What the Hell??!!! Why does every  Theist  that comes on the board,  either have a chip on their shoulder or a large target painted on their butt ?!?

 

At the risk of sounding like an Idiot, Havent been around the tube recently. I d rather hear the ravings of the redneck cephalopods: the Yogi BERRA of gibberish. The provider of GLUG, undoubtedly past on by his Grand-pappy from the prohibition days. :¬

 

 

 

 

                   .................but frankly we have heard it all before.

 

                  1]   Nameing existing citys and countries is no big deal any adult could do it.  Thousands of people were crucified in Roman times, I'd be amazed if they did not find such evidence in a graveyard.

 

                  2]   One, two & three hundred years after the fact they were rewriting hear-say evidence, Josephus never wrote a word on J.C. an 18th century asshole redacted his text.

 

                  3]  They were rewriting stories, some of which came from before 90 BCE.

 

                  4]  During a spring flood the mudbrick wall turned back into mud and collapsed.

 

                  5]   That ossuary was later proven a fraud and the man responsible is now doing time in an Israeli prison.

 

                  6]  It proves the text of the bible was the same in the first century CE, it does Not prove accuracy.

 

                   7]  That might prove Daniel existed, 500  years before Caeser.  So what?

 

                  8] it proves one of meny flood storys before the bible existed,  it may be where the bible writers got the idea from.

 

                   9]  Pilate was a Roman govenor, in Syria, in the wrong time frame.

 

                    10] destroyed by an earthquake. It does not prove god or a jesus.

 

                    11]   Localized versions of the "great flood" happen all over the world every spring thaw or a clogged drainage systom. People live near water sources.

 

                  12]  The list in the bible misses a few of the kings, which probably explains why it is 50 to 90 years off the real mark. 

 

                  13]  It wasn't much of a war the Assyrians invaded, and the biblical time frame is still 150 years off the mark.

 

                  14]  That might be significant if David was a god or at least invested with some godly powers, he wasn't.  David was a successful warlord, if his real name wasn't David, there was some warlord like him kicking ass in that time frame. It doesn't prove god, jesus or accuracy of the rest of the bible.

 

                   

 

                    

 

           

 

 

How the hell did you make me out to be a Theist? You can call me anything but that. I think you are confused.

 

                      Ossuary of James has already been proven to be a fake.

 

                    edit:  sorry, didn't notice that Jeffrick had already posted that info.

If you go and see the movie Superman, and he flies around New York city in the movie, since NY is a real city, does that mean Superman is real and can fly?

George Washington was a real person, but only a fool would believe someone if they claimed he could fart a real full sized Lamborghini out of his ass.

Magic/supernatural, are NOT REAL. The stories in the bible are embellished myth written to draw people into the stories in them.  Every culture back then believed some superstition. Once you buy a myth as fact, you will believe it and pass it down to the next generation, unless you get lucky like we did and wake up, or never be sold it in the first place.

Virgin births do not happen. Surviving rigor mortis dos not happen.

And another thing, don't assume what atheists don't know.(As the title of the thread implies)

You are not dealing with amateurs here. Many of us have been on line debating for 10-15 years on multiple websites. Many were born atheists. Many here have degrees in science, and some are even former minister

 

  

 

 

In the Theist's assessment and counter to Jeffrick' run down, how  about focusing exclusively on numbers 1 through 8 and 10 through 14?

My original comment, however wrongly directed, was at its' heart  solely on the Theists' behaviour on the board, that is all

I'm late to this discussion because I wanted to give it the detail and research it deserved.

OK, this could be interesting.

