If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   "You mean that Jesus might have had severe diarrhea?" "Yep, That's exactly what I mean." Holy crap   (religion.blogs.cnn.com) divider line 180
    More: Amusing, Nazareth, self-help, Liberty University, Christian mythology  
•       •       •

17057 clicks; posted to Main » on 07 Jan 2013 at 4:08 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



180 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-01-07 05:40:18 PM
Lord Dimwit

Supes: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Please. I'm Jewish and could give a rat's ass whether he actually existed or not, and I definitely don't believe he's divine. But there's no question at all there's a significant amount of historical evidence that a "Jesus" existed, and most historical scholars believe this.

Can anyone prove it? Of course not. But there's way more evidence there than for a historical Robin Hood or Merlin.

I've always been interested in the question of whether or not Jesus actually existed. I used to just accept the consensus of scholars that he probably did, but as I've gotten older I've changed my views back and forth several times. First off, most scholars who have even asked the question throughout history are Christian, and so have a bias.

There are no writings from Jesus's life that mention him. Zero. None. None of the Gospels were written during his life or even by anyone who knew him (the attributions of the Gospels to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John doesn't hold up to any kind of literary criticism). The Pauline Epistles, written before the Gospels, were written by Paul, a man who never knew of an Earthly Jesus and certainly never met him. In these letters, Jesus is usually described in metaphorical and spiritual terms.

Non-Christian mentions of Jesus happen well after his death (more than a hundred years) and almost always just repeat things as hearsay or just talk about "Christians" in general. No one doubts Christians in general existed in those times, though.

Anyway, it doesn't really matter to me since I'm a hell-bound heathen, but I'm just saying that there's not as much evidence as everyone seems to think.


Only chistians go to hell. Heathens get Valhalla.
 
2013-01-07 05:43:02 PM

Heathen: Lord Dimwit: Parthenogenetic: elchip: and Clerics are restricted to simple weapons (which doesn't include whips).

First off, WTF are you talking about

Second off, never played D&D but how is a whip not included on a simple items list?


In D&D v3 and 3.5, weapons are sorted into three basic categories: simple, martial, and exotic. Each list has weapons that are subcategorized as light, one-handed, two-handed, and ranged.

Druids, monks, and wizards have a limited list of weapons with which they are automatically proficient.

All other base classes have proficiency with simple weapons.

Fighters, paladins, rangers, and barbarians are proficient with simple and martial weapons.

Whips are categorized as exotic weapons.

SRD weapon table
 
2013-01-07 05:46:01 PM

Ilmarinen: /if I die before Pete Townshend maybe Moon and Entwistle will let me play guitar in their band for a while


Learn My Wife first. Doesn't get much better than that.
 
2013-01-07 05:46:15 PM

Dire: So what, just get a couple of the jumbo 42-lb bags of Ever Clean extra strength unscented, dump them out at the base of the crucifix... Give one of the centurions, Longinus or one of his friends or whoever, a heavy-duty litter scoop and an empty sack. Problem solved.


Pour some Sodium polyacrylate at the base and have a snow day.
 
2013-01-07 05:48:57 PM
Beautifully written.
 
2013-01-07 05:49:33 PM

Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

...snip... except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself...snip...


Am curious, no snark really, what texts written by Jesus himself? Am not aware of any.
 
2013-01-07 05:52:35 PM

Felix_T_Cat: Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

...snip... except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself...snip...

Am curious, no snark really, what texts written by Jesus himself? Am not aware of any.


Aside from some apocrypha, there aren't any. He's incorrect on that front. I think maybe what he was going for was "except those texts supposedly written by people who had a vested interest in having Jesus exist".
 
2013-01-07 05:52:57 PM

Wayne 985: Don't only Catholics believe that Jesus is God? I was raised as a non-denominational Protestant and attended a Baptist church, where it was made clear that he was meant to be the son of God, almost like a prince regent.

Are there Protestant sects who believe the two are synonymous?


All of them do, except for the cults like JW. Baptists definitely believe that he was God ("Before Isaiah was, I AM"). In fact, the deity of Christ is one of the few non-negotiable doctrines. We can disagree on infant baptism and it doesn't matter, but the deity of Christ is CENTRAL to Christianity.
 
2013-01-07 05:53:15 PM

Badgers: [i.imgur.com image 500x374]


Ok that gave me the holy chunky watery wormy LOLs.
 
