Question:
Juanita! You gonna get this paper put in the Lancet or just the JAMA, that rolling ad for little blue pills? Nothing could be a better plan for selling goods to stress laden low libido male population than by suddenly discovering another sixty thousand miles left on their tired old tires. The marketing demographics for this is bound to become, in terms of western european and north american cultrual development, equivalent of the veneration of the statue of Ozymandius in ancient days. cactus jammies 1) seriously avoiding laying sonic tonic trax eating fine, thanks for asking, other end works pretty good. anemia is abaiting for now. 2) look on me ye mighty and despair! 3) Second Law of Robotics 4) Raiding the covens and klaverns of your mind with my version of the Wall of Sound. Big sound. Big Big sound. "JV" <Meling…@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6335-42478BCD-75@storefull-3174.bay.webtv.net… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Oh my goodness CJ would you mind forwarding them for my on going Psycho > Analysis consolidation essay on the feller. Seems like a real bad case > of a aliasncognito. There is always a deep rooted and profound reasons > for 17 different addys????????????????? > An investigation will be in order. I even think a second opinion is > necessary from Dr. Killborne next door in sci.fiction ng. > LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL > Glad your feeling so playful I am > Juanita
Response:
"JV" <Meling…@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:6335-42478BCD-75@storefull-3174.bay.webtv.net… > Oh my goodness CJ would you mind forwarding them for my on going Psycho > Analysis consolidation essay on the feller. Seems like a real bad case > of a aliasncognito. There is always a deep rooted and profound reasons > for 17 different addys????????????????? > An investigation will be in order. I even think a second opinion is > necessary from Dr. Killborne next door in sci.fiction ng. > LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL > Glad your feeling so playful I am > Juanita
Making fun of someone with lies is funny to you? You’re the sicko, Juanita, but I am sure the other sickos here will be happy to let you into the In Group, what with you dissing me, their favorite whipping post. Alias
Response:
Alias.. wrote:
Never a good sign when we have an anonymous poster. > What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing.
Your effort to write this post tells us otherwise, at least in your opinion. > Everything supposedly attributed > to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique about > him had already been done many times before.
Tired retread of long-exploded ‘dying god’ myth noted. Where are you copying this from? > – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him.
Like who? > – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done by > many others.
Document some of them, with evidence that they really did. > – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old Testament > prophets.
So, Jesus is Elijah? Or Elijah is Jesus? Which is it? And prove it. > – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many others. > – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed to > be. > – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. > – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others.
‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ I shan’t need to go to the pet-shop for a parrot: I have you. What kind of pathetic argument is this? > "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile.
Compared to the founders of your own religious position — conformity to societal values? That’s a laugh. > "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced > without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was > crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound > nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons > of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr
Quote-mine noted. Justin is not addressing this issue: he is pleading not to be executed for being a member of a dangerous cult. Isn’t it interesting that dishonesty has to be used here? > He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his
contemporaries. Nonsense. > There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate > executed a man named "Jesus".
There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate existed. There is a piece of masonry; but of course you’ll say that this is a forgery, or something. > Unfortunately for the Christian faith there is > not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus".
Contemporary meaning in the 30’s AD? Just what ancient literature exists from that period, that mentions *anyone*? The usual bogus ‘contemporary’ fraud! > All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the death > of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who had > never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical > writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds or > interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve as > reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus".
Nonsense. > Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" > contradict each other and themselves in many places.
Argument from vituperation — how pathetic. Any two accounts can be rubbished like this. But, hey, it’s not as if you’re offering anything for your own hopeless conformity, eh? > – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for > aspiring god-men.
‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ ‘just like so many others’ You’re doing the parrot act again. > There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus".
‘There are no accounts except by people I have decided to exclude’ Yeah, sure. > Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians > quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his > Antiquities there are two references to Jesus.
Awkward for the brain-dead, isn’t it? > He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by > Christians.
Evidence? Of course, you just made that up. > There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings > remaining.
Oh dear. So every ancient text, in your view, is non-existent? > The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps > they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided to > add the references in order to validate their belief.
Perhaps you are just lying wildly? > Many serious scholars
You don’t know any. > hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have been > embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some > scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally > fabricated by the copyists.
And many think this passage authentic. Most people think it genuine but corrupt. The other passage is universally considered authentic. > It seems very odd that … [speculation snipped] > There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at the > time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified and > resurrected.