How is a 1st Century CE travelogue archeology?
You should also mention that the writer purported to be Luke for these 2 books had insufficient knowledge about the area where all of the Jesus episodes were alleged to have occurred. He also disagrees with the other storytellers on the events of the Jesus in many areas.
1-Where was Nazareth? No one but the writers of the New Testament seem to have noticed it existed in the 1st century CE, not even Josephus who you used later in your presentation. He described extensively cities, towns and villages in Judea but mentions no place named Nazareth.
2-The sermon on the mount or was it the sermon on the plain as Luke described it?
3-The healing of the blind man on the way into Jericho or was it on the way from Jericho as in Luke.
4-Luke 17 and the journey to Jerusalem. This trip is general. What village? Pay attention, Jesus has been on the road to Jerusalem since chap 9. Read carefully the descriptions of the geography and the lack of detail.
5-I haven't even touched on the storytelling episode of the supposed Roman census, which is pure fiction on the part of the writer of Luke as he told it.


As far as I know there was found but one "victim" in Jerusalem with a nail in his heel. His name was 'Yehohanan, the son of Hagakol' according to wiki. So was the supposed execution of the criminal  Jesus special somehow or was he modeled after the known methods of Roman execution?

This proves what exactly? That the Romans executed people, we already know that. Even back after the slave rebellion in Italy they did so. That the criminal Jesus was executed likely proves he incited rebellion against Rome and not being a Roman was executed in the most heinous way as an example. Such was also the case following the Jewish rebellion in 70 CE as well.

Did they now? Let see if your statement has basis and merit.

In the Annals book 15 chapter 44 all Tacitus has to say is the legend that Nero blamed the Christians for the fire in Rome. He refers to Christus being executed by Pilate. This was written in 115 CE well into the storytelling legend of the Jesus. Does this prove Tacitus knew of Jesus or he knew of the storytelling legends? Do You have a copy of his autobiography or detail attesting to what he knew or didn't know on the subject? If so, please detail it for us. What and Why do you think he knew and why do you think that?

You must be referring to his Letters 10.96-97 to Trajan circa 112-113 CE on the subject of Christians. How does the fact that he was discussing those said to be Christians reflect on the reality or not of the Jesus character? This letter only discusses those that believe and is not support that the Jesus was a real person and not just a character.

He was a second century Greek satirist who wrote that the founder of the Christians introduced the rites practiced by them and was killed for doing so. This info was easily obtained in the 2nd century that the Christians believed in this story. This somehow makes the Jesus a person and not a character? If so, explain how discussing what someone else believes makes the subject true.

I suppose that this tidbit is what you mean :
"In the fourth year, however, of Olympiad 202,* an eclipse of the sun happened, greater and more excellent than any that had happened before it; at the sixth hour, day turned into dark night, so that the stars were seen in the sky, and an earthquake in Bithynia toppled many buildings of the city of Nicaea. These things [are according to] the aforementioned man."
During the average day there are 50 earthquakes.
See - http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/eqstats.php
Bithynia is part of Turkey, an area with a long history of seismic activity.
Solar eclipses vary in their view and observance, depending on one's location.
This proves what?
That there were earthquakes and solar eclipses 2000 years ago?


I suppose you refer to his book "Life of Claudius 25.4" where it has the statement, "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."
However, this easily can be a Greek name and not the Jesus character at all.  About this time, 49 CE there is mentioned that Jews were expelled from Rome. Acts supposedly also mentioned this. So was Chrestus the Jesus, a Jew in Rome causing problems, or another messiah wannabe?
Suetonius also in the same book in 16.2 said  "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition."
However nothing of the Jesus character is discussed.
Yep, there were probably Christians around. Nope it doesn't prove that the character was real.


I think you probably mean Justus of Tiberias who was from the same area as the Jesus character supposedly. Funny you'd bring him up as his silence on the Jesus is more damning than supportive. He was a rival and contemporary of Josephus.
According to Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople in the 9th Century he read Justus' works and said, " I have read the chronology of Justus of Tiberias ... and being under the Jewish prejudices, as indeed he was himself also a Jew by birth, he makes not one mention of Jesus, of what happened to him, or of the wonderful works that he did."
So exactly what support do you have that Justus wrote about the Jesus?

 
Which Philo do you mean here?
Philo of Alexandria per chance?
If so, again you should have not mentioned him either as once again, he is one that should have noticed the Jesus and his Christians but he wrote not one word about the character or his followers. Funny that.

The only thing I know in this regard is this 1928 book of fiction written by W. P. Crozie titled Letters of Pontius Pilate: Written during His Governorship of Judea to His Friend Seneca in Rome.
Think this was real? See this link from a 1928 review of this book of fiction - http://www.guardian.co.uk/newsroom/crozier/images/0%2C12920%2C945919%2C00.html
Seneca wrote not one word in regard to the Jesus.


The only well known work by him was what may be one of the earliest novels, aka a book of fiction called The Satyricon of Petronius Arbiter.
You have something else on him, please present it?


The only thing I'm aware of regarding him is this, "We must now speak of the interior of Syria. Cœle Syria has the town of Apamea, divided by the river Marsyas from the Tetrarchy of the Nazerini; Bambyx, the other name of which is Hierapolis, but by the Syrians called Mabog."
Many like you see the Nazerini to be the Nazarenes. He wrote this prior to about 77 CE in his Historia Naturalis, Book V. He used research from official Roman records however dated to about 20 to 30 BCE long before the Jesus character appeared.
So, no Pliny the Elder did not write about the Jesus or his followers.

This one is not good for you either. The most likely date for this writer was about 109 BCE. Other possibilities exist such as about 52 CE or even 180 CE. The subject matter is the discussion of a solar eclipse, something we know happens all of the time.
As no original manuscripts exist or even copies of his work we know of him only by other writers and Christian Apologentics.

This is from a short letter to his son. the letter can't be pinned down any closer than from 73 CE to 200 CE. It says this "Or the Jews by the murder of their Wise King, seeing that from that very time their kingdom was driven away from them? For with justice did God grant a recompense to the wisdom of all three of them."
As to who the wise king was or when it was written its up for interpretation. The others mentioned in this letter are far before the time of the Jesus, so perhaps the wise king was a king of Judah before Nebuchadnezzar conquered them.
See this link for a discussion - http://www.theskepticalreview.com/tsrmag/4mara95.html


Anyone claiming this should read all of his works for perspective. This has already been mentioned as to why it is not likely, Josephus was a pious Jew and buying into the Jesus as the messiah is not in context with his other writing. He meticulously detailed Jewish beliefs for hundreds of years, if he bought the Jesus story why not go into detail on more than a simple mention of the Jesus the brother of James the Just being executed. It is likely a Christian forgery attempt by none other than Eusebius. Another Christian father Oriegen somehow never noticed this in the works of Josephus when he commented on them.

Would you expect the leaders of the Jesus storytelling legends to discredit the Jesus stories?

Polycarp was a believer, supposedly a disciple of John. As to the truth of this one can't know as he never himself indicated this was so in his writing. His sole surviving manuscript, Polycarp's letter to the Phillipians doesn't indicate this was so.

Another believer. He was supposedly acquainted with Peter. There are 7 letters deemed genuine by Ignatius and six forgeries. The 7 letters that are considered genuine were supposedly written as he was en route to Rome for trial and execution. I personally have doubts that these are any more real than those considered forgeries. In the content, he discusses the soldiers as wild beasts. Considering Christians were being hunted at this point one has to wonder how these letters were obtained while in custody of Rome.
Regardless, he did not witness the Jesus personally  anyway as he was born in 50 CE.
 
Another believer. He did not know the Jesus either as he was born somewhere between 115 and 142 CE, exact date unknown. He died in 202. He primarily wrote against heresies, his work Against Heresies was the prime example. He was born perhaps 100 years after the Jesus episodes and so is not a witness.
 
Clement supposedly the 4th bishop of Rome is attributed to be the writer of 1 Clement. 2 Clement most scholars consider a forgery in his name. He is alleged to be a disciple of Peter and never met the Jesus. He never discussed the 4 Gospels in his writing of 1 Clement circa 95 CE. He does however use the Hebrew Bible and its heroes in his discussion in his epistle to Corinth regarding the sedition that was in process there. He has no description of the Passion story but indicates the Jesus gave his blood and was raised from death. He also discussed the mythical Phoenix which supposedly rose from the ashes. He compares the resurrection to everyday events such as seeds growing.
 
