. Quran and Islam has been branded by the media and so called "Muslim Extremists" in wrong ways... People never read the Quran nor they Understand the Islam but they keep coveying their views from falsehood.
Yes. You are absolutely right, Kurrrrrrt!
*Randy smiles, nods, backs away slowly....*
Cries and begging to be relieved of the situation by God, Jesus Budda, or Mohammed will not do it. You've allowed this evil to decend on you and so it is you. A new consciousness change must take place. Not all humanity will choose to participate. There will be senseless people like Randy. For what creativity and knowing could a person like this offer?
@Kurrrt
Really? The Nepherhim? Are you really going there?
Goodness.
How about goblins? Gonmes? Or Hobbits? Why not pull out any fantasy creature and worship it?
You should really be focusing on your applied science, maths, and engineering. That will get you a good job.
Truth is, God is just an expression, not a living entity. The God's who came down from Niabrau into the Sumerian civilization were actually large human beings, they simply called them Gods for lack of a better term. Anyone who mentions to me repeated from a book or scroll or stone cone, whatever. Cannot convince me otherwise. Especially a one God. (All 9 different ones of them on this planet) I'll look into all of what they say & wrote even the Quran. (?) (Which I haven't read,-yet) I agree with what they all say about only one thing- becoming a better human being within the company of creation, that's it. Combating evil is the toughest obstacle and perhaps almost imposable as it appears today. So I reach within myself for the truth. No other outside (of the body) place is helpful to humanity, that's where you will only find evils lair. Huge human mistake for truth.
Jesus, Mosas, Mohammed... and many others were prophets ( human biengs) they were delivering the same Gods message. As you can see there is no name attached to whom wrote the 3 or 4 gospels which is very dangerous. The bible and Torah were right but they were distorted and changed. The last book from God the Quran has not been changed and cannot be changed. It is words of God. God speaks about jesus and mosas in the Quran and tells the true story. please keep an open mind and read the Quran for yourself and you will see.
Bless you all :)
Mathias- You'll have to find a Christian to ask about Neanderthals. The stages of early man and Science within creation is masked by some religions, and washed away by time, rediscovered by experts in that field. Perhaps research would recover some clues.
What do you Christians have to say about Neanderthals?
Recovering from religion is hard when dealing with the hate christians have in their fear baced hearts, worring about going to a hell, etc. How does the religious live a positive life with such negative minds? It's simply about being the most wonderful loving caring human being as one can. All those in industrial religious complexes are taking, taken away from creation and it's splender. If only they turn the clocks off and live.
As one human on earth I kindly let religion loose to those who suffer it's wrath. I hold no hate for the un-knowing. I have no time for them, for they can offer me nothing.
@kurt
couldn't say it better in a any way...
I am not a JW. I went to a Lutheran church.
I also think that the Old and New Testament should not be in the same book. That is why it is Old and New.
@ Kurt. Yes, totally agree with changes over time in the written word. That is why I don't blindly follow any teachings. Whether or not people believe in a real Jesus, if there was one he would have the same fate from the powers that be. If you wanted to kill me for my views it would be because you were protecting another worldly lucrative view. Otherwise, I would not be a threat. It's not about literal interpretation.
Jesus stopped a rape today, Jesus stopped a murder today, Jesus stopped another pope from getting poisoned today, Jesus stopped a war today, Jesus healed a cripple today, Jesus stopped a plane from crashing. ->NOT!
Jesus was as important as our passed away family members, and just as dead. I can tell the difference when I hear a lie and when I hear the truth, no matter how long ago or how recent. (Like, my grandpa walked across Lake Michigan and feed all the fish on his way across, yup, a great man indeed he WAS).
(Perhaps Jesus and his blood brother LOOKED ALIKE? And just maybe the billions and billions of people that lived and died in between Mr.Jesus Christ's death- could have twisted some stories> JUST A LITTLE BIT?)
How is it going to help us knowing how a nail went through his foot? geeze! Didn't Christianity begin 40 yrs after Jesus died? Relax, and have a great 2010+
Anyone who separates and believes bible text from reality of something that happened 2000 years ago, is applying faith in their opinions. It's a good book for becoming a better human (without the extreme threats). Perhaps many words are mis-interpreted, from the few language changes. 500 years ago mans bible was re-written, separated, and changed and the one God got sweetened up from the greedy, selfish, murdering, controlling God in the old bible. Now a days new modern technology and common sense playes a new roll on past realities. New findings like the Thomas papers, recent found scrolls etc., will not be re-written into a third bible. I don't feel sorry for closed minds...
On a totally different subject, I use all caps sometimes when I want to emphasize. Some people misuse this ability. Before the mid 19th century there was no such thing as grammar. Noah Webster totally invented American spelling of the English written language. I'm just telling people ahead of time to shove it up their ass when it comes to their RELIGIOUS views of the written word.
I meant To Randy
NOT Charles B.
To Charles B.
It's possible that you could have a following. People that hate and want to kill. However, there could arise a majority who mistake your views and promote peace and justice in your name. Who would wish your death?
What the fu**! People here have no idea what they are opining about. Hate or love what you want. If the average Joe today had the balls to even stand behind his words, with no miracles to back him up, he would still be killed. That is the truth. That is the pattern of recorded history. The big mouths who want to discredit this truth believe in this society today and their kind RELIGIOUSLY. If you need literal proof, you haven't even begun to get it. You are looking for dis-proof, and this world is all too willing to deliver. I look for things I understand. Maybe Jesus knew how to swim instead of "walking on water." The moral is still there. Why would thousands of people walk around a f-ing lake and not one person try to get to him through the water. HE WAS SAFE IN A BOAT!! The only miracle today is that most people can tie their laces.
Randy 05/08/2010 at 11:37 "Yeah, I mean, we are all just people crawling around on the skin of the world. We can still like each other.
But, I still hate jesus with every fiber of my being and if he ever existed, (which I believe he din’t) and I saw him on the street I would, naturally, try to kill him again. I mean, for the survival of the human species…
How do you feel about me, now, Charles?"
I feel pity for you, Randy. Sincerely.
Hate machine-
No it isn't a joke and your historical knowledge is inaccurate considering what you disclosed here. Sounds to me like everyone should do a little research for themselves on the "error of time subject".
Oh by the way "accuracy" of historical timelines that you speak are in the eye of the beholder. Does that make them absolute? I think not!
Difference between jesux and a picture of him???
Only takes one nail to hang the picture .
deicide!
SexMoneyMonkey wrote in refence to something Charles B. wrote:
“Religious evil” is probably the best way to describe Christianity.
-----------------
Uh-huh. That pretty much sums up what I have been saying in about a half-dozen of these boards... although you, SMM, synthisised it without my hyper-verbiage... (lol)
Yeah, I mean, we are all just people crawling around on the skin of the world. We can still like each other.
But, I still hate jesus with every fiber of my being and if he ever existed, (which I believe he din't) and I saw him on the street I would, naturally, try to kill him again. I mean, for the survival of the human species...
How do you feel about me, now, Charles?
Hah, okay. Yeah, I don't like your god very much... Pretty mean and grumpy character. But hey, maybe I'd be just the same if I would be the ultimate-ruler-of-the-universe.
But good joke!
@Charles B.
HA! I liked that one, Charles!
Ok. Last post today (maybe). Joke time just to lighten the mood! Reading above about Randy following what his wife told him to post in mind . . .
A survey was conducted in the U.S. about changing male roles in society. They asked all the men to stand in a line that either read "Henpecked" or "Not Henpecked" and then to fill out a survey why they chose that particular line. Only one man filled out the "Not Henpecked" questionnaire and on the end it asked, "Why did you choose to stand in this line?" He replied, "I don't know. That's what my wife told me to do!" :-)
Hardy: No.
Ruth wrote:
"Hi, Randy! No, don’t start a cult. Trust me, even if you wife had more money she would just spend it more and then you would need to make an even bigger cult. be simple and live more happy."
-----------
Hi, Ruth! Yes, that is my philosophy all around. It is the happy man that is satisfied with less! (Unfortunately, that is not the happy WOMAN!) Not true, and that was a joke... my wife told me to write that...
@Charles B
"Religious evil" is probably the best way to describe Christianity.
@Charles:
Do you believe a person which is a good person throughout his life but is agnostic towards the existence of a christian god can go to heaven?
I'm just curious toward what you think about this.
Randy and Hesus: Evil comes back to bite you in the but(t), especially religious evil. Be a better person, as you seem to have at least a seed for that. Do you think I can avoid moderation with my second "T" in the ()? ;-)
@Randy
I think your wife is on to something. I often played with the same idea. The only problem would be keeping a straight face while preaching.
Hi, Randy! No, don't start a cult. Trust me, even if you wife had more money she would just spend it more and then you would need to make an even bigger cult. be simple and live more happy.
@Chief
Yes, I am familiar with that work and other studies that have shared the conclusion you describe, and it reall is remarkable.
But, as you have indicated to us the region in which you live, I think you mat have the answer to your question all around you.
I'll just say, politely, European bias... and leave it at that...
Hesus referred @BBC to take a look at the Genographic Project, a documented study of the y-chromosome that pinpoints the connection of people to the San "People" of Southwest Africa. It is still amazing that people can refer to the work of Dr. Spencer Wells without pointing out his conclusion "We are all descendants of Africans!" Additionally, people can refer to Mitochondrial Eve as the mother of all living without pointing out that "We are all Africans!" Why the blockage?
@McGarvey
Thank you for that. That was fascinating, and could very well be all true.
And, in fact, I may be biased towards them, being so close, and enjoying their local produce so very, very much! LOL!
Thanks again, my gaelic brother! (Oh, and don't worry about the parenthetical sentences on my account I overuse them, as well! HA!)
@Randy
Not a problem, I was reading your post and just happened to remember! 'Springen' is German for jump so I guess 'spring about/jump about' would be an accurate translation(probably more so than mine!).
Interestingly, I have done some further reading on the subject and it suggests that the idea that the Amish encourage their children to experience the outside world may have been greatly exaggerated. Rumspringa is the period between turning 16 when they are considered adults of marriageable age(same as my country, Scotland - and we aren't too fond of the English either! ;))and when they are baptised as full members of the church. Because they are now considered adults(but not full members of the church) youthful indiscretions are tolerated(although the levels of tolerance and rebellion seem to vary from community to community). Most Amish will not stray far(both literally and metaphorically) from their church during their Rumspringa, although a minority will.
My point is that, from what I have read this evening, the idea that the Amish are actively encouraged to rebel/experience outside world as some sort of rite of passage(a view that I held) may be a media distortion(makes a better story!).
Apologies if you know all this, you did say you lived near Amish communities and so probably know a lot more about them than I do.(You may also have contradictory information? I would be interested to hear if you do!).
P.S - Apologies also for my extreme overuse of parenthesis!
@McGarvey
Thank you! That was bothering me, but it is much better to learn from an actual person than to google stuff, so I hoped someone would remind me.
As soon as I read it, I remembered. The root word is "shpringa" and I believe that is "spring", but you are right. I have heard it translated as "running about"!
@ Randy
Rumspringa - think it means "running about"(Probably spelt incorrectly too!)
The period when Amish adolescents are allowed to go wild/live English.
Jesus died like every human, not on the cross by crucifixion.
If sin was in the garden, that's mean god created it same as satan, god created him. So who to blame now? god i think.
@Epicurus who wrote @Charles, (who, I am not picking on anymore because he appears to be having a crisis of faith and I know how painful that can be):
"@charles, the adam and eve story’s proof, you claim, is found ONLY in genesis? in the bible?"
so you are telling me the story at the start of the bible is NOT symbolic or mythological, but you believe that it is REAL?!?! that those events ACTUALLY took place?!?!?
------------------
Epicurus, did you not know that fundamentalist christians actually believe every literal word of the King James?
I remember you saying you were Irish, so you are probably most familiar with catholicism, (unless you are northern Irish, *shakes fist* lol) A religion that, to it's dubious credit, does believe the bible is a "poem" about god and the symbols are art more than science.
I mean, even at the Vatican II conference in... '64? The pope announced that evolution was indisputable but that the church decided that "god did it..."
I kind of respected them for that... but... then the other craziness...
They believe that the snake talked or that Noah put all of the animals on the Earth in one boat... and various other types of whimsy... well... god did it. Magic.
I am familiar with both religions, having been baptised Irish catholic and then gettin' all fundie and then coming to an age of reason, so... yeah.
Whacky, huh? And I wouldn't even mind if they didn't keep trying to push those ideas into actual law, infringing on my right to go to hell the way I want.
Leave us alone! We have to study!
i think this doc could have been a lot better had they actually used the gospel as a whole they left out many key parts and they simply make up others. they say peter was the first to see him, but the gospels plainly say that the women came to anoint the body and mary saw jesus. i mean that is just simple, but how can these supposed experts get something so easy wrong. they also dont mention that all the gospels agree that jesus was beating and whipped to near death, before he was even sentenced to death. some even say there was a crown of thorn, they also say pilot wasnt sure if jesus was dead, but they dont mention that pilot ordered jeses to be stabbed with a spear to ensure he was dead.
these are simple things they leave out to make there point, but i would have liked the doc better had they mentioned these simple things, i still would have been happy with the question, but to leave out things from the bible they are supposedly quoting is just stupid. plus if you honestly believe that people from different walks of life many who never even met, would all have the same story about something that happened years before you are s%^&*. i mean everyone can say different things about things that have happened in recent years. i bet i could get so many different and even contradictory accounts about what happened on 911, does that mean 911 didnt happen. and this is something everyone saw.
and yet there are different stories out there. dont get me wrong all about getting people thinking, but there was just too much left out and too much arrogance for me. plus much of the bible is written in parables, just like the gospel says jesus frequently told to his followers, so things like noahs ark and job there are probably more then a fair share of metiphor in those stories then truth, but that was th point. it was to tell a story to get a point accross. does anyone think that there was really a turtle and a rabbit had a raise and the rabbit got cocking and lost? no its a story to get the point across. even that story can be told ten different ways, but the message will always be the same. the same thing with the gospel. but i was still happy to open up to the docs idea.
@charles, the adam and eve story's proof, you claim, is found ONLY in genesis? in the bible?
so you are telling me the story at the start of the bible is NOT symbolic or mythological, but you believe that it is REAL?!?! that those events ACTUALLY took place?!?!?
so magical being creates man out of dirt, then woman out of a rib (already believable!) then tells them not to eat from the magical tree because if they do they will die (even though he KNOWS they will) then a talking snake tells them to eat from the tree claiming god to be a liar and they wont die (why didnt god warn them of this little bastard? and notice how god lied and the snake was right, they DIDNT die!) then god has to LOOK for them in the garden because at this point i guess he isnt all powerful seeing as he has already messed up this badly.....now because a rib woman ate a magical apple that a talking snake told her to eat, WE are all evil sinful creatures that must accept that a jew who was crucified in the iron age middle east was done so to atone for said rib woman's apple incident...and if we dont we suffer for ever?????
I just have to apologize for my people infecting this terrible belief system on yours.
Institutional religion (I.R.) is a powerful form of mind control:
Please let me share mine and some close friends understanding of the mind control element of I.R. I am pretty sure that many of you will have had the same experience and others may be on the way to realilizing this.
we all have I.R's ideas fed to us throughout our lives, as well as scientific, social and many other types of understanding. we also have the ability to criticise, bend, play with, accept and regect these ideas if we so desire. The problem arises in the crtique of I.R.
My experience is that i was too scared to form any type of criticism of religion. Just at the point where i had found something to critisize and disagree with the over whelming fear kicked in. i have difficulty describing deatails, but it has a bit to do with fear of punishment- God knows your thoughts -you cant hide them -so dont even bother having any.
What amazes me now is that i was 27 years old before i could even attempt to say anthing negative about God. Now, that's control.
These observations have formed my current understanding of I.R's as a powerful form of mind control.
Addendum: I should have written... "...for a smart, but IMMORAL, man to con the gullible into buying easy, comfortable answers to a hard life..."
SexMoneyMonkey (Hey, there!) wrote to me:
"@Randy
If you could write a book that made all the fools in the world follow you because of a funny hat you wear, would you?
Christianity is based on the fact that there are a lot of people severely lacking in intelligence and that it’s really easy to control fools by use of big imaginary beings in the sky..."
-------------------------
In fact I COULD, write that book, but I wouldn't, because I would think it morally reprehnisble... as I said in another thread...
I have more respect for my fellow men and women than to dupe them in that way. And, it has cost me dearly, at times.
But! My wife is always saying to me, "You could make a cult like Scientology! Why don't you make a cult and make us rich?!?!" (cuase women are always wantin' us to get them more stuff... lol!)
Seriously, though it is very easy, as L. Ron Hubbard proved, for a smart man to con the gullible into buying easy, comfortable answers to a hard life.
It is reason enough to believe in this fairy tale. Calling it "proof" in any sense is an insult to the advancements of mankind.
@Randy
If you could write a book that made all the fools in the world follow you because of a funny hat you wear, would you?
