Author Topic: If you have a question about Jesus  (Read 20283 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Al Stefanelli

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Professionally Charming Curmudgeon
    • Al Stefanelli - The Rantings of a Professionally Charming Curmudgeon
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #232 on: March 18, 2010, 02:39:30 PM »
My favorite line in that move is:  "Only British people can fly!"

Like Bedknobs and Broomsticks? (another favorite of mine, witches whacking Nazis!)  If one is into fantasy and such, I've always figured that Mary and Bert were really some type of Fae.

I won't even TRY to understand Alice in Wonderland...
Organized Religion is like Organized Crime; it preys on peoples' weakness,
generates huge profits for its operators, and is almost impossible to eradicate.



Offline kevyrat69

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1209
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • oh rats.
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #233 on: March 18, 2010, 05:02:59 PM »
If you have questions about Mary Poppins, please ask.  I love Mary Poppins and love talking about her.

Did Mary Poppins need an umbrela to fly?  Did she really use a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down?

Was she born from a virgin or was it the normal way (like sex)?

How did she get her special powers?  Could she walk on water?

Oh Sister C I have so many questions.
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

whatever people are experiencing when they experience God, it's not something they're perceiving in the external world. It's something their brains are making up.
Greta Christina

Offline Pale Rider

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 610
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Agnostic
    • Bible Police
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #234 on: March 18, 2010, 06:17:39 PM »
I need an answer to all these:

Why are there no sculptures?
Why are there no drawings?
Why nothing written in his own hand?
Why no letters?
Why no commentaries?

Why no authentic documents written by his Jewish and Gentile contemporaries.
Justice of Tiberius, Philo, Josephus, Seneca, Petronius Arbiter, Pliny the Elder

And don't even try the TF by Josepheus that thing has already been proven a forgery.

Fool wrote:

Quote
Jesus claimed to exist before the world was made, and called God his Father.

How is that not a claim to divinity?

How? No evidence, no records nothing. Sure he existed it rises and sets everyday the "Sun" get it? Sun of God and Son of Man. He's a myth pure and simple. If you check out your ten commandments you will find they are an almost exact replica of the Spell 125 in the Egyptian Book of Dead only thing your so called Christian fathers did was change the wording. Care to look:

Exodus 20:2-17
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se ... ersion=KJV

Here is chapter 125 online
http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/EGYPT/BOD125.HTM

Also compare Jesus to the Egyptian God Horus almost identical MO. In fact if you compare him to about 15 others you will find most have the same MO. Its not new, most all mythological figures have now been realized as myth Zeus among others.   
« Last Edit: March 18, 2010, 06:27:40 PM by Pale Rider »

Offline bertatberts

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1428
  • Darwins +52/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Humanists. Not perfect. Not forgiven. Responsible.
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #235 on: March 18, 2010, 06:30:57 PM »
This is long post so had to split in to two parts, once you read this show me what evidence you have for a biblical jesus, thank you.
You are after all the one claiming he existed.

Part one.

There is no evidence for a biblical jesus

There may have been a man called jesus, just the same as there may have been a man called fred.
it by no means make him divine!

There is no contemporary evidence for Jesus.
Much of the "evidence" cited is false, or suspect, or very late.

Josephus is considered some of the best evidence - even though is is generally considered to be tampered with, if not an outright forgery (of course, the word used is "interpolated" - scholars avoid the word "forgery" even though that's exactly what it is.)




JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the Jew Josephus (who refused to call anyone "messiah"),
* The T.F. comes in several versions of various ages,
* The T.F. was not mentioned by Origen when he reviewed Josephus - Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present in that earlier era.
* The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.
* (The other tiny passage in Josephus is probably a later interpolation.)
An analysis of Josephus can be found here:
http://www.humanists.net/jesuspuzzle/supp10.htm
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/josephus.html

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
Such is the weakness of this evidence, This suspect passage is considered some of the best "evidence" for a historical Jesus of Nazareth, go figure.


TACITUS (c.112CE)

Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.
* Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)
* Tacitus accepts the recent advent of Christianity, which was against Roman practice (to only allow ancient and accepted cults and religions.)
* (No-one refers to this passage for a millennium, even early Christians who actively sought such passages.)