Another believer who was born after the Jesus approximately 70 CE who died in 150 CE. He was not thought of well by church father Eusebius who considered him to be a man of small mental ability.
Anything he wrote on the Jesus is hearsay.
 
Another believer born far after the Jesus approximately 185 CE who died in about 255 CE. He was another controversial church father.
He never met the Jesus or any of the disciples as they were long dead.
 
Bryant Wood! Really! He has been disgraced and removed from the investigation of Jericho. Kathleen Kenyon's dating has been well established showing Bryant is wrong and Jericho had no walls at the supposed time of the mythical Joshua invasion. See also Bible Unearthed by Finkelstein.
 
This was a fake, don't you keep up to date on these things?
See - http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1850111,00.html

 
But Enoch is not in your Bible and it was very prevalent in the DSS. Even the Jesus knew of it.
The accuracy you describe is far from perfect, and it does not do a thing towards validation of the story telling in the Hebrew bible at all.

 
For an extensive look at this subject I recommend the following thread where a believer named Gramster and I had a very long examination and argument.
See - http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/20506
From Post 252 to 1500
 
I personally like the Sumerian Creation stories which predate your Bible story telling episodes by generations, and even the Ebla tablets have basis in Sumerian, they were written in it for one.
 
And he was mentioned by Josephus as going a bit too far with violence, not that the Romans cared about dead Jews, he was causing far more issues than he suppressed.

 
No one knows for sure if these cities were real or not, I love how you jump at any thin possibilities though.
Not found however.
See - http://www.bib-arch.org/e-features/sodom-and-gomorrah.asp

 
I rather like the Sumerian stories of the flood. Man made so much noise the gods couldn't stand it and so flooded the world. It rained for 7 days and a wall of water engulfed their known world. Gee, this sound like a very large hurricane going up the Persian Gulf.

 
Since the Sumerians predate your Yahweh stories are you planning to start worshiping the one and only true gods the Annuanki and the ruler of the Earth the great Lord Enki?

 
As Israel and Judah were not the same kingdoms at this time, if ever actually, this substantiates nothing in regard to what god Israel actually accepted. Ahab, the vile hated by the writers of the Hebrew bible, was a very strong king who fought the Assyrians with a coalition to a draw in 853 BCE. The story telling of the Bible also has issues with regard to who actually killed Jehoram king of Israel and Ahaziah king of Judah. 2 Kings 9 claims it was Jehu however, the tel Dan Inscription, says it was King Hazael of Damascus who killed them.
 
This only indicates there was a 'house of David" much like "sons of Zeus". It also has king Hazael killing Jehoram and Ahaziah instead of Jehu thus discrediting the Bible's storytelling version.

 
Thousands! There are thousands of claims, yet none seem to stand up to scrutiny.

Thanks!

 

 

Lovely work, John Paul. Thanks for going to the trouble of doing that. I read all of it.

 

 

I agree someone wrote a Book that has the name of Luke and the same person probably wrote the Book with the name Acts.

Both books demonstrate a lack of knowledge of the geography of Palestine among other problems.

Rome crucified slaves, criminals, pirates and those found guity of treason or crimes against the state.

The nails used to attach the criminals were in high demand as healing amulets and because of the cost were either reused or melted down for the iron.

Normally, the executed corpses were left to rot and then dumped in a garbage dump. In 70 CE the rebels were left to rot on crosses after the Romans decimated Jerusalem as a warning.

Yep, and so was Caesar Augustus, Tiberious, Nero, Caligula, Herod the Great, Herod Archelaus, Herod Antipas, John the Baptist, James the Just, several messiah wannabes such as Judas of Galilee, Menahem ben Judah, Theudas, John of Gischala, an insane man called Jesus who the Romans captured and let go (not the one called Jesus Christ or Yashua bar Joseph) among others.