Christianity is based on the fact that there are a lot of people severely lacking in intelligence and that it's really easy to control fools by use of big imaginary beings in the sky.
Randy, Randy, Randy. Have you no sense of wit and humor at all? I thought it was funny! I was wondering if anyone would chide me for that statement. But, in fact, it IS proof enough for me. ;-)
Charles B. wrote:
"The proof of origianl sin in the Adam and Eve story is that it’s recorded in the book of Genesis..."
-----------------
You wrote the word PROOF there... I would submit that your book of Genesis is no more proof of the origin of man than comic books are proof of the existance of Batman.
Without your novel, what other PROOF do you have? Do not quote the bible at me... if you do I will quote the "Lord of the Rings" at you.
(A much better written novel, it is, having much better theology and morality than ever expressed in any, supposed, holy book)
Epicurus: The proof of origianl sin in the Adam and Eve story is that it's recorded in the book of Genesis. And, after just watching the Ken and Barbie Killers, doc there is no doubt sin is alive and well in the world today, so whoever started it need not pen it all on Adam and Eve! Ultimately The most pertinent question is not where the sin came from origianlly (if you think Adam and Eve only fairy tales), but how is sin dealt with now? That answer has always been and always will be, the precious red blood of Jesus Christ, shed on the Cross where he gave his life.
Peace.
The_MaChine_of_HaTe (hatred of ignorance) wrote:
"When did this “huge discrepancy” happen. I would say both the east and west have had accurate calendars for 2500 years and the Americas of course had the Maya.
Ancient calendars were accurate to minutes per year and current calenders are accurate to minutes for 10,000 of years. I mean they adjusted the calendar because the earth quake in Chile slightly change the rotation of the earth..."
Isn't that incredibly beautiful? I mean, the problem with the Erik Von Doniken theories... (I don't feel like looking up the proper spelling of the name of the author of "Chariots of the Gods"... a book that I have read and it is knocking around here somehwere...) is that they are essentially racist. Ancient people were really, really smart, even if they weren't European, and could figure out a lot of very intricate, natural processes.
They got more right, than they got wrong... (like christianity, apparently...). Why? Why would anyone ever need this horror novel written by mentally disturbed camel herders from the Middle East to explain the world when we have all of this testable and verifiable proof of...
You know? I can't go on with that dissertation. It kind of depresses me...
But! I loved your post and your clear illucidation of these timing/astronimcal/calendar concepts!
@HaTe_MaChInE - Oh and current calendars even account for the tidal forces of the moon. A few million years form now the day will actually be like 35 hours long. Dont quote that number.. Im not in the mood to look it up.
@charlesovery - "The “error of time” relates to when mankind stopped using calendars from anceint civilizations and came up with the one we use today. There is huge discrepancy between the one we use today and the ones that were used by anceint civilizations. It is proven that the anceint calendars are way more accurate than the ones today."
This is a joke right?
Exactly what ancient calendar did we stop using? The Julian calendar has been in constant use since 46 BC. The thing was named after Julius Caesar because he started using it.
We can trace events back into history to the day even to the hour sometimes. Mostly because when people recorded (and predicted) solar and lunar eclipse and things like that. Astrology is a very accurate calendar. Stonehenge is an accurate calendar. The chinese calendar is like 2500 years old and is still being used.
When did this "huge discrepancy" happen. I would say both the east and west have had accurate calendars for 2500 years and the Americas of course had the Maya.
Ancient calendars were accurate to minutes per year and current calenders are accurate to minutes for 10,000 of years. I mean they adjusted the calendar because the earth quake in Chile slightly change the rotation of the earth.
if adam and eve story is not true then original sin claim is not true, if those are not true the story of jesus dying for original sin is not true.
guess what...adam and eve is a make believe story.
present ONE bit of evidence for this story.
traditions are too sometimes superstitions. but Randy is ok too..... HA!
Hi, Ruth!
(I couldn't resist!)
traditions are to sometimes superstitions. but Randy is ok too..... HA!
Hi, Randy! I like it too. It is an old fashioned name. I like traditions.
Hi, Ruth! Great!
(I really love this, "Hi, Randy..." --- "Hi, Ruth" thing we have going on! It's very fun!)
Ruth is a great name, one of my favorite people in the whole world, other than my wife, is named Ruth!
@RANDY I did know about this and do agree....... I respect alot o religions but those are usually Taoism etc but after 18 yrs of hearing it ....... im sure the 85% you say are just as brainwashed as any other. luv ya Randy
Hi, randy. got it!
Randy: I don't know any Amish, but I like them too. I do love the Menninites as well; never met one I didn't really like in all ways. Yes, I had read that about the Amish kids being attacked. It broke my heart. When I person reaches 18 they can make their own choices as shall my kids too, but I'll never encourage them to "go wild" just to try it out! Sorry. No can do.
Charles Over: Thanks. If I don't post much, it's just because I'm trying the best I can to refocus my time and efforts towards ministry here. I had a wise man once tell me, "Charles, a man's first ministry is to his wife and kids, and then to others after that." I never forgot the wisdom of that saying. Pastor your own little ones first and then shepherd others secondly that are willing and asking, and then lastly debate the ones that have no desire for your insights on line! LOL. ;-)
Charles B.- you can google it but I will tell you a little about it so you know some of the information you are to look for. Take your time as it is more for you than for me.
The "error of time" relates to when mankind stopped using calendars from anceint civilizations and came up with the one we use today. There is huge discrepancy between the one we use today and the ones that were used by anceint civilizations. It is proven that the anceint calendars are way more accurate than the ones today.
@ Chucky B.
You know, you hold up pretty well, as a christian being slapped around by ivy-league, north-eastern egg-heads... Let me tell you about a christian sect I actually respect.
The Amish.
They keep to themselves. They are off the grid and never require anything from our scientific society. They care nothing for our laws and never try to impose their morality on our legislative process, (unlike you bastards!)
They do this amazing thing; something that I believe all christians should do, when their children reach the age of 16, they let them out on the world to experience all that life has to offer. The Amish have a great deal of money in their communities, from the awe inspiring crops and livestock, and the fact that they use no banks or utility services, so the kids can live a total hip-hop lifestyle for a month, if they want to. Philadelphia, in spring, is often over-run with Amish teenagers gone wild!
The German word for this is... damn... can someone help me out here? It means "time of spring?" Schpringenspiel? Schprignenshprect?
That's just sad... anyway, the kids get to decide if they really want to stay in the church or go out into the world, after having experienced drugs, alchohol, movies, TV, cars, everything the Amsih are opposed to. 85% of teens come back to the church. The important thing is, they allow their kids to make up their own minds. They don't brainwash them, or browbeat them to remain "faithful".
Also, when, recently, a group of Amish school children were raped and murdered by some maniac in Pennsylvania, (I live 40 minutes from Amish country, so it was all over our local news, you may have heard of this, too)... the Amish community openly forgave the a**hole that did it, and counseled the mother of the perpetrator, (who killed himself afterwards), with real "christ-like" blah blah blah.
I've never met an American christian who could do that.
Could you?
Two "Charles" and now two "Randys"! So, if I understand it, Randy IS an Atheist, but not Randy-the-Atheist! Good to know.
Charles Overy: Error of time. Ok. But I just spent the last four hours (or more) answering Razor and Faith on the Darwin thread. Do you want me to Google it, or would you mind just letting me know briefly what I'm supposed to be looking for. Thanks.
Ooops, I just realized you were talking to the OTHER Randy... sorry, Ruth and Randy the Athiest.
But, my statements still stand, if you care to take them.
Ruth wrote:
"Hi, Randy. Can you give me your source. I did a search. I found this, but it is opposite opinion you give. It gives reasons why mithras is fake and not 2000 years before jesus."
Hi, Ruth! Try using sources that aren't biased toward christianity. Naturally, they are going to say that anything outside of the bible is made-up/hoaxed/devil-did-it.
I am HUGE fan of Joseph Campbell, the foremost American authority on world mythology, before his death in the '80's. I would start there. He had no axe to grind, being a secular scholar and fairly agnostic, possibly atheist from what you might gather from "The Power of Myth".
There are at least, AT LEAST, 16 ancient god-men in the western and eastern cultures that far pre-date Judaism, (I'm having one of those days where nothing seems spelled right when I look at it... is that right? anyways...), let alone the story of christ. Perhaps as many as 25 sacrificial lambs of god that save the world and have 12 followers and healed the sick and born of a virgin and blah blah blah...
But, bottom line: research real scholarship, not the advertising brochures for a morally bankrupt cult.
hello , for anyone who s interested in what allah reavealed to mohamed (pbuh) in koran about jesus (pbuh), this is in chapter 3 , verses 44,45,46 , the Almighty said:
( We reveal it unto thee (Muhammad). Thou wast not present with them when they threw their pens (to know) which of them should be the guardian of Mary, nor wast thou present with them when they quarrelled (thereupon). (44) (And remember) when the angels said: O Mary! Lo! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, whose name is the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, illustrious in the world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (unto Allah). (45) He will speak unto mankind in his cradle and in his manhood, and he is of the righteous. (46) She said: My Lord! How can I have a child when no mortal hath touched me? He said: So (it will be). Allah createth what He will. If He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is. (47) And He will teach him the Scripture and wisdom, and the Torah and the Gospel, (48) And will make him a messenger unto the Children of Israel, (saying): Lo! I come unto you with a sign from your Lord. Lo! I fashion for you out of clay the likeness of a bird, and I breathe into it and it is a bird, by Allah's leave. I heal him who was born blind, and the leper, and I raise the dead, by Allah's leave. And I announce unto you what ye eat and what ye store up in your houses. Lo! herein verily is a portent for you, if ye are to be believers. (49) And (I come) confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful some of that which was forbidden unto you. I come unto you with a sign from your Lord, so keep your duty to Allah and obey me. (50) Lo! Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. That is a straight path.)
thanx mustafa
@Charles B. - Even though there are things that we will agree on we disagree on alot as well. Mithra is older than Jesus and the Romans were worshipping Mirtha centuries before the time of Jesus. There are similar characteristics between Mithra and Jesus are more than just their birthday. The day for worshipping Mithra was Sunday. That's right your sabbath day. Are you aware of the "error of time?" If not you should look into because it is extremely interesting. Their is noway that anyone accepted the birthday of Jesus first and then rewrote the history of Mithra to follow suite. It is documented and there is proof to show that it is the other way around.
lol
It's also plausible that Satan made you think that Satan did it when it wasn't. Or Satan made me think that I would think that Satan made you think that Satan did it when it wasn't.
Dont you think? ;)
Mr. Razor: There is a real Devil! He's not idle. I just don't blow smoke for the sake of blowing smoke; if I say that Satan did it, then it's a very real and plausible explination.
But I didn't see any "discrepency" to the Bible here. It's the "Mithra" materials that are in dispute as to their accuracies.
Peace.
@ Achems Razor
I bet sometimes he does, even if the fairies had no tales! Not that I'm calling anyone a fairy mind you.
@ Charles B:
Howdy, Charles, I some times reply in wonderment to your posts, when you do know that there may be discrepancies to the bibles teachings re:
"Mithra" right away you and all religee's refer to the old adage, the devil did it!
Such a land of fairy tales and wonderment you all live in, how come you guys are not flying around effortlessly, as per "toons"
Randy the Atheist: OK. You're right, digging up the guy in India wouldn't prove anything. As you said, they would just be old bones. Believe in the Swoon theory if you want to. At least you state it well.
As far as the reckless life style for me . . . . well . . . . I was a bit reckless before I got married, but I've got a wife and kids now. I have no "death wish" at all. Heaven will still be there when it's my proper time. Besides, Jesus said that "It is written" that, "You shall not 'tempt" the Lord Your God." This is generally thought of as "putting God" to a test that is foolish in nature. It was said by Jesus to Satan when Satan recommended Jesus jump off the temple to prove He was the true Son of God, as angels would surely catch Him! Jesus probably would have died right then and there without fulfilling His purpose in life, which was to die for our sins on the Cross. Satan knew such a "test" would "fail", and so he wanted to kill Jesus before the time. I think I'll follow Jesus' example in such things and just "play it safe" for now. Thanks anyway!
As far as Mithra is concerned, I'm sure that Judaism out dates it and if so, then the Judaic Messianic prophecies would out date it also. I've looked a little on-line. Those are pretty spectacular claims to similarity if they pan out. I suspect they are post-Christian era even as the materials we have on the subject of Mithra are scant at best (from what I read). Also, it is indeed a valid apologetic to say that Satanic interference can be cited as the reason for some similarities for BOTH older religions as well as newer religions with Christianity proper.
Deception is best served incognito to well-known truth. ;-)
Besides, I don't think Jesus was born on Dec. 25th but that is just the chosen date we use to celebrate His birth. If Mithra was said to have been born on that date too, then I highly suspect it was written after the Christians used that date to draw attention away from the Winter Solstice, or so I've heard.
Peace.
I'm not advocating that Jesus never existed. I think he was a very real person that happened to survive Roman crucifixion which, in first century, would be believed to have been a resurrection when in actuality, it was a "Resuscitation".
An interesting piece here:
He was the son of the Holy God.
Born, on 25th December, of a virgin mother.
In a manger in a stable.
Was visited by three wise men.
He was known as the Light of the World.
He had twelve disciples.
He had a last supper with those disciples before his death.
Hebrews called him Cristos or Messiah.
His death was an atonement for the sins of Mankind.
His name was Mithras of Persia and he lived 2000 years before Jesus was even a twinkle in the Emperor's eye.
There are remarkable records of Pagans arguing with Christians and vice versa in very early Rome about the bragging rights each displayed of their god. Pagans argued that their God was older and therefore original. The Christians admitted Jesus came later, but claimed the Pagan's was a work of the devil whose similarities to Jesus were intended to confuse and mislead men prior to his arrival. This was apparently the stock answer for many generations as it has been recorded by Tertullian, Justin, Plutarch and Servilius.
But I do not advocate that he is a retelling of an old myth. I do however, advocate that Christians (Paul in particular)used Jesus to usurp the old myths which had grown old and rather stale in first century Rome.
Cheers ~
Randy the Atheist
WTC7 said:
"Yes, Chris, religious superstitions are more healthy than alcoholism or drug addiction, but also much more dangerous on a larger scale. Nobody is going to see an alcoholic as an idol but a demagogic “prophet” can make irreparable harm many young brains..."
Quoted for truth. Well said, WTC7! (despite that unfortunate sentence, "...can make irreparable harm many young brains..." sounds like Frankenstein wrote it, LOL! J/K, I do the same thing, the lack of editing feature is frustrating...)
Rock on!
Well, then there is that old boogeyman of which I am very fond. That jesus never existed AT ALL...
There is no concrete evidence no matter what your pastors, your church-mates, and your born-again archeoligists say with their personal bias.
I've examined all the evidence that christians have provided and have yet to be convinced. There were hundreds of messianic, Jewish prophets running around at that time. Many did the same things attributed to jesus, or Yeshua, or whoever... but none did all the things described in the new testament. At best, he is an amalgam of alot of characters, at worst, (for christians), he was a re-telling of an ancient myth.
And as the gospels were written 40-70 years after his supposed death, there really is no eye-witness testimony.
So... there is that...
The road to Emmaus in Luke is one of the most glaring cases of an incognito fugitive. Peculiar, as the men who knew Jesus well could not even recognize him all the way thru dinner. Why? Because he's cloaked and in hiding. Hence, the hasty exit after revealing himself.
And digging the guy up in India will not provide us with any more info that would be useful. It would just be a pile of 2000 year old bones. What is useful to us is the recorded history of this masoleum, why it was built for this guy, and the reasons it has attracted visitors afar for the past 1900 years.
Crucifixion. The cause of death was not suffocation as first postulated in 1925. The only way to suffocate while hanging is to nail the hands directly above the head and weight the feet so the person cannot bend the arms. This was documented by WWII POWs who were crucified in various ways by the Japanese. Furthermore, when deployed in this manner - it takes 20 minutes to kill and there is no way for a person to speak, drink, or cry out. Recent experiments by volunteers suspended in Roman custom had no increased difficulty in breathing even with feet dangling. Only an increasing amount of severe pain in arms and shoulders.
But lets entertain the idea of suffocation. Even if slow suffocation is the cause of death on the cross, Jesus's body is hastily removed and brought down shortly after he passes out. We know he only passes out because he gave a lengthy oration just before he "gave up the ghost". At this point he would begin to suffocate. So Joseph runs to Pilate and pleads with him for the body upon which it strikes him odd that he has died "so soon". Dispatching his sentry to "check" and report does not take more than a few minutes. Shortly after this, Joseph returns and takes the body down. Jesus is still alive. Bleeding, tired and unconscious - but alive. In any case, these two possible causes of death does not impact his chances of survival. It is already quite high due to the situation of fortunate events that unfolded.