This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but it is merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)
So this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.
http://oll.libertyfund.org/ToC/0067.php
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tacitus.html


PLINY the Younger (c.112CE)

About 80 years after the alleged events, (and over 40 years after the war) Pliny referred to Christians who worshipped a "Christ" as a god, but there is no reference to a historical Jesus or Gospel events.
So Pliny is not evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth,
just evidence for 2nd century Christians who worshipped a Christ.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/pliny.html


SUETONIUS (c.115CE)

Roughly 80-90 years after the alleged Gospel events, (about 75 years after the war) Suetonius refers to a "Chrestus" who stirred the Jews to trouble in Rome during Claudius' time, but:
* this "Chrestus" is a Greek name (from "useful"), and is also a mystic name for an initiate, it is not the same as "Christos"
* this Chrestus was apparently active in Rome, Jesus never was.
So this passage is not evidence for Jesus,
it's nothing to do with Jesus,
it's evidence for Christians grasping at straws.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/suetonius.html


IGNATIUS (107CE? 130-170CE?)

The letters of Ignatius are traditionally dated to c.107, yet:
* it is not clear if he really existed, his story is suspicious,
* his letters are notoriously corrupt and in 2 versions,
* it is probable that his letters were later forgeries,
* he mentions only a tiny few items about Jesus.
So Ignatius is no evidence for Jesus himself,
at BEST it is 2nd century evidence to a few beliefs about Jesus.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ignatius.html


QUADRATUS (c.125CE)

Quadratus apparently wrote an Apology to Hadrian (117-138), but:
* we have none of his works,
* it is not certain when he wrote,
* all we have is 1 sentence quoted much later.
So Quadratus is uncertain evidence from about a century later.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/quadratus.html


THALLUS (date unknown)

We have NO certain evidence when Thallus lived or wrote, there are NONE of Thallus' works extant.
What we DO have is a 9th century reference by George Syncellus who quotes the 3rd century Julianus Africanus, who, speaking of the darkness at the crucifixion, wrote: "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse".
But there is NO evidence Thallus made specific reference to Jesus or the Gospel events at all, as there WAS an eclipse in 29. This suggests he merely referred to a known eclipse, but that LATER Christians MIS-interpreted his comment to mean their darkness. (Also note the supposed reference to Thallus in Eusebius is a false reading.)

Richard Carrier the historian has a good page on Thallus:
http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...r/thallus.html

So Thallus is no evidence for Jesus at all,
merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.


PHLEGON (c.140)

Phlegon wrote during the 140s - his works are lost. Later, Origen, Eusebius, and Julianus Africanus (as quoted by George Syncellus) refer to him, but quote differently his reference to an eclipse. There is no evidence Phlegon actually said anything about Gospel events, he was merely talking about an eclipse (they DO happen) which LATER Christians argued was the "darkness" in their stories.
So Phlegon is no evidence for Jesus at all -
merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.


VALENTINUS (c.140CE)

In mid 2nd century the GNOSTIC Valentinus almost became Bishop of Rome, but:
* he was several generations after the alleged events,
* he wrote of an esoteric, Gnostic Jesus and Christ,
* he mentioned no historical details about Jesus.
So Valentinus is no evidence for a historical Jesus.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/valentinus.html


POLYCARP (c.155CE)

Polycarp wrote in mid 2nd century, but :
* he is several generations after the alleged events,
* he gives many sayings of Jesus (some of which do NOT match the Gospels),
* he does NOT name any evangelist or Gospel.
So Polycarp knew sayings of Jesus,
but provides no actual evidence for a historical Jesus.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/polycarp.html


LUCIAN (c.170CE)

Nearly one-and-a-half CENTURIES after the alleged events, Lucian satirised Christians, but :
* this was several generations later,
* Lucian does NOT even mention Jesus or Christ by name.
So Lucian is no evidence for a historical Jesus, merely late 2nd century lampooning of Christians.


GALEN (late 2nd C.)

Late 2nd century, Galen makes a few references to Christians, and briefly to Christ.
This is far too late to be evidence for Jesus.


NUMENIUS (2nd C.?)

In the 3rd century, Origen claimed Numenius "quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus--without, however, mentioning His name" - i.e. Numenius mentioned a story but said nothing about Jesus, but by Origen's time it had become attached to Jesus' name.
This not any evidence for Jesus, it's just later wishful thinking.