Using real people in storytelling is a common practice. So?

 

I DON'T CARE! If there was a person named Jesus. 1. Jesus was a common name back then. 2. Many cultures back then invented "Kristos" meaning "anointed one". Hardly impressive. The Romans were excellent census takers and would not take kindly to the challenge to the state. NOWHERE outside the bible is there any lick of evidence OF ANY NOTE TAKING, during the alleged time of the Jesus Character. All the writers of the NT WERE AFTER THE FACT, Josephus was AFTER THE FACT. And no matter what IT TAKES TWO SETS OF DNA to make a baby, so the birth of Jesus as a claim of ghost sperm is bullshit. Human flesh cannot survive rigor mortis, thus making the magical claim of the character's death bullshit.

Noah? Really? Go read your own bible, there isn't just one version or one account. It both claims 2 of each and 7 of each. And how would Noah take care of dangerous animals like hippos and alligators and cobras and black widows and dart frogs? "Poof", that's all you have is "poof". Abra Kadabra.

The bible is a book of myth, PERIOD. It is not a science textbook, it is a book of myth. Written over 1,000 year period with books left out, and written by over 40 authors. Your alleged god creates the entire universe, but cant put out a book in one setting? How about reality, the bible wasn't written in one setting because it was written by humans and NOT handed down by a god.

"God did it" is no different to me than when a child invents a pretend friend, the only difference is when we grow up, we give up on pretend friends.

 

 

You mean that the books of Luke and Acts exist. 2-That the Romans executed criminals 3-And that storytelling sometimes uses real peoples names to make the stories seem real though they aren't

If the Jesus character was a real human or he lived on this planet in the suggested time frame, my thought is he was a rebel in the mold of John the Baptist, possibly one of his lieutenants. They eventually had a parting of the ways as John wanted to use violence to free Judea and the Jesus tried to win over the population to his side with less violent means. Though the story of attacking the temple concession stands indicates he was also capable of using violence as well.

But no my friend, I have issues with the Yahweh god of mythology that is supposedly the father of the Jesus. The Yahweh is a Canaanite god that has morphed over time into the god of the Jews. His origins lie in the Canaanite myths where he is the son of El and possibly the same god worshiped as Ba'al.

If any ark is ever discovered it won't be Noah's ark it will be Ziusudra's or Atrahasis' ark not Noah.

That would establish that Enki is the Lord of the Earth, not the pretender Yahweh.

As the Noah storytelling is based on the Sumerian and it's just storytelling as well, no ark is ever going to be found, as an ark was not needed to escape the hurricane flood waters in Mesopotamia.

The KJV and the later NKJV are inaccurate as compared to the Hebrew Bible. All of them contain inaccurate history, myths, and storytelling.

No Moses, no invasion of Canaan, No great kings David and Solomon. No United Israel. Samson is a Jewish version of the Herakles myths.

So, no that's not going to occur.

The only Apostles of the early group that have possibilities of any roles in history are: Paul the Mythmaker, James the Just the priest, and Peter. The rest of the 12 described have little basis in reality as portrayed. Whether any of them may have been real persons is indeterminate, but in any event the NT has multiple choice versions of their characters that exhibit storytelling. Other than James and Paul it is difficult to find any history of them outside the NT storytelling.

 

BINGO!

It makes much more sense to me that our current myths are merely the product of spin offs of prior myths and we(our species that is) merely market to compete. It isn't that gods are real, it is that some conflict happens in a society to the point where a rival decides to compete with the social norm, they pull prior motifs and even names out of the surrounding culture and start something new.

It is the same thing that drives businesses to compete. Coke comes out with a cherry soda and Pepsi looks at it and says "I gotta get in on that". It isn't that gods are real, anymore than Coke was the first beverage because it's can was red.

All these myths were not around 1 billion years ago, and they will not be remembered after our species goes extinct because there won't be any future generation to sell the myths to.