Had the original practice of crurifragum been deployed, True Death would have ensued from traumatic shock and no amount of medical attention would save him. But because he was spared the leg breaking, the entire course of history was altered and it is in this sence, that Jesus is indeed, a god.
Cheers ~
Randy the Atheist
@Charles B
Who says anybody knew he "swooned"... Maybe he tricked everybody.
If you really believe in Christianity then why don't you just repent and ask forgiveness then go do a bunch of very reckless things. That way if you happen to pass away from one of them you'll get into heaven which is such a better place, right?
So just live really, really well by the bible for about a year and then start on the reckless things?
That is, unless you doubt your beliefs... In which case you wouldn't do that...
PS: I don't want this to come off as a "go die" reply. I just want to point out your own doubt.
Charles Overy: Wow! Thanks for that bone, Mr. Overy. I appreciate that. We finally agreed on one small historical fact that asphyxiation or suffocation was a common cause of death with crucifixion.
That actually would make "swooning" much harder as you'd just die if you passed out as well. My supposition of course.
SexMoneyMonkey: Yes, I do know that Jesus died on the cross out of necessity to meet God's requirements for "payment" for sin, if for no other reason. It wasn't an accident, but the plan of God from at least the time of Adam and Eve's sin to redeem mankind in that way. It's the pillar of the Christian faith. Had he not died on the Cross as said, and then subsequently been resurrected, then Christianity wouldn't exist as it does today. Isaiah chapter 53 is generally considered the Suffering Messiah passage where Christ pays for the sin of many and not his own.
Similarly, the reasons for the Old Testament animal sacrifices were "postponements" of God's judgment on sin until Christ's perfect propitiation (payment in full) for sin could be accomplished. You can void a lot of things in the Christian faith and still have some similitude of Christianity, but you cannot void the Cross and Jesus' death on it and have anything left of Christianity.
Besides, No one would have followed him after wards--to the death, in fact--had something extraordinary not happened. "Swooning" just doesn't fit that bill. Death and resurrection----now that's miraculous and a life-changing event for everyone connected to the events in question. Now that's something worth believing in and dying for to maintain as truth!
Had Jesus just "swooned" on the cross and others saved him later, then it surely would have come out early in the church when people were being beaten, thrown in prison, and stoned to death for their faith. Wouldn't you think?
Nothing else is more fundamental to the Christian faith than the cross; good teachings, etc. are all secondary.
Peace.
@Charles B
No, you don't know that. But are deluded enough to believe you do.
@Randy the Atheist - You must have researched a lot and dome your homework....somewhat.
Only one thing that I read that was wrong with your comment above and that is:"Crucifixion was a device they used to deter people by killing very slowly via dehydration." Actually it has been recorded that crucifixion victims died mostly from asphyxiation or suffocation more than dehydration.
Randy: Ironically the sermon last Sunday in my church was over the Road to Emmaus (Luke 20:13-49). You know your swoon theory very well, but you misinterpret every part of every scripture you use. Assuming that it was indeed Jesus on the road to Emmaus (something I 100% believe also), then you should listen to what is reported as Jesus saying to them that the Christ, Himself (V. 27). However, verse 46 is the most clear as it doesn't use figurative language and says plainly that "Then He said to them, 'Thus it is written, and thus it 3ws necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day.'"
You can have the swoon theory, but there is trouble if you use the Bible to try and prove such. I can research the burial rites of the Israelites at that time if you'd like.
As for the guy in India name "Jesus" that died there of old age, I wish they would just dig him up and examine him. Even if his name was "Jesus" that's was not a totally unique name for the times.
But, it's of non consequence, because if you tie the Old Testament predictions of Jesus with the New Testament account, it's clear that Jesus needed to die, not just swoon. If he swooned on the cross or was drugged, and survived, then all Christianity is void and based on non-truth.
Lastly, I heard that the reason they broke the legs were not so that they bled to death from the femeral artery being crushed, but so that they would suffocate. So much pressure was placed on the chest by crucifixion that they had to push up with their legs to ease the pressure to breath. If you stopped pushing up, you couldn't breath. So, even if Jesus swooned, he would have died of suffocation quickly even withing the time they asked Pilot for his body to be taken off the cross. If Jesus wasn't a coward before the cross, then had he swooned, he wouldn't have been a coward afterwards. The Disciples were turned into very bold evangelists after meeting the risen Christ. I don't think I'd be personally bold enough to die a terrible death myself for a man that I knew to be a liar and a cowered that I helped save from death by treating him and then hiding him. Would you? That just doesn't make sense to me.
Sexmoneymonkey: I don't know about historical survival rates of Crucifixion, but I know that Jesus didn't survive his and that's all that really matters.
Peace.
The Romans were indeed very good at what they did. So good that they knew how to prolong torture. Pilate - the most professional of them all knows this extremely well which is why he directly disbelieves Joseph that he died so soon and needed affirmation from his guard. Right there in the gospels is our first indication that Jesus survived.
Crucifixion was a device they used to deter people by killing very slowly via dehydration - not via whipping, flogging and nail piercing. It was the ultimate suffering tool and was used up until the 19th century on black slaves in America of which many were reported to last an average of seven days. Roman historian Josephus also records people surviving crucifixion which is why they began the routine of leg breaking - a routine that wasn't performed on Jesus.
By breaking the legs of the crucified, the femoral artery is pulverized causing a Class IV hemorage which is fatal in minutes. Without that, the death is slow and brutal - exactly what it was designed for. Thus, Jesus had it relatively easy compared to the other two criminals next to him whom had their legs smashed. And this is the defining moment of chance in the story of Jesus.
Also, a kidney poke by a spear is not mortal. It is considered to be a moderate injury if no other intra-injuries are present and usually does not require surgery. Bed rest and liquids. Surgery is only required for laparotomy or if kidney is detached. Therefore, Nicodemus only has to stabilize the bleeding and disinfect. How? With about a hundred pound mixture of myrhh and aloe. Was this used to embalm? No. Jewish custom forbids embalming - then and even now. Only a ritual bath followed by plain wrappings in the traditional shroud are allowed to touch the body. No earthly things are to go with the deceased - this includes myrhh, aloe, flowers and spices. And therein lies yet another indication that jesus is alive - Nicodemus and Joseph do not give him the ritual bath. Instead, they quietly move his body out of the tomb to a new location as claimed by Mary Magdelene who rushed back to tell Simon, Peter and a few other disciples that "They have taken away the lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him!" (John 20:2)
What follows is an interesting portrayal of someone in hiding as he walks incognito to the town of Emmaus alongside a man named Cloepas, his friends and the disciple Simon which is recorded in Luke 20:13-49. In the weeks thereafter, Jesus is shown infrequently visiting the disciples - often hungry - and asking for something to eat. The disciples give him what appears to be leftovers rather than a holy banquet which indicates that his visits were always unexpected and in hasty fashion.
There is a 2000 year old belief in India that a man named Jesus migrated from the west and died of old age and is buried under the Rozabal Masoleum in the Kan Yar section of Kashmir, India. The Rozabal is a large structure, still intact, and is visited by believers from around the world.
Cheers ~
Randy the Atheist
@Charles B
Your logic is flawed. By that logic than nobody throughout the history of mankind has survived execution. Or in fact, has successfully escaped the law. It's completely plausible that Jesus was drugged with the sponge while on the cross and what not. And Jesus was basically just another criminal to bee killed to the Romans.
And a spear to the bladder would only be fatal if it wasn't healed shortly after.
Ruth: You're quite right. It wasn't very "mild" to be crucified.
Randy The Atheist: That was the best "swoon" theory I have ever read. Very well said. . . . . BUT . . . .
The Romans were very good at what they did. Their job was to kill you and make it hurt as well! Jesus was very much dead when they took him off the cross if for no other reason than the Romans were professional executioners and Jesus was not just a common criminal to be killed. The Pharisees and Sadducees were also there to make sure he died if no one else cared. A spear to the side even if it did hit the bladder sounds pretty fatal to me!
The spices used on the bodies of the dead were to keep decay away long enough for burial and mourning. Jesus was buried quickly as the Sabbath was coming at sundown, so there was no time for "rigor" to set in. I'm not sure, but I don't think any spices were used on Jesus at his burial as the women were coming to do precisely that after the special Sabbath as he was buried so quickly.
Nonetheless, it's all academic as without Jesus' actual death, then Christianity is completely baseless and void. But, that's your whole goal isn't it, Randy The Atheist? ;-)
Hi. Randy, I'm not sure crusivixion was that mild. Can anyone else comment on that.
okay....back to the subject....
There is a large amount of evidence in the bible itself that jesus actually survived his relatively simple ordeal. The first bit of evidence was that he was not in physical shock. Emotional shock, yes, but far from physiological shock. He could walk, he could speak coherently and was situationally aware even while nailed to the beam. He showed signs of only slight to moderate blood loss - patient was coherent, active motor skills and supported his weight to prevent anoxia for several hours indicating extremely strong vitals. The soldiers did not break his legs which guaranteed a very very high survival rate. He could sustain himself for many days in this condition and even Pilate knows this for he is surprised to hear that he is "dead so soon". So surprised is he, that he sends his sentry to confirm it as he is in total disbelief.
The piercing - flowage of water and blood - indicates that a body is still alive. It is not yet dead. The water is most likely urine from his kidney - another sign that the nervous system is still intact. Then there is the traditional wrapping of jesus in the cloth - his arms being crossed - indicating no Rigor. Also no mention of Livor. Then theres Nicodemus rushing to apply a mixture of myrhh and aloe - a salve that was known to stop mortal bleeding. But this mixture was not the only thing that was peculiar... the sheer amount of it was extraordinary - approximately 100 pounds of it was used.
Then we have much more stuff like jesus playing coy and remaining incognito, disciples shuttering doors and windows when he appears out of fear and trepidation rather than rejoicing like they won the lottery, and jesus asking for food indicating hunger. Also, the food he is given appear to be leftovers. This clandestine-like activity recorded in the gospels indicate a fugitive lifestyle of a person who is attempting to evade recapture.
@charlesovery
I guess the point is that I haven't contributed more than an 8 year old by choice and lack of opportunity, whereas he hasn't contributed more than an 8 year old because he's limited by his thought process and mental abilities.
@charlesovery
I've hardly added to this documentary's comment thread, I'll agree to that. Most of my contributions are on other ones. I was merely pointing out that Charles wasn't adding anything so as to not send another thread down the path he's sent every other one. Which in itself wouldn't be bad if he had exhibited any ability to learn from the other threads.
@SMM - I believe there is better wya to state what you are trying to state without being ignorant to Charles B. yourself. So far from what i have read from is nothing more than an 8 year would state as well, so where does that put you?
@Epicurus - I found your last post to be of interest as I am a Psychologist myself with a historical and behaviorial emphasis. Your stattements are right on point and extremely admirable.
@Charles B. - First off I have never been rude to you and I have never belittled your beliefs...ever. My intentions is to tell you the truth about what it is you believe that is actually false. That is not hating you for your beliefs or that you are christian. My point has always been to educate you and others in that you may understand what it is that you should really be believing in, not what you are told to believe in. It is my sole intention counter circular logic as from everything that I have witnessed and studied proves that circular logic is extremely harmful. Not only that though the historical facts about your religion is questionable, however the bible is still a historically fact book. This is why it is so widely misinterpreted and misguiding to people. This is also the reason that it is known as the group think matter that is today. With the holy trinity and the things that you think gives you the faith to believe in it are not what you think they really are or were. Take for example your last post to Epicurus about evolution. The bible represent a historical account of how mankind has evolved with the creation of this religion over centuries of time, but you believe in evolution in either sense of what it means. Just because I state things straight forwardly doesn't mean that there is any anger or hatred there.
I told you before that yes I hate organized religion because it is harmful and it has proven itself to be harmful ever since its creation. In my personal opinion all organized religions should be abolished. They should be pushed back to private whorship and taken out of mainstream culture. There is no place for it in our culture today unless it minds to the weak and those that want to be dumb downed in our currrent civilization. No I am not saying that people of whorship or certain beliefs should be killed or executed or anything like that. I am stating that churches, mosques, the intricate political ventures need to cease, the creation of public works and businesses need to cease, and they should be practiced privately.
Epi, now I see where you get your neurotic ideas. They are deliciously interesting. :)
Mr. Overy: If your going to respond rudely to an old post, then you should quote it first. Briefly. There was a lot of posts after that one and at least one or two from you. My bad. I thought you were responding rudely to the post to Epic. And yes, you do very much dislike if not out rightly hate fundamentalist Bible-believing Christians. Do you not? Who am I to say that? The recipient. I can feel it with every post, but granted, you are usually more civil than some.
Epicurus: Thank you for your prolonged reply. That wasn't really necessary. I look up a great many things on-line every day. Your major was the least of my concerns; I just wanted a civil reply. Well said, nonetheless. Like I understood previously, evolution (psychological or biological or otherwise) is in the foremost part of your makeup. Moderately interesting, but what would be the application for such study? Perhaps you will become the next Richard Dawkins; you're well on your way.
@Epicurus
Wow! That post was incredible! So well put and crystal clear. I mean, you just explained, like, 5 years of my personal study and about 200 books worth of reading that was all fragmented and scattered across multiple volumes and disciplines... just wow!
You are a credit to your namesake! Can I subscribe to your newsletter?
Rock on with the big brain, my friend!
anytime charles says anything about god the response ought to be "prove it"
you ignore everything said to you and just state "god did it"
prove god exists and prove he made DNA.
you read my proof and YOU didnt see any. because you lack the appropriate education and you have the appropriate bias to dismiss all facts that are peer reviewed and established.
you deny absolute fact so you can feel comfortable in your delusion. you claim people are rude to you but you ignore how insanely rude you are. YOU base your beliefs on faith. we all study this and educate ourselves. we look at empirical data and evidence without a bias view. you INSERT and ASSUME god and that is your downfall and that is why you lack a firm grip on reality.
oh and here you go because you are too lazy to look it up but so quick to insult it:
Evolutionary psychology (EP) attempts to explain psychological traits—such as memory, perception, or language—as adaptations, that is, as the functional products of natural selection or sexual selection. Adaptationist thinking about physiological mechanisms, such as the heart, lungs, and immune system, is common in evolutionary biology. Evolutionary psychology applies the same thinking to psychology.
Modern evolutionary psychologists (see, for example, Confer, Easton, Fleischman, Goetz, Lewis, Perilloux & Buss, 2010; as well as Buss, 2005; Durrant & Ellis, 2003; Pinker, 2002; Tooby & Cosmides, 2005) argue that much of human behavior is generated by psychological adaptations that evolved to solve recurrent problems in human ancestral environments. They hypothesize, for example, that humans have inherited special mental capacities for acquiring language, making it nearly automatic, while inheriting no capacity specifically for reading and writing.
Other adaptations, according to EP, might include the abilities to infer others' emotions, to discern kin from non-kin, to identify and prefer healthier mates, to cooperate with others, and so on. Consistent with the theory of natural selection, evolutionary psychology sees organisms as often in conflict with others of their species, including mates and relatives. For example, mother mammals and their young offspring sometimes struggle over weaning, which benefits the mother more than the child. Humans, however, have a marked capacity for cooperation under certain conditions as well.
Evolutionary psychologists see those behaviors and emotions that are nearly universal, such as fear of spiders and snakes, as more likely to reflect evolved adaptations. Evolved psychological adaptations (such as the ability to learn a language) interact with cultural inputs to produce specific behaviors (e.g., the specific language learned). This view is contrary to the idea that human mental faculties are general-purpose learning mechanisms.
Fields closely related to EP are animal behavioral ecology, human behavioral ecology, dual inheritance theory, and sociobiology.
@Charles B - Did you not write this:"Charles B.04/22/2010 at 00:31 Overy: Later. I’m rushing. 300 plus papers to grade, and Sunday materials to prepare for my speaking. Remind me next week."
I'll address your other comments tomorrow and clear this up. However, before i leave I have one questions for you.
Who are you to say that I hate anyone or anything?
I'm hardly telling him what to do, just pointing out that his flawed reasoning and definitions of basic ideas such as proofs, facts and theories is detrimental and incompatible with intelligent discussion.
I don't say he isn't entitled to his beliefs, even when I mention my hope for the end of his brainwashed thought process I point out that it won't mean the end of his beliefs.
Charles' contributions thus far have amounted to about as valuable as those of most 8 year olds when discussing things such as this. Simply because his thought process with these things is exactly the same "I was told this by people I trust so I will make sure to believe it so as not to disappoint them" and such.
I didn't ask him to leave or order him, just merely suggested. It'd be better for him and for the discussion.
I'm sorry if I was insulting, I only meant to be honest.
@ S.M.M:
Charles B. is entitled to his beliefs no matter what they are. Because I do not believe in religion per se: I do not go about trying to kill the person with words, and you must know words are mightier than the sword!
Lay off!! And tell no-one what they may, or may not do, or say!!
I mean not spreading hate.
I agree. People have a right to their opinion good or bad as long as this is an open forum and they spreading hate.