TALMUD (3rd C. and later)

The Talmud was written over the third, fourth, and fifth centuries.
In the tractiate Sanhedrin, page 43a it mentions a Yeshua(Jehoshua), who was hung for forty days before his execution. it also states he was born a hundred years pre-christ and that he had five disciples Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah who were executed along side him.
* these references are from 3rd century or later, and seem to be (unfriendly) Jewish responses to Christian claims.
* the references are highly variant, have many cryptic names for Jesus, and are very different to the Gospel stories
So the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus,
the Talmud merely has much later Jewish responses to the Gospel stories.
http://www.heartofisrael.org/chazak...es/intalmud.htm

This Yeshua is not the same jesus now is he


christianity is simply a mishmash of much older religions, and below is a list of other writers (apart from the ones in the above links) around at the time of this alleged christ, that wrote nothing whatsoever about him.
Some even walked the same paths, but heard and wrote nothing.

Philo Judaeus lived in Alexandria, he spent time in Jerusalem and had family there during the times of Jesus. He wrote many books about the Jews and their religion and history. He developed the themes of the Logos and the Holy Spirit.
No mention of Jesus or the Gospel events.
Valerius Maximus wrote historical anecdotes c.30CE
No mention of Jesus or the Gospel events.
Marcus Manilius wrote on astrology/astronomy in Rome early 1st century.
No mention of Jesus or the Gospel events.

Writers from shortly after Jesus time:
Lucius Annaeus Seneca wrote many philosophic (Stoic) and satirical books and letters (and Tragedies) in Rome.
Petronius Arbiter wrote the Satyricon in Rome.
C. Musonius Rufus wrote on Stoic philosophy in Rome.
Aulus Persius Flaccus wrote several satires in Rome.
Marcus Annaeus Lucanus wrote the Pharsalia (Civil War) in Rome.
Hero(n) of Alexandria wrote many technical works, including astronomy.
Geminus wrote on astronomy in Greece.
Plutarch of Chaeronea wrote many works on history and philosophy in Rome and Boetia.
Justus of Tiberias wrote a History of the Kings of the Jews shortly after the time of Jesus, and from the same region - his works are now lost, but Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople wrote in the 8th Century: ''Read the Chronicle of Justus of Tiberias, entitled A Chronicle of the Kings of the Jews in the form of a genealogy, by Justus of Tiberias. He came from Tiberias in Galilee, from which he took his name. He begins his history with Moses and carries it down to the death of the seventh Agrippa of the family of Herod and the last of the Kings of the Jews. His kingdom, which was bestowed upon him by Claudius, was extended by Nero, and still more by Vespasian. He died in the third year of Trajan, when the history ends. Justus' style is very concise and he omits a great deal that is of utmost importance. Suffering from the common fault of the Jews, to which race he belonged, he does not even mention the coming of Christ, the events of his life, or the miracles performed by Him. His father was a Jew named Pistus; Justus himself, according to Josephus, was one of the most abandoned of men, a slave to vice and greed. He was a political opponent of Josephus, against whom he is said to have concocted several plots; but Josephus, although on several occasions he had his enemy in his power, only chastised him with words and let him go ... "
Pliny the Elder (Gaius Plinius Secundus) wrote a large Natural History in Rome.
Dio Chrysostom (Cocceianus Dio) was the dominant Roman Orator of the times (his works show Stoic and Cynic ideas), and wrote many works and gave many speeches in various Roman and Greek centres, of which 80 survive e.g. the Euboicus.
Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, wrote the Education of an Orator in Rome - his many speeches are lost.
Publius Papinius Statius wrote numerous poems (e.g. Ode to Sleep and the Thebaid) in Rome.
NONE of these early writers even MENTIONED Jesus or the Gospel events.
Only AFTER the Gospels became known in mid 2nd century (LONG long after the alleged events) did anyone mention Jesus.
There are about 50 writers from the 1st century - NONE of them mention Jesus.
But,they DO mention many HUNDREDS, maybe even THOUSANDS of characters in their books - including minor nobodies like servants and family, un-important names mentioned once in passing.
But NOTHING about Jesus - who must have been LESS important, LESS known, LESS notable than the most minor nobody.