I think you are missing the point completely.  You won't be able to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that THE Jesus existed.  Even if a Jesus rebel with a brother James did exist, and even if he was crucified, so what? He certainly didn't perform any miracles, and there are greater atrocities going on as we speak in the Middle-eastern conflict and most ongoing African conflicts.  The point is, the absolute very best you are ever going to establish is that some person that existed is tied to something mentioned in the bible.  That should hardly be a revelation in any way shape or form.  I will give you that right now so you can stop wasting effort.  Some biblical stories are based on real historical individuals... there, happy?

Of course the bible is partly based on real individuals, and partly based on borrowed ancient myths.  Christianity is no different from any other religion.  

Yes, i am.

Farewell

This one comes from a Atheist historian.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdqJyk-dtLs&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I unfortunately don't know enough to contribute anything to this discussion. I just wanted to say you guys are awesome, and I'm learning tons reading all of this! You make me feel so proud to be an atheist! Thank you!

Jimenezj: I watched it (listened to it) the first time you posted it. I laughed less the second time. I’m not a complete fool, I would just never want to debate the likes of Brian37, or pauljohn, or most any other atheist on this forum. I’ll take on a theist any day, any time though. What exactly should I have found to be so earth shattering about that recording you posted? Many otherwise intelligent people believe in the historical Jesus. Even National Geographic prints articles about it. At one time, most otherwise intelligent people believed the earth was flat, or had four corners, or was the center of the solar system. They were wrong. Besides, even if a person named Jesus the son of Joseph lived, and was the revolutionary the NT has made him out to be, that is no reason to believe he is the son of an imaginary monster god… There is no reason to believe Yahweh fucked Marry with the holy spirit. It’s a completely silly idea. Wake up!

Neither do any ancient writings of any culture. Archeology DOES prove that humans existed and DOES prove cultural beliefs and memes and superstitions that that culture held at that time.

So you try to back peddle with a "pseudo bone" for us atheists to attempt to say "BUT here is the real truth lies"

Which makes Archeology a much more valid objective tool to observing the past than a comic book club humans subscribes to. It does not have the bonds of blind loyalty like religion because it's only objective is to say "This happened at this time and at this time these people did theses things and held certain beliefs at that time"

"I distrust what god believers say what god wants because it usually coincided with their desires" Susan B Anthony.

Here is the only go of Archeology "THIS HAPPENED"

Here is the goal of religion " I am the best, my club invented everything, humans are nothing without it"

 

Ok fuckwad, next time you go to Disney World or Disney Land deny that the park YOU ARE FUCKING STANDING IN, makes claims about a fictional mouse. The difference between that business and religion, is that it is not trying to sell Mickey Mouse as real. But both business and religion require on marketing, even if both sell crap.

 

I've never seen any evidence of the tooth fairy...

"Transitional Form?" What exactly would qualify as such? I hope you don't mean a crocoduck. I have a huge aquarium which contains fish that, if denied access to air would DROWN. They also use their pelvic fins to walk across the aquarium bottom. They are gorgeous examples of "Transitional Forms" but I'm guessing you don't know enough biology to see that. Just please don't tell me you are looking for a crocoduck...

You said,
"Transitional Form?" What exactly would qualify as such?

Read Charles Darwin's books and find out if you are serious about evolution and life .

Read the bible and study it if you are serious about debating it.

You said,

I am still technically an ordained priest.

You have said it all and answered the question
Of why you do not understand scripture.

Man will choose and ordaine priest and pastors.

God will choose and anoint servants for the ministry that are ministers
For life.

That is the reason why you do not understand scripture.
Because you place your hope in man, and man will always
Fail. Therefore you will fail to understand.

Any one can read the bible, but not everyone will study it, in
Trying to understand it.

I do not have the time to teach children about evolution theory .

But i will give you a clue:

This is what Charles Darwin wrote :

…Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties?

Go to school and find the answers to man's questions.

You will have better luck understanding the bible if you were to read it and study it.

Farewell.