Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed The Bible

February 15, 2007

>Reply to article by: "codebreaker@bigsecret.com" <Codebreaker@bigsecret.com>

>Date written: 14 Feb 2007 04:56:35 -0800

>MsgID:<1171457795.388910.106280@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>

>> In the OT, God prophecized to Jeremiah that no one would be a descendant of Jeconiah (Coniah), yet

>> Jesus was, therefore that disqualifies Jesus from being the Messiah.

>> Apparently the same people who don't read their Bible are the same ones who believe in it.

> Now I see why the Auhtor of the Qur'an kept accusing the Jewish

> scholars for messing up with the Scriptures.

> He said they did so for preventing people to see Jesus as the

>Christ

> that is to say the Messiah

Yet another person that go it wrong. Just so everyone here can see the two Bible verses in question,

which clearly and unambigiously indicate Jesus cannot be the Messiah because he was disqualified to

be the Messiah, I will quote them...

"[is] this man Coniah a despised broken idol? [is he] a vessel wherein [is] no pleasure? wherefore

are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? O earth, earth,

earth, hear the word of the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man [that]

shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of

David, and ruling any more in Judah." (Jer 22:28-30)

vs

"And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;"

(Matt 1:12)

There are many more verses besides these, like the one where it said the Messiah's name would be

"Emmanual" instead of "Jesus", but all it takes is one.

The Sage

=============================================================

http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm

"All those painted screens erected by man to shut out reality

-- history, religion, duty, social position --

all were illusions, mere opium fantasies"

John Fowles, The French Lieutenant's Woman

=============================================================

February 15, 2007

On Feb 15, 3:44 am, The_Sage <The_S...@everywhere.com> wrote:

> >Reply to article by: "codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com>

> >Date written: 14 Feb 2007 04:56:35 -0800

> >MsgID:<1171457795.388910.106...@m58g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>

> >> In the OT, God prophecized to Jeremiah that no one would be a descendant of Jeconiah (Coniah), yet

> >> Jesus was, therefore that disqualifies Jesus from being the Messiah.

> >> Apparently the same people who don't read their Bible are the same ones who believe in it.

Why do you translate the word of "Jeconiah" to "coniah"...

WHILE ITS "JACOB's Daughter" YOU BLOODY VERMIN...

Jacobite which ofcourse already is a false Name too, Since its again

that same NAME that shows up.

"Jeconiah" (SMS of GOD to his people which say's) "Jack Amra "Bar"

"Hasan"" the Wife of Hasan, the Virgin. NOT HIS MOTHER BUT his RED

HAIRED WIFE... Which means The woman of the Family Henry VIII and

Hasan son of the Invincible Golden RaisH... the real hidden Name of

the ROSE.

I tell you dont known how to Read... and me you dont believe...

> > Now I see why the Auhtor of the Qur'an kept accusing the Jewish

> > scholars for messing up with the Scriptures.

> > He said they did so for preventing people to see Jesus as the

> >Christ

> > that is to say the Messiah

>

This is the Hard truth... and why you read that the Evil Pharaoh

ordained that the Name of Moses must be deletted from all the pillars

and Scrolls... Well they did that with inventing the Printing Press.

They made Sandals of those Scrolls... and than sold ye a version that

leads more from the path of GOOD... So does the Great Deciever Work.

They did hide the Origanl works or destroyed them and inject new

version where you can't read any more the name or understand the Holy

Witness of a man that had to come... and NO man will believe him...

because of those lies people may believe.

Why because they made sheep of the 11 Nations... and now they get

ready to attack the Last Tribe who is still standing... THE LAST

KNIGHT with one LEG.

> Yet another person that go it wrong. Just so everyone here can see the two Bible verses in question,

> which clearly and unambigiously indicate Jesus cannot be the Messiah because he was disqualified to

> be the Messiah, I will quote them...

>

He aint the massiah... he is Hassan son of the MacbaBiyan and the

TUDORS.. A PRINCE of the MOST HIGH... who shall do no Miracles than

tell his story and that of his tribe how they suffered so evil could

sit on his fathers Throne... and 10 Other tribes shall simply take

example for him that came from Nowhere.... and no man knew about

him... till that day in one Night and day his Voice shall be heared

over all the world... and Than only they will say... WE KNOWN THAT

"GUY"... he is good... and Honnest... The only thing speciale that

Hasan has... And those Blind and crepel and lepre and Whine miracles

are symbolic vision from the dumb rats... for the sheeps, that believe

in Canaanite LIES... who have become Blind and crepel and lepre.

> "[is] this man Coniah a despised broken idol? [is he] a vessel wherein [is] no pleasure? wherefore

Right Like Saddam Hussein Image was removed from Iraq so is Hasan

Image removed from all minds... you remember him as BLACKBEARD... and

You dont knowwn that is in reality KING ARTHUR.

But The beloved Son shall overcome... THAT'S WRITTEN and Satan will

admit that TOO. HAH.

> are they cast out, he and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not? O earth, earth,

RIGHT his SEEDS LIVE NOW in BABYLONE(Europe) as second hand citizens

doing the dirty job of the BEAST. creat insecurite... so he can rull

better the sheeps... WE ALL TOGHETER are the BEAST... all the NATIONS.

parlement in strasbourg... compare the this Two Links and you may

understand something.

http://www.tomwisemep.co.uk/news/data/upimages/strasbourgbuilding.jpg

Babylone

http://www.helsinki.fi/~haonnela/images/Wien/Hex-Wien%202001%20joulukuu%206-Tower%20of%20babylon-Brughel.jpg

> earth, hear the word of the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man [that]

> shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of

> David, and ruling any more in Judah." (Jer 22:28-30)

>

> vs

>

> "And after they were brought to Babylon, Jechonias begat Salathiel; and Salathiel begat Zorobabel;"

> (Matt 1:12)

>

> There are many more verses besides these, like the one where it said the Messiah's name would be

> "Emmanual" instead of "Jesus", but all it takes is one.

>

> The Sage

>

> =============================================================http://members.cox.net/the.sage/index.htm

>

> "All those painted screens erected by man to shut out reality

> -- history, religion, duty, social position --

> all were illusions, mere opium fantasies"

> John Fowles, The French Lieutenant's Woman

> =============================================================

February 15, 2007

On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in

> > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to

> > > conclusion"?

>

> > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?

> > You make me laugh indeed

>

> That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even

> if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of

> what it might say.

Atheists are best known as braggarts. Putting down

is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight

to what we already know

>

> Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,

> and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human

> being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.

>

> A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to

> someone.

Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...

boy, you have no idea what I know, what I know from an infailible

SOURCE

>

> -Panama Floyd, Atlanta

> aa#2015, Member Knights of BAAWA!

> EAC Martian Commander

> Plonked by Kadaitcha Man Sept 06

> "..the prayer cloth of one aeon is the doormat of the next."

> -Mark Twain

>

> Religious societies are less moral than secular ones:http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html

February 15, 2007

On Feb 14, 7:29 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.

It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus

but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the

knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.

It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you

or perhaps, you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.

So for you there can be Christ without Jesus. You just need

to tell us who that Christ is

There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording

of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of

nonsense we are everyday.

So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks

who take their ignorance as bliss.

Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament

was compiled by Christians for Christians, here Christian meaning, the

follower of Christ who was identified as Jesus.

If you want to find an evidence of Bush President of America, you

don't look

for Governor, but for President Bush in the right place.

Why are you so sure about your knowledge.

Do you think your knowledge

is limitless? If not why can't you just contemplate the possibility

that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?

Why don't you just accept the blame?

As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence

of Jesus ouside the bible.

The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples

is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.

The very fact that there were Christians in

Thessalonica around year 10 AD

is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled

200 years later.

Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica

were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or

Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about

investigating History.

The very fact that Nero burnt Rome and turned around

to accuse the Christians is another evidence

of Jesus outside the Bible, unless you want to tell

me that you have a proof that the Christian in Nero' Empire

worshipped a different Christ other than Jesus the one

described in the Bible.

-this incident not recorded in the Bible but by

seculars biased historians-

Are you such a history illiterate?

The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus

in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,

the Ephesian Congregation preceding the formation of

the New Testament unless you have a proof

that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ

who could not be Jesus.

Are you such a history illiterate?

The very fact that there were Christians in Antioch in year 6 AD

is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, Antiochian Christians

reporting to Jesus as the Christ/Messiah promised

in the Jewish ORACLES.

The Antiochian congregation preceding the formation

of the New Testament

unless you have a proof that the Christ of Antioch

was not Jesus. Are you such an History illiiterate?

The very fact that there were Christians in Philipi,

Athens, Macedony in year 30 AD

are all evidence of Jesus outside the Bible. These

Christians knowing nothing about a certain

New Testament, unless you want to tell me that

they were followers of a different Christ apart from Jesus?

What more contemporary evidence do you need O Homme vain?

>

> There are for other figures in the new testament, like Pilate , John The

> Baptist, The Jewish priests etc, Jesus disciples.

>

> But nothing about Jesus .. which, considering the events surrounding his

> birth, life and death, and the fame he supposedly had across the land is

> highly implausible.

>

> The lack of any third part evidence would be enough to relegate any similar

> figure into the realms of myth or story.

>

> > It is like asking If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside

> > the

> > Origin of the species by Darwin...

>

> We ar etalking about a person .. not a theory. the theory exists already.

>

> If you ar etalking about whetehr Darwin existed, there is plenty of

> contemporary evidence about him from the time he lived. Including the books

> he wrote.

>

> There is nothing from when Jesus was supposedly alive .. no writings by him

> or about him, no physical evidence .. nothing. All we have is stories that

> first appeared many many years after his supposed death.

February 15, 2007

On Feb 14, 7:29 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.

>

> There are for other figures in the new testament, like Pilate , John The

> Baptist, The Jewish priests etc, Jesus disciples.

>

> But nothing about Jesus .. which, considering the events surrounding his

> birth, life and death, and the fame he supposedly had across the land is

> highly implausible.

Hmmmmmmm... That is interesting. I am really baffled by the way

you guys' minds work.

There is evidence for John the baptist but not for Jesus

the man is associated to. So evidence of John

could not be evidence of Jesus. We call this not

a result of a sound scholarship but malice.

Now to make sure I understand you correctly

can you tell me how you did manage

to find evidence for John?

>

> The lack of any third part evidence would be enough to relegate any similar

> figure into the realms of myth or story.

Why do you think that the mention of Jesus in the

talmud, a book written

by Jesus enemies is not a third part evidence?

>

> > It is like asking If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside

> > the

> > Origin of the species by Darwin...

>

> We ar etalking about a person .. not a theory. the theory exists already.

>

> If you ar etalking about whetehr Darwin existed, there is plenty of

> contemporary evidence about him from the time he lived. Including the books

> he wrote.

Darwin never existed... The Book may have been written by another

who used the name Darwin.

This book is not enough to be accepted as Darwin evidence

>

> There is nothing from when Jesus was supposedly alive .. no writings by him

> or about him, no physical evidence .. nothing. All we have is stories that

> first appeared many many years after his supposed death.