2013-01-07 05:58:57 PM

Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Cite your evidence that Jesus didn't exist. You seem pretty well convinced he didn't.

To save time, the Bible, both those parts written by the ancient Hebrews and those written by later writers during the Roman era, contains a ton of historical information that is easily verified by secondary sources and archeological evidence. Of course there is allegory and things that are probably "amplified" depending upon your beliefs. But on balance, there's enough there that can be verified that you must take it into account when studying or writing about ancient Middle Eastern history.

If Jesus is a conglomeration of different prophets that arose in the days before the Jewish revolt, then there would have been some sort of evidence that would have been unearthed by now. That hasn't happened. You can talk about secret Vatican documents or Imperial suppression of the Gnostics all you want, but we're still left with a guy that several people who knew him decided that his teachings were important enough that they wanted to write about them and they suffered terribly for it.

There is no other written evidence of a historical Jesus, except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself. There is no evidence that Pontious Pilot ever executed a man named Jesus. There is not a single contemporary writing that even mentions Jesus. None, zilch, zero, zip, nada, nothing.

The four canonical Gospels of the bible did not come from the "original" authors themselves, but are works derived from early Christian founders. The gospel of Mark comes from around 70 CE and that is that any gospel ...



Didn't the Jewish historian Josephus ben Matthia write of Jesus?
 
2013-01-07 06:00:16 PM
Fundys of any stripe are bad, but holy crap internet atheists come off as some of the most smug and condescending people i think i could meet.

Organized religion sucks, but nobody likes a smarty pants.
 
2013-01-07 06:00:44 PM

Felix_T_Cat: Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

...snip... except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself...snip...

Am curious, no snark really, what texts written by Jesus himself? Am not aware of any.


"Having Fun with FORTRAN: 44 Easy Projects to Master Today's Computing"
 
2013-01-07 06:00:57 PM

Bermuda59: Did he also have Industrial Disease?


One of the Jesuses (Jesii?) certainly did.
 
2013-01-07 06:03:08 PM
Supes

TwilightZone: There in NO evidence that Jesus ever existed. Stories in the bible are all hearsay. There is no a single nonbiblical source that mentions him. So , no you can't make a credible argument that he existed. On the other hand, there are statues of Zeus.

Ignoring the obvious sarcasm in your response, hearsay is actually a type of evidence. It may not admissible in American courts, but that's not relevant to historical research.


You can't ignore what isn't there. I wasn't being sarcastic. Hearsay isn't evidence. Not in American courts or science or historical research or any other field.

Using evidence from the Iliad, Henrich Schliemann excavated the ruins of Troy. The Iliad mentions a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. Since Troy existed, the Greek gods and goddesses must exist. This proves the bibles's claim of monotheism is false. If that part is false, the whole book is suspect. You might think there's a flaw in my logic. You'd be right. If it doesn't work to prove Appollo is real; don't work for any biblical character whatsoever. Just because England is real doesn't mean Harry Potter is.
 
2013-01-07 06:03:13 PM

TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.


Yes, because you were there and saw it all happen! Or rather, not happen!
 
2013-01-07 06:03:31 PM
What evidence is there that Jesus existed? Besides being the fulcrum upon which all of human history is divided.
 
2013-01-07 06:06:23 PM
www.realscience.us

/am I the first?
//really?
 
2013-01-07 06:07:13 PM

big_hed: Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Cite your evidence that Jesus didn't exist. You seem pretty well convinced he didn't.

To save time, the Bible, both those parts written by the ancient Hebrews and those written by later writers during the Roman era, contains a ton of historical information that is easily verified by secondary sources and archeological evidence. Of course there is allegory and things that are probably "amplified" depending upon your beliefs. But on balance, there's enough there that can be verified that you must take it into account when studying or writing about ancient Middle Eastern history.

If Jesus is a conglomeration of different prophets that arose in the days before the Jewish revolt, then there would have been some sort of evidence that would have been unearthed by now. That hasn't happened. You can talk about secret Vatican documents or Imperial suppression of the Gnostics all you want, but we're still left with a guy that several people who knew him decided that his teachings were important enough that they wanted to write about them and they suffered terribly for it.

There is no other written evidence of a historical Jesus, except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself. There is no evidence that Pontious Pilot ever executed a man named Jesus. There is not a single contemporary writing that even mentions Jesus. None, zilch, zero, zip, nada, nothing.

