Author Topic: when God shows up  (Read 1318 times)

Offline Baruch

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #210 on: July 20, 2017, 06:23:03 PM »
Some fictions can be timeless--like Aesop.  But when reading stories about Washington or Lincoln, one still needs to be cautious.  Minister Weems illustrates that when he crafted character stories around Washington; Washington's not lying about chopping down a cherry tree is totally made up, but became accepted  as history.  No matter when history was written one must be cautious when accepting it at face value.

Baseless claims ... all the way down.  The question is, what point does the fiction serve?  In the case of political fiction, it serves politics.
שלום

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #211 on: July 20, 2017, 06:58:19 PM »
I have shown extra biblical transcripts from several sources

1. Tacitus never mentions Jesus, just a religious group that names itself after its anointed leader.  A lot of leaders of all sorts of things, not just religions, were anointed in those days.

2. Josephus never mentions Jesus.  We have to wait until a 5th century copy contains the forgery that so obviously wasn't written by a Jew (and Josephus was one).

I'll skip listing everyone else but:
a. Anyone born after 33 CE was repeating hearsay, so it's not evidence.
b. There's no contemporaneous eyewitness account of Jesus - and if he had been performing miracles on the street, you'd think that at least one man would have noticed, huh?  (Some women were illiterate in those days, so the fact that no woman wrote anything might just mean that all the women who saw the so-called miracles were illiterate, but the men had to know how to read and write.)
Oh, and c. Jesus was just the 11th telling of the godlet story.  Read Paul.  I mean really read Paul, don't just read the parts some preacher tells you are okay to read.  He describes Jesus as a spirit who lives in the 7th heaven.  Really?  You want us to take that seriously?  (Everything else is hearsay, so sensible people - even those with an agenda, even if you call them "historians" - don't use it as a source.  Those who use it as a source aren't being too sensible.)

Another "Oh" - in the year 1 CE, where Nazareth now stands, were just 2 farms - two families.  Joseph, according to the myth, was a carpenter, not a farmer, so Jesus didn't come from Nazareth.

And Roman law was that one had to return to the place of one's residence for a census, not one's birth, so "Mary" (no such name in Hebrew - it would have been Miryam) and "Joseph" wouldn't have needed "room at the inn", they had room at their own house - where they had to be.  (But the story plays better if Jesus was born in a manger.)

The "Star of Bethlehem"?  I don't care how powerful God was, he couldn't make a star move to guide the Magi (the optics just don't work).  It the star was far enough away, it would appear to be fixed in the sky (plus Earth's rotation).  If it were close enough to move and guide them, we'd have 2 problems.  1. Earth would have burned to a cinder.  2. The purturbations to the Solar system would probably have flung at least a few planets out of the system - and we have Greek records of the 5 easiest-to-see planets - and they're still there.

All you've shown, really, is the opinions of some people (who just happened to have a vested interest in Jesus being real).  We don't even have a date of Jesus' birth until Dionysius Exiguus decided (he never said how).  The years were identified by naming the consuls who held office that year; Dionysius himself stated that the "present year" was "the consulship of Probus Junior", which he also stated was 525 years "since the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ".  He made it up!

The year of Jesus supposed birth was 754 ab urbe condita (auc) meaning "from the founding of the City (Rome)".

Why?  Because Dionysius Exiguus said so, there was no other reason.

So we have nothing but opinion (which you choose to believe, but that doesn't make it correct) of people who lived after Jesus supposedly died, except for one man whojclaimed that he was a spirit living in the "7th heaven" - which sounds more like a psychiatric condition that an historical report.

(BTW, it's existentially positive assertions that bear the burden of proof - "I don't accept your assertion" doesn't.  So you can keep looking for proof - but be prepared for a LONG search, because you won't find any.  No one has yet - in 2017 years.  (Or whenever he was supposed to have been born - the best we have are conflicting dates.)
Afflicting the comfortable for 70 years.
Science builds skyscrapers, faith flies planes into them.

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #212 on: July 20, 2017, 07:54:04 PM »
Baseless claims ... all the way down.  The question is, what point does the fiction serve?  In the case of political fiction, it serves politics.
Fiction can serve well, if it is clearly labeled as such.  History should have no place for fiction.  But Weems, and others, said they wanted to simply use a historical character to illustrate a point of good character and so felt justified in creating a fiction using historical figures.  Religion always falls under the label of fiction.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #213 on: July 20, 2017, 09:29:43 PM »
Have you written this sceneario on your own?

Offline Baruch

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #214 on: July 20, 2017, 09:46:30 PM »
Fiction can serve well, if it is clearly labeled as such.  History should have no place for fiction.  But Weems, and others, said they wanted to simply use a historical character to illustrate a point of good character and so felt justified in creating a fiction using historical figures.  Religion always falls under the label of fiction.

You are still a captive of the political matrix, Archeo.
שלום

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #215 on: July 20, 2017, 10:34:04 PM »
You are still a captive of the political matrix, Archeo.
Why, of course I am.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent,
Is he able but not willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able or willing?
Then why call him god?