SMMonkey: What am I wrong about?
My post was to Epic, not Mr. Overy. Mary K. Baxter makes what I said she does on her books. David J. Stewart IS a fundamentalist Christian and believes that anything other than the King James version of the Bible is of the Devil. Of what in those facts are "wrong"? When Charles Overy used that website it was very hypocritical of him because it's the OPINION of a fundamentalist Christian (ultra conservative), and not any "proof" at all that she is a fraud. Did you look up his web link? I did.
I researched the "Sounds of Hell" audio recording years ago. There is a story that goes with the recording. Did you read it? I did. That is also a fact.
If I stop posting it will be out of respect for my family time (which I plan to do) but I want to make very clear to you that you have no say in what my opinions are and whether or not I can speak them freely. Just because they differ from yours you have no right to say that I cannot speak them.
In fact, I have more opportunities than I have time to preach, teach, lead Bible study and post on other forums where they have repeatedly requested my insights (more than once) but I've spent more time here as I like watching the docs as well as giving sound advice.
If I stop posting it's out of a change of focus for my energies, and in no way whatsoever because you think you have the right to order me off this thread.
Ironically, I made up my mind last night to cut back, and "family time is family time" and not Internet time, but I couldn't let your social rudeness go unanswered.
If you want to "prove" Mary K. Baxter a fraud, then do so. You can post here also, or e-mail me personally, but try and find something other than the opinion of another fundamentalist Christian to do it. Has she stolen money? Did she admit she lied? Was she caught on tape laughing about deceiving people? That would be more of a proof than what Mr. Overy's link proved to be who disagreed with her on solely Biblical grounds.
Good day to you.
Vlatko: I sincerely apologize to you for getting so upset and defensive. This is your website and I respect that. I do in fact plan to scale back a lot, but the Monkey really made me mad telling me what to do. Sorry!
Peace.
Charles B.
@Charles B
I'd like to point out that you're wrong about basically everything you posted and find links to prove it but, you've proven yourself quite impervious to reason. I'll recommend you just stop posting in this thread and stop getting in the way of discussion. Everybody else is actually taking into account what others are saying. BBC especially (on that side of the fence) has been rather receptive to evidence.
You are brainwashed and it's almost scary to see the degree to which you are. I really hope you break it's hold on you one day, even if you remain a Christian afterwards, doesn't really matter to me. But in the mindset you are currently in you're a hindrance to intelligent conversation.
Mr. Overy: I'm so upset. I've lost my post to you twice now, and perhaps that's a good thing. I wasted a whole hour of my life and lost it! Would have gone to moderation for sure, so perhaps it's a good thing. I don't have another hour to type it again, but to state it precisely, "You need to apologize."
First of all, I wasn't asking YOU TO REMIND ME OF ANYTHING! I was responding to Epic's post and speaking to him, not you. If you thought I was posting to you, you made a mistake. If you were the one that posted most of the "proofs" of evolution on the other thread, then good for you. Epic was boasting proofs both "macro and micro" and I thought those were his post going from memory.
Let me conclude and get to bed by asking one question, "Why would you use David J. Stewart's website to refute Mary K. Baxter?" It's like pitting Billy Graham against Mother Theresa. You hate fundamentalist Bible-believing Christians to our core, and I'm sure you disagree 100% with all that David J. Steward says, except maybe for about Mary K. Baxter. It's a theological disagreement, not proof that she's a "wolf" or wrong in any way.
As far as the sounds of Hell, the reason that it was not more widely made known is that it came out of Russiah for one thing. How many people have you asked to listen to it? Hum? So, you're a non-propigator yourself. Perhaps this is just the first time that a believer such as myself has suggested you listen to it. It's been around for a while, and even my wife from the Philippines has heard it and she's from a 3rd world country. "You're lack of researching it thoroughly is quite pathetic to me!"
In fact, I found other information about it years ago and read up on it. You sir need to appologize as your last statement to me is precisely how I feel about you to the last letter.
P.S. Do you know how much Ms. Baxer makes per book? $0.02! Yep, that's right. 2 little pennies! (If memory serves me correctly. She was asked on an interview I watched how much she made per book and she was embarrassed to admitt she made nothing from the book sales as she wanted the books to help save souls, not make her money. Now that's a servant of the most high God!
I couldn't find it if you actually had a refute for the sounds of Hell other than you didn't think they were valid and gave links to the same recording. How weak is that?
Awaiting your appology.
Charles B.
@BBC - "To say they plagiarized, i do not think is a fair assumption. We all at times cite works in our writing, or quotes scenes from movies, when we are relating stories."
Citing work is different then using the same story then changing the names involved in the story and claiming it to be yours. This is why it is not based on what you and others believe it is based on. Your words even stated it and yet, I will put money on it, that you will deny that. Read your quote again and then look at how the religion is being taught and stated and believed and then tell me that you didn't even state that.
@Charles B - No I will not remind you. Everytime you want me to look at something I do so, however when I want you to look at something you either don't or procrastinate in doing so. Which ever it is is fine. I say that because it is now obvious to me that you are afraid of it. Case in point you asked me if I believed in what this Mary lady has stated or seen. I checked it out and then responded with a piece of evidence to show why I do not believe in her story, but because you believe her so strongly you are afraid of learning that she is nothing but a fraud. The weakness to believe something that someone states without researching it thoroughly is quite pathetic to me.
Epic:
Why would I even know what "evolutionary psychology" involves? I asked once and you either missed it or didn't' bother to give me a civil response. Why try to humiliate me for not knowing what your expertise of study involves? I figured the word "psychology" would have something at least to do with the human mind, but perhaps not! Perhaps it's just a fancy title for learning advanced evolutionary theory. Why don't you forgo the insults and give me a strait answer?
As far as the Catholic church being thinking that the sun revolved around the earth, that was one of many rather stupid (and evil) things they did. Granted.
As far as your "proof" for evolution "macro and micro," I read them but didn't see any "proof" at all. DNA was created by God to work the way it does. If man can combined pears and apples to make a unique fruit, great! We can do a lot of things with the opportunities and the adaptable DNA machinery that God has put into place. There could be a lot of variation already in the DNA that is latent and can lead to variations when activated, but it's still within kinds, Epic. Try harder to convince me, if you can. Which thread are your best arguments posted on? Darwin's non-Genius? I will review them again as I have time.
One argument that I have against evolution is that DNA is degrading worldwide. Errors are compiling, and codes are being lost and diseases are becoming more common from genetic disorders. We're moving from states of perfection to imperfection as time goes on. Evolution isn't happening on the DNA level, but rather the opposite is happening; death and eventually genetic replication failure.
As far as my genius level wife is concerned, she doesn't need a Ph.D. in psychology to know truth when she hears and sees it, both in her husband and in life in general. She's as strong a believer as I. We're very well match. A marriage made in Heaven in fact, and nearly five years strong.
BBC: To brighten your day, since you responded to the "love" question on one of the other threads (and for those that bemoan the fact that I'm even a parent educating my kids to love God), my wife and I are seriously discussing plans (if we can) to open an orphanage in the Philippines or becoming pastors with our own church there if we can. Or at least run a school there. We would call it "Agape House" (A House of God's love) the same as our residency we're building there, as we want to turn our house into a missions center as well. Why not spread the love and wisdom as greatly as we can while we still can?!? Time is short! ;-)
God Bless!
@Charlesovery,
"If the writers were writing to thier respective audeinces the stories from other cultures how exactly can be based on truth of thier own culture?"
The Israelites were always surrounded by other cultures. Their culture was heavily influenced by the cultures around them. Just like the cultures around them were influenced by their (Hebrew) culture. There are stories of Hebrews influencing Kings of Babylon, and Assyria. Look at North America today, we all influence each other. THe same would have been for the Ancient Near East.
To say they plagiarized, i do not think is a fair assumption. We all at times cite works in our writing, or quotes scenes from movies, when we are relating stories. I think the same could be said about the ancients. In the Book of Jude, there is a quote from the Book of Enoch. We know that the Book of Enoch is not recognized in the Canon. However, the Book was read by most people around the time when Jude was written. When we speak to people we try to relate to them, so that they may understand us. Otherwise, our words fall on deaf ears.
@BBC - Sorry I just noticed your comment to me on ecliptic religions.
Even though the writers of the old testament could have been writing to their audiences, wouldn't this show and prove that they basically copied or plagerized older known stories? If thier god is always differetiating himself from others to make himself the one true god and the writers were basically writing to thier audeinces, why mention it then? If the writers were writing to thier respective audeinces the stories from other cultures how exactly can be based on truth of thier own culture?
This is very simple actually. The writers of the old testament pretty plagerized older stories from other belief systems. This disproves your theory of them writing to thier respective audiences. The only part of any writing to any respective audiences would be the fact that they dilleborated for centuries on how thier god would defeat other gods and then would eventually become a monolythic belief or monothiestic one god foundation. However, the fact that Judiasm actually was developed by so many other paganistic worships shows that in fact that it is ecliptic to all other religion before it. It does not stand alone as some devine creation as a plan for mankind. If that were the case don't you think that it be a little more original than it is? This same idea also encompasses islam, buddism, and many other earthly religions. The question is why are there so many different belief systems built on the foundation?
Epicurus
Change of plans, no longer going out west, gunna be around for that protest on the 1st. Hook me up with your number or email and I'll give u a call when I get there. We'll smoke one or some.
P.S - Sorry for the unrelated post everyone.
@charles, you went to a christian university. naturally they would all be christian. i do not.
also the term evolution in the title absolutely refers to adaptive evolution based on natural selection.
why are you so ignorant to things yet so quick to judge them?
and how can you claim any field of KNOWLEDGE as a waste of time when those people would waste their entire life going to church and reading mythology?
i was pointing out that the VAST majority of intellectuals and those in academic studies are not religious and if they are they are very moderate in their beliefs. people like you are a minority thankfully.
i dont suggest your wife get a doctorate in psychology. she might start to realize that you lack proper cognitive functioning.
i didnt plan on responding to you or being rude in anyway but your post is just full of arrgoant snide remarks i couldnt let it go.
please dont use the term evolutionist. its just one more stupid thing for me to laugh at. would you gravitist? would you say germist? evolution is fact. just accept it. i have shown examples over and over again of 100% evolution. macro and micro. please. do as the christians had to in the early half of this millenium and abandon your ancient dogmas and accept modern science (flat earth, geocentric model) remember those? your religion can and has been wrong.
"Not that you lied to me but that I no longer believe you - that is what has distressed me - "
Today a man of knowledge may feel as if he were God become animal. - Nietzsche
*Edit: Cut out the AFAIK, it's obviously talking about American scientists...
@Charles
Just quoting wikipedia here for lack of other reference:
"in 2009, 33% of American scientists believe in God, 18% of scientists believe in a higher power, and 41% of scientists believe in neither."
For the so called 'general public' the values are 83%, 12% and 4%. These values don't add up, which makes me question the source, but I assume the basic idea behind them is correct.
This is America AFAIK, so it will probably be quite a bit lower in Europe, for example.
Amazing and should be a mandatory class documentrary in all schools. simply put... In the beginning was the word and the word was with "God" and the word was "God"....
in the beginning was "THE WORD". A rose by any other name is still yet a rose. It or "God" can be any of the many many words that humanity chooses for the word used by an instant oatmeal society to represent the beginning to be. Thought creates energy, energy creates matter, so what does it matter? Jesus is, as many other human mar-tiers in historical necessity, a vice to lay blame and idolize, in humanity's incessant complacency and intellectually starved by the power hungry who control the truth. Choice...Freewill..Atom or Adam and Eve the "woman" or Eve "the time before something begins", Science or religion, Its all in the linguistics of the chosen, but yet its all still the same. Gematria or Pythagorean geometry also adds mathematics to those linguistics. so possibly the answer is 42 and Douglas "Adam"s is the author of the Aquarian bible.
Epic: You are implying that all the intelligent people don't hold a religious view as proved by your classmates and yourself.
Everyone in my university was Christian and it would be hard to find an evolutionist as I went to a Christian university. Even the name of your major has "evolution" in it. I take it to mean "development" in this case, but then, it shows the bias of the field to chose that as its name. Why would any self-respecting theist want to wast his or her time getting "faith-smacked" every day for four or six years in your classes? What a waste of time!
My wife would like to get her doctorate in psychology and I actually entered into the masters of counseling therapy once before I realized it would be too expensive, but it would revolt me to have to sit through the God-heaters' lecture series for 6 years to get my masters degree in the field of "evolutionary psychology."
Cheers.
Mustafa: Yeah, I know that Muslims do not hold Jesus' death on the cross as important. That was my whole point.
Kurt: Let me think about your questions and get back to you if I have time and don't forget. If you really want answers to your questions let me know and I will try harder.
Peace.
if you want a good laugh take a look at the creationism museum out in alberta. im sure there are pics on the internet.
its about the size of my garage LOL
its almost impossible for me to find someone in my classes (Evolutionary Psychology at University of Toronto) who would willingly argue a position of theism. the only time i come across someone who actually believes in religion more than they trust science is when im talking to my Muslim friends.
if you get a chance and are still in university, you should put together a questionnaire and see how many religious people in your school, what courses they take, and how religious they think they are. you will see an interesting correlation with atheists and more difficult academic science type programs.
as for canadians having more time on our hands...maybe. you tend to have more time for yourself and family life when you have a healthy level of socialism in your society. We dont have as many personal worries as the worry is shared by all.
Yes I am a Canadian.
My previous post is in moderation heaven again!!!
so will try not to put any bad words in here.
A lot of religious stuff is going on in Canada! I was in Surrey B.C.
some years back, at some kind of religious banquet. Don't ask me how I got there, but the conversations ran like, every second word or so was praise the Lord!
The icing on the cake was when almost the whole room started to speak in tongues, literally fr**ked the H*** out of me.
The guest of honor was some evangelist from U.S.A. who I could tell was also fr**ked out, I thought they were supposed to be acclimatized to that stuff!
@Joe_nyc
It could just as easily be Canadians care more about informing themselves. ;P
Let's not turn this into Canada versus US. I'm just saying there's a nice amount of Canadians, it's surprising.
Yes, Canadians seem to have lot more time on their hands.
Although the point is brought up that many Religious people would kill other people if they didn't believe in God while most atheists don't. Hence making atheists better people by religious people's own arguments. :P
“In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy and abortion in the prosperous democracies." Fun quote!
On another note, anybody else surprised with the ratio of Canadians to anybody else on this site? BBC, Epicurus, Achems Razor, young(I think) and myself are all Canadian.
:) I was answering with the same flavour that you my friend put fourth. Glad you see the idiocy in it. It's a two way street. See the wink at the end, it should have given away the exaggeration with what i had put fourth. Our discussion here appears to be going in circles, and quite pointless.
I'm from vancouver B.C.
@BBC its a sad sad life you must live if the only way you can see worth and value in humanity is if there is a god. that is very sad.
maybe if you grasped evolution you would appreciate how valuable all life is and you would have a better outlook. claiming the "intelligent" actions of human beings is natural selection shows you have no clue what evolution is. please. until you understand, keep the retarded comments to yourself. you are like someone making fun of Newton
"OHHH look everyone! Newton has this new THEORY he is calling Newton's law of universal gravitation where he states that every massive particle in the universe attracts every other massive particle with a force which is directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them! HA! we all know things stay on the ground because gods love holds them there!!"
or maybe like the church when it refused to admit that the earth revolved around the sun.
I cant believe in the year 2010, I would be arguing with a fellow canadian (you did say you were canadian right?) over evolution...we are in worse shape than I thought.
I suppose you think men also have one less rib than women since they were made from one of our ribs?!
lol, Epic is right, we all came from a monkey. Humans have no value, lets go kill them all. They were not naturally selected enough to defend themselves from our guns.
Lucky, man was made in the image of God, and all human life has value. I'd rather urge people too seek the invisible Creator of heaven and earth, than the invisible missing link.
PS. Unicorns might be the missing link to horses, so you should not make fun of them. ;)
lol there never was an adam and eve and a talking snake in the garden of eden. so there was no original sin. so the idea that man is evil and must be forgiven by a jew being crucified is just silly.
please guys grow up and stop arguing over the colour of the invisible unicorn you all believe.
If it was necessary to redeem humanity from the sin committed by adam ,God would have sent jesus as the son of adam and eve, who was to be crucified. So ,as cover all humans that were to come but he didn't. It clearly shows that this theory of jesus being the savior is absurd & illogical.
This death by crucifixion is very dramatic. I wonder if jesus was stabbed, hung, burned or clubbed to death would that have served the purpose.
Also, God would be worried about if he sent jesus early , he would not have humans to cook in hell to satiate his sadistic desire to torture.
It's mentioned in Muslim Jesus that they believe that Jesus avoided crucifixion or at least survived it --- and ah, yeah, that totally defeats the purpose of the Cross which was to pay for our sins before God. No Cross; no forgiveness for sins; it really is that simple.
@SMM
There is a a doco on this site - The muslim Jesus.