The four canonical Gospels of the bible did not come from the "original" authors themselves, but are works derived from early Christian founders. The gospel of Mark comes from around 70 CE and that is ...


Josephus did mention Jesus, at least once. The most controversial mention was basically a retelling of the Crucifixion and is of disputed authenticity. The other is talking about the stoning death of James, whom Josephus calls "brother of Jesus, who was called Christ". This still isn't contemporary evidence, though, since the stoning of James had happened about thirty years before the time of Josephus' writing, and the death of Jesus thirty years before that, and neither were witnessed by Josephus (I think).

Either way, the writings of Josephus are pretty much the only reason why I go back and forth, as opposed to rejecting the historicity of Jesus entirely.
 
2013-01-07 06:10:26 PM

STRYPERSWINE: What evidence is there that Jesus existed? Besides being the fulcrum upon which all of human history is divided.


By that argument, Prometheus existed too, as did (and more importantly to me) Ninkasi.
 
2013-01-07 06:15:27 PM

hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Cite your evidence that Jesus didn't exist. You seem pretty well convinced he didn't.

To save time, the Bible, both those parts written by the ancient Hebrews and those written by later writers during the Roman era, contains a ton of historical information that is easily verified by secondary sources and archeological evidence. Of course there is allegory and things that are probably "amplified" depending upon your beliefs. But on balance, there's enough there that can be verified that you must take it into account when studying or writing about ancient Middle Eastern history.

If Jesus is a conglomeration of different prophets that arose in the days before the Jewish revolt, then there would have been some sort of evidence that would have been unearthed by now. That hasn't happened. You can talk about secret Vatican documents or Imperial suppression of the Gnostics all you want, but we're still left with a guy that several people who knew him decided that his teachings were important enough that they wanted to write about them and they suffered terribly for it.


So Zeus is real? Because there is a LOT of information in the Greek mythological stories that can be verified as having existed or do exist such as Mount Olympus!
 
2013-01-07 06:18:29 PM

Louisiana_Sitar_Club: elchip: Everybody knows that a Paladin gains immunity to disease at level 3.

Jesus had to be at least level 6, because he could clearly cast "Remove Disease" on others.

We know he's a Paladin rather than a Cleric because he showed proficiency with a whip, and Clerics are restricted to simple weapons (which doesn't include whips).

You are aware, of course, that a cleric has access to a whip if he worships Calistria.


Well crap. This, combined with the fact that Raise Dead isn't on the Paladin spells list, seems to be irritable evidence that Jesus was at least a Level 9 cleric.

Except, I think it's more likely that he was a cleric of Loviatar, the Forgotten Realms deity of pain (whose clerics get proficiency in whips and scourges). It explains why he's got such a hard-on for subjecting people to eternal torment.
 
2013-01-07 06:18:59 PM

big_hed: Didn't the Jewish historian Josephus ben Matthia write of Jesus?


No. Interpolation. It was inserted in by another writer long afterwards. Study it out.
 
2013-01-07 06:19:21 PM

ChrisDe: No! Jesus was a Caucasian man that spoke English!


Funny we were always taught he was a Jew that spoke Hebrew.
 
2013-01-07 06:19:44 PM

Lord Dimwit: The Pauline Epistles, written before the Gospels, were written by Paul, a man who never knew of an Earthly Jesus and certainly never met him. In these letters, Jesus is usually described in metaphorical and spiritual terms.


Wasn't Paul the one who belonged to the opposing party then was rescued in the desert? The Jesus people saved him and he couldn't understand why then converted. His sect tried to kill him, eventually succeeding, but he did his writings before they whacked him. And yeah, he never met The Man.

Been a long time since I read that in a book I have since lost.
 
2013-01-07 06:19:52 PM

elchip: Louisiana_Sitar_Club: elchip: Everybody knows that a Paladin gains immunity to disease at level 3.

Jesus had to be at least level 6, because he could clearly cast "Remove Disease" on others.

We know he's a Paladin rather than a Cleric because he showed proficiency with a whip, and Clerics are restricted to simple weapons (which doesn't include whips).

You are aware, of course, that a cleric has access to a whip if he worships Calistria.

Well crap. This, combined with the fact that Raise Dead isn't on the Paladin spells list, seems to be irritable evidence that Jesus was at least a Level 9 cleric.

Except, I think it's more likely that he was a cleric of Loviatar, the Forgotten Realms deity of pain (whose clerics get proficiency in whips and scourges). It explains why he's got such a hard-on for subjecting people to eternal torment.


Irrefutable evidence, not irritable evidence. Stupid Swype.
 
2013-01-07 06:22:27 PM
Sorry to do a dump and run... I used to think there was no evidence of Christ, then someone posted a link to Wikipedia... Roman Senator Tacitus documented Pontius Pilate putting hurtin' on some dude named Christus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ
 
2013-01-07 06:23:10 PM

TwilightZone: Supes

TwilightZone: There in NO evidence that Jesus ever existed. Stories in the bible are all hearsay. There is no a single nonbiblical source that mentions him. So , no you can't make a credible argument that he existed. On the other hand, there are statues of Zeus.

Ignoring the obvious sarcasm in your response, hearsay is actually a type of evidence. It may not admissible in American courts, but that's not relevant to historical research.

You can't ignore what isn't there. I wasn't being sarcastic. Hearsay isn't evidence. Not in American courts or science or historical research or any other field.

Using evidence from the Iliad, Henrich Schliemann excavated the ruins of Troy. The Iliad mentions a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. Since Troy existed, the Greek gods and goddesses must exist. This proves the bibles's claim of monotheism is false. If that part is false, the whole book is suspect. You might think there's a flaw in my logic. You'd be right. If it doesn't work to prove Appollo is real; don't work for any biblical character whatsoever. Just because England is real doesn't mean Harry Potter is.


Seriously, I understand the logical fallacy you've been trying to demonstrate, and I generally agree. But there's really no question hearsay is, in it's literal definition, a type of evidence, That's why it's frequently called "hearsay evidence."

It's not a good kind of evidence, it can easily be refuted by physical evidence, it's not admissible in most legal systems around the world (and for very good reason) but it IS evidence. Historical evidence is largely composed of hearsay. There's really nothing wrong with that..
 
2013-01-07 06:24:41 PM

StudlyDoRight: Sorry to do a dump and run... I used to think there was no evidence of Christ, then someone posted a link to Wikipedia... Roman Senator Tacitus documented Pontius Pilate putting hurtin' on some dude named Christus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ


You do know that Jesus was a common name for that time period and area?
 
2013-01-07 06:27:40 PM
jesus-withyoualways.com

"Hey, you better pull over here, or I'm gonna squirt butt lava in your cab"
"That's like the third time in an hour- bro, are you even bringing gas money on this trip?"
 
2013-01-07 06:32:08 PM

Princess Ryans Knickers: StudlyDoRight: Sorry to do a dump and run... I used to think there was no evidence of Christ, then someone posted a link to Wikipedia... Roman Senator Tacitus documented Pontius Pilate putting hurtin' on some dude named Christus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

You do know that Jesus was a common name for that time period and area?


"Yes?"

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-01-07 06:36:27 PM
 
2013-01-07 06:40:15 PM

PapaChester: Was Japanese.


Well, considering TFA combined with a recent fan-made shoot-em-up game that recreated Jesus as a lolita in a white dress, I think I know what's going to be a hot topic at this year's Comic Market...
 
2013-01-07 06:40:58 PM

Supes: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Please. I'm Jewish and could give a rat's ass whether he actually existed or not, and I definitely don't believe he's divine. But there's no question at all there's a significant amount of historical evidence that a "Jesus" existed, and most historical scholars believe this.

Can anyone prove it? Of course not. But there's way more evidence there than for a historical Robin Hood or Merlin.


loosen up the Yarmulke cause it's keeping the blood from getting to your brain. there is absolutely no concrete evidence that jesus existed outside of a mexican(or some other latin) soccer team.

/JESUS SAVES!!! NO GOAL! NO GOAL!
 
2013-01-07 06:44:16 PM
Supes
Seriously, I understand the logical fallacy you've been trying to demonstrate, and I generally agree. But there's really no question hearsay is, in it's literal definition, a type of evidence, That's why it's frequently called "hearsay evidence."

It's not a good kind of evidence, it can easily be refuted by physical evidence, it's not admissible in most legal systems around the world (and for very good reason) but it IS evidence. Historical evidence is largely composed of hearsay. There's really nothing wrong with that..