Which writers would those be? This post is just a pathetic shed-load of self-serving lies. All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
…..bored….. Doug "Alias" <a…@maskedandanonymous.eu> wrote in message
news:e7K1e.25476$dr.10827@news.ono.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote in message > news:aNCdnTUYB50Gw9rfRVn-2g@adelphia.com… >> OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug > Ho hum? Is this supposed to be clever and cute? > Alias >> . >> . >> " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… >>> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly >>> attributed >>> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique >>> about >>> him had already been done many times before. >>> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. >>> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done >>> by >>> many others. >>> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old >>> Testament >>> prophets. >>> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many >>> others. >>> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed >>> to >>> be. >>> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >>> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. >>> What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours >>> and >>> messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was >>> the >>> "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate >>> his >>> credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective >>> experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim >>> to be >>> the Messiah, and many have. >>> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new >>> concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes >>> although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" >>> or >>> "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known >>> much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant >>> of >>> such things. >>> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced >>> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >>> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we >>> propound >>> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem >>> sons >>> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr >>> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. >>> All >>> claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical >>> evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or >>> self >>> written documents. >>> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >>> executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith >>> there is >>> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". >>> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the >>> death >>> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who >>> had >>> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or >>> allegorical >>> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious >>> frauds or >>> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve >>> as >>> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". >>> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" >>> contradict each other and themselves in many places. >>> – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different >>> times. >>> – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. >>> – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is >>> traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill >>> prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. >>> – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year >>> before >>> his death, while John says three years. >>> – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" to >>> "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private >>> talk >>> given only to the disciples. >>> – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each >>> other, and no one states how old he was when he died. >>> – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the >>> historical >>> Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. >>> – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so >>> would >>> boost his arguments >>> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for >>> aspiring god-men. >>> – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the >>> sick, >>> raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. >>> You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The >>> Messiah", >>> "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in >>> exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. >>> Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries >>> Christians >>> plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by >>> combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom >>> they >>> could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were >>> competing >>> for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, >>> changed, >>> amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for >>> centuries. >>> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". >>> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many >>> Christians >>> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >>> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. >>> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >>> Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >>> remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. >>> Perhaps >>> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided >>> to >>> add the references in order to validate their belief. >>> The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so >>> out >>> of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from >>> from >>> the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, >>> and >>> had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. >>> Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have >>> been >>> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some >>> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >>> fabricated by the copyists. >>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >>> the >>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during >>> the >>> time it supposedly occurred. >>> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at >>> the >>> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified >>> and >>> resurrected. >>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >>> the >>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the >>> time it occurred. >>> http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
Some body’s been watchin tv, but you do not have all your facts, as usual. Sharon
Response:
Alias wrote: > <roger_pea…@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > news:1112016812.851720.113670@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com… > > Alias.. wrote: > No, I didn’t write it. I posted it.
You think you’re not responsible for what you post? Do explain. > I didn’t say whether I agreed with it or not so all your debating, well, was > in vain.
Of course. All the best, Roger Pearse
Response:
<roger_pea…@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1112016812.851720.113670@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com… > Alias.. wrote:
No, I didn’t write it. I posted it. If you have any problems with it, contact the author at http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml I didn’t say whether I agreed with it or not so all your debating, well, was in vain. Alias – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Never a good sign when we have an anonymous poster. >> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. > Your effort to write this post tells us otherwise, at least in your > opinion. >> Everything supposedly attributed >> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique > about >> him had already been done many times before. > Tired retread of long-exploded ‘dying god’ myth noted. Where are you > copying this from? >> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. > Like who? >> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been > done by >> many others. > Document some of them, with evidence that they really did. >> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old > Testament >> prophets. > So, Jesus is Elijah? Or Elijah is Jesus? Which is it? And prove it. >> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many > others. >> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others > claimed to >> be. >> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > I shan’t need to go to the pet-shop for a parrot: I have you. > What kind of pathetic argument is this? >> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. > Compared to the founders of your own religious position — conformity > to societal values? That’s a laugh. >> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was > produced >> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we > propound >> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you > esteem sons >> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr > Quote-mine noted. Justin is not addressing this issue: he is pleading > not to be executed for being a member of a dangerous cult. Isn’t it > interesting that dishonesty has to be used here? >> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his > contemporaries. > Nonsense. >> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >> executed a man named "Jesus". > There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate > existed. There is a piece of masonry; but of course you’ll say that > this is a forgery, or something. >> Unfortunately for the Christian faith there is >> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". > Contemporary meaning in the 30’s AD? Just what ancient literature > exists from that period, that mentions *anyone*? > The usual bogus ‘contemporary’ fraud! >> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years > the death >> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people > who had >> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or > allegorical >> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious > frauds or >> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly > serve as >> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". > Nonsense. >> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of > "Jesus" >> contradict each other and themselves in many places. > Argument from vituperation — how pathetic. Any two accounts can be > rubbished like this. But, hey, it’s not as if you’re offering anything > for your own hopeless conformity, eh? >> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard > for >> aspiring god-men. > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > ‘just like so many others’ > You’re doing the parrot act again. >> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". > ‘There are no accounts except by people I have decided to exclude’ > Yeah, sure. >> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many > Christians >> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. > Awkward for the brain-dead, isn’t it? >> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >> Christians. > Evidence? Of course, you just made that up. >> There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >> remaining. > Oh dear. So every ancient text, in your view, is non-existent? >> The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps >> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and > decided to >> add the references in order to validate their belief. > Perhaps you are just lying wildly? >> Many serious scholars > You don’t know any. >> hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have been >> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading > some >> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >> fabricated by the copyists. > And many think this passage authentic. Most people think it genuine > but corrupt. The other passage is universally considered authentic. >> It seems very odd that … [speculation snipped] >> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around > at the >> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was > crucified and >> resurrected. > Which writers would those be? > This post is just a pathetic shed-load of self-serving lies. > All the best, > Roger Pearse
Response:
"Cactus Jammies" <n…@joshuatree.nemor> wrote in message
news:RQK1e.114893$fc4.84781@edtnps89… > When I reset my filters to exclude this fella, I noticed that it has been > 17 name changes since the first I ever set things up for him. He should > feel select I suppose, because he was the first non-spambot that I > killfiled. Seventeen changes for him since November, I think it was.
So, are you my biographer now? You’ve counted them? How sick is that? > Almost as thick as the bible pounders but they claim this time of year > for their own yarns only. Coca Cola corporation owns Chrissmas. So I can > tolerate that until the whollie ghillie finds home. Should be any day > now, figger.
Huh? Is English your native language? > Auditions for the 2005 Maypole Flouncing Flingaree will be held in the > beer garden, Tough T*tty bar and grisle. On Ruby Tuesday. Only the > Virtuous need apply. > 
> cactus jammies
Oh, how clever and witty of you! Alias – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> +++++++++++++++++ fish sign ++++++++++ > "Alias" <a…@maskedandanonymous.eu> wrote in message > news:e7K1e.25476$dr.10827@news.ono.com… >> "Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote in message >> news:aNCdnTUYB50Gw9rfRVn-2g@adelphia.com… >>> OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug >> Ho hum? Is this supposed to be clever and cute? >> Alias >>> . >>> . >>> " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message >>> news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… >>>> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly >>>> attributed >>>> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique >>>> about >>>> him had already been done many times before. >>>> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. >>>> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done >>>> by >>>> many others. >>>> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old >>>> Testament >>>> prophets. >>>> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many >>>> others. >>>> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed >>>> to >>>> be. >>>> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >>>> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. >>>> What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours >>>> and >>>> messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was >>>> the >>>> "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that >>>> substantiate his >>>> credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective >>>> experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim >>>> to be >>>> the Messiah, and many have. >>>> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new >>>> concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes >>>> although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" >>>> or >>>> "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have >>>> known >>>> much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant >>>> of >>>> such things. >>>> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced >>>> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >>>> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we >>>> propound >>>> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem >>>> sons >>>> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr >>>> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his >>>> contemporaries. All >>>> claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical >>>> evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or >>>> self >>>> written documents. >>>> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >>>> executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith >>>> there is >>>> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". >>>> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the >>>> death >>>> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who >>>> had >>>> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or >>>> allegorical >>>> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious >>>> frauds or >>>> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve >>>> as >>>> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". >>>> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" >>>> contradict each other and themselves in many places. >>>> – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different >>>> times. >>>> – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. >>>> – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is >>>> traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill >>>> prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. >>>> – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year >>>> before >>>> his death, while John says three years. >>>> – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" >>>> to >>>> "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private >>>> talk >>>> given only to the disciples. >>>> – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each >>>> other, and no one states how old he was when he died. >>>> – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the >>>> historical >>>> Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. >>>> – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so >>>> would >>>> boost his arguments >>>> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for >>>> aspiring god-men. >>>> – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the >>>> sick, >>>> raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. >>>> You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The >>>> Messiah", >>>> "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in >>>> exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. >>>> Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries >>>> Christians >>>> plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by >>>> combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom >>>> they >>>> could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were >>>> competing >>>> for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, >>>> changed, >>>> amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts >>>> for >>>> centuries. >>>> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". >>>> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many >>>> Christians >>>> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >>>> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. >>>> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >>>> Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >>>> remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. >>>> Perhaps >>>> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided >>>> to >>>> add the references in order to validate their belief. >>>> The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so >>>> out >>>> of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from >>>> from >>>> the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, >>>> and >>>> had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. >>>> Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have >>>> been >>>> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some >>>> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >>>> fabricated by the copyists. >>>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important >>>> to the >>>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during >>>> the >>>> time it supposedly occurred. >>>> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at >>>> the >>>> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was >>>> crucified and >>>> resurrected. >>>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important >>>> to the >>>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during >>>> the >>>> time it occurred. >>>> http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
Oh my goodness CJ would you mind forwarding them for my on going Psycho Analysis consolidation essay on the feller. Seems like a real bad case of a aliasncognito. There is always a deep rooted and profound reasons for 17 different addys????????????????? An investigation will be in order. I even think a second opinion is necessary from Dr. Killborne next door in sci.fiction ng. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL Glad your feeling so playful I am Juanita
Response:
"Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote > …..bored….. Doug