@mustafa
In this case I think they were more focusing on one possible outcome and not all. But I'm still surprised they didn't mention it if the story goes as you said. I'm unfamiliar with it.
@Mustafa,
If Jesus did not die on the cross, then no one has paid for our transgressions. And we are still dead in our sins. Allah is most merciful, and He did provide a Way for us to be forgiven. Jesus is the Way. He who has the Son, has life, he who does not have the Son does not have life. If He did not die, we are still dead in our sin. And no amount of Haj, prayer or fasting, will do anyone any good. Because punishment is still upon us. No matter how much good a man does, he still falls short of the glory of God.
Overy: Later. I'm rushing. 300 plus papers to grade, and Sunday materials to prepare for my speaking. Remind me next week.
@Epicurus
Your statement reminds me of when theist ask "What if your wrong?"
Well, if I'm wrong, it doesn't mean your right. In fact it means that there's a very high chance both of us are going to hell. Mathematically speaking, the chances are against you that you choose the right religion :P
as soon as someone tells you they believe we drilled holes into the ground and heard screaming from hell or that people are possessed by demons you should either ignore them or call a psychiatric hospital.
there is no way a rational sane healthy logical person would accept those things as fact. I just cant understand how people can be so absolutely clueless to reality.
why would christian people be so quick to believe their own silly stories but any other faith that claims something is put to skepticism? why create this double standard of evidence? if one is going to question the validity of another faith's claims, one should put their own faith under the same scrutiny. THE EXACT SAME.
@ Just say Grow:
do a study on the OT and find the word Kannabosm was misstranlated to CALMUS and you will find that the holy jew child-raping priests used KANNABOSM in the most holy anointing oil.
Further, always remember that the JEW is taught that the GOYIM is cattle and is ONLY fit for slaughter (GOYIM is all NON-Jews.) Learn that lesson, now, as the zionists seek control of the world in the same way as the poor uneducated and woefully delusional wonders in the deserts of the middle east want to do: run the world. But first, let's look at what the Zionist teach in ALL of the TEMPLES throughout the United States (my mom taught this bullshit so I KNOW!) This is what we need to wake up about:
"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001
"Our race is the Master Race. We Jews are divine gods on this planet. We are as different from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races are beasts and animals, cattlce at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." - Menachem Begin, Israeli Prime Minister to New Statesman magazine on June 25, 1982
Hope that clarifies for all you stupid GOYIM what the truth is.
(Not that I believe such rubish - but the pedophile rabbis believe it.)
Now, go find that dead fake jew on the cross and bury his as* - if he was real
It was proven to be a hoax guys cmon. Don't you ever look this stuff up? I for one immediately check the opposition once I start agreeing with something. Is questioning things the devils work?
You are all so deluded to think a god you pray to heals and does miracles. Go show me that god that heals a deserving amputee and I'll believe. But since god does not exist, that becomes pointless.
All religious people are deluded and those of us outside the delusion see your problem clearly: you believe in fairy tales and magic.
Funny, Funny! Videos, Religious people have to be the most gullible people in the world.
They actually believed The drilled into Hell urban legend!!
Ah, Joe! You're right about the "C R A P" word. My other comment's gone to the "Vladko" for moderation. Rats!
Joe: I really think it's a plausable story and could be true. Check it out if you like. Google "Sounds of Hell" or anything like that and I'm sure you can find it. If not interested, then don't. It's scary crap when you hear the recording and sounds like Hell to me! I wasn't there personally, so I don't know for 100% sure it's, but I already believe in Hell, so I'm an easy sell. Art Bell broadcasted it once even, on his program, so ya know it's gotta be true! ;-)
Just Google "drilled into hell"
Russia, drilled a hole in Siberia. Supposed to be fiction, looking at it now.
I guess there are a list of words that would put your posts in the moderation.......
Charles
“they accidentally drilled into Hell and could hear people screaming”
What is the meaning of this? If you believe this c r a p then I am flabbergasted beyond measure.
Charles B
“they accidentally drilled into Hell and could hear people screaming”
What is the meaning of this? If you believe this cr*p then I am flabbergasted beyond measure.
Sorry, Mary K. Baxter. Not "Mark" LOL.
Charles Overy: No Hell, eah? What do you think of the story where supposedly they accidentally drilled into Hell and could hear people screaming. They have an audiotape. I'm sure you can find it if you do a Google search.
Also, Have you heard of Mark K. Baxter? Do you think she made the whole thing up? Just curious.
You ask:
"Why is it Charles B that a man can not see god or be in the presence of god?"
Hum. Tricky question indeed. I would say that separation betwen God and man started with Adam's sin, and sin is the fundamental reason why mankind is still in a state of relative darkness until now. Later on, we shall see God face to Face in Heaven, but for now it's just "faith" to Face for whatever reason God has chosen.
But, in reality, we can enter God's presence even now in various degrees. Ironically, in fact, I recently wrote a song about that! Perhaps I'll share it with you guys is someone asks nicely. It's entitled "In Your Presence." Seriously.
Charles B- Even though we agree I am sure our reasons are probably different.
Onto your second statement then!
You speak of motive of the heart but nowhere do you mention anything of the mind that instructs the heart. There is no differnce in this matter. The heart is not what makes you feel, think, project, believe, have morals or ethics, and it surely doesn't speak of itself by itself. How is it then that god would look at the matters of the heart when it really is only subjected information that is controlled by your brain? The heart pumps blood throughout your body as the mechanism to provide nutrients to the body and rid the body of toxins such as CO2. That is the only thing it does. The brain though does everything else. Sends hormones where they need to go when they need to go there, provides learning, memory, neural tranmissions to understand what is going on with the body, the communication center for your motor skills and drives, and it also is the place that provides your morals and ethics. One of my biggest problems with religion is that it takes away the natural self of being human. In the persuit of perfectin and god like status we grow further and further from our true selves and what we really are and what we are suppose to do. It is natural for teens to want to start experimenting with sex. However, religions say that it is a sin and that it is unnatural to even desire such acts. Hormones tell us what our bodies want and need not a god or a religion. This stripping of our natural selves is detramental to our existence. Are you aware that in the 18th century the Catholic Church used its influence to attribute childrens unusual or disturbing behavior to thier inherently uncivilized and provocative nature. In fact, during this period nonreligious explanations for disordered behaviors in children were rarely given serious consideration because possession by the devil and similar entities was the only explanation anyone needed. Many children were subjected to harsh treatment or indifference by thier parents and society if they acted inappropriately. Cruel acts ranging from extreme parental and societal indifferences and neglect to physical and sexual abuse of children went unnoticed pr were considered and adults right for educating or disciplining a child. This was also in consideratin with what the "church" deemed as sinful behavior.
As for hell and satan go, I would really love to see actual proof of either. In all my research that I have done on religion I am very confident and comfortable in saying that there is no satan nor a hell. That they are man made ideas that have been submitted to societies for control throughout human history and all religions. Every religion has the same subject matter and once again here we are at the ecliptic idea.
Why is it Charles B that a man can not see god or be in the presence of god?
Jusus May the lord's peace and blessing be upon him,was no more than a prophet,a humain who recieved the gospel from God to bring humains of that period from darkness to light.
Jesus is not dead,he is in the heavens,and Godwilling he will come back and its only then,that the ones who have being trying to convince themselves of lies,get so decieved because they were telling lies,and creating things that have nothing to do with the truth,,repent people and worship only one God,the lord of the heavens and the earths,who has no son,no partner and he is the most gracious the most merciful.
Mr. Overy: Wow! We agree on something!
@Ed - it matters.
I care.
who cares
@Charles B
No I did not mean the change of Christianity. I meant on humans, civilization, society, etc...
If I were to use SMM's statement:"“Only a fool would believe that the first answer he found was the correct and only answer”, it would sum up some of my conjective thoughts about what you wrote. However, that maybe unfair considering that I know that you answer only through your convictions to your belief in your religion.This is why I am having such a hard time responding to your statement. It made me quite angry. Not because of what your intentions were of what you stated but because of what you did state and the level of ignorance that I found in it. Allow me to explain before you get to offended by that.
Your theory of a God vaccum in the hearts of man being the reason there is religion world wide is aboslutely one of the most circular logical ideas I have ever heard. There is no sound proof to this idea or theory at all. So I will tell what there is absolute proof of.
Religion begun with the studign of the heavens...astrology. That was the beginning and the first of any religious form on earth. That lead to sun worship, which then lead to religions that explained the multitude of phenomenons that occured on earth that man could not explain. Religion sthat acquire multiple gods. Gods for the winds, fire, earth, lightning, clouds, rain, snow, and the list continues on and on. Those religions then lead to the personifications and eliberate story gods...Greek mythology and Egyptian religion. From those religions came the religions that became monolythic. However, even the monolythic religions are nothing more than the same stories of all those other religions before them. We know this because they have the same theories, philosophies, and purposeful ideas. The only difference is the characters have changed but they still represent the same. One perfect example of this is the story of Gilgamesh. It predates the story of Noah by at least 1200 years.
What makes you think that God gave us spirituality? What makes you so sure that we even have spirituality? What is it that would even give us the notion of having spirituality? The one and probably the most truthful answer to that is our consciousness. Without it would we be able to even determine that reality exists? I think not.
Since christianity came from judiasm, allow me to tell you a few facts that you obviously do not know. In the Judiasm texts Satan is not an evil doer that does work outside of what God tells him to do. This is even in your bible in the book of Job. However, almost all "truthful" dictionaries define Satan as the tempter of mankind for God. In other words he works for god to tempt mankind and by Gods permission he does so. Now the difference between the two religions is that you are right the religion had to grow and by doing so the story of Satan has been changed to fit certain aspects of superstitions. For he is the scapegoat to all that is evil in the world and the ultimate reason why mankind does the evil that he does. The biggest contradictions in the bible and the Christian religion is this idea. It completely takes the responsibility of the wrong doing of mankind away from him and focuses as a choice we choose to do because Satan has cursed us with it. I could on about this part of this conversation but I have already stated what I would state to you before and you still haven't even answered that.
Anyway that is a good start for now and I will respond to your second statement tomorrow.
@Jari
I do not respect the ridiculous notions of god presented throughout history.
But I do respect ones right to believe whatever they want.
Imagine you were a psychiatrist in a mental hospital and you treated your delusional patients with a complete lack of respect and mocked what they truly believed was reality. How do you ever expect these people to respect you, how do you expect to help them if you show them a complete lack of respect? How do you expect to cure them?
I do not know why anybody's unprovable belief deserves any shred of respect. I do not respect anyone's belief as long as they do not provide a concrete evidence.
I mock every god because I believe that they've all been created by man and they are really not cool! If that is an offence, then let your gods speak for themselves. We have self-appointed god representatives here who feel butt-hurt when their gods are insulted. But they have no shame in calling each others' gods "false". Hypocrites! Eat my shorts!
Your god and your belief in him does not gain any respect from me as long as he remains invisible, inconsistent, and useless.
I especially have no respect for the Judeo-Christian god... even if he existed. His values do not agree with my values. And if I end up in hellfire for disagreeing with him, so be it. Meanwhile, his representatives on earth should stop seeking any respect for their precious beliefs because we know that it is this respect that is giving faith to intimidate others.
Ah, that good old archaic mantra. " I know God therefore I am right". Or is it " I am right therefore I know God".
Young: Ok. Appology accepted. I have two comments "in moderation" of which one is for you, but it's not overy rude I don't think. Not sure why that one got snagged, but the other has a link. I'll look up your link after church tomorrow. Thanks for the post.
Peace.
SMMonkey: I have a post for you that's waiting moderation. Check back later. Hopefully it will pass the Vlatko moderation process. I couldn't find the same testimony I listened to before, but I found one from Don Piper that is even better!
Peace.
Young: Why don't you watch the link (both video and text) I'm going to give SMmonkey in the next post. I'd like you to explain Don Piper's "reality" of death and resurrection. I would argue quite stringently that you are the one with the deficient view of reality. It breaks my heart to read your posts.
SMMonkey: Sorry, but I can't immediately find the same link to the testimony I read before (maybe later next week), but I found this testimony by Don Piper. Dead for 90 minutes, mangled, and obviously bleed out from his accident, God resurrected him through the prayers of the Christians obedient to God who asked them to praying for him. Mock if you want to, but realize Who you mock first.
Here's a cut and paste so I don't get the "facts" wrong in your opinion:
While Don stood at the gates of heaven, [after an auto accident that remained DEAD for 90 minutes] pastor Dick Onerecker of Kline, Texas, stood on a Texas highway by Don's lifeless body. He had also attended the pastor's conference. He came upon the accident moments after it happened. The EMS personnel had told him that Don was dead.
"It was as though I was compelled to stop and to pray for him. The Lord had just impressed on me very emphatically, very urgently that I was to pray for him," says Dick. "I walked over by the door. There was great physical damage on the outside. I laid my hands on him and began to pray for him."
As soon as Don's journey began, it ended. Don found himself back in his crushed vehicle, staring up at a tarp that had been thrown over him by medical attendants.
Says Don, "The first conscious memory was 'What a Friend we have in Jesus.' I was singing. I was thinking to myself, Why am I singing this song? I'm in the dark, and I knew it was about noon time when the accident happened. I'm in the dark, I'm singing, and I'm holding a hand. I'm thinking to myself, What on earth is happening?"
Charles B.
@Charles
"Only a fool would keep on looking when he’s found the answer."
That's not true at all. It is arrogant to assume that the first answer you find is the correct one. It is why scientific theories have so much weight, because once answers are found they can always be overturned.
To rephrase your sentence:
"Only a fool would believe that the first answer he found was the correct and only answer"
so the reason you believe the bible is credible is because you felt god in your heart and you knew right away it was the christian god. and it had nothing to do with any outside influence?
this is just more proof that you lack a firm grip on reality.
I would argue that people of all faiths throughout all of history have made the same claim as you and even more CERTAIN than you (blowing themselves up for it)....why would i believe you over them? why would YOU believe that what you think you felt is god? how do you know it wasnt a demon trying to trick you away from the actual god?
you have not answered a single thing. just made more baseless assertions.
okay fine im not god you got me...but i can fly...only when people arent looking...now explain to me why when i say that you are skeptical but when someone tells you demons were in their body you believe them?????
and Charles just so theirs no confusion, it doesn't surprise me that your teachers would say such things about you because judging from your comments throughout this site you are a very polite, nice and respectful person. But it's not your moral character that I am questioning. It's your perception of reality. The end does not justify the means in my opinion.
@Charles B
I said that you are like Manson on the loony level not in terms of motivation. I don't feel this way about 99% of those I have met that believe in a god. Respect must be earned, even so, I still give unconditional respect to those I don't know until they prove they are not worthy of it, which is what you have done.
BBC: That link about the healing testimony was actually for you and not SSM. Do you know who Smith Wigglesworth was? He had a ministry of healing and praying for those that had died and quite a few were resurrected. When asked by a mocker, "Smith, when you pray for someone and they don't come back to life, then what do you do?!?" Smith calmly replied, "I step over them and pray for the next one." ;-)
If I can, I intent to scale back here for a few days giving my opinion as it seems to be making a backlash for all Christians, yourself included.
Epicurus: You asked BBC "why do you accept the bible as a credible source to argue your point from?" If I may answer for BBC, I will at least give you my reason for faith in the Bible and in Christianity above all others. I believe there is a true God; one God; THE God. When He spoke to my heart to believe, I didn't harden my heart, but I answered Him. Why need I sort through all the smuck and muck of false religion when I've already found the One true God, and His means of communicating to us, the Bible? Only a fool would keep on looking when he's found the answer.
To those, like me, with a heart that is willing to listen, I use the Bible. That is why.
Epicurus: Also, I LEARN from other people. You are not God and may God have mercy in your mocking soul.
Young: That was evil of you to say about me. Even if I address issues, I rarely call someone personally horrible names. Manson was a self-indulging manipulating murder at heart. Obviously you have no discernment whatsoever. I have no respect for your comments any more either. Absolute zero now. I have lots of friends and not all of them are Christian. Just yesterday my co-teacher told me that the other teachers really like me because I'm polite, friendly, open, and bow slightly when I greet them in the hallway unlike the other "foreign" teacher.
SMMonky: I can link you the near-death testimony I was talking about later. I was stating it as I remembered it. Your stat doesn't make a lot of sense, either. If a car crash of 7 people happens, then seven people instantly enter into eternity. An war can take thousands in just a few days. An earthquake, tens of thousands in just a few seconds. I'll link you the testimony later so you can read it right from the original source without my filter, if I can find it again on-line.
Secondly, God's righteous judgments cannot be compared with Satan's wicked intentions. You need to use a little God-given wisdom before you make such accusations.
Lastly, The other post cleared moderation, so you can read about my mother's experiences now in case you missed it.
Joe: I do know God! That is the whole purpose of God's creation of mankind, for fellowship. It will be an eternal learning process for us as we understand deeper and deeper His love and character. Sorry that you don't.