Heres a few others you may want to look up.
Aulus Perseus (60 AD)
Columella (1 st. cent. AD)
Dio Chrysostom (c. 40-c. 112 AD)
Justus of Tiberious (c. 80 AD)
Livy (59 BC-17 AD)
Lucanus (fl. 63 AD)
Lucius Flours (1st-2nd -cent. AD)
Petronius (d. 66 AD)
Phaedrus (c. 15 BC-c. 50 AD)
Philo Judaeus (20 BC-50 AD)
Phlegon (1st cent. AD)
Pliny the Elder (23?-69 AD)
Plutarch (c.46-c. 119 AD)
Pomponius Mela (40 AD)
Rufus Curtius (1st cent. AD)
Quintilian (c. 35-c. 100 AD)
Quintus Curtius (1st cent. AD)
Seneca (4 BC?-65 AD)
Silius Italicus (.25-101 AD)
Statius Caelicius (1st cent. AD)
Theon of Smyrna (c. 70-c.135 AD)
Valerius Flaccus (1st cent AD)
Valerius Maximus (fl. c. 20 AD).

There is no historicity for a jesus person.

Now to the gospels

G.Mark

It is consensus among modern scholars that the first Gospel to be written was G.Mark - but it clearly was NOT by an eye-witness, for several reasons :
* G.Mark shows ignorance of Palestine geography,
* G.Mark shows dependence on oral tradition,
* G.Mark was most likely written for a Roman audience,
* Ireneus says G.Mark was written in Rome.
* G.Mark was largely crafted from the whole cloth of the OT.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/mark.html

For more detail, I suggest Michael Turton's great work on G.Mark:
http://www.michaelturton.com/Mark/GMark_index.html

It is sometimes argued that Mark was the secretary of Peter, but this seems unlikely for several other reasons -
* there is no evidence in the NT stories to support Mark being Peter's secretary,
* G.Mark shows the structure of literature crafted from the Jewish scriptures, not recorded conversations,
* G.Mark includes many scenes in Peter was NOT present, which can only mean they are fiction.
* Peter is a cowardly dullard in G.Mark which ends with Peter un-redeemed after having betrayed Jesus (G.Mark ended 16:8 with the empty tomb - G.Mark 16:9-20 is merely the most popular of one of a number of later endings which were attached to the abrupt end 16:8.). A secretary recording the words of a hallowed elder would hardly portray him like that.

It is also sometimes noted that Papias gives early evidence of G.Mark (and is the source of the Peter connection) - but Papias refers to G.Mark being the recollections of Peter but "adapted as needed" ... "but not in order". This just does not match at all well with G.Mark, which is in chronological order, and shows no sign of being the adapted words of Peter.

G.Matthew

It is the firm consensus of scholars that G.Matthew was NOT written by a disciple, because :
* it depends largely on G.Mark, copied word for word, while making changes based on theology, not history
* it conflicts with statements by Papias and Ireneus,
* it shows signs of being a 2nd or 3rd generation work
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/matthew.html

It is also sometimes noted that Papias gives early evidence of G.Matthew - but Papias refers to G.Mark being written in Hebrew - this just does not match at all well with G.Matthew, which was written in Greek.

1,2 Peter

Scholars agree that the letters attributed to Peter were forged by 2 different people, neither of whom had ever met Jesus - 1 Peter probably writen in Rome c.90, 2 Peter in early-mid 2nd century.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/1peter.html
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/2peter.html

G.John

Scholars agree that the Gospel of John could NOT be by an eye-witness - because :
* the issue regarding expulsion from the synagogues - such a glaring anachronism could not be by an eye-witness,
* at one stage this Gospel was believed to be written by Cerinthus (and thus rejected),
* it tells such a different, and fantastic, story.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/john.html

False NT attributions

The same is true of all the NT documents (apart from Paul1) - NONE are by an eye-witness, all are later FORGED by unknown authors who never met Jesus -
* James (FORGED in c.80s)
* 1 John (FORGED in c.80s)
* 2 Thessalonians (FORGED in c.80s)
* Ephesians (FORGED in c.90s)
* 1 Peter (FORGED in c.90s)
* Jude (FORGED in c.100s)
* 1 Timothy (FORGED in c.120s)
* 2 Timothy (FORGED in c.120s)
* Titus (FORGED in c.120s)
* 2 John (FORGED in c.120s)
* 3 John (FORGED in 120s)
* 2 Peter (FORGED in c.130s)
The arguments for these can be all be found at Peter Kirby's or in Brown NT Commentary e.g.


No NT author met Jesus

So, of the NT authors we find -
* Paul only met Jesus in a VISION,
* several of "Paul's" letters were forged by unknown authors,
* G.Mark was written in Rome by someone who never met Jesus,
* G.Matthew was largely copied from G.Mark, not by an eye-witness,
* G.Luke was largely copied from G.Mark, not by an eye-witness (A.Luke does NOT claim to be an eye-witness, A.Luke does NOT claim he spoke to eye-witnesses, he merely refers to eye-witnesses as distant sources),
* G.John was written long afterwards by someone who never met Jesus,
* Jude - forged by an unknown author who never met Jesus,
* 1,2 Peter - forged by 2 unknown authors who never met Jesus,
* James - forged by unknown author who never met Jesus,
* 1,2,3 John - forged by unknown authors in early-mid 2nd century who never met Jesus.

In other words - the general consensus of modern NT scholars is that NOT ONE SINGLE NT document was written by anyone who ever met Jesus. You can check this is any modern commentary - try Brown's or the New Jerome or see Peter Kirby's.

"This article is only about the historicity of Jesus - whether he existed as a real person. That is the only point that historians regard as effectively proven; that he existed, not that the claims made about him are true."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Historicity_of_Jesus.
nowhere in any Roman records does it state that a jesus person, was executed by Pilate, this is only written in the NT. And the Romans kept meticulous records.

Continues next post.
« Last Edit: March 18, 2010, 06:34:46 PM by bertatberts »
We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

Offline bertatberts

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1428
  • Darwins +52/-8
  • Gender: Male
  • Humanists. Not perfect. Not forgiven. Responsible.
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #236 on: March 18, 2010, 06:33:40 PM »
Continued from previous post

Part two

Claiming that the bible is a historical document

In other words - a very old document which appears to tell a history of ancient times. There are many such documents, of varying quality - but no such ancient book is true just because some believer, then or now, BELIEVES it to be true.

All old writings must be evaluated by all the methods at our disposal. Christians sometimes try to argue that ancient documents can be presumed to be true, unless proven otherwise - sometimes even invoking the irrelevant phrase "innocent until proven guilty" or even invoking a supposed law of Aristotle.
Well, this is nonsense - no historian assumes an ancient book to be true, and certainly not religious works, and nor did Aristotle say so. Rather all ancient writings are criticised and compared and analysed carefully to see what can be considered reliable, and what is myths and legends or lies or exaggeration or just plain error.

Consider some other ancient works

The Golden Ass of Apuleius - this "historical document" tells the story of how Apuleius turned into an Ass and met the gods face to face. It dates to the very same period as the Gospels, is set in historical places and includes historical figures and events. It has speeches and stories and miracles and divine events, including an EMPTY TOMB scene!. In short it is very similar to the Gospels.
http://eserver.org/books/apuleius/

The Iliad - this "historical document" is famous and very well attested indeed. This work was seminal in Greek culture and includes real places and realistic people, it has Gods and miracles and speeches and heroes - to the Greeks, Homer was like the Bible.
http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/iliad.html

Both of these writings are similar to the Gospels and are similarly true - i.e. not particularly true at all. In other words being a "historical document" means nothing about a books truthfulness.

So getting back to the point, yes there could have been a jesus, but not the one written in the bible, thats all, so whether the Muslims have a jesus who was a prophet, or the Jews a Yeshua, who was executed along with his five disciples, a hundred years earlier, does not mean your jesus actually existed.

And NT Authorship

The New Testament alone consists of twenty-seven books written by at least eight different authors. Furthermore, of those eight, only three (Matthew, Peter, and John) were a part of the original twelve disciples. Of the remaining five, two were originally skeptical concerning Jesus' identity. One was a great persecutor of Christians and even consented to the execution of the first New Testament martyr. One was a gentile, and one was a young boy when Jesus lived and taught. Additionally, these New Testament authors came from a wide variety of backgrounds and experiences. One was a tax collector, another a physician. Another was a highly educated Pharisee. At least two were fishermen while two others grew up as the children of a carpenter and most likely learned that trade."

The NT must be judged on its merits like any ancient writing - and it HAS been so judged and evaluated, it is one of the most studied works in Western culture

With the exception of some of the letters of Paul, we do NOT KNOW for sure who wrote ANY of the remaining books of the Bible - all we know is what we find IN the books. (Bear in mind there is no external evidence of any kind about Paul either, but some one person wrote most of those letters and we call him Paul mostly for convenience.)
The Gospels were originally anonymous documents of unknown origin - the earliest mentions of Gospels are as UN-NAMED works, the current titles were not attached to the four Gospels until late 2nd century by Iraneus based on a few earlier scraps and speculations. Before then we see various references to Gospels without authors - by Aristides, Justin, Ignatius, Polycarp, Theodotus, Hegesippus, Melito, Polycrates, Autolycus - all make reference to anonymous Gospel(s).

