See other Religion Articles
Title: Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross?
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Oct 18, 2007
Author: Bible
Post Date: 2007-10-18 13:09:07 by richard9151
Keywords: None
Views: 2722
Comments: 195
I find it curious that so many people have so much faith in men. And, in what men say, and this is esp. true when what the men says flys directly in the face of what they claim to represent/say. I hold to this firmly; A man is known by his actions, and not by his words. And this leads me directly to what is wrong with America; the churches. And specifically those churches which claim to be Christian churches. And to the men who serve in those churches, and who know that they lie. After all, such men do, supposedly, read the Bible. Well, they have at least one time in their lives I think it is fair to assume. More than that? Pretty doubtful actually. So this brings me to the question I posed in the title of this post; Was Jesus Christ crucified on a cross? The only acceptable answer to this comes from the Bible. I assume that everyone who claims to be Christian will agree with this. My first Bible (that I read extensively) was The King James Study Bible. I have continued to use it, although I have more than a dozen different Bibles now. In the King James; Galatians 3:13; Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, CURSED is EVERYONE THAT HANGETH ON A TREE. Second witness; "...for it is written ... " ; Deutronomy 22:22; And if a man have committed a sin worthy of death, and he be to be put to death, and thou hang him from a tree; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shall in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God;) ... Now, this may come as a surprise to many of you, but a tree ain't a cross; it is a post. In the Spanish translation of the King James, it is clearer, for they use the term madero, which means board, or, post. In addition, if you have read anything about the Roman Empire, one of the notable facts about the Romans was their efficiency in killing people. And it is not efficient to use two pieces of wood, i.e., a cross, when a single piece of wood, a post, will suffice. And, in fact, this is how the Romans did hang those who they wished to make examples out of; on a post. (Yeah, yeah, I know; all the movies use crosses. And, your point is?) There is another point that must be made here; when a man is hung on a post, or, for that matter, if he were to be hung on a cross, with nails, YOU CAN NOT DRIVE THE NAILS THROUGH THE PALMS OF HIS HAND. It will not work, because when the post/cross is lifted up and dropped into the hole prepared for it, the nails will rip out of the hands and the man will drop to the ground. The Romans knew this from, I am sure, experience, and the nails were ALWAYS driven into the wrists of the victim, between the two bones of the arm. This is the only location which offers enough strength to be usuable is such a manner. The best depiction of Jesus being executed that I have seen is contained in the Watchtower book; What Does The Bible Really Teach? on page 52. What does this mean: If you are attending a so-called Christian church, which uses the cross as a part of their worship, and protrays Jesus on that cross with nails through the palms of his hand, then you are participating in a deliberate lie. And, you are in a church properly described in Revelations a one of the daughters of the whore of Babylon. (I paraphrase; not going to look it up today.) Now, let's look at a couple of other Bibles and see what is said; New American Standard Bible; Galatians 3:13; Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us -- for it is writte, "CUESED IS EVERY ONE WHO HANGS ON A TREE" -- Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you hang him on a tree, (23) his corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), ... Pretty good. Not far off, but.... let's take a quick look at another Bible. Holy Bible From the Ancient Eastern Text (George M. Lamsa's Translation from the Aramaic of the Peshitta); Galatians 3:13; Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming accursed for our sakes (for it is writtenm Crused is everyone who hangs on a cross). OOPS! WOW! Boy, do we need that second witness now! Second Witness; Deuteronomy 21:22; And if any man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is crucified on a tree, and thus put to death; (23) His body shall not remain all night upon the tree but you shall bury him the same day (for he who shall revile God shall be crucified), ... Gotta a problem here, because the second witness does not confirm what was written in Galatians. That means that there is an error in this Bible, and brings into question any quotes taken from it, unless they be confirmed by a second witness. And this problem probably stems from the translator wanting to believe what he had been taught about the cross. And rather than translate directly, he transposed his beliefs into the translation. I am a Christian; I freely and happily and contentedly proclaim this to be true. Chritianity is NOT a religion; it is a way of life, attempting to follow in the footsteps of The Christ. As a Christian, I have a responsibility to study His Word, that I not be lead into error. I accept that responsibility. I also accept the responsibility to help others to learn as well, that any errors that I or they hold may be revealed and corrected jointly. I have stated this before; I ask for correction in anything that I am in error on. And I have been corrected, and I thank those who help me to learn, and, (this is a big one!) change. I hope you find this post helpful, and that it helps to bring all of us to a wider understanding of what is being, deliberately, done to America, through what is supposed to be His church (people). Next post, in a day or so; Is Jesus Christ God?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-11) not displayed.
