• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Historical Jesus

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ricardo said:
love the enemies?
Click to expand...
And hate your family
Matty
10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.
10:35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:35 I have come to set a father against his son, the daughter against her mother, and a daughter in law against her mother in law.
10:36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
10:37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

Could anyone really be that much of a twat?
 
Last edited:
Ricardo said:
You must believe that Jesus existed!
Click to expand...

Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate.

What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question.

Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John?

Or was it Paul who never met Jesus?

Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence?
 
Last edited:
I don't have a reason to think about Jesus.
Be it real or just a story doesn't matter to me.
If he existed he didn't know of the workings of the nature as much as an 8-year-old-today knows. Would you say he'd have known how rain comes about?
So I wouldn't worry about anything else he may have said then.
 
acbytesla said:
Why must I? The evidence is flimsy at best. But even if a Yeshua existed and preached in the first century does not mean that what was written about him 30 to 100 years later is remotely accurate.
Click to expand...
I agree.
What makes you believe based on the ANONYMOUS Gospels that this person was divine? That is the important question.
Click to expand...

It certainly is a stumper. I have no idea why anyone would think that.

Was it the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) that were clearly copied from each other or another source that convinced you? Or the radically different book of John?

Or was it Paul who never met Jesus?

Do you think any of this is good evidence? If so, why is it good evidence?
Click to expand...

I think the fact that Paul joined an already existing Jesus cult and set about challenging their belief system is evidence that Jesus and his followers (brothers and all) probably did exist.

I suspect that very soon we will hear about Richard Carrier and his, er, research...
 
Jesus existed, sure, but the stories about her became very garbled over time and retelling and mistranslations and mistakes. The historical Jesus was a hardboiled detective using her wits, guts, and fists to solve crimes in ancient Persia while also being a single mother of two. And this was this one time she was staying at an elegant country house party weekend and the duchess was strangled to death but only Jesus was clever enough to figure out the duchess strangled herself to throw off suspicion that it was the duchess who stole the duchess's emerald necklace from herself because she was being blackmailed by the duchess under the threat that she would reveal her own involvement in the crime of blackmailing herself to steal the emeralds! What a tangled web the duchess weaved when first she practiced to redundantly fractal-recursive plot against herself redundantly also again! But trust St Luke to screw up the story and change it to shepherds or fishermen or whatever the hell instead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom