Early Christian Conspiracy - How Was It Done?

reply to post by jagdflieger


HA! Are you serious?

No really, are you?

Interesting points to study are the writings of Gerald Massey who informs that Christianity is mystical mythology canalized by ignorant people.

The whole story we have is ALL MYTHOLOGY

Therefore the historical personage of Jesus is irrelevant, what is key is deciphering the mythology

reply to post by Captain_Sense

HA! Are you serious?
No really, are you?

Would you mind explaining. The "pagan gods" theory (Kersey Graves) has been refuted over and over. One of the sites I posted was at "infidels.org". It still does not answer the original question.

reply to post by jagdflieger


Honestly, on that level of absurdity, I will not waste any time entertaining that one. I was hoping for much better discussion, but that is just not even fun in anyway blowing that one outta the water, trust me. Sorry!

There is almost no point in debating with someone like jagdflieger. ALMOST.

I just finished "The Pagan Christ" by Tom Harpur. START there. But I honestly doubt you will read it.

Oh oh, another one of 'those' threads guaranteed to get the ire up of many.

This is an amazingly deep debate and if anyone here has ever experienced any of my prior post, you know where I stand and what I believe concerning this. I almost died in a car accident back in 2007 and had a VERY FRIGHTENING 'vision' of the spritual realities that consist of Heaven AND Hell. Now, I can't quantify that experience easily or 'share' it objectively with anyone but it is what it is.
But in case anyone is wondering, Jesus is real, Heaven is real, HELL is real and this 'life' is your one and only chance to choose. Of couse what you choose and believe (and your behaviour) will determine what you experience AFTER you pass the veil. (For eternity).

That aside, the main contention in the op that I would like to start to address is this one:

1. There are no Roman records of Jesus; there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus, and the claimed evidence is very weak, late, forged, suspect or not about Jesus at all. Therefore the historical Jesus never existed.

This is not true.


Let's start with this one:

The following excerpt contains the testimony of Josephus about Jesus Christ in paragraph 3. This famous paragraph is known as the �Testimonium Flavianum� in Latin, or �The Testimony of Flavius.� This reprint is from �The New Complete Works of Josephus�, translated by William Whiston, with commentary by Paul L. Maier. Copyright 1999 by Kregel Publications. Pages 590-591. I have reproduced the William Whiston translation of "Jewish Antiquities" here, including his footnotes.


There are others that I will chime in about later when I have time.


We will ALL take our last breaths.. believe what you will and at your own peril. Like Joyce Meyers always says.."If I'm wrong, (About Jesus) Oh well. But if I'm right? Man, LOTS of people are in for the rudest awakening..."

Boy, that is the ultimate understatement.

View





[edit on 30-4-2010 by ViewFromTheStars]

reply to post by ViewFromTheStars


Ok, scrolling halfway down your source page, just because I thought I'd check, we have this quote:

"There is some debate among scholars over the authenticity of paragraph 3. Most scholars believe that the majority of the paragraph is authentic, with a few crucial sentences inserted later by Christian scribes. Some scholars think that the entire paragraph is a later Christian insertion. A few scholars believe that the entire passage is indeed authentic, and that Josephus himself wrote it down in the form seen here, without later revision. (There is another shorter reference to Jesus in 20.9.1(200).)".

I'll tell you why, in my opinion, and I'm sorry I have never had a near-death experience to back up my claims with, just many many hours of research and soul searching and questioning, there is no concrete evidence that Jesus lived as a HISTORICAL human being. There is none.

And all I am talking about is HISTORICALLY, not spiritually. But that opens a can o worms.....

[edit on 30-4-2010 by worlds_away]

Originally posted by jagdflieger
reply to post by St Udio

 

Start from the beginning. How did it begin, How was it implemented? We are only concerned about events before about 100CE (not 325CE). If you were in court, your testimony would be immaterial.

the idea or fertile ground for the emergence of Christianity was established all during the extended Roman occupation of Palestine/Judea...

every generation of Jews, including semite indigenous peoples (some of which could have been heritage 'Lost' Israelites) had an uprising or insurrection by zealots with a leader claiming to be some sort of messiah.

a sensible court of law would indeed hear my evidence even though it was based on Constantine in 325AD that formalized the once pagan/magical cult of Jesus the Christ


[edit on 30-4-2010 by St Udio]

reply to post by ViewFromTheStars


Here is my point:

The atheists say:
1. There's these forgeries - you see. (debatable).
2. There's these pagan gods - you see (debatable relationship)
3. The Christians just mixed them together and came up with Jesus - you see.

No, I don't see. Show me a "paper trail". Show me a time line. Show me something I can take to the grand jury. Connect the dots in a plausible scenario of implementation. For example:

Several years ago there was a case involving a ex-football player charged with murdering his ex-wife (no need to name him). The prosecution built a very effective scenario that it was plausible that the accused could have done the murder (he knew where she lived, he knew when she would be home, he was physically fit enough to run the distance from her home to his house in the 10 minutes, etc.) The grand jury agreed that he could have very well committed the murder and indicted him. Substitute my name for his, the grand jury would say "That guy couldn't cover a mile in 10 minutes even if he was on a pair of roller skates; case dismissed".

dbl post

[edit on 30-4-2010 by worlds_away]

reply to post by jagdflieger


But you MUST understand there is NO proof. That is why it is called FAITH. Even I, an "atheist" as labeled, understand that.