.
.
.
#12. To: gengis gandhi (#8)
I am to assume from this comment that you have not read the Bible. If you had, and if you had spent any time in it, you would realize that the Bible is not and does not pretend to be a so-called god. The word god means judge; as in, those who judge. This is why the Ceasars were known as judges. They made the law and they judged the people according to the law. The Bible is about knowledge. That is why it has lasted for thousands of years. The Bible teaches people who they are, and how they stand in relation to the Natural Law of the universe, in however a manner you wish to view that Law. With the understanding that if you wish to deny that God is responsible for the universe, and you, then at some point you will pay a price for that belief. This is esp. true if you do crack open a Bible, and then deny what you have learned. I understand perfectly (as perfectly as is possible) that His Word is written in our hearts, and if we listen to Him, we know right from wrong. But that is not the purpose of the Bible, which is to explain many of the things we are faced with in this life, and how to deal with them. As well, as what is correct in ordering our lives. THAT, is why the Bible is so good for us.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
That applies only to the good ones. Yeah, and not only that but you have to be part of the RIGHT faction to qualify. The Catholics know they're the "right" faction, and everyone else is screwed. And the Baptists know their's is "right", just like the Lutherans know they have it right etc. Yep, that notion is quackery. Especially in light of the fact that Scripture teaches otherwise. Of course, religious leaders DON'T teach what the Scriptures actually say. Incidentally, I haven't found in Scripture where it says you'll "go to heaven" when you die either. I think the Bible has gotten a "bad rap". The worst thing that ever happened to it was that religions got their hands on it...
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. I'd just assume debate the historical verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings.
have you seen Zeitgeist Part 1? i'm not saying yea or nay. i do think it's compelling enough historical information to be at least considered as factual.
Where do you get that non-sense? Where does it teach, in the Bible, that Christians are to go to some heaven? And if you can not point out specifically where, in the Bible, this is taught, then you should not speak of that which you have no knowledge of. Do not confuse the mainstream daughters (so-called churches) of the whore of Babylon (Roman Catholic church) as Christian churches just cause they say that they are; a man is known by his works, and not by his words.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Really? And, where do you find this in the Bible? Please, I would like to know, cause I must have missed it. A bunch of times!
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
When Gibson's work is around for a couple of thousand years, then, just maybe, it will have some vailidity. Short of that, spare me.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Well Innie, I must admit you put forward a solid argument, and I'm especially happy about that lake of fire thing. I was told by a poster never to be mentioned by me that I might be doomed to spend a least a short shift there. I haven't had a decent night's sleep since.
That's fine. I just often wonder why people say things as if they are fact without being prepared to offer any evidence to support it.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. I have the Gibson Platinum DVD Collection pal...."The Passion" is complete with Aramaic / Latin / Hebrew subtitles and has a shelf life of more than twice that of my Spam stash, so it will pass your precious test of time.
No I haven't. Thanks for the link. I'll check it out later.
99 percent of lawyers give the rest a bad name. I get my information from reading. Where do you get yours from, the Bible? Where does it teach, in the Bible, that Christians are to go to some heaven? The Bible says, "Our Father who art in heaven," and, "No one gets to the Father except through Him." That's probably where Christians get the idea about Heaven and how to get there. The idea of ascending to "Heaven" is a ubiquitous notion in ancient religions predating Christianity by thousands of years. The pyramids in Egypt were built to facilitate the ascension of pharaohs into "Heaven" to join Horus, who was the son of Amen-Ra. The way to the Father was through the Son.
Huh! Thanks for this information. What happened to those who couldn't afford a pyramid? Wherever I'm going, I'll be there instantly, so cremation is the plan for my husk.
Here's a statue of Isis (the virgin) holding Horus, the son of God. Does it remind you of anyone?
I agree with you. Biblical literalists are the ultimate idolaters: Bibliolaters. They worship the literal text rather than following the spiritual meaning and teachings. It's not surprising that many Fundies also tend to be Zionists, which is basically idolatry of a piece of land.
I've been looking for the table of contents of the Bible 'in scripture' as opposed to the minutes of a Council of Catholic Bishops for years, but I haven't found it yet. Perhaps you can find me a table of contents from scripture itself?
America is not at war. The military is at war. America is at the mall and the Congress is out to lunch.