Yaknow, that’s one thing that I never get is bored. You being a Christian and all, one would think that Easter would be a very exciting time for you, hunting all those easter eggs. Alias – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Alias" <a…@maskedandanonymous.eu> wrote in message > news:e7K1e.25476$dr.10827@news.ono.com… >> "Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote in message >> news:aNCdnTUYB50Gw9rfRVn-2g@adelphia.com… >>> OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug >> Ho hum? Is this supposed to be clever and cute? >> Alias >>> . >>> . >>> " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message >>> news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… >>>> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly >>>> attributed >>>> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique >>>> about >>>> him had already been done many times before. >>>> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. >>>> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done >>>> by >>>> many others. >>>> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old >>>> Testament >>>> prophets. >>>> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many >>>> others. >>>> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed >>>> to >>>> be. >>>> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >>>> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. >>>> What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours >>>> and >>>> messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was >>>> the >>>> "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that >>>> substantiate his >>>> credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective >>>> experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim >>>> to be >>>> the Messiah, and many have. >>>> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new >>>> concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes >>>> although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" >>>> or >>>> "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have >>>> known >>>> much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant >>>> of >>>> such things. >>>> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced >>>> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >>>> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we >>>> propound >>>> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem >>>> sons >>>> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr >>>> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his >>>> contemporaries. All >>>> claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical >>>> evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or >>>> self >>>> written documents. >>>> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >>>> executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith >>>> there is >>>> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". >>>> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the >>>> death >>>> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who >>>> had >>>> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or >>>> allegorical >>>> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious >>>> frauds or >>>> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve >>>> as >>>> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". >>>> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" >>>> contradict each other and themselves in many places. >>>> – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different >>>> times. >>>> – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. >>>> – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is >>>> traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill >>>> prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. >>>> – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year >>>> before >>>> his death, while John says three years. >>>> – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" >>>> to >>>> "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private >>>> talk >>>> given only to the disciples. >>>> – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each >>>> other, and no one states how old he was when he died. >>>> – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the >>>> historical >>>> Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. >>>> – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so >>>> would >>>> boost his arguments >>>> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for >>>> aspiring god-men. >>>> – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the >>>> sick, >>>> raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. >>>> You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The >>>> Messiah", >>>> "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in >>>> exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. >>>> Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries >>>> Christians >>>> plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by >>>> combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom >>>> they >>>> could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were >>>> competing >>>> for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, >>>> changed, >>>> amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts >>>> for >>>> centuries. >>>> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". >>>> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many >>>> Christians >>>> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >>>> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. >>>> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >>>> Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >>>> remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. >>>> Perhaps >>>> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided >>>> to >>>> add the references in order to validate their belief. >>>> The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so >>>> out >>>> of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from >>>> from >>>> the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, >>>> and >>>> had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. >>>> Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have >>>> been >>>> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some >>>> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >>>> fabricated by the copyists. >>>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important >>>> to the >>>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during >>>> the >>>> time it supposedly occurred. >>>> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at >>>> the >>>> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was >>>> crucified and >>>> resurrected. >>>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important >>>> to the >>>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during >>>> the >>>> time it occurred. >>>> http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
When I reset my filters to exclude this fella, I noticed that it has been 17 name changes since the first I ever set things up for him. He should feel select I suppose, because he was the first non-spambot that I killfiled. Seventeen changes for him since November, I think it was. Almost as thick as the bible pounders but they claim this time of year for their own yarns only. Coca Cola corporation owns Chrissmas. So I can tolerate that until the whollie ghillie finds home. Should be any day now, figger. Auditions for the 2005 Maypole Flouncing Flingaree will be held in the beer garden, Tough T*tty bar and grisle. On Ruby Tuesday. Only the Virtuous need apply. cactus jammies +++++++++++++++++ fish sign ++++++++++ "Alias" <a…@maskedandanonymous.eu> wrote in message
news:e7K1e.25476$dr.10827@news.ono.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> "Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote in message > news:aNCdnTUYB50Gw9rfRVn-2g@adelphia.com… >> OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug > Ho hum? Is this supposed to be clever and cute? > Alias >> . >> . >> " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message >> news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… >>> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly >>> attributed >>> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique >>> about >>> him had already been done many times before. >>> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. >>> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done >>> by >>> many others. >>> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old >>> Testament >>> prophets. >>> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many >>> others. >>> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed >>> to >>> be. >>> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >>> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. >>> What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours >>> and >>> messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was >>> the >>> "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate >>> his >>> credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective >>> experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim >>> to be >>> the Messiah, and many have. >>> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new >>> concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes >>> although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" >>> or >>> "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known >>> much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant >>> of >>> such things. >>> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced >>> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >>> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we >>> propound >>> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem >>> sons >>> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr >>> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. >>> All >>> claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical >>> evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or >>> self >>> written documents. >>> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >>> executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith >>> there is >>> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". >>> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the >>> death >>> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who >>> had >>> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or >>> allegorical >>> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious >>> frauds or >>> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve >>> as >>> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". >>> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" >>> contradict each other and themselves in many places. >>> – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different >>> times. >>> – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. >>> – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is >>> traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill >>> prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. >>> – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year >>> before >>> his death, while John says three years. >>> – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" to >>> "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private >>> talk >>> given only to the disciples. >>> – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each >>> other, and no one states how old he was when he died. >>> – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the >>> historical >>> Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. >>> – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so >>> would >>> boost his arguments >>> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for >>> aspiring god-men. >>> – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the >>> sick, >>> raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. >>> You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The >>> Messiah", >>> "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in >>> exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. >>> Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries >>> Christians >>> plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by >>> combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom >>> they >>> could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were >>> competing >>> for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, >>> changed, >>> amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for >>> centuries. >>> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". >>> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many >>> Christians >>> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >>> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. >>> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >>> Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >>> remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. >>> Perhaps >>> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided >>> to >>> add the references in order to validate their belief. >>> The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so >>> out >>> of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from >>> from >>> the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, >>> and >>> had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. >>> Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have >>> been >>> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some >>> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >>> fabricated by the copyists. >>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >>> the >>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during >>> the >>> time it supposedly occurred. >>> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at >>> the >>> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified >>> and >>> resurrected. >>> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >>> the >>> destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the >>> time it occurred. >>> http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
"Douglas" <d…@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:aNCdnTUYB50Gw9rfRVn-2g@adelphia.com… > OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug
Ho hum? Is this supposed to be clever and cute? Alias – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> . > . > " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message > news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… >> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly >> attributed >> to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique >> about >> him had already been done many times before. >> – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. >> – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done >> by >> many others. >> – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old >> Testament >> prophets. >> – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many >> others. >> – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed >> to >> be. >> – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. >> – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. >> What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours and >> messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was >> the >> "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate >> his >> credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective >> experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim to >> be >> the Messiah, and many have. >> "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new >> concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes >> although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" or >> "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known >> much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of >> such things. >> "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced >> without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was >> crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound >> nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem >> sons >> of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr >> He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. >> All >> claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical >> evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or self >> written documents. >> There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate >> executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith there >> is >> not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". >> All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the >> death >> of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who >> had >> never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or >> allegorical >> writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds >> or >> interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve >> as >> reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". >> Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" >> contradict each other and themselves in many places. >> – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different >> times. >> – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. >> – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is >> traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill >> prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. >> – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year >> before >> his death, while John says three years. >> – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" to >> "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private >> talk >> given only to the disciples. >> – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each >> other, and no one states how old he was when he died. >> – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the >> historical >> Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. >> – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so >> would >> boost his arguments >> – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for >> aspiring god-men. >> – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the sick, >> raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. >> You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The >> Messiah", >> "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in >> exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. >> Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries >> Christians >> plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by >> combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom >> they >> could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were >> competing >> for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, >> changed, >> amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for >> centuries. >> There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". >> Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians >> quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his >> Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. >> He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by >> Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings >> remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. >> Perhaps >> they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided to >> add the references in order to validate their belief. >> The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so >> out >> of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from >> from >> the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, and >> had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. >> Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have >> been >> embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some >> scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally >> fabricated by the copyists. >> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >> the >> destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during >> the >> time it supposedly occurred. >> There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at >> the >> time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified >> and >> resurrected. >> It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to >> the >> destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the >> time it occurred. >> http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