It is extremely hard to talk about this topic because of how personal faith is to people. I strive to be an open, questioning, human being. Of no determinable faith, because it is, in my opinion, divisive. A divisive issue that will continue to be divisive until people start taking their faith less personally, and actually doing some research themselves. Instead of demanding proof from others do some research, without your answer already decided. If you've already decided on an answer, then STOP asking the question. But do not ask people for help and then slam their opinion because you have already decided on an answer.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by worlds_away]

Originally posted by worlds_away
reply to post by ViewFromTheStars

 

Ok, scrolling halfway down your source page, just because I thought I'd check, we have this quote:

"There is some debate among scholars over the authenticity of paragraph 3. Most scholars believe that the majority of the paragraph is authentic, with a few crucial sentences inserted later by Christian scribes. Some scholars think that the entire paragraph is a later Christian insertion. A few scholars believe that the entire passage is indeed authentic, and that Josephus himself wrote it down in the form seen here, without later revision. (There is another shorter reference to Jesus in 20.9.1(200).)".

I'll tell you why, in my opinion, and I'm sorry I have never had a near-death experience to back up my claims with, just many many hours of research and soul searching and questioning, there is no concrete evidence that Jesus lived as a HISTORICAL human being. There is none.

And all I am talking about is HISTORICALLY, not spiritually. But that opens a can o worms.....

[edit on 30-4-2010 by worlds_away]

I'm glad that's just your opinion because

"Some scholars think that the entire paragraph is a later Christian insertion."

Some Scholars think? lol

Keep up your search. I'll be adding other references here in a bit'.

View

Originally posted by worlds_away
reply to post by jagdflieger

 

But you MUST understand there is NO proof. That is why it is called FAITH. Even I, an "atheist" as labeled, understand that.

I do understand, believe me. The Bible says it is IMPOSSIBLE to please God (The God of Isaac, Abraham and Jacob) without Faith.. maybe that's why He 'set' this all up the way He did.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by ViewFromTheStars]

It is extremely hard to talk about this topic because of how personal faith is to people. I strive to be an open, questioning, human being. Of no determinable faith, because it is, in my opinion, divisive. A divisive issue that will continue to be divisive until people start taking their faith less personally, and actually doing some research themselves. Instead of demanding proof from others do some research, without your answer already decided. If you've already decided on an answer, then STOP asking the question. But do not ask people for help and then slam their opinion because you have already decided on an answer.

There is an original letter from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius in the Library of Rome, discussing Jesus. There is also a copy of the letter in Washington D.C.

Pontius Pilate came to the conclusion that Jesus was the son of God in the letter, so that to me is proof that Jesus existed.

Where faith steps in is in believing he was actually the son of God.

reply to post by worlds_away

t is extremely hard to talk about this topic because of how personal faith is to people. I strive to be an open, questioning, human being. Of no determinable faith, because it is, in my opinion, divisive. A divisive issue that will continue to be divisive until people start taking their faith less personally, and actually doing some research themselves. Instead of demanding proof from others do some research, without your answer already decided. If you've already decided on an answer, then STOP asking the question. But do not ask people for help and then slam their opinion because you have already decided on an answer.

You see I am looking for the skeptic response to how Christianity developed from "pagan beliefs" to its state around 100CE to 120CE. I want to hear comments on where it started, who started it, when was it started. Not charges of forgery, etc. See my posting above.

reply to post by Blanca Rose


Do you have a source? Or is this maybe something you have seen firsthand? I am in no way doubting you, just would like to check it out for myself and google wasn't finding anything specific.

Originally posted by Blanca Rose
There is an original letter from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius in the Library of Rome, discussing Jesus. There is also a copy of the letter in Washington D.C.

Pontius Pilate came to the conclusion that Jesus was the son of God in the letter, so that to me is proof that Jesus existed.

Where faith steps in is in believing he was actually the son of God.

I was trying to get around that to that one. Not at home right now so trying to dig stuff up but I found this on short notice:


Source. Translated by Alexander Walker. From Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 8. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1886.) Revised and edited for New Advent by Kevin Knight.


This one in particular is VERY fascinating. I'll do more rooting and snooting.

[edit on 30-4-2010 by ViewFromTheStars]

reply to post by worlds_away


Dang Windows Vista!

I had read a book about this, and did some research only to find it's true. I apologize for not supplying a link, but, I tried and was having problems.

I don't want to sound like a jerk, but if you google Tiberius, Pontius Pilate, and Jesus, you will get a lot of information.

I really do apologize!

Interesting thread. I might add my 2 cents.

I am of the opinion that Jesus did exist. I don't really believe he was the son of god though. I don't quite think christianity went from pagan to christian. I was under the impression it went from judaism to christianity. Have you checked out the apocryphal texts? They are quite interesting to read, and offer a few more slants on his life like him striking down the kids he did not get along with to learn the lesson of using his powers for good not evil. There is also a lot more of John the Baptist and how he taught Jesus, which led to Jesus taking up his teachings. These were then later homogonised to the later versions we are familiar with.

My own personal belief that fits is that Jesus existed as the leader of a Jewish cult that was big enough to transcend his death and have people still attracted to it's belief system after his death. This cult then was warped and developed again and again until it was unrecognisable in its original form. And please don't take my use of the word cult the wrong way. It is only meant as in the definition that it was an offshoot sect of judaism.