Charles B- I will respond to your comment as soon as I find a way to say so that it is so harsh.
@BBC
It was that last statement in particular. I have friends who believe loosely, some who follow closely, and some who are born again, but that just seemed nuts. Literally nuts. Lost all credibility. If I believe in UFO's and someone tells me this magical story of them being abducted I probably wouldn't believe them, I especially wouldn't cite their story as proof of their existence.
@ Epicurus - almost quoted it exactly
If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. – Bertrand Russell
what strikes me as odd is that all of charles odd stories begin with, "someone told me" or "i know someone who did this"....listen charles. I am a god. I am the only god. I made the universe and I created all religions to test my creation to see if it is bright enough to figure out they were all wrong.
why dont you believe me?
what if i told you i can fly? what if i told you that i went to another galaxy last night in a spaceship that came and picked me up?
what if someone told you they died and say the hindu god or they died and saw nothing?
you create a double standard of evidence. anything that confirms your belief you accept without question. anything that doesnt toe the line of your belief is scrutinized as it should be. but you create a double standard.
@BBC why do you accept the bible as a credible source to argue your point from? you couldnt use it in court, you cant use it in a history paper. so why do you think you can use it when arguing your point for your god? do you think if a muslim wanted to convince you that using the quran would work? a quote from the quran? NO because you not believing in their god goes hand in hand with not trusting their book as credible information.....same goes for the bible. not credible sir, and not a good thing to argue from.
I've got to agree with Epicurus, Joe_nyc and young here. You seem to be quite disconnected from reality.
I'd like to point out that your description of Satan (lie, destroy, kill) is rather accurate for God too. "The apple will kill you", the flood, waaaaay too many examples.
And only about 2 people die per second worldwide according to the US census among other sources. So I don't see how "thousands" of people are 2.5 percent of that. In fact, if 1000 people was 2.5 percent of how many people died a second then many times the human population would die every hour:P
@Overy,
Re: Ecliptic religion.
The style of the OT writers was heavily influenced by the culture they kept. Babylon, Canaan, etc. There is a story in Daniel about God coming on the clouds of heaven. There are other Ancient Near East stories of their gods coming this way. It's possible that the author is writing in a style that would be understood by his audience, since that is their culture. However, the God of the OT is always differentiating Himself from other gods. Basically there is no real God, besides Him. Authors write to reach an audience. Know the audience, and then understand the writing.
@Joe,
Jesus says, "Now this is eternal life: that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent" (John 17:3).
When Charles is saying that "it is impossible to know God", I think he is not meaning it the way you interpret it. For example, if a person knows science, and looks at how the universe began. We can look at Hubble's work at how the universe is expanding. We know the universe is expanding. Rewind the film and we get the Big Bang. No one can say they know how, why, or what was before.
In the same way, Jesus came that we may know God. Knowing Him is knowing God. Jesus says, "If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him" (John 14:7). But really God is so big that it is impossible to entirely grasp Him. We can know Him in part now, we shall know Him in full when we are with Him for eternity.
@Joe,
Man experienced God, and wrote down these experiences in the Bible. When we know a majority of the Bible, we can have a glimpse into how, and who God is.
@Young,
I am curious why you feel that way about Charles? Because i am sure you feel the same way about me. However, i have many friends. They all spend quite alot of time with me. And they do not believe in God.
Why do you not respect him? Please be honest.
Thanks
I agree. I'd hate to be disrespectful but any unconditional respect I give to people before I get to know them you have just lost. I'd put you up there with Charles Manson on the loony level. Any person on the fence when it comes to religion would surely be pushed towards atheism after a conversation with you.
For someone who admits it's impossible to know God you sure do seem to know a heck of alot how God thinks.
.....and you actually believe everything you just typed....and you have children. scary.
(Part one is awaiting moderation as I used a variant of a cuss word in it) LOL! Thought that might happen. ;-)
Question 2: Where did I get my information about Satanism from? I read a book by a former Satanist, and that is what she said in her book that women in Satanism were of a higher level than the men. I took the statement for face value.
Thought 3: You're right. Your last thought was a bit hard to understand. I think you mean: What has been the force for change in Christianity? Who is to say who is the "correct" group within the percentage of those who call themselves Christians? Hum. Let me give you my "heart's desire" theory of salvation.
God doesn't want cookie-cutter Christians. If I've even learned one new thing about God that I didn't know yesterday, then I'm different in at least knowledge than from the day before. Was I not "saved" yesterday? No; just less educated yesterday. God looks at the motive of the heart and when the motive of the heart is to please Him and honor Him and to love Him and to believe in Him, and most importantly, you have accepted Jesus as the payment for your sins by faith along with the others, then you're safely within His love as a "Christian" believer.
Christianity can adapt and change and grow, but the heart's focus must always remain pure, and the only truly unmuteable element of Christianity is Christ's death and Resurrection for our sins. All the other aspects are potentially "fudgeable" unless they are outright sin or compromise.
I forgot who asked the question, but "Yes," most people will go to Hell, sadly. That's even mentioned in the Bible itself as what will happen.
On a side note, I listened to a testimony of a man that was killed (and came back to life). In that time when he was clinically dead, he started to go to Heaven. He was overjoyed to see how many people every second were also joining him in that direction (thousands in fact). He was then told it was only a fraction of the people that had just died and it figured out to be only 2.5% of the population that had just died at that time. The percentabe remaind costant second by second.
Now I understand we cannot put a person's experience on par with Scripture, but he was saddened that so few people were actually making Heaven worldwide. 2.5% is a lot less than even the professing Christians, so if he understood correctly and was telling the truth and had a genuine experience, then that's quite sad. :-(
In conclusion:
God is not mocked, for without true holiness, no man shall see the Lord; without Jesus Christ, no man has true holiness. It really is that simple.
Peace.
Mr. Overy: There is a God-shaped vacuum in the heart of every man and that is why religion is world-wide. There is no place on earth where everyone is atheistic and have always been that way. God has made mankind to be inherently spiritual.
Combine this natural spiritual tendency with a real God and a real Devil (Satan, who's sole purpose is to lie, kill, and destroy), it's no wonder there are similarities with religions world-wide. It would be more shocking if there were absolutely none. Just because there is a multitude of diabolical confusion world-wide does not mean that Christianity is part of that haze of deception. Christianity is not ecliptic of other religions by your definition, as this was God's doing from the beginning. However, there is a lot of syncritism now and mixing Christianity with other religions is a recipe for disaster. Bastardized Christianity is indeed a big problem worldwide and we need to work against that for sure with education and literacy so people can read the Word of God for themselves.
There has to be a "real" in order for there to be a false. Even you believe that the soul goes on (as energy cannot ever end but just changes form). I read that in your post on another thread. What do you base that on if not from the Bible? Mere science?
@BBC
I suppose you have a point that people can justify their actions. It is hard to be angry at yourself. I see it as a safety switch. However if you as a person have average moral standards it will be hard for yourself to justify murder, rape or a criminal deed. Circumstances have to be extreme for a person to be pushed to that level. But when it comes to church this forgiveness is even more flawed. Now if you go to confession and tell all about your sin you have nothing to worry about, all is forgiven. Imagine that. Get out of hell free card anytime and for anything. What was one of the thorns in the heal of the reformation movement? It was priests selling forgiveness for your sins. Dubious morals indeed.
I think it should be a conscious decision on part of every individual to try and better their lives. Be good in general (not cause harm and misfortune to others). We are human so we make mistakes. Sometimes we do bad things. Important is to realize when that happens, learn from experience. I call it personal growth. We usually make biggest steps in this direction when it becomes apparent that the way we live makes us miserable. So we change. Usually in extremes for awhile than find middle ground that suits us. So in a way it was this need for change that pushed you in to religion. It is at those moments when we are weak that we can fall pray to religion and the like. However it doesnt mean that what you belive is correct. It just helped you through difficult times in your life.
@Luke,
I have the same answer as Charles to your question.
@Charles,
I know 100% there is no mention of the Trinity in the Bible. I also know 100% that God says He is One. However, i also know that Jesus existed with God, and that nothing that has been created was created without Jesus. I know the Spirit is His Spirit, and He is personified, He is not an active force. I know that all three are part of salvation. I know that Jesus is worshiped in Revelation, and that God says we shall have no gods before Him. If Jesus is being worshiped then they must be the same God.
Can i explain this logically? No. I can not explain string theory either. Some things a finite mind can not comprehend.
@Hesus,
If people are honest with themselves, they will find themselves justifying some of the things they do. They do this in their mind. The reason they justify their actions before themselves (not judges, or friends, or anyone around them), is because they know they are wrong. They justify their actions or lack of action to make themselves feel better and relieve their convictions.
My life is well adjusted now. 5 years ago, not so much. Jesus changed me from the inside out. I am happier then i have ever been. I've made millions, and lived life very well and had everything i ever wanted. But, something was always lacking. 5 years ago, i realized what that was. Jesus.
@SMM,
"What’s scary is that there are a bunch of people who instead of being decent and moral by their own volition only do it because of a big imaginary person in the sky"
The majority of those people are not moral or decent. Being good out of fear is not true belief. And doing good because they are forced is not good at all. True Goodness is selfless. True selflessness comes from an inner change, when another person encounters true selflessness (LOVE).
Charles B- No that is not what ecliptic means. The bible, old and new testament, are stories that existed in other cultures and other religions that predated them. This is what ecliptic means. All religions are ecliptic to one another because they all have the same framework, the same myths, the ideas, the philosophies, the same
type of monolythic god and the list continues. You can actually view this right in the bible yourself. In the Old Testament there is Joseph who carries around the same characteristics as the New Teastament Jesus. Extremely interesting.
However, I found that the bible is nothing more than the same as astrology and other forms of what you would call pagan religions. Just look at the symbolism that is involved in the religion and the churches.
Also I find it interesting how therre are so many different denominations of the religion itself. To me this shows how that religion of itself is based on false intentions. This is because it gives you the power to decide what to believe and not to believe as it fits for your belief system.
Most can't even understand this next point so I hope that you do at least a little bit. If not let me know and I will try explain it differently. Here goes: When you give the masses a tool or a list of instructions how many in those masses do you think can follow the instructions perfectly? Lets say the masses are 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, and 1,000 seperately. If in all these seperate masses all they had to do is agree with one another and follow these instructions, how many of these groups do you think would actually be able to do that? Now lets say that several of these groups follow these instructions differently. What do you think would make them follow the instructions differently, even though they believe they read them correctly? What acting force continues to change our belief systems today? What force is the only force that has ever acted on man?
@mk:
I know what Jesus is for the Muslims, thanks for breaking out such a big news.
What I meant is that if Jesus' credibility is because of the number of his followers as you mentioned, then Mohammad is as credible and so are the Hindu gods.
You have no problem with people going for Mohammad? Doesn't it bother you that according to your religion, 1.2billion of them living today are going straight to hell for not accepting Jesus as the son of god? Every non-Christian today(5billion) is doomed for hell for knowingly or unknowingly rejecting Jesus as their savior. How wrong is that?
Remember that others are dead sure about their religion as much as you are. You are going to their hell for all they care. You can't prove them wrong because once you've thrown logical thinking out of the window comes in "faith" and every one is "right".
@Luke: I agree with some points, I disagree with others. I might be able to post my ideas sometime this weekend :-)
What's scary is that there are a bunch of people who instead of being decent and moral by their own volition only do it because of a big imaginary person in the sky :P
@ Luke
"Maybe that is why in europe and even america church attendance and practising christians have declined gradually as living standards got better."
I would say this is a minor influence compared to secular education. It is through knowledge that people began to question ages old dogmas.
Also I doubt that wars would erupt all over if religion disappeared. Unless those who had faith would interpret that without god there are no rules. But that would really be a problem only in lawless countries. We have so many rules imposed by our secular society we don´t really need the ten commandments to keep us in-check.
@BBC
"We are all ill-moralled people, if the punishment of sin is death? Then we are all doomed. Especially if Jesus’ death and resurrection is not true. Because He paid the price for our wickedness, and He lives, just as those who believe in Him have hope that one day they will live with Him face to face."
You take life too seriously. Why are we all ill-moralled? Why can´t you accept yourself as you are and project this image on everyone else. I for one consider myself a good person although not politically correct but that is besides the point. I mean you can´t be a well adjusted person if you think we are all sinners the moment we are born...
LOL @ charles attempt to explain satanism. that was funny. where did you get that charles? your backside?
you said "Satanism is controlled by women. They are of higher level then the men. High ranking Satanist women hold gold captors, while their male counter parts have silver."
care to let me know where you came across this drivel? and could you tell me who founded satanism?
and luke i dont think anyone in the past 50 years has done as much for the progression of rational empirical thinking than Richard Dawkins. people can hate him all they want but there is a reason he is so highly regarded in the academic world.
@Luke Wilson
Dawkins and people like him are not helping religion at all. Keep in mind the main way religion gets new followers is by brainwashing children, simple as that. By spreading the idea that it is okay not to believe they hope to reach those people. It does have averse effects, sure, but overall it's a good movement.
And I highly down the end of religion would cause war. Religion is a vessel in which archaic principals live on to the future. Atheists in general are nice people (stats on jails and crime and what have you).
In fact, if there is no god then the good as well as the bad ideals in the bible were manmade. As those bad ones are obviously no longer held in this day and age while the good ones are still praised it'd be foolish to believe that they'd disappear with religion.
Long story short: Religion is a terrible thing and the world will be a much better place once it is gone.
@ Hardy.
I personally dont know what would happen if there was absolutely no organised religion whatsoever in this world. I think they'd be competing elements that might determine the final outcome. One is that humanbeings through science alone and nothing else will somehow manage to bring up there living standards for everyone across the population in the whole world that there would be no need to rebel or fight for resources or freedom or humanrights (a naive view in my opinion). A utopian sort of view. The other is that due to the finite resources in this world and peoples infinite material wants, it is inevitable that once the shuckles that restrain the majority of the planet are removed then chaos will ensue and God only knows what the final outcome will be....
My personal opinion of it is that there would be a huge fight between the haves and have-nots... Whoever wins that fight will get to be the one that determines the future of humanity - think the french revolution...
Consider this for a second. If atheists did not attack religion... surely it would only be natural that religion would get faced-out and die in the west as people got richer and better off and in-pursuit of better socio-economic standards. Religion would gradually die almost naturally. Maybe that is why in europe and even america church attendance and practising christians have declined gradually as living standards got better. People just stop caring about this God and the Bible and ironically where else on this world do you get people shouting the loudest about there rights and freedoms(Europe and America). However, by attacking them(the last remaining religees in these places), all of a sudden, you force them to re-unite and start recruiting with more vigour and give this dying beast a new-lease of life... Richard Dawkins might be the biggest religious nut-case going cos by what he is doing, he is not only ensuring religion doesnt die, he is bringing all the fundamentalists out of the woodwork and into the foreground... THAT IS WHAT I THINK! The rich and educated dont want religion to die, why would they? They'd be nuts to want that to happen!! By attacking it, they ensure it lives on, and better yet, not defended by them(the rich and well-off) but by the very people who are held back by it! IRONIC! Deception at its grandest! Does anyone think George W. Bush is a christian in the true sense of the word?? EHH!! Wrong!! A classic example of how a rich well off person used religion to get what he wanted!! Who suffers??? DOES HE SUFFER? Ehh!! WRONG!!! You are the one that will end up paying the price!!!
Excuse me but am just gonna go right ahead and say it, I wouldnt be surprised if Dawkins somehow gets paid by the Vatican itself. He's doing them a great favour and service!
Again just what I think. Might all be soooooo very wrong!
A funny thing happened today. I enjoy to play video games every once in a while, and while playing a real-time strategy game I had an uproar in my capital city because of low taxes for the nobility and high taxes for the peasants (the peasants didn't like it). As a solution, I built churches and the peasants suddenly ignored their money-problems and were happy again.
Sorry for the OT, but I really had to chuckle at that...
But what I actually wanted to ask @ Luke Wilson:
I agree with the point you made, but how do you see this hypothetical "no-religion" situation in terms of it's outcome? Would it be good or bad for humanity as a whole? Just interested in your opinion, that's why I'm asking.
Joe: P.S. I don't view myself as a polytheist, but as a monotheist. The term "Son of God" is a bit of a mystery, as before the incarnation, He wasn't the "son" as I understand it, but the second Person of the Trinity. He became "the son" for the purpose of the redemption of mankind. It sounds like contradictory terms, and the paradox is very hard to explain, so we just have to take it by faith that it is so until the time we see things fully.
BBC: Do you have any thoughts on the subject of the Trinity? How would you explain it, provided you also hold a similar view of the Godhead.
Grace.
sexmoneymonkey: The comment is still under moderation, but I think it will pass (it's not rude, as far as I can tell) it just has a link in it. I'll check tomorrow.
Luke: You're smart in an odd sort of way. I'm comming down with a sore throat and I have plans all day tomorrow, so I'll make this short and try to get back to you if I can.