But the Church founded on him rose the first day into existence

not many years after. THE BEST EVIDENCE OF AMONG ALL

EVIDENCE

February 15, 2007

"codebreaker@bigsecret.com" <Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in

news:1171550011.049469.198880@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> On Feb 14, 7:29 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>

>> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.

>

> It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus

> but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the

> knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.

What the hell do you people mean by this? This reminds me of the bully

in Back to the Future that tells the girl she likes him, only she just

doesn't know it yet.

> It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you

> or perhaps, you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.

> So for you there can be Christ without Jesus. You just need

> to tell us who that Christ is

"Annointed One". So he was oily.

>

> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording

> of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of

> nonsense we are everyday.

If that's nonsense, let's hear the sense. Got any?

> So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks

> who take their ignorance as bliss.

I'm sorry you don't like non-believers. I guess if your beliefs were a

little stronger, and supported by actual facts, you wouldn't get so

riled.

>

> Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament

> was compiled by Christians for Christians, here Christian meaning, the

> follower of Christ who was identified as Jesus.

> If you want to find an evidence of Bush President of America, you

> don't look

> for Governor, but for President Bush in the right place.

If you knew the right number to dial, you could call Bush on the phone.

Can you call Jesus? E-mail him, perhaps? No?

>

> Why are you so sure about your knowledge.

We evaluate you. It's your lack of knowledge that assures us.

> Do you think your knowledge

> is limitless?

Your religion sets your limits. Further knowledge makes those in power

over you nervous.

> If not why can't you just contemplate the possibility

> that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?

The right places (your heart, your feelings, the sky) are places where

people are not found. Except maybe in the sky, in planes or dangling

from parachutes.

> Why don't you just accept the blame?

Blame for what? Original sin? Bwaaaaahahahahahaha! That went out with

evolution.

>

> As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence

> of Jesus ouside the bible.

Too bad you can't convey it to rational people.

> The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples

> is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.

Circular reference. The bible does not offer proof for itself.

>

> The very fact that there were Christians in

> Thessalonica around year 10 AD

> is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled

> 200 years later.

Bullshit. It's evidence of organized religion, evidence that people got

together and decided to believe the same bullshit sans evidence.

> Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica

> were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or

> Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about

> investigating History.

Money talks and bullshit walks. Together they travel quickly.

> The very fact that Nero burnt Rome and turned around

> to accuse the Christians is another evidence

> of Jesus outside the Bible, unless you want to tell

> me that you have a proof that the Christian in Nero' Empire

> worshipped a different Christ other than Jesus the one

> described in the Bible.

No, moron, it's only evidence of a belief system.

> -this incident not recorded in the Bible but by

> seculars biased historians-

> Are you such a history illiterate?

You certainly are.

>

> The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus

> in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,

> the Ephesian Congregation preceding the formation of

> the New Testament unless you have a proof

> that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ

> who could not be Jesus.

> Are you such a history illiterate?

Damn, you're stupid. The presence of Christians is evidence only of the

fact that a bunch of people believed something.

>

> The very fact <snip idiocy>

--

Uncle Vic

aa Atheist #2011

Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped

chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department

Convicted by Earthquack

Plonked by Fester

February 15, 2007

On Feb 13, 6:05 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> Again OUR BOOK was written by believers and for believers, not for

> Atheists. The first Generation of believers did not have a book of New

> Testament, yet they all had faith in one Savior that Moses foretold.

> The point being that even If the whole New Testament turn out to be

> nothing but a junk, Christianity would not die out. Sola Scriptura of

> course will die out and not Christianity. FUCK YOU AAALLLLLL

>And how dishonest the author of the Qur'an too because it is shown

>that he developped in his book this Mosaic pronouncement at lengh.

>FUCK YOU AND PLONK AGAIN

Dear Mr Codebreaker,

I don't go to church. I don't pray. I don't believe in any gods.

And I

don't use vulgar obscenities in polite discussions.

So, who is the better person, You or I ?

Tim

February 15, 2007

On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in

> > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to

> > > > conclusion"?

>

> > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?

> > > You make me laugh indeed

>

> > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even

> > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of

> > what it might say.

>

> Atheists are best known as braggarts.

You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's

not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.

> Putting down

> is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight

> to what we already know

You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post

attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.

> > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,

> > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human

> > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.

>

> > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to

> > someone.

>

> Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...

No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe

this will help:

Main Entry: ig

February 15, 2007

codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>

>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>>

>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

>>>--

>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>>

>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

>>Jesus.

>

> There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

> And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

> would be born,

===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.

then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

> No Jesus, No Christ

> Simple logic. As simple as that. You think any chronicler

> is an historian, you are wrong.

>

February 15, 2007

codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

>>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>>

>>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>>

>>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>>

>>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

>>>>>--

>>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

>>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>>

>>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

>>>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

>>>>Jesus.

>>

>>>There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>>

>>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in

>>Christ/Messiah myth.

>>

>>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

>>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>>

>>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus

>>outside of the bible or the religion.

>

> I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking

> If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the

> Origin of the species by Darwin...

> Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.

===>That is STUPID!

We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,

even pictures of his father and sister.

The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction

written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.

February 15, 2007

On Feb 15, 11:55 am, "landson" <landson2...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On Feb 13, 6:05 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> > Again OUR BOOK was written by believers and for believers, not for

> > Atheists. The first Generation of believers did not have a book of New

> > Testament, yet they all had faith in one Savior that Moses foretold.

> > The point being that even If the whole New Testament turn out to be

> > nothing but a junk, Christianity would not die out. Sola Scriptura of

> > course will die out and not Christianity. FUCK YOU AAALLLLLL

> >And how dishonest the author of the Qur'an too because it is shown

> >that he developped in his book this Mosaic pronouncement at lengh.

> >FUCK YOU AND PLONK AGAIN

>

> Dear Mr Codebreaker,

>

> I don't go to church. I don't pray. I don't believe in any gods.

> And I

> don't use vulgar obscenities in polite discussions.

>

> So, who is the better person, You or I ?

>

> Tim

Of course Darwin, eternal damnation be upon him,

was not a better person.

And anything you heard about him is a second hand testimonies

from people since you never talked to Darwin in person.

Why do you think it is ok for you but it is not

ok for me to rely on what Peter or Luke or Paul

have to say about Jesus?

February 15, 2007

On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

wrote:

> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>

> >>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>

> >>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>

> >>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

> >>>>>--

> >>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

> >>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>

> >>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

> >>>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

> >>>>Jesus.

>

> >>>There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>

> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in

> >>Christ/Messiah myth.

>

> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>

> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus

> >>outside of the bible or the religion.

>

> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking

> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the

> > Origin of the species by Darwin...

> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.

>

> ===>That is STUPID!

>

> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,

> even pictures of his father and sister.

>

> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction

> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -

Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father

existence would not be questioned.

When Jesus was preached around the world nobody

ever questioned his existence, I mean nobody

until a bunch of good for nothing like you come up

with a questionable scholarship and methodology

of investigating

>

> - Show quoted text -

February 15, 2007

On Feb 15, 1:57 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

wrote:

> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>

> >>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>

> >>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

> >>>--

> >>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

> >>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>

> >>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

> >>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

> >>Jesus.

>

> > There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

> > And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

> > would be born,

>

> ===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.

>

> then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

I will believe that If the Jewish Council Of Jamnia claimed it.

They are the gardiens and authority on this Jewish Scriptures.

And since their goal was to stop the spread of Christianity,

the system of belief grounded on Christ/Messiah, since their

agenda was to stop it, "Moses never said such thing"

would have been easier for them.

Or they should have hired you on their advisory board.

Son of the bitch you are.

>

> > No Jesus, No Christ

> > Simple logic. As simple as that. You think any chronicler

> > is an historian, you are wrong.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

February 15, 2007

"codebreaker@bigsecret.com" <Codebreaker@bigsecret.com> wrote in

news:1171569101.502952.315290@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

> On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

> wrote:

>> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

>> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote

>> >>innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>>

>> >>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>

>> >>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net>

>> >>>>wrote:

>>

>> >>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>> >>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

>> >>>>>--

>> >>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

>> >>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>>

>> >>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside

>> >>>>the Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an

>> >>>>historic Jesus.

>>

>> >>>There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>>

>> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a

>> >>BELIEF in Christ/Messiah myth.

>>

>> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

>> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>>

>> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic

>> >>Jesus outside of the bible or the religion.

>>

>> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking

>> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the

>> > Origin of the species by Darwin...

>> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.

>>

>> ===>That is STUPID!

>>

>> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,

>> even pictures of his father and sister.

>>

>> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction

>> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -

>

> Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father

> existence would not be questioned.

> When Jesus was preached around the world nobody

> ever questioned his existence, I mean nobody

> until a bunch of good for nothing like you come up

> with a questionable scholarship and methodology

> of investigating

>

Given the choice between Jesus and getting hit with a big rock, I'd have

chosen the jesus too.

--

Uncle Vic

aa Atheist #2011

Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped

chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department

Convicted by Earthquack

Plonked by Fester

February 15, 2007

>> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.

>

> It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus

None has been found

> but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the

> knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.

It could be you lack the skills to recognise what is proof of Jesus and what

isn't

> It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you

I know exactly what it means. Do you?

> you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.

How silly. What would make you suggest that I am that foolish.

> So for you there can be Christ without Jesus.

Of course there can .. there is nothing that says the messiah has to be

called jesus.

> You just need to tell us who that Christ is

There may not yet have been an anointed one. The jews are still waiting for

the messiah .. and they should know, as it is to them that the messiah that

was promised.

But we are not talking about the concept of a Christ / Messiah .. but of the

existence of Jesus .. the man about who the Gospel stories are about.

> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording

> of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of

> nonsense we are everyday.

Its not nosense .. there is no credible evidence outside the bible .. (the

bible is not contemporary with Jesus, and so therefore is not historical

evidence).

If you think there IS historical evidence of Jesus living, then please

present it .. the world will be anxious to here of it.

> So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks

> who take their ignorance as bliss.

No thanks .. I don't want to be part of your group. I don't qualify as a

jerk.

> Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament

> was compiled by Christians for Christians

Yes .. and that is relevant how?

> that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?

So where is this 'right place' that provides the proof?

> Why don't you just accept the blame?

I have nothing to be blamed for. Why not accept the (lack of) evidence ..

is it ignorance or arrogance?

> As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence

> of Jesus ouside the bible.

Where?

> The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples

> is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.

It was not written by the disciples .. they were all dead (or at least very

old) when it was written. The stories were written in the name of those

disciples (not that there were disciples amongst the twelve called Mark or

Luke).

Matthew was written by an unknown author near the end of the first century,

not by the Disciple Matthew

Mark was written earlier by a disciple of Peter

Luke was written by an unknown author, but probably someone who knew Paul,

and the same author wrote Acts, and at the end of the first or beginning of

the second century

John was written by an unkown author, also around the end of the first or

beginning of the second century, not by the Disciple John.

There is, of course, historical evidence of (at least some of) the disciples

/ apostles .. but that does not mean there is evidence of a Jesus.

If there were any writings from the people who had physically seen Jesus,

that would be historical evidence. I would love to see it.

> The very fact that there were Christians in

> Thessalonica around year 10 AD

> is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled

> 200 years later.

How could there be christians when Jesus was only 10. he hadn't started his

ministry at that time. If anything, that would be evidence Jesus was not

the presonal inspiration of Christianity.

Perhaps that date was a typo or error on you part.

Regardless, that is just evidence of Christanity .. Noone says Christanity

dose not exist. It still exists, so we don't need to prove it.

Also note that the christian community at Thesalonica was founded by Paul

around the year 50 , who had never met the man Jesus.

> Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica

> were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or

> Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about

> investigating History.

You are only showing the existence of the religion. That's like showing

proof that the Greek and Romans worshiped their Gods as evidence that those

God's existed. It doesn't follow.

> The very fact that Nero burnt Rome

More proof of Chitianity and not Jesus

> The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus

> in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,

More evidence AGAINST Jesus existing, if that is the date you meant to type.

How could Christians exist before Jesus began his teachings if it is

actually Jesus that they are referring to

> unless you have a proof

> that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ

> who could not be Jesus.

What you said above would have proved it for me .. unless you were lying or

mistaken.

[snip more inforamtion that only lends prove to the NON existence of Jesus

OR the existinece of Christianity]

Please .. if you're going to bget on your high horse and insinuate I am

historically illiterate .. at least present information that is relevant.

You've done nothing to show Jesus himself existed

> What more contemporary evidence do you need O Homme vain?

Well .. any contemporary historical evidence at all would be good. You

seem to be very good at proving the existence of christian groups, but not

of Jesus.

February 16, 2007

> There is evidence for John the baptist but not for Jesus

Yes .. you've got it in one.

> So evidence of John could not be evidence of Jesus.

No .. they are different people. There is no evidence other than the gospel

stories written much later, that John met Jesus or know of him

> We call this not a result of a sound scholarship but malice.

Just saying there is a story that person A and person B knew each other .

..therefore because person A exists, then that is evidence of person B. It

makes no logical sense

> Now to make sure I understand you correctly

> can you tell me how you did manage

> to find evidence for John?

Its called doing research. You shoul try it sometime. There is credible

written contemporary evidence of John the Baptist (outside of the bible

stories wiich were written later) .. there is no such credible evidence

about jesus. Look at jewish Antiquities for an account of John. nothing

about Jesus though.

>>>>>

"2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came

from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John,

that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and

commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one

another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the

washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not

in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for

the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly

purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds

about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his

words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people

might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they

seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting

him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself

into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it

would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's

suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there

put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army

was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to

him."

>>>>>

>> The lack of any third part evidence would be enough to relegate any

>> similar

>> figure into the realms of myth or story.

> Why do you think that the mention of Jesus in the

> talmud, a book written

> by Jesus enemies is not a third part evidence?

It is not clear that that refers to the Jesus of the bible (it was a common

name). It is thought it refers to a person of the same name from about a

century earlier (there have been several historial 'Jesus's at various

times). The Talmud was not written until the second century and later

(although based on some earlier writings), and so it not contemporary with

the biblical Jesus supposed lifetime.

> This book is not enough to be accepted as Darwin evidence

There is more evidence of Darwin than just his book. There is NO evidence

of jesus (not EVEN a book written by him).

So if you can claim darwin doesn't exist, despite large amounts of evidence

to that he does,. then you should reject jesus as existing, giving the

complete lack of evidence at all.

You are inconsistent.

> But the Church founded on him rose the first day into existence

> not many years after. THE BEST EVIDENCE OF AMONG ALL

> EVIDENCE

Its non-evidence among a void lacking any evidence at all. The existence of

the Christian church does not prove Jesus existed .. only that the church

existed.

If you really do have some evidence .. I would truly love to see it.

February 16, 2007

codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

> wrote:

>

>>codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

>>

>>>On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>>

>>>>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>

>>>>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>>

>>>>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

>>>>>>>--

>>>>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

>>>>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>>

>>>>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

>>>>>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

>>>>>>Jesus.

>>

>>>>>There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>>

>>>>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in

>>>>Christ/Messiah myth.

>>

>>>>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

>>>>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>>

>>>>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus

>>>>outside of the bible or the religion.

>>

>>>I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking

>>>If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the

>>>Origin of the species by Darwin...

>>>Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.

>>

>>===>That is STUPID!

>>

>>We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,

>>even pictures of his father and sister.

>>

>>The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction

>>written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -

>

> Let us wait 2000 years later and see If his books, his sisters, father

> existence would not be questioned.

===>What an inane response!

> When Jesus was preached around the world nobody

> ever questioned his existence,

===>Really?

How do you know that? ;-) -- L.

February 16, 2007

codebreaker@bigsecret.com wrote:

> On Feb 15, 1:57 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

> wrote:

>

>>codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

>>

>>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>>

>>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>>

>>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>>

>>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

>>>>>--

>>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

>>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>>

>>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

>>>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

>>>>Jesus.

>>

>>> There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>>> And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

>>> would be born,

>>

>>===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.

>>

>>then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>

> I will believe that If the Jewish Council Of Jamnia claimed it.

> They are the gardiens and authority on this Jewish Scriptures.

> And since their goal was to stop the spread of Christianity,

> the system of belief grounded on Christ/Messiah, since their

> agenda was to stop it, "Moses never said such thing"

> would have been easier for them.

===>Is it that much easier for you to just LIE than to tell

us WHERE "it is prophecised that in this world Christ

would be born"? -- L.