Hearsay is only evidence that others heard the story. I've heard of Harry Potter so he must be real. Historical evidence is composed of eyewitness reports and physical evidence. Are you sure you understand the definiton of hearsay?
 
2013-01-07 06:45:23 PM

big_hed: Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.

There's more evidence for a historical Jesus than an historical Zeus... Whether he was divine or not, you can make a credible argument an individual named Jesus existed.

just like you can prove that robin hood existed and merlin?

oh wait... no, no you can't.

Cite your evidence that Jesus didn't exist. You seem pretty well convinced he didn't.

To save time, the Bible, both those parts written by the ancient Hebrews and those written by later writers during the Roman era, contains a ton of historical information that is easily verified by secondary sources and archeological evidence. Of course there is allegory and things that are probably "amplified" depending upon your beliefs. But on balance, there's enough there that can be verified that you must take it into account when studying or writing about ancient Middle Eastern history.

If Jesus is a conglomeration of different prophets that arose in the days before the Jewish revolt, then there would have been some sort of evidence that would have been unearthed by now. That hasn't happened. You can talk about secret Vatican documents or Imperial suppression of the Gnostics all you want, but we're still left with a guy that several people who knew him decided that his teachings were important enough that they wanted to write about them and they suffered terribly for it.

There is no other written evidence of a historical Jesus, except those texts supposedly written by Jesus himself. There is no evidence that Pontious Pilot ever executed a man named Jesus. There is not a single contemporary writing that even mentions Jesus. None, zilch, zero, zip, nada, nothing.

The four canonical Gospels of the bible did not come from the "original" authors themselves, but are works derived from early Christian founders. The gospel of Mark comes from around 70 CE and that is ...


well the great Walter Crane wrote of Robin Hood, but that doesn't make him anymore real.
 
2013-01-07 06:47:39 PM

Supes: TwilightZone: Supes

TwilightZone: There in NO evidence that Jesus ever existed. Stories in the bible are all hearsay. There is no a single nonbiblical source that mentions him. So , no you can't make a credible argument that he existed. On the other hand, there are statues of Zeus.

Ignoring the obvious sarcasm in your response, hearsay is actually a type of evidence. It may not admissible in American courts, but that's not relevant to historical research.

You can't ignore what isn't there. I wasn't being sarcastic. Hearsay isn't evidence. Not in American courts or science or historical research or any other field.

Using evidence from the Iliad, Henrich Schliemann excavated the ruins of Troy. The Iliad mentions a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. Since Troy existed, the Greek gods and goddesses must exist. This proves the bibles's claim of monotheism is false. If that part is false, the whole book is suspect. You might think there's a flaw in my logic. You'd be right. If it doesn't work to prove Appollo is real; don't work for any biblical character whatsoever. Just because England is real doesn't mean Harry Potter is.

Seriously, I understand the logical fallacy you've been trying to demonstrate, and I generally agree. But there's really no question hearsay is, in it's literal definition, a type of evidence, That's why it's frequently called "hearsay evidence."

It's not a good kind of evidence, it can easily be refuted by physical evidence, it's not admissible in most legal systems around the world (and for very good reason) but it IS evidence. Historical evidence is largely composed of hearsay. There's really nothing wrong with that..


actually.... considering hearsay is not permitted as testimony in most trials, i would say there is something wrong with that.
 
2013-01-07 06:48:24 PM

Lord Dimwit: big_hed: Slaves2Darkness: hdhale: suthrnrunt: Supes: TwilightZone: How can a purely fictional character have any disease? That's like saying Zeus had gallstones.
...


Yup, you'll find references in Josephus to James, Jesus and John the Baptist. Josephus was a historian. Jewish, but at times working with Greek or Roman backing. There was text added later to these, but scholars think they have reduced the references back to the original. I don't have the 44 volume definitive translation, but my 'good enough' translation has the 3 entries. That still doesn't tell us who or what Josephus' sources were. For a non christian Jew to include James and Jesus is just pretty odd. Especially as the Jesus reference is so damning. Here it is out of Wiki:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

Josephus actually calling him the Christ is mind blowingly odd.
 
2013-01-07 06:48:30 PM
weknowmemes.com
 
2013-01-07 06:50:39 PM
Paging Dr. Jones. Dr. Jones. Please pick up the white courtesy phone.
 
2013-01-07 06:54:02 PM
it'd be easier to prove your average aspca mutt's great great grandparent then provide definitive existence of any single non king from millennia ago before widespread writing or even distinctly-identifying names. it's a mighty high bar to set.

except for his birth clearly shoehorning in similar local legends, jesus's life reads more stream-of-consciousness then it does a planned script. he espouses a morality, but it does read to me like a history, complete with unfulfilled wishes and realpolitik. his social impact looms over history like a black hole's x-rays.
 
2013-01-07 06:54:37 PM

Vegan Meat Popsicle: You're asking me to read an awful lot of words about something that happened 2000 years ago when those words come from a guy who is completely unqualified to talk about anything that happened on this planet before he was about five years old...


No, it's worse than that.
They're asking you to read an fluff opinion piece on literalist translation of a mythological allegory from that guy.
 
2013-01-07 07:00:14 PM
Beware the Golgothan!
 
2013-01-07 07:02:15 PM
How do you know he's Jesus?

Because he's not covered in shiat.
 
2013-01-07 07:07:41 PM
The idea of "Jesus" being real is so ingrained by the Christian literalists (I.E. Roman church and its offspring) that even many atheists still believe that Jesus probably existed. There is still no evidence he did.

His very story is so closely aligned with the stories of multiple pagan gods before him, it should leave no doubt as to the origin of the Jesus mythos.
Anyone interested in this should read The Jesus Mysteries or Jesus and the Lost Goddess.
 
2013-01-07 07:11:45 PM

Oznog: [jesus-withyoualways.com image 850x637]

"Hey, you better pull over here, or I'm gonna squirt butt lava in your cab"
"That's like the third time in an hour- bro, are you even bringing gas money on this trip?"


It looks more like the mortal is the one having gastrointestinal distress in that picture. He also looks sort of like Mitt Romney.
 
2013-01-07 07:17:55 PM
Wow, is this the kind of greenlight Drew entrusts the "modmins" to approve? Is it appease the God-haters day again?

- 1 submitter

- 1 x 103 moderator

+ 1 Satan
 
2013-01-07 07:35:12 PM

TwilightZone: Hearsay is only evidence that others heard the story. I've heard of Harry Potter so he must be real. Historical evidence is composed of eyewitness reports and physical evidence. Are you sure you understand the definiton of hearsay?


A significant amount of evidence we have regarding the existence of MANY historical figures comes from the writings of numerous historians from centuries ago. Here's a list of some of those historians and chroniclers of the ancient world.

Did these ancient historians personally experience the stories they told? By and large, no they did not. Therefore it is hearsay. But it's still a valuable historical research tool, and for many individuals/events, the only information we have.
 
2013-01-07 07:36:25 PM

Stinkyy: Wow, is this the kind of greenlight Drew entrusts the "modmins" to approve? Is it appease the God-haters day again?

- 1 submitter

- 1 x 103 moderator

+ 1 Satan


Life is much better when you're not afraid of the boogeyman.

Off to hate me some unicorns.
 
2013-01-07 07:38:43 PM
i1.ytimg.com
 
2013-01-07 07:43:53 PM

TwilightZone: Supes

TwilightZone: There in NO evidence that Jesus ever existed. Stories in the bible are all hearsay. There is no a single nonbiblical source that mentions him. So , no you can't make a credible argument that he existed. On the other hand, there are statues of Zeus.

Ignoring the obvious sarcasm in your response, hearsay is actually a type of evidence. It may not admissible in American courts, but that's not relevant to historical research.

You can't ignore what isn't there. I wasn't being sarcastic. Hearsay isn't evidence. Not in American courts or science or historical research or any other field.

Using evidence from the Iliad, Henrich Schliemann excavated the ruins of Troy. The Iliad mentions a pantheon of Gods and Goddesses. Since Troy existed, the Greek gods and goddesses must exist. This proves the bibles's claim of monotheism is false. If that part is false, the whole book is suspect. You might think there's a flaw in my logic. You'd be right. If it doesn't work to prove Appollo is real; don't work for any biblical character whatsoever. Just because England is real doesn't mean Harry Potter is.


Bzzzz. Fallacy of composition.

Just because the Illiad was right/useful for determining the location of Troy, does not automatically mean that it was right about everything.

And you were doing so well before that.

/Not Christian
//I do believe in Jesus; he sat two cubes down from me, and DJs on the weekends.
 
Displayed 50 of 180 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report