I thought I had posted this earlier, before I went to town, but it didn't 'take'. This provides a little more info regarding crosses and crucifying. From the International STandard Bible Enclyclopedia: CROSS (ÃıÅÁ¿Â, stauros, “a cross,” “the crucifixion”; ú¿»¿È, skolops, “a stake,” “a pole”): The name is not found in the Old Testament. It is derived from the Latin word crux. In the Greek language it is stauros, but sometimes we find the word skolops used as its Greek equivalent. The historical writers, who transferred the events of Roman history into the Greek language, make use of these two words. No word in human language has become more universally known than this word, and that because all of the history of the world since the death of Christ has been measured by the distance which separates events from it. The symbol and principal content of the Christian religion and of Christian civilization is found in this one word. 1. Forms of the Cross The cross occurs in at least four different forms: (1) The form usually seen in pictures, the crux immissa, in which the upright beam projected above the shorter crosspiece; this is most likely the type of cross on which the Saviour died, as may be inferred from the inscription which was nailed above His head; (2) The crux commissa, or Anthony's cross, which has the shape of the letter T; (3) The Greek cross of later date, in which the pieces are equally long; (4) The crux decussata, or Andrew's cross, which has the shape of the letter X. 2. Discovery of the True Cross The early church historians Socrates (1, 17), Sozomen (2, 1), Rufinus (1, 7) and Theodoret (1, 18) all make mention of this tradition. The most significant thing is that Eusebius (Vit. Const., iii.26-28), who carries more weight than they all together, wholly omits it. According to it, Helena, the mother of Constantine the Great, in 325 ad, when she was 79 years old, discovered the true cross of Jesus by an excavation she caused to be made on the traditional spot of His grave. With the cross of the Saviour were found the two crosses of the malefactors who were crucified with Him. A miracle of healing, wrought by touching the true cross, revealed its identity. When found it was intact, even the holy nails of the crucifixion being discovered. The main part of the cross was deposited by Helena in a church erected over the spot. Of the remainder, a portion was inserted into the head of the statue of Constantine, and the balance was placed in a new church, specially erected for it at Rome and named after it Santa Croce. Small fragments of the wood of the true cross were sold, encrusted with gold and jewels, and since many among the wealthy believers were desirous of possessing such priceless relics, the miracle of the “multiplication of the cross” was devised, so that the relic suffered no diminution “et quasi intacta maneret” (Paulinus epistle 11 ad Sev). Fragments of the true cross are Thus to be found in many Roman Catholic churches of many countries, all over Christendom. It is said that the East celebrated the staurosimos hemera (Crucifixion Day) on September 14, since the 4th century. The evidence for this fact is late and untrustworthy. It is certain that the West celebrated the Invention of the Cross, on May 3, since the time of Gregory the Great in the 6th century. The finding and publication of the apocryphal “Doctrina Addaei” has made it evident that the entire legend of the discovery of the cross by Helena is but a version of the old Edessa legend, which tells of an identical discovery of the cross, under the very same circumstances, by the wife of the emperor Claudius, who had been converted to Christianity by the preaching of Peter. 3. Symbolical Uses of the Cross (1) Extra-Scriptural The sign of the cross was well known in the symbolics of various ancient nations. Among the Egyptians it is said to have been the symbol of divinity and eternal life, and to have been found in the temple of Serapis. It is known either in the form of the Greek cross or in the form of the letter “T”. The Spaniards found it to be well known, as a symbol, by the Mexicans and Peruvians, perhaps signifying the four elements, or the four seasons, or the four points of the compass. (2) Scriptural The suffering implied in crucifixion naturally made the cross a symbol of pain, distress and burden-bearing. Thus Jesus used it Himself (Mat_10:38; Mat_16:24). In Paulinic literature the cross stands for the preaching of the doctrine of the Atonement (1Co_1:18; Gal_6:14; Phi_3:18; Col_1:20). It expresses the bond of unity between the Jew and the Gentile (Eph_2:16), and between the believer and Christ, and also symbolizes sanctification (Gal_5:24). The cross is the center and circumference of the preaching of the apostles and of the life of the New Testament church. 