Before Jesus was "incarnated" in Mary's womb, He eternally existed as part of the unmutable and unchangeable Triune Godhead. Read the first chapter of St. John: "In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. . . the Word became flesh (Jesus) and dwelt among us." He wasn't known as "Jesus" until his incarnation. It wasn't a conception where the child or entitiy begins at conception, but an incarnation.
Anyway, nice try. No demi god as you would have us consider; Jesus was and is still fully divine. :-)
Joe: Your thought process is hard to understand, but I think you're trying to say that since "Jesus" wasn't specifically mentioned in the O.T. prophecies, it wasn't about Him. Correct? Much of what Isaiah prophesied hasn't even happened yet. It takes a lot of wisdom to discern what each passage is about, but a few passages are known to be about the "Messiah" specifically and those passages were fulfilled by Jesus who was the Christ (or will be fulfilled in the future). The name "Jesus" means "savior" so the name is not totally unexpected for the true Messiah.
Good night all.
Religion was invented so the poor people would not kill the rich!
In my opinion the aim of religion is not to get anyone closer to any God or anything like that. The aim of religion is to give people false unprovable hope in a world where there is almost none for those of us that are unlucky to get born on the wrong side of the fence(that is why the stories of the bible are filled with ppl that suffered that somehow through there belief in God overcame there suffering). The side where poverty, death and suffering are an everyday occurance. They need something to give them hope and make there life somehow not feel worthless and that I believe is what religion is there for. So in my opinion religion was probably an invention by some rich clever person somewhere who noticed how gullable and easily manipulated such people are. Ontop of that I think it is a method of ultimate control over the human mind of its victim. See the truth for what it is!!
Can you imagine if religion did not exist, there would be an uproar on this planet, people would demand equal rights - not only on paper but in real life, people would not fight by the rules for there will be no fear of hell or any kind of damnation for that matter beyond this life. The poor the oppressed, they would not waste there time in church praying for a better tommorrow, no sir, they would be doing everything in there power, good or bad to get on an equal footing with the so called elites of this planet.. So in conclusion I disagree with the people that say without religion there would be less wars, I think its the opposite, I think there would be more wars - is it any wonder why kings and emperors of old attached themselves to God - giving themselves such titles as divine rulers?? why?? Because no one would dare challenge them... Just my Opinion before anyone out there decides to bite my head off. Feel free to disagree and state your reasons.
This again I think is the reason why jews and muslims reject the idea of jesus as the son of God. Why? Because it is a contradiction to the very definition of your religion which is a monotheistic religion. You will almost 100% deny this charles B and any other christian person out there. And I would like to hypothesis that the reason for you denying this is not that I might be wrong or am wrong or whatever, the reason is that you have been brought up to deny and reject or not even question any facet of your religion and accept all that you are told without question or else you risk eternal damnation. I would also like to hypothesis that religion is one of the only institutions that has reached dictatorial nirvana in this planet. No where else would you see an oppressed people so happy to be oppressed and sooo willing to defend there own oppression! Do not kidd urself if this was a con-movie, you sir would have been the mark that got conned big-time! Deep down you know it you can try and deny it a million different ways but you can not change the facts.. Your religion is fundamentally flawed and the Bible is no word of God.
@ Charles B and any other christian person out there that would care to answer: Would you agree that Jesus was a demi-god? - Think carefully before you answer, the defination of a demi-god is someone with 1 parent that is human and 1 that is a god. Jesus' mother was human and his father was God - it doesnt matter the method of conception, his dad was still GOD not joseph or any mortal man! It also follows that a demi-god is mortal unlike a God atleast while he lives on this planet and also that he has superior abilities to that of a man, and jesus had superior abilities. So we can clearly see he was a demi-god. No?
So when priests say Jesus was a man, they are clearly lying or half-lying. He wasnt only a man, no man could perform miracles like he did, no man could do what he did.. They forget the part where he was a god aswell. Abit like blade, a hybrid half man-half god. So how can christianity be monotheistic when there was more than 1 god? Or by monotheism do you just mean the worship of one god but not the existance of one god? Or do you mean every other god or demi-god or whatever has to be somehow related to this 1 superior God by blood if you like eg a son of his???
@Charles is that message with a part aimed at me still under moderation? I haven't seen it yet.
Either way you seem very happy about your faith and I'm happy for you. Just, as I've mentioned before, don't push your faith because there is no evidence that it is true. In fact, it is probably false.
@BBC Sorry for addressing that comment to Isabella, it was meant to be addressed at you as you assumed correctly.
DNA is the blueprint of every form of life out there. It has been mapped to a scary degree and small changes in it cause small changes in the creature some of them positive others negative. Your DNA is slightly different than your parents and grandparents but you'd have to go back many-many generations before you'd be unable to breed with them.
@In General
The problem I have with faith is that people believe something simply because they were told it from a young age or they experienced something improbable and seemingly fantastic. Christs teachings were great and all, the bibles much less so, but he was human and whether he got his ideas from himself, a human, or from buddhism, started by another human, they did come about by natural means. So how can you say that religion gives mankind morality when it's morality we came up with in the first place?
If we all believed in Religion blindly then mortality rates would shoot up. Science cures diseases. Evolutionary science has come up with new ways to treat HIV which seem to be working. A lot of the practical means that we stay alive and enjoy life are based on these principals that religion can not explain or is contradicted by.
Charles
On a monotheistic religion you just cannot have multi gods. There cannot be a Son of God or Demi-God or whatever. I know this concept goes against everything you believe in but, really, think about it.
Charels, then isn't it obvious that Isaiah wasn't talking about Jesus. Basically, aren't you are taking a guess? And it's not even a good guess because Book of Isaiah is talking about the fate of Israel and it's neighbouring nations. There is no mention of Son of God. Let's suppose God is giving prophetic visions to Isaiah don't you think, if He intended, His Son will on top of the lists? Why would He just slip that in without a proper name? Again, you and your brothers are misinterpreting the Bible.
Question: Did Jesus Die?
Answer: Yes he did.
Discussion: Over!
Sparrow: Sorry I meant "phrase" not "pharse"! LOL! Mix up two letters when you're typing quickly and boy it can change the meaning of a statement, can't it?!? ;-) How embarrassin. Usually when I mix up my letters it doesn't have such a bad meaning when I re-read it back!
Sparrow: That's too bad; I do so love your penname; it reminds me of the pharse Jesus used that not even a sparrow falls to the groud without His knowledge of it's loss. :-) Sparrows always reminds me of God's grace and care; I do so like them very much.
Joe: The name "Jesus" is not used in the Old Testament. You won't find it if you look! LOL. :-) Isaiah 53 is a "Messianic" passage and shows that the crucifixion was known to God centuries before Jesus had to endure it. Other passages take about the Messiah in more vailed ways. That is why some scholars can spend their whole lives reading and studing the Bible and yet never know it all.
Peace.
Charles, I don't remember OT mentioning Jesus. I'll check it out.
sorry charles b. i believe in the historical christ but he is not divine. i believe in christian principles as well as buddhist, confucian, socratic, gandhian or whatever contributes to justice and peace. i have to say to you too that "our very own 'humanity' depends on being able to discern truth from fiction and truth from lies. dig deeper."
BBC: I sent you a comment with a link, but it's awaiting "moderation." Look for it later if it gets buried in the comments. It's about a healing miracle.
Sexmoneymonkey: There's a comment for you too on that one.
Peace!
Sparrow: Jesus didn't die in Kashmir as this documentary says He did. Christianity is based on the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christ's death was the essential non-negotiable payment for mankind's sins; no death, no payment in full for our sins. It was His stated purpose in many places in the New Testament and even in Old Testament passages like Isaiah chapter 53.
I believe in a real God and a real Satan. If Satan couldn't stop Jesus from paying for our sins on the Cross, then he lies and says that Jesus survived the Cross, thus nullifying all of Christianity by removing the purpose of the Cross. Don't be fooled by diabolical (literally) lies. Our very souls depend on being able to discern truth from fiction and truth from lies. Dig deeper.
Peace.
Mr. Charles Overy: You said: "How is any religion [Christianity] that is ecliptic to other religions the only one that is truthful?"
I assume by your word "ecliptic" religion, you mean a later religion that says all religions that preceded it are now made void. Correct?
Well, I would argue that Christianity is not "ecliptic" and it's the very God-intended development and conclusion of God's eternal plan for mankind.
Adam had a perfect relationship with God; or a state of "perfect religion", if you please. After his sin, that relationship with God was broken. God reestablished contact with mankind again giving regulations on how to relate to Him now that perfect fellowship had been broken by Adam's sin. He did this through speaking to the prophets or even to individuals personally. However, this regulation period is vague as it seems that Abel and Cain both had some direct contact with God in the Book of Genesis, as did Enoch and Noah.
Much later, the revelation of God's will was recorded by Moses in his writings, and expanded upon by prophets for the Old Testament writings (Judaism). Ultimately, in fulfillment with Old Testament prophecies starting directly from the Garden of Eden given by God Himself when He cursed Adam and Eve, Jesus Christ fulfilled many those prophecies and expanded our knowledge and understanding about many others.
Now that we have a completed work of Christ, we have the set standard by which we can know God: The Holy Bible (inclusive or exclusive of a few manuscripts in question).
I see an unbroken continuity of faith and "true religion" from the dawn of man until now, and not an "eclipse" of a former one. From the beginning of mankind until now, it's been the rule of God's love and the authority of His word that we rely on. Very simple.
If by chance you think that other "older" religions were before Judaism Proper, then I would argue that none were before Adam and Eve's time and many errant beliefs can offshoot from truth in just years, so there is no surprise that "Pagan" beliefs abounded from time to time before the Word of God was standardized. In fact, all that idolatry is why God judged the Israelites in the past, and should we ourselves become errant to the point of negating Jesus' role in Christianity today (like the lovely doc does), then there is no guarantee that we too will not be swept away with history as an errant religion.
"History" is "HIS story". It's all about Jesus, and Jesus' life, teachings, and death and resurrection were God's full intention from the time of Adam and Eve's sin until now and into the future eternally. The Cross and Jesus' redemptive work for us is essential to Christianity and in no way can be taken out without forfeiting also salvation by faith and grace. Christianity is nothing with out the "Christ" in it.
Peace.
Charles B.
what an incomplete documentary! somebody should fund a group of mercenaries and storm that kashmir tomb and extricate the bones of the supposed jesus who died there. museums instead of churches could make a lot of money by exhibiting these bones. and more money could actually be made if there were a reconstruction of these bones into how jesus actually looked. now we can replaced the mythified jesus images which have been popularized by paintings, statues and calendars! this should be named "operation jesus."
Phoenix: You asked a question and I gave you a reply. If you don't want me to "speak for God" then ask Him yourself. Obviously you haven't been listening to God's voice when He speaks to your heart as I'm quite sure He would answer you if you ask Him directly and sincerely and probably has already in some way.
Luke: Thank you for the apology. If you have questions, I'll do my best to address them if I can. You can be honest, but use some polite wisdom, eah? Yeah, church can be ultra-boring especially for a kid; been there, done that!
You asked why so many Christians are monetarily "poor" and that's a good question. In Jesus time, people believed that wealth alone was a good indication of "God's favor" and it was utterly shocking to them when Jesus said it was "harder for a rich man to enter Heaven than for a camel to go through the eye of a needle." The small holes in the wall of a heavily fortified city were called an "eye of the needle," and a camel COULD get through one, but only with great difficult, so this was not an impossibility, just difficult.
Yes, most Christians are poor, but I'm glad about that as it would be horrible if we had to be wealthy to have God's favor and to gain eternal life. I've thought perhaps that I have enough but am not wealthy as I'm not sure my character is strong enough to handle great wealth. I wouldn't want to loose my soul to the lust of riches now that I've come so far. Only God knows which of his "wealthy" or even "poor" stewards are being faithful with their finances, and not "fleecing the flock!"
mahususi: Satanism is controlled by women. They are of higher level then the men. High ranking Satanist women hold gold captors, while their male counter parts have silver.
Mr. Razor: You're anthropomorphizing God now. God made us sexual entities for a purpose (to enjoy and to reproduce), which He doesn't need to do. And when man fell into sin, the purity of enjoyable sex was polluted with "lust". It really is that simple. Yes, we are created in God's image, but not the "lust" part. ;-)
@SMM,
"You obviously don’t understand how evolution works, I don’t mean to be insulting here but, you don’t. You should inform yourself. These small changes are smaller than you think."
Do you understand how DNA works?
@Isabella
"When we evolved into the first human, who did this first human mate with. At some point the change in DNA would not allow for this one mutation to produce offspring with the former. There would have to have been numerous changes for people to reproduce. As it stands we have not found a link in DNA to any predecessor. Have we? Can you explain how this works? I can’t."
The idea that there are these clear lines between species is fallacious. When a species branches into two separate species through evolution it does so because those two species can't reproduce with each other. This takes a very, very long time and a completely different environment that naturally selects who lives. So humans who stuck together would always be the same species as each other, even before they were "human".
There are -small- changes overtime. As a rule, you can mate with the generation directly above you.
You obviously don't understand how evolution works, I don't mean to be insulting here but, you don't. You should inform yourself. These small changes are smaller than you think.
Another to keep in mind is that in a large group of people (say 7 billion) extraordinary things happening becomes expected. What happened in that hospital room was nothing exceptional. Events like that should be expected with 7 billion people. Low probability does not make something impossible. I'm sure it was a very moving experience, but all that happened was that you prayed for her (1 in 2 chance, considering you are compassionate and were there) and she responded well to being taken off life support(1 in 500 chance, maybe, I don't know enough medecine to know). With those numbers it's a 1 in 1000 chance. Which, with 7 billion people in the world should happen quite often.
As for morality and what not, it's easily explained by evolution as moral people would lead to better tribes which would lead to those tribes succeeding. Immoral people would just fight amongst themselves.
If your beliefs help you enjoy life then go for it. There's nothing wrong with personal beliefs. But don't push them and realize that they are probably wrong. The fact that they are probably wrong shouldn't get in your way.
no offence to some of you though
BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLA BLAH H BLAH YOU GUYS CARRY ON AND ON HAVING THESE REDICULAS DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE SAME THING OVER AND AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN
RELIGION IS TOTAL B.S. AND IT SHOULD JUST END THERE YOU SHEEP.
Ohhh Charles B.- you stated this:"World religions are even more simple (people can create one any time they like); the real one is Christianity proper."
Seriously?! How is any religion that is eclyptic to other religions the only one that is truthfull?
I would love to hear your answer Charles.
Only deserved :-D
@WTC7 and Hesus
blushing with surprise... thank you both for lovely comments.
1. yes
2. yes
3. more or less
4. agreed
5. agreed
6. true
and glad you enjoyed it :)
Isabella, your comment is profound. Very nice :-)
anyone notice when a mass of people condone to a singular belief system, those in positions of authority are filthy rich?
anyone notice the finger pointing, hate, prejudice not to mention death and oppression induced, defending the believers' affiliation?
anyone notice the rules of conduct and decency are self contained? seem not to apply to those whose philosophy differs.
this explains why the subject matter of this doc is controversial.
i think religions and governments are cut out of the same bolt.
there are good decent people all over the world. from all walks of life.. now that is something to believe in!
at any rate, I enjoyed watching the doc and reading the comments.
@kretik77 and Hesus,
kind thanks for the links :)
very fun to watch
@Will
I completely agree with your point. Christianity is in a position where it is openly criticized while almost all other religions are near untouchable.
The difference is that many of us deal with christianity being pushed on us and so it creates resentment. There's also christianity being pushed into schools and what not.
It's simply a matter of christianity being more pushy and people reacting to that. I can't imagine that the other religions will remain untouchable for long.
LOL :) @Razor
well, I have to agree with @ Phoeinx, and Luke Wilson, and mahusi,
no slight to you Charles.
If we were made in the image of God, he must be a horny Mother F*****.
How comes all reigion starters are Men?In judeo/christian/islam Gods,prophets,high priests,angels,sons etc are men.Oriental religions too heads are men-buddhas,krishnas,dalai lamas?In africa many religions revolved around men.
In mordern societies women have shown they can be as good with their men counterparts in all the fields that they venture.
Men created gods but women worship them the most,so its the high time both men and women stopped worshiping this idoltary and accepted reality-science
this is a symbolic figure,so the argument about its death is lost,there are other know figures who came earlier by as many as 1000 years.This vacuum issue
Furthermore I wont mock nor belittle christianity or you(not that I have) anymore. Honestly I have never read the Bible, I used to go to church when I was young and I found it dangerously boring sitting there for like 2 hrs hearing some guy talk and talk and talk some more so I stopped and I just dont think it is condusive to modern life, religion that is. Btw this is just my personal opinion. I disagree with religion as I think its a way of mass control and by this I mean the poor suffering sector of the population who have no choice but to be religious in the hope that somehow there situation can get better, not only in this life but maybe even the next. Sad thing is that it doesnt. That is why I personally dislike religion, it gives people false hope in my opinion. You could disagree citing yourself as an example, maybe you are not poor, maybe your life is perfect and yet you choose to be religious, well good for you but if we took the whole religious community, the great majority are poor folk who come from developing countries or lower economic brackets in developed country. Its rare you find the well off being as devoted and maybe if they pretend to do is as a means to an end e.g. like a politician who wants to get votes etc.