Papias does make some unclear comments possibly in about 130CE which refer to writings by Mark, and writings by Matthew - however his comments do NOT match our modern Gospels, and he does NOT use the word "Gospel", and he makes it clear he holds such writings in LOW regard.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/papias.html

Justin in about 150CE is the first to make lengthy quotes of Gospels almost like the modern ones - but he calls them "memoirs of the apostles" as well as "Gospels" but gives NO authors' names.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/justin.html

Aristides, possibly just before Justin, described a singular, un-named Gospel that had "been preached for a short time". This is an important clue - a church father who mentions "the Gospel, as it is called" - showing that is what it is called "the Gospel", no name, just one. Furthermore he explicitly says it had only been preached for a "short time", perhaps a few years - evidence for when the Gospel became known in Christian circles.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.co...tides-kay.html

Tatian possibly wrote an important work called the "diaTessaron" (literally "from four", implying a harmony of four, meaning a harmony of four Gospels) about 172 (after he split from the early Christian. This numbering of the Gospels as four seems to occur slightly before they are actually named, and may have come about because Tatian inherited the "memoirs of the Apostles" from Justin, and there were four of them, but they had not yet been named.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/diatessaron.html

It was not until about 185CE that the Gospels received their current names with Irenaeus.
http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/irenaeus.html

So there you have it.


 
We theists have no evidence for our beliefs. So no amount of rational evidence will dissuade us from those beliefs. - JCisall

It would be pretty piss poor brainwashing, if the victims knew they were brainwashed, wouldn't it? - Screwtape. 04/12/12

Offline Gimpy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Are we there yet?
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #237 on: March 18, 2010, 08:28:46 PM »
Oh, my wow! ^^^ that is awesome! I need to bookmark that!
Not all those who wander are lost; some are buried in my backyard. . .

Offline Sister Chromatid

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 302
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #238 on: March 18, 2010, 08:35:02 PM »
If you have questions about Mary Poppins, please ask.  I love Mary Poppins and love talking about her.

Did Mary Poppins need an umbrela to fly?  Did she really use a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down?

Was she born from a virgin or was it the normal way (like sex)?

How did she get her special powers?  Could she walk on water?

Oh Sister C I have so many questions.

Yes (so it's not really flying... more like gliding), yes, no (she was conceived using the Kama Sutra), it's beyond your understanding, no --but she was a fantastic at synchronized swimming!

I hope that answers your questions!

Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #239 on: March 18, 2010, 08:49:48 PM »
I have a Mary Poppins question:  Why didn't she use her magic to improve Bert's accent?

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12463
  • Darwins +323/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #240 on: March 19, 2010, 12:57:11 PM »
Like Bedknobs and Broomsticks? (another favorite of mine, witches whacking Nazis!)  If one is into fantasy and such, I've always figured that Mary and Bert were really some type of Fae.

I just watched Bye Bye Birdie last night with Dick Van Dyke. I like some of the songs but most of them were lame, and I felt the entire movie was a bit boring.  I've never seen a boring Dick Van Dyke movie before. This is a first for me.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #241 on: March 19, 2010, 01:00:31 PM »
I just watched Bye Bye Birdie last night with Dick Van Dyke. I like some of the songs but most of them were lame, and I felt the entire movie was a bit boring.  I've never seen a boring Dick Van Dyke movie before. This is a first for me.

-Nam


It's because they completely demolished the story when translating it from stage to film.  The film should have been titled. "Hello, Ann-Margret".  I  think Dick Van Dyke made that comment once.

Offline Gimpy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Are we there yet?
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #242 on: March 19, 2010, 01:05:43 PM »
^^^ I guess it's one of those "you had to be there" (in the 60s) !!

I loved it. But then, I'm old. (though I was just a kid when it first came out).

Also, for some bizarre reason, I always get it mixed up with "Goodbye Charlie" with Tony Curtis, Debbie Reynolds, Walter Matthau and a few others.

Charlie is a womanizer who gets shot and falls into the ocean, where he gets reincarnated as Debbie Reynolds. Fun, laughter and embarrassing moments ensue.
Not all those who wander are lost; some are buried in my backyard. . .

Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #243 on: March 19, 2010, 01:08:29 PM »
^^^ I guess it's one of those "you had to be there" (in the 60s) !!

I loved it. But then, I'm old. (though I was just a kid when it first came out).

Also, for some bizarre reason, I always get it mixed up with "Goodbye Charlie" with Tony Curtis, Debbie Reynolds, Walter Matthau and a few others.

Charlie is a womanizer who gets shot and falls into the ocean, where he gets reincarnated as Debbie Reynolds. Fun, laughter and embarrassing moments ensue.
I wasn't even born when "Bye Bye Birdie" came out.  Well, a few months later I was.  I just happen to like old movies. 

Offline Operator_011

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2646
  • Darwins +17/-1
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #244 on: March 19, 2010, 01:10:15 PM »
<Public service announcement>

Fool has been banned from WWGHA so won't be able to respond to any more questions about Jesus.

<Public service announcement>


Move along now. Nothing to see here.


Eleven.
Former Moderator Account

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12463
  • Darwins +323/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #245 on: March 19, 2010, 01:11:47 PM »
It's because they completely demolished the story when translating it from stage to film.  The film should have been titled. "Hello, Ann-Margret".  I  think Dick Van Dyke made that comment once.

I think, for me, it's just too long.  It's like the Fred Astaire film "Daddy Long Legs". I mean, overall, I like that film. But the problem is, it was too long. they seemed to make it too much of a musical, and didn't really focus on the story.  I actually like the silent film better than that one; and I don't care too much for silent films, to tell the truth.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Al Stefanelli

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 314
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Professionally Charming Curmudgeon
    • Al Stefanelli - The Rantings of a Professionally Charming Curmudgeon
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #246 on: March 19, 2010, 03:26:21 PM »
<Public service announcement>
Fool has been banned from WWGHA so won't be able to respond to any more questions about Jesus.
<Public service announcement>

You're trying to get us to believe that god exists, aren't you?
Organized Religion is like Organized Crime; it preys on peoples' weakness,
generates huge profits for its operators, and is almost impossible to eradicate.



Offline Gimpy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Are we there yet?
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #247 on: March 19, 2010, 03:28:39 PM »

You're trying to get us to believe that god exists, aren't you?




Not all those who wander are lost; some are buried in my backyard. . .

Offline Operator_011

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2646
  • Darwins +17/-1
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #248 on: March 19, 2010, 03:39:22 PM »
You're trying to get us to believe that god exists, aren't you?

Damn, I've been busted again. <Tips hat>
Former Moderator Account

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6858
  • Darwins +71/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #249 on: March 19, 2010, 04:03:44 PM »
You're Hermes.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline GodIsDead

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Female
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #250 on: March 19, 2010, 04:50:14 PM »
Here is my question about Jesus.

Do you think Jesus would like modern day Christians?

Do you think Jesus would "buy in" to the shit these churches spew forth in his name?


I think modern day Christians would make Jesus CRY out in disgust.
"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything." -- Friedrich Nietzsche

Offline Pale Rider

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 610
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Agnostic
    • Bible Police
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #251 on: March 19, 2010, 06:02:26 PM »
I don't think he would (if he existed?) the word Christian did not appear until some 40 years after his supposed death? No way he could have even known about it. and besides he was Jewish not Christian according to legend.

Offline ReasonIsOutToLunch

Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #252 on: March 19, 2010, 06:58:03 PM »
I just watched Bye Bye Birdie last night with Dick Van Dyke. I like some of the songs but most of them were lame, and I felt the entire movie was a bit boring.  I've never seen a boring Dick Van Dyke movie before. This is a first for me.

-Nam


Ann Margaret couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. What were they thinking when they cast her?
God, doesn't know pi.

Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #253 on: March 19, 2010, 07:00:14 PM »
Ann Margaret couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. What were they thinking when they cast her?

She could twitch her ass.  lol

Offline ReasonIsOutToLunch

Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #254 on: March 19, 2010, 07:24:10 PM »
Ann Margaret couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. What were they thinking when they cast her?

She could twitch her ass.  lol

LOL. Ok, the thing is I appreciate talent in whatever package it come in. I don't care if it can twitch its ass, even if it's talent coming from a guy. Besides, I am sure they could have found a singer that could twitch her ass. Ann Margaret can act, she can't sing. Hey wait a minute, couldn't they have had her lip sinc, it would have saved us from that screeching.
God, doesn't know pi.

Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #255 on: March 19, 2010, 07:32:26 PM »
LOL. Ok, the thing is I appreciate talent in whatever package it come in. I don't care if it can twitch its ass, even if it's talent coming from a guy. Besides, I am sure they could have found a singer that could twitch her ass. Ann Margaret can act, she can't sing. Hey wait a minute, couldn't they have had her lip sinc, it would have saved us from that screeching.
Ann-Margret was big box office at the time.  That's all they were looking at.  They even went so far as to shift the emphasis of the film from the Albert/Rosie story to her character.  Big mistake.  It completely unfocused the whole film.  Also -- this is a pet grievance -- why didn't they cast Chita Rivera as Rosie?  lol

Offline ReasonIsOutToLunch

Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #256 on: March 19, 2010, 10:41:27 PM »
^^^It would make too much sense. But, maybe she was busy on Broadway at the time. Who knows, maybe they wanted a whiter cast. I dunno, I am still flumoxed over Ann Margaret being in the film.
God, doesn't know pi.

Offline dmnemaine

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1557
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #257 on: March 19, 2010, 11:03:06 PM »
^^^It would make too much sense. But, maybe she was busy on Broadway at the time. Who knows, maybe they wanted a whiter cast. I dunno, I am still flumoxed over Ann Margaret being in the film.

Maybe their reason was out to lunch? &)

Offline Gimpy

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +1/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • Are we there yet?
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #258 on: March 20, 2010, 08:30:04 AM »


Ann Margaret couldn't carry a tune in a bucket. What were they thinking when they cast her?

pfffffft.


Not all those who wander are lost; some are buried in my backyard. . .

Offline Tealeaf

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 978
  • Darwins +0/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #259 on: March 20, 2010, 02:29:10 PM »
I have a question. Christians maintain the belief that Jesus' life, death, and resurrection was the key to God's forgiveness of human sin and salvation. Why, exactly, did these events have to occur in order for God to forgive humans of anything? What is the relevance of:
a) the life, death, and resurrection of a divine entity manifested in the flesh (Jesus), to

b) A God's his attitude towards human sin.

'Cause honestly, I see absolutely no causal relevance of a) to b). If God wanted to forgive humans, why didn't he just do it, why were the events described in a) a prerequisite to forgiveness?
Sorry I missed your post before.

It's a good question. You might be surprised at the answer.

The Bible says that the cross was a demonstration(of God's righteousness). He was revealing the situation as it truly was since long before the crucifixion. God had been forgiving peoples sins and treating them graciously for all time, and had created the world well aware of the suffering that would be caused by his creatures acting disobediently. Since God knows all things, He is intimately aware of the suffering of every man woman and child who ever came into existence. So when Jesus went to the cross, it was to SHOW people the character of God. It was to REVEAL that God was humble and lowly in heart, and that He cared for us and has always cared for us. It was to PROVE that God had not abandoned His people, or failed in His promise.

The revelation of Jesus is the model for God's plan, except that we are all heirs by grace, and Jesus displayed God's perfect righteousness in the flesh by works. So Jesus died in the flesh and was raised again, I die to the flesh and am raised again. As Jesus was glorified and lives eternally I will be glorified and live eternally.

I wish I had seen this before, it was a pleasure to reply.

Utterly astonishing wilful stupidity here. Utterly utterly baffling.

How the hell is it supposed to mean anything, that god makes up a promise to HIS creations, then does what he says he will.... But then you are still screwed because if you don't acknolwedge god playing with Tonka trucks in the sandbox, you burn in his concieved hell that he always knew you would because he sees all....????

Can you not see how utterly nonsensical the Jesus 'sacrifice' thing is????
 
Then you go and twist it around into this whole drawn out 'revealing' crap display. Bullshit.

Acknowledge the siutation as it is. And don't make up stuff.

Offline Jim

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2462
  • Darwins +11/-1
  • Born Again Atheist
Re: If you have a question about Jesus
« Reply #260 on: March 20, 2010, 02:54:37 PM »
Hi Tealeaf.  Mr Fool is gone.  Banished to the wastelands of theological idiocy.

Now, please be civilized and get out of the way of that lovely Ann Margaret pic.  Thank you.

;)
Survey results coming soon!