4. Crucifixion As an instrument of death the cross was detested by the Jews. “Cursed is everyone that hangeth on a tree” (Gal_3:13; compare Deu_21:23), hence, it became a stumbling-block to them, for how could one accursed of God be their Messiah? Nor was the cross differently considered by the Romans. “Let the very name of the cross be far away not only from the body of a Roman citizen, but even from his thoughts, his eyes, his ears” (Cicero Pro Rabirio 5). The earliest mode of crucifixion seems to have been by impalation, the transfixion of the body lengthwise and crosswise by sharpened stakes, a mode of death-punishment still well known among the Mongol race. The usual mode of crucifixion was familiar to the Greeks, the Romans, the Egyptians, Persians and Babylonians (Thuc. 1, 110; Herod. iii.125, 159). Alexander the Great executed two thousand Tyrian captives in this way, after the fall of the city. The Jews received this form of punishment from the Syrians and Romans (Ant., XII, v, 4; XX, vi, 2; BJ, I, iv, 6). The Roman citizen was exempt from this form of death, it being considered the death of a slave (Cicero In Verrem i. 5, 66; Quint. viii.4). The punishment was meted out for such crimes as treason, desertion in the face of the enemy, robbery, piracy, assassination, sedition, etc. It continued in vogue in the Roman empire till the day of Constantine, when it was abolished as an insult to Christianity. Among the Romans crucifixion was preceded by scourging, undoubtedly to hasten impending death. The victim then bore his own cross, or at least the upright beam, to the place of execution. This in itself proves that the structure was less ponderous than is commonly supposed. When he was tied to the cross nothing further was done and he was left to die from starvation. If he was nailed to the cross, at least in Judea, a stupefying drink was given him to deaden the agony. The number of nails used seems to have been indeterminate. A tablet, on which the feet rested or on which the body was partly supported, seems to have been a part of the cross to keep the wounds from tearing through the transfixed members (Iren., Adv. haer., ii.42). The suffering of death by crucifixion was intense, especially in hot climates. Severe local inflammation, coupled with an insignificant bleeding of the jagged wounds, produced traumatic fever, which was aggravated the exposure to the heat of the sun, the strained of the body and insufferable thirst. The swelled about the rough nails and the torn lacerated tendons and nerves caused excruciating agony. The arteries of the head and stomach were surcharged with blood and a terrific throbbing headache ensued. The mind was confused and filled with anxiety and dread foreboding. The victim of crucifixion literally died a thousand deaths. Tetanus not rarely supervened and the rigors of the attending convulsions would tear at the wounds and add to the burden of pain, till at last the bodily forces were exhausted and the victim sank to unconsciousness and death. The sufferings were so frightful that “even among the raging passions of war pity was sometimes excited” (BJ, V, xi, 1). The length of this agony was wholly determined by the constitution of the victim, but death rarely ensued before thirty-six hours had elapsed. Instances are on record of victims of the cross who survived their terrible injuries when taken down from the cross after many hours of suspension (Josephus, Vita, 75). Death was sometimes hastened by breaking the legs of the victims and by a hard blow delivered under the armpit before crucifixion. Crura fracta was a well-known Roman term (Cicero Phil. xiii.12). The sudden death of Christ evidently was a matter of astonishment (Mar_15:44). The peculiar symptoms mentioned by John (Joh_19:34) would seem to point to a rupture of the heart, of which the Saviour died, independent of the cross itself, or perhaps hastened by its agony. See BLOOD AND WATER.
We know from history that over 3000 accused Hebrew zealots were executed on the same hill where Jesus is said to have died. They used crucifixion, but it was not like the version seen in most Christian churches. The cross was the top of a T bar cross. It fitted upon a pole that stood there as the bottom part of the T structure. The person to be executed was nailed through the wrists to the top bar of the T section, then the top bar was hoisted upon the bottom of the T section - the pole. The pole was permanent. The T cross piece was removed and reused for the next person to be executed. If Jesus was executed by the Romans, he was likely crucified as described above, on a T bar cross.
Here's your lake 'o fire. Now, the poster who I shall not name is missing for nearly a year which leads me to believe either the Rapture has already happened and he made the cut, or his whereabouts was discovered by the men in white coats.
Jesus is the personification of the sun, or the sun anthropomorphized. He's the sun of god, the light of the world, who has risen. Christianity has its roots in the worship of the heavens. This is why Christians believe that when they die they will go to "heaven" with God's sun. They'll be coming for you after dark, heretic, but you're right.
Because GOD IS LOVE!! Yeah, but don't piss him off by geeing when you should have hawed.
All of your religious beliefs are OPINIONS. And that's a FACT. You worship dogma you've been taught. We worship knowledge, information, and logic. It's a FACT that you cannot prove there is a God or that Jesus ever lived.