@ Charles B: Ok ok you win. You are right. I wont talk like that about God anymore... Its abit disrespectful I agree whether he really does or doesnt exist.. My sincere apologies!!
Good one Charles. My question is in my first post. Nice of you to answer for Him.
Phoenix: What is your question precisely? Why wouldn't 23:20 be part of the Word of God? God is equating the idolatry of Israel following after other "gods" with adultery. It's quite simple; it's an exaggerated statement meant to demonstrate total debauchery and corruptness without restraint. It's giving the reasons for the coming judgment against the city of Jerusalem.
Luke: You obviously didn't read the passage Phoenix quoted. It's not in reference to God. Haven't you even the slightest fear of the God you're mocking? You are so vulgar. The word of God says that "a virgin" shall be with child; that precludes all forms of sex by definition.
In fact, there aren't any passages in the Bible that even hint at any type of sexual desire by God in a natural or physical sense. the Song of Solomon is the closest, but it depends on how much you spiritualize what Solomon is writing there towards God. You can disbelieve if you want to, but you need to clean up your mouth and show a little more respect.
Infact Jesus christ fit the characteristic of a demi-god pretty well, Human mother divine father. Was mortal but had abilities that were beyond that of a normal mortal... Hmmm I think God one day saw mary and lusted for her and decided to you know, have her and who was she to deny him, could she even if she wanted to??. How else would she have gotten pregnant?? Virgin birth?? Cmon, lies that dont even make any sense!!!! God and Mary did it!!!! Why has none of this christians ever suggested that?? They deny jesus had a lover and they deny that God has human desires!! Yes he does!! He feels anger as demonstrated in so many passages of the bible, he feels pity, he feels joy, he feels sad!!! So it is not by the stretch of the imagination that he could also possess sexual feelings aswell just like his counter-parts in other mythologys!!
Interesting. God has human desires aswell?? In greek mythology and all other different mythologys there Gods desired human women and regularly procreated with them and produced off-spring that were known as demi-gods. Now whats to say the christian God is any different... cmon really??, not even once has he been tempted by a good looking girl to come off his high throne up there in heaven and indulge himself in his desires??? I mean his angels did it, why not him!!! If I wasnt going to hell before, Now I definately am after writing that!!
"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses."
If the bible is the word of God, what the hell was he thinking in Ezekiel 23 : 20?
Teachings and essence of Jesus died when, many years later, zealous followers twisted his wisdom and turned him into a god of a new religion.
@jari I can only laugh at your non sequitur! We are talking about Jesus here and muslims consider him to be prophet too ! If they get inspired by Prophet Mohammad that is fine with me ! Your a little too dim. Sorry to say too.
mk,
Prophet Mohammad has also billions of followers.
You are obviously slow. Sorry to say.
I think the better question is "Who cares?".
Ultimately if you don't accept the idea that Christ is the messiah, then what does it matter whether he died on the cross or not? For an atheist, or even an agnostic, or even a non-Christian, the question is entirely academic and irrelevant.
What I find interesting, and I say this as an agnostic/rationalist, is that you see all kinds of documentaries talking about how silly Christianity is (and I'm not saying it isn't), but you see very few documentaries about how Islam is ridiculous and how Judaism is ridiculous. Those two are just as silly... of course, there's no actual risk in criticising Christianity. Nobody cares if you offend a Christian, nobody's going to issue a fatwah, nobody's going to accuse you of anti-semitism.
The truth is that Christianity is the only "safe" religion to criticise. I'm not saying it SHOULDN'T be criticised, but it'll be really nice when we can get to the point where all religions can be considered targets of equal opportunity.
What is Islam/BBC waiting for???. Come on exhume the grave of Jesus and save us from our misery.
It is asinine to assert that Jesus didn't exist. People who claim this , should check their own lineage they wouldn't even know after ten generations, who was their great grandfather. Also , people calling Bible a fairytale should grow up and stop watching disney cartoons now.
I see here a bunch of brainwashed atheists, who have no original thoughts but are forwarding the word of their childish leader named richard dawkins . As far as did Jesus died is concerned , he lives in the hearts of minds of billions of people and inspires them daily , only a great man like him can inspire the people of world not any hopeless philosophy which takes human beings in the abyss of meaningless existence.
inb4 the atheist nuts type paragraphs of stuff without remembering to hit the SPACEBAR.
And no, before you go mental at me for being a 'religious nutjob' (your defence again just about everything) I'm agnostic. I believed that Jesus did exist, every myth and legend starts somewhere, I just do not think that he lived in the form that the bible would have us believe. Something this documentary tried to prove only a lot of you couldn't hear that over your raging self importance.
Nice documentary, was abit skeptical when I saw it was done for the bbc but its actually quite good. Makes the bible atleast the death and so called resurrection of jesus christ seem belivable. So if jesus did not actually die in the classical sense of the word and went away after regaining his health and I can only assume lived a normal family life where he eventually died in the classical way then what does that do to christianity??
Maybe thats what the knights templar found out and to keep them quiet they got paid alot of money by the vatican and that could also explain there incredible wealth and leverage that they had... Am sure most christians would disagree but whatever it doesnt matter anyways.... doesnt make a difference either way to the modern world. The only way this issue can be resolved is with hardcore archeological evidence, either find what it is those knights templar found or find where the real body of jesus christ is buried and somehow find away to prove that it was indeed him then they will all shut up...
Intriguing aswell cos if what they are implying here is true, then why did jesus after literally growing up in kashmir go back to palestian where he taught and got crucified(but did not die) for his troubles - one can only assume he knew he was going to get into trouble for his teaching and rocking the boat... why would he do that voluntarily???
@Franky T
What I meant was most scientists are. I should have put a period between that and the rest. The rest of the professions I listed I didn't mean to imply most of them are atheists.
@Franky T
Key word is most, since more than 50% are atheists then that would constitute "most".
These stories in which you refer are rooted in superstition and oral tradition. If you can get "hope" from that then you can get hope from any fictitious novel which offers answers. Whether they are right or wrong doesn't seem to matter.
@ Young.
How can you say that 'most scientists are atheists as well as doctors, motivational speakers etc'?
There are plenty of scientists out there that are Christian including my local Pasteur who has a Phd in Chemistry.
You should have a look at a magazine called Creation for its contributors are all scientists and yet they all endorse the story of Creation and write from a objective and scientific perspective.
In regard to what Joseph said, I do not agree that scientists do not offer hope for they do. Yet, for all the scientific advancement of today, science offers very little about the BIG questions of life for example the question of how we came to be.
But religion does and there are ancient stories written by numerous scribes over period of a milenniuem who wrote and recorded stories about God, the one who does offer hope and salvation.
@Charles B.
Oh, sorry I thought you meant hope in life not hope in death. Yeah false hope from the book definitely works better.
@ Charles
According to Spencer Wells there was a common female ancestor around 160 000 years ago if I remember correctly. A common male ancestor lived around 60000 years ago. Anyway wait for my post for more on the subject.
Young: No, Atheistic scientists, speakers, teachers etc. don't offer much hope in the long run. I've yet even once to have the sudden urge to pray to Stephen Hawkings to save my soul, despite the fact that he's called the "Mater of the Universe"! ;-)
BBC: If you're going to post a link about the male Y chromosome, did you know also that they've said the same thing about women? They've tested mydrocondrial DNA (passed on through women only) and they say we all came from one woman too.
@ Joseph
Eterna life? Look in to cryonics - I think you will have a much better chance at achieving it through them then Jesus.
Anyway I have a comment awaiting moderation concerning BBC genetic explanation.
@Joseph
"Too bad that atheist cannot give the world any hope.
Jesus can and does."
Many and most scientists are atheists, doctors, teachers, parents, motivational speakers, etc are atheists. Do they not offer anyone any hope?
mockers and scoffers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your heads!
after reading some of the comments i find it really intriguing that Jesus Christ can invoke such hate and anger against him even though he lived and died and rose from the dead 2000 years ago.
The Gospel of Luke says that Jesus will expose the thoughts of men, amazing that he can still do it after 2000 years.
i cant even name one atheist or agnostic because who cares. Yet Jesus can bring out such angry responses from those who deny his existence.
Did Jesus die should have been "Why did Jesus die?" Again I will quote God's word.
"For God so loved the world that he sent his only son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Too bad that atheist cannot give the world any hope.
Jesus can and does.
P.S. Of course Cain's wife was a sister, and the version of the Bible that is most accurate is the Greek and Hebrew that it was written it, but any version of the Bible that you enjoy and read is the correct one. Also, quite simple. I'm surprised one could answer those questions for you.
Linda: My kids are of mixed blood. I'm white and my wife is Asian. They are both cocoa brown with dark brown hair and black eyes. Should they marry another Amerasian mix their children could range anywhere from lily white (like me) to quite dark like their mother with jet black hair. That's only two generations.
I know of an author named Crying Wind Stafford. She was half Kickapoo Indian, but when she married, she married a white man and had four blonde-haired blue-eyed children; all four of them. No one believed she was their real mother, but she was. It is sad to leave the church over something as simple to explain as where the races came from. Noah's kids, most certainly were middle colored just like my kids are and from there, it's not hard to have any color of the rainbow in just a few generations let alone hundreds or thousands of year. Intermarriage focuses any gene pool into people groups again that are distinct. Very simple.
World religions are even more simple (people can create one any time they like); the real one is Christianity proper.
Now that you know the answers, will you consider returning to church again? Seriously, if that's why you left in the first place. Have a little faith. :-)
Charles B.
This Documentary presents some serious contraversial historical truths. However this doc onlt touches the surface and barely that of the issues that I research and the historical data that has been uncovered.
WTC7- your hypothesis is just that and nothing more for several reasons.
1. The only historical data that is consistant with anything about jesus and his life are the connections between Horus and Jesus.
2. There is no accurate historical data to show that Cleopatra ever bore children at the tender age that she would have been to birth Jesus at the time of his recorded birth.
3. That recorded birht is only known in the bible and the Quaran and no where else. If Cleopatra was his mother wouldn't you think her trusted servant scryb would see to it that there was some kind of historical data left behind? Remember that most of the Egyptian elite had scrybs of there own that wrote in plain Eygptian language but also in code as well?
4. There is no historical reference that Cleopatra had relations with such a person. It is only speculative information with no historical proof to it at all.
5. The Ceaserion Eygptians were forbidden to travel at length from Eygpt alone and therefore could not have passed through most of the Canonite villages that surrounded what was then known as Eygyt. They were not known as a security force! They were essentially Shamans!
6. It absolutely forbidden in the days of Cleopatra to have traveled the route you suggest to what we know today as India. The only route was through anceint Greece. This is proven time and time again by the artifacts that have been found and are still being found to this day, from Canonite to Greece.
7. Are there serious historical accounts that India at that time was under the religion of Buddism? There is only a minimum amount of accounts that only suggest this hypothesis and there has never been anything concrete ever found to prove it. Mostly the religion of that time in anceint Persia and such was the religion of either, Krishna, Mithra or anceint Dyonisis.
The list continues on and I continue till I am probably dead myself. Speculation is never a good way of considering a hypothesis to be a serious contender of validation in any historical accounts on anything.
@BBC
What genetic research has concluded we came from one man? Do you understand how illogical that is? There is no "first human", there are many long stages of slow changes. The example I once heard used that explains it best is this one: if we took a photo of you every single day of your life, could you look back to any single photo and say "this is the last day I was a kid" or, "this is the first day I was a teenager" solely by physical appearance? Each generation is literally ONE photo in the "scrap book of life". This also does not just apply to humans, but every organism.
I also second allan's request regarding a source on your claim that there are 3 different types of people. You're obviously referring to race, yet even different races are not especially different in any biological perspective.
@Linda - good thing you're a bright person! :)
P.S - Did Jesus Die? Of course! Everybody dies eventually! I know this is in poor taste but I couldn't resist.
@BBC
Would it be fair to say that since you believe that science to be true you would also believe in the science which says humans are hundreds of thousands of years old?
We all came from one "man". Man is the key word their, the "man" that we came from was much different biologically then men today. I don't think that it would be the only man of the time but one of many of that sub species.
Could you post me a link please on "Science shows there are only 3 kinds of people on earth: Asiatic, Negroid, and Caucasoid."
Nothing I've read has been conclusive in stating that we are fundamentally different on a biological level.
@Linda,
"where did cain’s wife come from?, if there was a great flood and only Noah and his family were saved why have we got people of different colour’s and religion’s?"
There has been genetic research done showing that we all come from one man, they found this looking at the y chromosome in men. Noah had three sons. Science shows there are only 3 kinds of people on earth: Asiatic, Negroid, and Caucasoid.
Is it possible, that you fail to see something? Or do you have it all figured out for sure?
Hi All,
I was brought up in a non practicing protestant household,but I went to Sunday school to listen to the lovely stories of the baby jesus and all the other storie's they try and brainwash young children with,untill I was old enough to start asking questions, where did cain's wife come from?, if there was a great flood and only Noah and his family were saved why have we got people of different colour's and religion's?. They could not answer me so I left and have never beliieved in religion since. In my opinion it was just a way to control people. I would also amswer if I believed in the biblr which one. In this documentary the version that make's the most sense to me is that he went to Kashmir. I dont force my veiw's on any one. have a good day folk's I enjoyed sharing with you. I enjoyed this documentary also.
Linda ;-*
Good grief! Another one of these docs!?! I just gotta be a billionair someday so I can make about a dozen intelligent life of Jesus and Biblical docs with MY bias more than quite evident from the beginning to the end.
I'd do it too, if I had the bucks, and ya all know it! ;-)
@ justsaygrow!
"And for that heresy my son...ye shall be stoned"
What that preacher says in this doc. "you left your brains in the parking lot" sums up what I feel about religion!
any one see the documentary that said Jesus was the son of Cleopatra?...i forget the name of that one ...i like that one better...but this one was good too
If I were asked, "Do you believe the Bible is the Word of God?" I would have to answer, "Which version?"
Alcohol (beer) is a drug! Very debilitating one at that. More conditioning blazing through. Tell ya, the world would be a better place if he had turned straw to cannabis, than (allegedly) water to wine
Well... a few beers is goooood :-), but drugs, buh, don't think so
But alcoholism or drug addiction isnt ALL bad.
And further to what I said above, don't take yourself as an example - you are lucky to either have not been subjected to serious conditioning since you were a child, or you were intelligent or courageous enough to find the 'light' on your own despite such conditioning. We are all conditioned one way or another, it takes some courage to get out of the magic circle and, believe me, not many are that brave. Being conditioned by a dogma is much more dangerous than being stupid - stupid ones don't have an ideology, they're just stupid. A dogmatic stupid... hmmm, that's bad...
Yes, Chris, religious superstitions are more healthy than alcoholism or drug addiction, but also much more dangerous on a larger scale. Nobody is going to see an alcoholic as an idol but a demagogic "prophet" can make irreparable harm many young brains
all religions are founded on silly falsehoods, so I ask: who cares who jesus really was, or how he really died?
All that matters is that those who believe do so without a need for factual confirmation.
Let those who need religion have their superstitions. I'd say it's much more healthy a crutch than alcoholism or drug addiction.
By the way, Ceasarion's Egyptian names were:
'Heir of the God who saves'
'Chosen of Ptah' (where Ptah is the "primordial mound" and he who "called the world into being")
'Carrying out the rule of Ra' (Ra - the Egyptian Sun god, later the ruler of the sky, earth and underworld, etc.)
'Living Image of Amun' (Amun - "creator deity "par excellence", he was the champion of the poor and central to personal piety" among other things)
There's an interesting hypothesis that Jesus could have actually been the son of Cleopatra and the Ceasar, the Ptolemy XV, nicknamed Ceasarion (little Ceasar), whom his mother, in fear of Octavian's armies, sent to the Red Sea port Berenice with her trusted servants.
He was of the age of 17 then & there have been unconfirmed references that he was captured by Octavian and murdered. The intention was for him to escape to India from the Red Sea. The hypothesis further speculates that, if he travelled to India, he would have been introduced to Buddhism & that's where the hypothesis converges with this doc at some point. The fact is that Jesus (supposedly) introduced new notions, of love and compassion, previously not known to the followers of the OT, the Jews.
Given that nobody actually knows when Jesus was born, and what was happening with him for many years before he appeared in Judea as a teacher and a healer, this hypothesis should be seriously considered.
Q: Did Jesus Die?
A: No. He didn't live, therefore he couldn't possibly die.
inb4 the religious nuts type paragraphs of stuff without remembering to hit the SPACEBAR.
Proof me wrong, if you want people to see your message then format it right.
Who the hell cares? Not me.