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

> On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> > > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in

> > > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to

> > > > > conclusion"?

>

> > > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?

> > > > You make me laugh indeed

>

> > > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even

> > > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of

> > > what it might say.

>

> > Atheists are best known as braggarts.

>

> You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's

> not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.

You have not delivered anything yet. All what you come up

is fossils say such and such. Fossils do not talk for themselves.

They say what you want them to say... That ain't nothing

>

> > Putting down

> > is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight

> > to what we already know

>

> You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post

> attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.

I know that DARWIN, eternal damnation be upon, erred...

There is no worse mythology that a monkey turning into a human

yet you swallow this garbage because its make look like

you are above average joe. No you ain't. Darwin, eternal

Damnation be upon was no historian. He had no sense

of History

>

> > > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,

> > > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human

> > > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.

There is no fear. My faith was born is a fournace. Its worse enemies

failed lamentably. You too will meet with the same fate.

>

> > > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to

> > > someone.

>

> > Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...

>

> No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe

> this will help:

>

> Main Entry: ig

February 16, 2007

On Feb 14, 7:29 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

>

> If you ar etalking about whetehr Darwin existed, there is plenty of

> contemporary evidence about him from the time he lived. Including the books

> he wrote.

Did you ever meet Darwin in person? No

Where you there when he was writing? No

Anything you know about Darwin has been handed down

to you from previous generations. You have no mean to confirm

or infirm it.

You just believe it because it is written, If you believe any garbage

just because it is written down, why don't you believe

that you are a bastard and you don't know your real father

as mother were in business to change men over night.

Now to come back to the case at hand. We trust

those eye witness who were sent to teach in the name of

Jesus the Savior, just the way you trust anything

written down about Darwin.

Somwhere at some point, you need to trust somebody.

We trust the Apostles just the way you trust Darwin propagandists

>

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 2:01 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

wrote:

> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 11:20 am, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>"codebrea...@bigsecret.com" <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote innews:1171458165.012872.319100@k78g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

>

> >>>On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>

> >>>>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>

> >>>>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>>>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

> >>>>>--

> >>>>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

> >>>>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>

> >>>>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

> >>>>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

> >>>>Jesus.

>

> >>>There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

>

> >>There would be no Christians without the religion, which is a BELIEF in

> >>Christ/Messiah myth.

>

> >>>And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

> >>>would be born, then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

>

> >>Circular argument. See if you can find evidence of an historic Jesus

> >>outside of the bible or the religion.

>

> > I don't think this is what evidence means. It is like asking

> > If we can find a record of Darwin of evolution outside the

> > Origin of the species by Darwin...

> > Yours is indeed a circular reasoning.

>

> ===>That is STUPID!

>

> We know Darwin WROTE that book, we have his PICTURES,

> even pictures of his father and sister.

YOU KNOW IT FROM WHO? NOT FROM DARWIN HIMSELF.

You have his picture? How do you know If it is Darwin?

Did you meet him in person before.

You see again, somewhere you decide to trust someone who

reported who Darwin was and wrote. We all depend

on hearsay

>

> The stories (Gospels) about "Christ" are pure fiction

> written by some unknown Christian authors. -- L.- Hide quoted text -

Yep, we are not embarrassed about it.

The life of Jesus the Messiah was written by Christian and for

Christians. If you are clueless as how to read it

it is because you are not a Christian.

Ask me what does the word Christian means.

The answer, the one who follow Christ.

Again there would be no christian without Christ

>

> - Show quoted text -

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 1:57 pm, Libertarius <Libertar...@nothingbutthe.truth>

wrote:

> codebrea...@bigsecret.com wrote:

> > On Feb 14, 12:40 am, Christopher A.Lee <c...@optonline.net> wrote:

>

> >>On 13 Feb 2007 20:59:03 -0800, "Snowman" <jkel...@zoomnet.net> wrote:

>

> >>>On Feb 12, 3:06 pm, Uncle Vic <addr...@withheld.com> wrote:

>

> >>>http://www.jesusneverexisted.com

> >>>--

> >>>Try showing that site to an actual historian.

> >>>See how hard you get laughed at.

>

> >>Try finding a real historian who can provide any evidence outside the

> >>Christian tradition to corroborate Christian claims of an historic

> >>Jesus.

>

> > There would not be Christians without Christ/Messiah

> > And since it is prophecised that in this world Christ

> > would be born,

>

> ===>NOWHERE is any such thing "prophecised". -- L.

>

> then Christ was born in the form of Jesus.

You are such a prentious little asshole...

Are you a Scibe versed in Moses Law? No

Are you a Doctor of the Law? No

Now you may think that anybody who can read and write

should give his opnion on what the Law of Moses says

and that opinion should become authoritative, it ain't so,

Otherwise the whole Israel should turn into the

land of lawyers and Scribes.

The same way people are trained to explain the American

Constitution, the same way there were people in Israel

trained to read the Law of Moses and interprete it.

You are not ONE of them, so why should I care about

your PRIVATE OPINION.

You are not a good Historian either, otherwise you would

have baked your opinion up with something authorritative from the

distant

past. I went back 2000 years in time and quoted what

Paul said about Deuteronomy 18:15 and how it applied to

Jesus, I also quoted the Qur'an to support my opinion.

Apparently If you were a good historian you should do the same.

Go back to first Century Jerusalem and quote a Scribe or

a doctor of the Mosaic Law who ever said that Deuteronomy

18:15 never was about a Messiah/Christ, therefore the Apostle

cheated. They were very close to the event

Common on now back your opinion up with historical fact, at least

you can quote the Council of Jamnia.