Scientology and Mormon religions are built around works of fiction, so why not use LOTR to start one? It would make more sense than the bullshit Mormons and Scientologists believe.
I think the evidence that someone named Jesus existed is pretty good.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
If you ever do nearly as much reading as I do/have done, then you can mention it. Not until. I started with the Bible long after I read hundreds of books. Found out it was the only place with the information I needed. As to the above; The Bible says, "Our Father who art in heaven," and, "No one gets to the Father except through Him." The first is a prayer, and the second has nothing to do with going to heaven, so what is your point? The last part you got at least partly correct, but you did not go to the correct source, which is Babylon. If you want to understand more, start with the book, The Two Babylons. Then, do a net search for December 25th and the son of god Nimrod Istar. There are several more parts of this as well. The point being that Nimrod is the god mentioned in this search and in most of the religions that follow Babylon, only under different names.
When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest.
Horus. Jesus. Same stories with variations. The problem with arguing with religious types is they are so ignorant of anything except the echo chamber they live in, and the dogmatized myths that they accept uncritically, no matter how illogical or absurd. If they had ever read any history that wasn't fouled with religious nonsense, they'd know that nothing about the Jesus story is original - particularly not his famous Sermon on the Mount. That's why I don't argue with them any more, just ridicule them like I would a person who believes in the tooth fairy.
You think is right. You don't know, and there is very little evidence he did. Perhaps you're influenced by your religious beliefs. That's what usually makes people believe religious stories. From a historical point of view, there is simply no credible evidence.
My first three degrees are in Classics (Greek and Latin). I studied a lot of ancient (mostly non-Christian) literature and history. So I'm familiar with documents of the time. And the evidence that someone named Jesus existed is stronger than that for the existence of a lot of ancient persons whose historicity is undoubted.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Thank you. You are absolutely correct. It is idolatry. They worship their own versions and interpretations of the Bible. The funniest part is that every generation is CONVINCED that it understands the Bible better than any other before it, and that ITS interpretation is really THE ONE. Such incredible smugness, just the type Jesus routinely scorned.
You have no proof Jesus ever existed, your statement to the contrary notwithstanding. I don't care if the Pope gave you a letter of recommendation, your history is weak, weak, weak. I'm familiar with the documents of the time, too, and that's why I know they do not mention Jesus, except for one very dubious reference made at least 30 years after he is alleged to have died. Stop acting like you have a secret stash of historical info. You're bullshitting and calling it part of your education. I'm not going to recite my curriculum vitae.
There are a couple of papyrus fragments of the Gospels of Mark and Matthew that seem to antedate the First Jewish Rebellion and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. The Jesus Papyrus.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Then I'm sure you are familiar with this guy: …if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. ... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.[73] - Michael Grant
Matthew and Mark are both based upon another unidentified source, commonly call Q. Mark was written circa 65 BCE, before Matthew, about 30 years after Jesus is said to have died.
This is how religions get started. The difference between a group of mad hatters and a religion is largely time and the aggregate number who follow the beliefs.
Not trying to be facetious, but the words "crucifix" and "crucify" are formed from the root cruc, meaning a cross. (In automotive lingo, a chassis that has an X-shaped support is termed "cruciform".) Had they just nailed Jesus to a post, I think they would have used a different word.
" Junk is the ideal product... the ultimate merchandise. No sales talk necessary. The client will crawl through a sewer and beg to buy." - William S Burroughs
I started with the Bible long after I read hundreds of books. Found out it was the only place with the information I needed. You found out it was the only place with information you needed? How did you find this out? Was it through the power of the holy spirit? The first is a prayer, and the second has nothing to do with going to heaven, so what is your point? You asked me where the Bible says that Christians are going to Heaven. I showed you. What difference does it make what context it's in? Christians believe in Heaven and that they're going there. I've never met a Christian who didn't believe that. Either they read it somewhere or somebody told them. In either case, they blindly believed it. ...you did not go to the correct source, which is Babylon. You need to go further back. Sun mythology and the worship of the heavens predates Babylon and Nimrod.
I appreciate the Jesus story for its inspirational and literary value. If he didn't live and die for his beliefs, he should have. Myth or reality, this song still has meaning for me.
Well at least ya won't have to drag a sleeping bag there.
"Satan / Cheney in "08"
That is the conventional dating of the gospels, which was developed before these papyrus fragments turned up. Science is supposed to alter its views to cope with conflicting data.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
…if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. ... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.[73] - Michael Grant Yes, I've read several books by Michael Grant. I'm glad to see he had the same opinion I do. (I use the past tense because I discover from Wikipedia that he died in 2004.)