OBTW Alias…..ho..hum…. Doug . . " Alias.." <m…@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:flI1e.27999$US.87@news.ono.com… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly attributed > to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique about > him had already been done many times before. > – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. > – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done by > many others. > – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old > Testament > prophets. > – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many others. > – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed to > be. > – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. > – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. > What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours and > messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was > the > "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate > his > credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective > experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim to > be > the Messiah, and many have. > "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new > concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes > although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" or > "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known > much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of > such things. > "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced > without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was > crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound > nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem > sons > of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr > He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. > All > claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical > evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or self > written documents. > There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate > executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith there > is > not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". > All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the > death > of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who had > never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical > writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds > or > interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve as > reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". > Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" > contradict each other and themselves in many places. > – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different > times. > – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. > – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is > traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill > prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. > – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year before > his death, while John says three years. > – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" to > "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private > talk > given only to the disciples. > – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each > other, and no one states how old he was when he died. > – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the > historical > Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. > – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so would > boost his arguments > – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for > aspiring god-men. > – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the sick, > raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. > You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The > Messiah", > "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in > exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. > Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries > Christians > plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by > combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom they > could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were > competing > for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, changed, > amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for > centuries. > There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". > Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians > quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his > Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. > He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by > Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings > remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps > they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided to > add the references in order to validate their belief. > The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so > out > of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from > from > the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, and > had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. > Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have been > embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some > scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally > fabricated by the copyists. > It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to > the > destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during > the > time it supposedly occurred. > There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at > the > time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified > and > resurrected. > It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to > the > destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the > time it occurred. > http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
Response:
What’s So Special About "Jesus"? Nothing. Everything supposedly attributed to "Jesus" and everything that Christians tout as special and unique about him had already been done many times before. – He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him. – He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done by many others. – He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old Testament prophets. – He healed ~ that’s old news and had been accomplished by so many others. – He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed to be. – He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others. – He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others. What makes "Jesus" stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours and messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was the "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate his credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah, and many have. "Jesus" said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" or "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of such things. "When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, "Jesus Christ", our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. All claims of "Jesus" derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or self written documents. There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate executed a man named "Jesus". Unfortunately for the Christian faith there is not even a single contemporary writing that mentions "Jesus". All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the death of the alleged "Jesus" and are from either unknown authors, people who had never met the earthly "Jesus", or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds or interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve as reliable evidence for a historical "Jesus". Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of "Jesus" contradict each other and themselves in many places. – The birth of "Jesus" is depicted as having taken place at different times. – Mark does not mention his birth or childhood. – Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other. – He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year before his death, while John says three years. – Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by "Jesus" to "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private talk given only to the disciples. – The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each other, and no one states how old he was when he died. – Paul never knew "Jesus" and has almost nothing to say about the historical Jesus ~ he’s all about the risen Christ. – Paul fails to mention Jesus’ sayings and doings even when doing so would boost his arguments – Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for aspiring god-men. – Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the sick, raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries. You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The Messiah", "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail. Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries Christians plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom they could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were competing for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, changed, amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for centuries. There are no first hand non-biblical references to "Jesus". Flavius Josephus’s Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians quote to prove the historical existance of "Jesus" because in his Antiquities there are two references to Jesus. He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus’ writings remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps they were offended because there was no mention of "Jesus" and decided to add the references in order to validate their belief. The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning "Jesus" are so out of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from from the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, and had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view. Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus’s writings have been embellished to boost the Christians claims about "Jesus", leading some scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally fabricated by the copyists. It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during the time it supposedly occurred. There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at the time, or just after, "Jesus" allegedly was born, preached, was crucified and resurrected. It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the time it occurred. http://www.worldzone.net/family/johnanderson/indexz31.shtml
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.