Offline Drich0150 (OP)

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #216 on: July 21, 2017, 01:00:48 PM »
1. Tacitus never mentions Jesus, just a religious group that names itself after its anointed leader.  A lot of leaders of all sorts of things, not just religions, were anointed in those days.
  :histerical:


It's called G-O-O-G-L-E... maybe you oughta google it before you make an assertion that contridicts one of mine. Why? Because I have at least 3 sources to back up EVERYTHING I say.

Quote from: tactius
Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations,  called Christians by the populace.Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.

Quote
2. Josephus never mentions Jesus.  We have to wait until a 5th century copy contains the forgery that so obviously wasn't written by a Jew (and Josephus was one).



or it does and someone in the 19th or 20th century simply calls into question the works of Josephus.

Here's the thing with that claim sport... Someone in the 19th century (probably some anti Jesus douche) looked up the oldest complete set of the works of Josephus, which the oldest set is kept by the church in Latin, and it is from the 5th century... (so they "anti-jesus douches" create some sort of conspiracy that a bunch a priest conspired to change the works of Josephus to match the bible..

The problem with that theory, is this guy didn't have google when He made his claim.. Otherwise he's know That said there are individual books much much older, and better yet we have quotes from people like Eusebian who quotes and records the Testimonium Flavianum (the fancy word smart guys use to describe the Jesus bits in the works of Josephus,) in His works from the early from the 4th century... Which then vets the 5th century copies of Josephus' works. thus nullifying your little (anti-jesus douche) claim.

I trust a paper held in the hellenistic studies @ Harvard would be a sufficient source to dispel your little myth...
https://chs.harvard.edu/CHS/article/display/5871

If not I have a few others... or you can G-O-G-G-L-E_I-T yourself

Look guys, if you still believe there isn't enough evidence for Christ you are 10 years behind what current atheist think. GOOGLE your beliefs, open your minds as you far more educated breathern have been forced to do. Because picking off these antiquated 20 year old arguments is... tedious at best. (minus the fun I can have by calling you anti Jesus douches)

Quote
I'll skip listing everyone else but:
a. Anyone born after 33 CE was repeating hearsay, so it's not evidence.
that is closed minded to say. so authorized biographies are... what hear say?

Quote
b. There's no contemporaneous eyewitness account of Jesus
From a culture that 95% could not read or write we still have the works I mentioned in this post and the last.

Quote
- and if he had been performing miracles on the street, you'd think that at least one man would have noticed, huh?
Indeed and they were recorded in a non religious letter written to Theophilous who commissioned a historean writter and doctor to go and see what Jesus was all about. would you like a link to this 3rd party letter?

Quote
(Some women were illiterate in those days, so the fact that no woman wrote anything might just mean that all the women who saw the so-called miracles were illiterate, but the men had to know how to read and write.)

 Google it 95 to 98% did not. They spoke a language that had no offical written counterpart, so everything written had to be written in a base language most did not speak.
It is like speaking ebonics or creol which is a spoken dialect that does not have an official rule set to is proper grammatical, nor spelling use. Then those people who may not even speak korean be made to write everything in Korean as that is the only official language. Not saying someone who speaks ebonics can't write in korean. I am saying very few can. and of those how much of what they write in korean would keep for 2000 years without a massive 'religious' organisation preserving and recopying their work? Then after all that time couldn't some shallow thinking douche bag just ignore what they wrote and dismiss it as a 'religious' text just because the religion kept the works intact???

Can you at least see the scope of what you are asking??? If you can the fact that we have what we do is absolutely amazing.

Quote
Oh, and c. Jesus was just the 11th telling of the godlet story.
dumbest thing I ever heard. citation please
Quote
Read Paul.  I mean really read Paul, don't just read the parts some preacher tells you are okay to read.  He describes Jesus as a spirit who lives in the 7th heaven.  Really?  You want us to take that seriously?
Different levels of Heaven are not new. Read the book of Daniel or even Revelation. If you know what to look for you can even see it in the teaching of Christ in the way of bigger rewards for the more faithful/Harder working, and those who death bed confess they enter heaven with little more than the cloths of their back. Not a new thing, unless your version of Christianity was so far off from the biblical description you would not know God if He kicked you in the ass personally.

 
Quote
(Everything else is hearsay, so sensible people - even those with an agenda, even if you call them "historians" - don't use it as a source.  Those who use it as a source aren't being too sensible.)
:histerical:

Quote
Another "Oh" - in the year 1 CE, where Nazareth now stands, were just 2 farms - two families.
Glob... Nazarath was a military encampment... That ment a tent city doom-mas.

Quote
Joseph, according to the myth, was a carpenter, not a farmer, so Jesus didn't come from Nazareth.
the word translated meant laborer. which included carpenter/tent maker or farmer.

Quote
And Roman law was that one had to return to the place of one's residence for a census, not one's birth,

Luke put the cencus as a command of Herod, the roman appointed King of the Jews. Herod would have an intrest in sending people to be counted back to where they came from as they would indicate house from which one was born.. As identifying the line of David.