If you can't then Shut your ASS UP. YOU ARE NOTHING

BUT A CRACKPOT HISTORIAN.

Do you think that being historian mean reading the works

by some Historians?

Being historian means being able to investigate and find the cause

and effect.

Hey it looks like History does not support your viewpoint.

JESUS IS THE CHRIST, NO JESUS, NO CHRIST

>

> > No Jesus, No Christ

> > Simple logic. As simple as that. You think any chronicler

> > is an historian, you are wrong.- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

>

> - Show quoted text -

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 6:48 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> >> There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus.

>

> > It could be that there is no contemporary evidence of Jesus

>

> None has been found

None has been find yet... And who is looking for that evidence?

Those who have a vested interest to make you blieve that

your ancestor turned into a human being from monkey sometime

over night, sometime 10 trillions years around and all other nonsense.

Hummmmm.... conflict of interest oblige

>

> > but it could also be that there is evidence but you lack the

> > knowledge to evaluate it on its own merit.

>

> It could be you lack the skills to recognise what is proof of Jesus and what

> isn't

>

> > It could also be that the title Christ means nothing to you

>

> I know exactly what it means. Do you?

>

> > you may be thinking that Christ is Jesus last name.

>

> How silly. What would make you suggest that I am that foolish.

>

> > So for you there can be Christ without Jesus.

>

> Of course there can .. there is nothing that says the messiah has to be

> called jesus.

>

> > You just need to tell us who that Christ is

>

> There may not yet have been an anointed one. The jews are still waiting for

> the messiah .. and they should know, as it is to them that the messiah that

> was promised.

>

> But we are not talking about the concept of a Christ / Messiah .. but of the

> existence of Jesus .. the man about who the Gospel stories are about.

>

> > There is no contemporary evidence of Jesus seems to be a rewording

> > of no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, this kind of

> > nonsense we are everyday.

>

> Its not nosense .. there is no credible evidence outside the bible .. (the

> bible is not contemporary with Jesus, and so therefore is not historical

> evidence).

>

> If you think there IS historical evidence of Jesus living, then please

> present it .. the world will be anxious to here of it.

>

> > So let me lump you all together in the same box full of jerks

> > who take their ignorance as bliss.

>

> No thanks .. I don't want to be part of your group. I don't qualify as a

> jerk.

>

> > Allows me to remind you all, O blissful fools that the New Testament

> > was compiled by Christians for Christians

>

> Yes .. and that is relevant how?

>

> > that you may be looking for evidence of Jesus in the wrong place?

>

> So where is this 'right place' that provides the proof?

>

> > Why don't you just accept the blame?

>

> I have nothing to be blamed for. Why not accept the (lack of) evidence ..

> is it ignorance or arrogance?

>

> > As far as we are concerned, we everyday come across evidence

> > of Jesus ouside the bible.

>

> Where?

>

> > The very fact that the New TESTAMENT was written by Jesus disciples

> > is by itself an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.

>

> It was not written by the disciples .. they were all dead (or at least very

> old) when it was written. The stories were written in the name of those

> disciples (not that there were disciples amongst the twelve called Mark or

> Luke).

>

> Matthew was written by an unknown author near the end of the first century,

> not by the Disciple Matthew

> Mark was written earlier by a disciple of Peter

> Luke was written by an unknown author, but probably someone who knew Paul,

> and the same author wrote Acts, and at the end of the first or beginning of

> the second century

> John was written by an unkown author, also around the end of the first or

> beginning of the second century, not by the Disciple John.

>

> There is, of course, historical evidence of (at least some of) the disciples

> / apostles .. but that does not mean there is evidence of a Jesus.

>

> If there were any writings from the people who had physically seen Jesus,

> that would be historical evidence. I would love to see it.

>

> > The very fact that there were Christians in

> > Thessalonica around year 10 AD

> > is an evidence of Jesus outside the Bible, the Bible being compiled

> > 200 years later.

>

> How could there be christians when Jesus was only 10. he hadn't started his

> ministry at that time. If anything, that would be evidence Jesus was not

> the presonal inspiration of Christianity.

>

> Perhaps that date was a typo or error on you part.

>

> Regardless, that is just evidence of Christanity .. Noone says Christanity

> dose not exist. It still exists, so we don't need to prove it.

>

> Also note that the christian community at Thesalonica was founded by Paul

> around the year 50 , who had never met the man Jesus.

>

> > Unless you want to tell me that the Christians in Thessalonica

> > were followers of another CHRIST who was not Jesus or

> > Unless you want to tell me that you know nothing about

> > investigating History.

>

> You are only showing the existence of the religion. That's like showing

> proof that the Greek and Romans worshiped their Gods as evidence that those

> God's existed. It doesn't follow.

>

> > The very fact that Nero burnt Rome

>

> More proof of Chitianity and not Jesus

>

> > The very fact that there were Christians in Ephesus

> > in year 20 AD is another evidence of Jesus outside the Bible,

>

> More evidence AGAINST Jesus existing, if that is the date you meant to type.

> How could Christians exist before Jesus began his teachings if it is

> actually Jesus that they are referring to

>

> > unless you have a proof

> > that Ephesian Christians were followers of Christ

> > who could not be Jesus.

>

> What you said above would have proved it for me .. unless you were lying or

> mistaken.

>

> [snip more inforamtion that only lends prove to the NON existence of Jesus

> OR the existinece of Christianity]

>

> Please .. if you're going to bget on your high horse and insinuate I am

> historically illiterate .. at least present information that is relevant.

> You've done nothing to show Jesus himself existed

>

> > What more contemporary evidence do you need O Homme vain?