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Comments (53 - 195) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestidolatry of a book....a map is not the place, a book is not god.
#13. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
This is why Christians believe that when they die they will go to "heaven"
The bad ones will be tossed into a lake of fire, where rather than die quickly, they'll roast alive for eternity. Quackery.
Steven Wright
#14. To: innieway (#11)
#15. To: innieway (#11)
#16. To: Alan Chapman (#9)
Christianity has its roots in the worship of the heavens.
#17. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
The bad ones will be tossed into a lake of fire, where rather than die quickly, they'll roast alive for eternity.
#18. To: Jethro Tull (#7)
Why is the Gibson vehicle any less valid than the recount in any of the myriad of B-books ?
#19. To: innieway (#13)
#20. To: Alan Chapman (#14)
I'd just assume debate the historical verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings.
Steven Wright
#21. To: richard9151 (#18)
When Gibson's work is around for a couple of thousand years, then, just maybe, it will have some vailidity.
#22. To: christine (#15)
have you seen Zeitgeist Part 1?
Steven Wright
#23. To: richard9151 (#16)
#24. To: Alan Chapman (#23)
The idea of ascending to "Heaven" is a ubiquitous notion in ancient religions predating Christianity by thousands of years. The pyramids in Egypt were built to facilitate the ascension of pharaohs into "Heaven" to join Horus, who was the son of Amen-Ra. The way to the Father was through the Son.
#25. To: innieway (#20)
#26. To: gengis gandhi (#8)
idolatry of a book....a map is not the place, a book is not god
#27. To: richard9151 (#17)
where do you find this in the Bible? Please, I would like to know, cause I must have missed it.
#28. To: richard9151 (#0)
#29. To: all (#0)
#30. To: richard9151 (#17)
http://www.biblicaltheology.org/lof.pdf
#31. To: Alan Chapman (#9)
Jesus is a fictional character like Hercules and the Bible is nothing but a collection of sun-worship allegories and folklore.
#32. To: Jethro Tull (#10)
That applies only to the good ones. The bad ones will be tossed into a lake of fire, where rather than die quickly, they'll roast alive for eternity. Quackery.
#33. To: innieway (#11)
Can you offer any evidence of these allegations? If not, then they are merely opinions.
#34. To: Alan Chapman (#14)
I'd just assume debate the historical verisimilitude of Lord of the Rings.
#35. To: Paul Revere (#33)
#36. To: Alan Chapman (#23)
I get my information from reading. Where do you get yours from, the Bible?
#37. To: Alan Chapman (#23)
The idea of ascending to "Heaven" is a ubiquitous notion in ancient religions predating Christianity by thousands of years. The pyramids in Egypt were built to facilitate the ascension of pharaohs into "Heaven" to join Horus, who was the son of Amen-Ra. The way to the Father was through the Son.
#38. To: aristeides (#35)
(Edited)
I think the evidence that someone named Jesus existed is pretty good.
#39. To: Paul Revere (#38)
#40. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#26)
I agree with you. Biblical literalists are the ultimate idolaters: Bibliolaters. They worship the literal text rather than following the spiritual meaning and teachings. It's not surprising that many Fundies also tend to be Zionists, which is basically idolatry of a piece of land.
#41. To: aristeides (#39)
(Edited)
#42. To: Paul Revere (#41)
I'm familiar with the documents of the time, too, and that's why I know they do not mention Jesus, except for one very dubious reference made at least 30 years after he is alleged to have died.
#43. To: Paul Revere (#34)
#44. To: aristeides (#42)
My first three degrees are in Classics (Greek and Latin). I studied a lot of ancient (mostly non-Christian) literature and history.
#45. To: aristeides (#42)
There are a couple of papyrus fragments of the Gospels of Mark and Matthew that seem to antedate the First Jewish Rebellion and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
#46. To: Alan Chapman (#43)
Jedi census phenomenon
#47. To: richard9151 (#0)
#48. To: richard9151 (#36)
#49. To: Alan Chapman (#48)
#50. To: Jethro Tull (#19)
I'm especially happy about that lake of fire thing. I was told by a poster never to be mentioned by me that I might be doomed to spend a least a short shift there. I haven't had a decent night's sleep since.
#51. To: Paul Revere (#45)
#52. To: SmokinOPs (#44)
Then I'm sure you are familiar with this guy:
.
.
.