So to say Herod order a census from one pov is the same as saying Rome ordered it as He was king appointed by rome to that region. then 10 years later there was a offical roman census in 6ad

Quote
so "Mary" (no such name in Hebrew - it would have been Miryam) and "Joseph" wouldn't have needed "room at the inn", they had room at their own house - where they had to be.  (But the story plays better if Jesus was born in a manger.)
glob...
†Μαρία María, mar-ee'-ah; of Hebrew origin (H4813); Maria or Mariam (i.e. Mirjam), the name of six Christian females:—Mary.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3137&t=KJV

Quote
The "Star of Bethlehem"?  I don't care how powerful God was, he couldn't make a star move to guide the Magi (the optics just don't work).  It the star was far enough away, it would appear to be fixed in the sky (plus Earth's rotation).  If it were close enough to move and guide them, we'd have 2 problems.  1. Earth would have burned to a cinder.  2. The purturbations to the Solar system would probably have flung at least a few planets out of the system - and we have Greek records of the 5 easiest-to-see planets - and they're still there.
ἀστήρ astḗr, as-tare'; probably from the base of G4766; a star (as strown over the sky), literally or figuratively:—star.

So what is a star to a first century man? it is a point of light in the night sky. with a few 1000 dollars I can move a point of light anywhere I want in the night sky. If God couldn't do this or even better plan a celestial event that coinsides with a prophesy He started with foreknowledge of said event, then you are right. how ever not only is this plausible I can point to three such celestial events that science says may have been one such celestial event. or you can google it yourself.

Quote
All you've shown, really, is the opinions of some people (who just happened to have a vested interest in Jesus being real).
  :biglaugh: You haven't even shown that. you have only produced your own interest in Christ not being real. Or did I miss your citations?

Quote
We don't even have a date of Jesus' birth until Dionysius Exiguus decided (he never said how).
  so? do you have my date of birth? Am I not real?

Quote
The years were identified by naming the consuls who held office that year; Dionysius himself stated that the "present year" was "the consulship of Probus Junior", which he also stated was 525 years "since the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ".  He made it up!
so??? That is a religion mistake. The bible nor anything in it gives us a date.

Quote
The year of Jesus supposed birth was 754 ab urbe condita (auc) meaning "from the founding of the City (Rome)".
BCV please... Meaning book chapter and verse.
Quote
Why?  Because Dionysius Exiguus said so, there was no other reason.
Again religion mistake not a God/bible issue. You catholic boys need to learn to seperate religion from God. God hates that religious crap.

Quote
So we have nothing but opinion (which you choose to believe, but that doesn't make it correct) of people who lived after Jesus supposedly died, except for one man who claimed that he was a spirit living in the "7th heaven" - which sounds more like a psychiatric condition that an historical report.
It's God moron. What God does is not going to be the everyday mundain crap you think limits reality. open you mind mr the world is flat... What do you think Makes God, God?

Quote
(BTW, it's existentially positive assertions that bear the burden of proof - "I don't accept your assertion" doesn't.
Not an assertion but a map... the proof in the any map is the destination. Does the map take you where you want to go???
If you want proof follow the map. My map just indicated some of the road signs I saw along the way. it is not meant to be proof unless you are on the journey. Can't proof any map sitting on your ass.

Quote
  So you can keep looking for proof - but be prepared for a LONG search, because you won't find any.  No one has yet - in 2017 years.  (Or whenever he was supposed to have been born - the best we have are conflicting dates.)
if that were true I wouldn't be here and neither would this religion. it would have died 2016 years ago (irony is fun/especially after you acknoweledge we don't know when Jesus was born)
1Thess 5:21 Question all things and hold on to what is Good. This is a charge meant for those who think themselves Christian. We are to question the foundational as well as the questionable, and hold on to the truth. Because I've done this my answers may be... Different than the typical Christian

Offline Drich0150 (OP)

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #217 on: July 21, 2017, 01:02:59 PM »
Have you written this sceneario on your own?
It was written in accordance to what happened to me.
1Thess 5:21 Question all things and hold on to what is Good. This is a charge meant for those who think themselves Christian. We are to question the foundational as well as the questionable, and hold on to the truth. Because I've done this my answers may be... Different than the typical Christian

Offline Baruch

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #218 on: July 21, 2017, 01:18:07 PM »
It was written in accordance to what happened to me.

You were there in 1st century CE Judea?  Amazing!  If you are a Christian, why don't you kiss the Pope's ring?
שלום

Offline Munch

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #219 on: July 21, 2017, 01:57:42 PM »
You were there in 1st century CE Judea?  Amazing!  If you are a Christian, why don't you kiss the Pope's ring?

if he's that old, why isn't he the pope himself :O

Offline Cavebear

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #220 on: Today at 02:50:38 AM »
It is pretty hard to scar a cavebear...
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead

Offline Drich0150 (OP)

Re: when God shows up
« Reply #221 on: Today at 09:12:11 AM »
It is pretty hard to scar a cavebear...

Duh, it's because he hides from all who threaten it.
1Thess 5:21 Question all things and hold on to what is Good. This is a charge meant for those who think themselves Christian. We are to question the foundational as well as the questionable, and hold on to the truth. Because I've done this my answers may be... Different than the typical Christian