>

> Well .. any contemporary historical evidence at all would be good. You

> seem to be very good at proving the existence of christian groups, but not

> of Jesus.

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 7:15 pm, "Jeckyl" <n...@nowhere.com> wrote:

> > There is evidence for John the baptist but not for Jesus

>

> Yes .. you've got it in one.

>

> > So evidence of John could not be evidence of Jesus.

>

> No .. they are different people. There is no evidence other than the gospel

> stories written much later, that John met Jesus or know of him

>

> > We call this not a result of a sound scholarship but malice.

>

> Just saying there is a story that person A and person B knew each other .

> .therefore because person A exists, then that is evidence of person B. It

> makes no logical sense

>

> > Now to make sure I understand you correctly

> > can you tell me how you did manage

> > to find evidence for John?

>

> Its called doing research. You shoul try it sometime. There is credible

> written contemporary evidence of John the Baptist (outside of the bible

How do you decide this is credible and this is not?

Just because something meets your fantazy does not make it credible

> stories wiich were written later) .. there is no such credible evidence

> about jesus. Look at jewish Antiquities for an account of John. nothing

> about Jesus though.

>

> "2. Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came

> from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John,

> that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and

Who did he baptized and for what purpose did he baptize

February 16, 2007

On Feb 15, 8:42 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

<Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> On Feb 15, 1:41 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > On Feb 15, 8:39 am, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > > On Feb 14, 6:31 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > > On Feb 14, 4:17 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

> > > > > On Feb 14, 1:46 pm, panamfl...@hotmail.com wrote:

>

> > > > > > On Feb 13, 6:36 pm, "codebrea...@bigsecret.com"

>

> > > > > > <Codebrea...@bigsecret.com> wrote:

>

> > > > > > Summing up the last 150 years of research by the finest minds in

> > > > > > archaeology, historical text research, and anthropology is a "rush to

> > > > > > conclusion"?

>

> > > > > 150 years of what??????????????????? Fine mind?

> > > > > You make me laugh indeed

>

> > > > That's because you're an ignorant, illiterate waste of humanity. Even

> > > > if you were smart enough to read the evidence, you're too scared of

> > > > what it might say.

>

> > > Atheists are best known as braggarts.

>

> > You know nothing of atheism or atheists, you insipid twat. And it's

> > not "bragging" if you can deliver the goods.

>

> You have not delivered anything yet. All what you come up

> is fossils say such and such.

WTF? Fossils prove Jesus never existed? What the hell are you smoking?

On the contrary, ancient texts prove if there was a historical Jesus,

he was as much a nobody as you are.

Fossils, OTOH, simply prove the Bible is not inerrant.

> Fossils do not talk for themselves.

> They say what you want them to say... That ain't nothing

Now that doesn't even make sense. Why don't you call your local

community college and see if they offer a night course in remedial

English.

> > > Putting down

> > > is another form of bragging. Thank you for giving weight

> > > to what we already know

>

> > You know nothing, you putrid little pretender of a man. Every post

> > attempting to defend your moronic mythology proves it.

>

> I know that DARWIN, eternal damnation be upon, erred...

Of course there were errors. The book was published over 100 years

ago, moron. There's plenty we've learned since then. Darwin simply

uncovered the mechanism.

BTW: There is no "eternal damnation", either. The man is dead.

> There is no worse mythology that a monkey turning into a human

Idiot. Monkeys are just as "new" as men. We don't "come from monkeys".

We share a common ancestor.

> yet you swallow this garbage because its make look like

> you are above average joe.

No, I can observe what happened by the changes found in the bones of

dead animals. It's obvious to someone without an agenda to advance.

And in other parts of the world with indoor plumbing, I am not an

"above average joe". Only here in the Land of Debris and Home of

Depraved is an ignorant man such as myself considered "educated".

> No you ain't. Darwin, eternal

> Damnation be upon was no historian.

That's right. He was a naturalist, moron.

> He had no sense

> of History

That's because he was not a historian, dumbass. He studied biology .

> > > > Sooo...you simply laugh at it. You laugh to cover up your ignorance,

> > > > and you laugh to cover up your fear. A pathetic excuse for a human

> > > > being, cringing in fear of what you don't know.

>

> There is no fear. My faith was born is a fournace. Its worse enemies

> failed lamentably.

Bullshit. The Christian mythology enslaved Europe for more than a

thousand years. Only after discarding it with the ashes of the Second

World War were the Europeans able to build a thriving society with its

nations at peace with one another.

Your faith? Yeah, keep it. We'll put you in the zoo as the last living

Christian, as your species goes extinct.

> You too will meet with the same fate.

Empty threats from an idiot who still clings to the dress of an Iron

Age fertility god. All you've done is prove is that Christianity is a

religion of hate. Beginning with hatred of those who don't believe

xian mythology, and ending with hatred of the self. Wretched,

tormented creatures, you are. You'd be easy to pity if your situation

had been imposed by others, but since you only have yourselves to

blame, sit down and shut up.

> > > > A fine advertisement of what the disease called religion does to

> > > > someone.

>

> > > Just because you think I am ignorant does not make me so...

>

> > No, your lack of knowledge or understanding makes you so. Here, maybe

> > this will help:

>

> > Main Entry: ig

Sign In

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed The Bible

Recommended Posts

Guest The_Sage

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Guest Warhol

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest Uncle Vic

Guest landson

Guest panamfloyd@hotmail.com

Guest Libertarius

Guest Libertarius

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest Uncle Vic

Guest Jeckyl

Guest Jeckyl

Guest Libertarius

Guest Libertarius

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest codebreaker@bigsecret.com

Guest panamfloyd@hotmail.com

Join the conversation

Browse

Activity

Support