Exposing the tragic fabrication of a saviour of the world

reply to post by LetsGoViking

very interesting for those of us on the journey. Thank you, OP!

I'm honored! Thanks for your bump, LGV....
I do try.....

reply to post by wildtimes

Perhaps the member 7 years ago should have "camouflaged" his/her link. But, folks, this is really pertinent stuff.

All he is doing is blowing up into a big deal the stuff I have been talking about all the time.
Such as the forged letters of Paul, like Ephesians, and the historical fiction of Acts which serious biblical scholars do not take as being factual.
People have created a mythology around the reality, but is does not make the original thing less real.
I do not find the core Jesus story unbelievable at all because I have lived through all those manifestations of God which it represents.

reply to post by wildtimes


In regard to Nazareth not existing in the 1st Century. This is an old idea that has since been proven wrong by Archaeology.

In 2009, a dig at Nazareth unearthed significant evidence that Nazareth was a thriving small community. Wikipedia - Nazareth, Archaeology

reply to post by wildtimes


It's more of the same old stuff. People who hate Christians just because they exist, blame the actions by fake Christians on all Christians. The hate is so deep they knowingly lie and pretend that the actions of fake Christians represent the Christian belief.

Sad really. Christians are the new replacement for hate based on Race. Same kind of people doing the hating, only the target has changed. As in all cases of extreme bigotry, lying is considered OK.

reply to post by chr0naut

This is an old idea that has since been proven wrong by Archaeology.

Right.
A lot of stuff on that site is outdated.
There is nothing new on it.
He confuses things in an annoying way, where it seems obvious that it is geared towards people who are new to these ideas and will think it is saying more than it really does.

reply to post by chr0naut


Are we reading the same page?

According to the Israel Antiquities Authority, "The artifacts recovered from inside the building were few and mostly included fragments of pottery vessels from the Early Roman period (the first and second centuries AD)

So the fragments where few and mostly from the first and second century – doesn’t this make them to late to associated with the Jesus character?

unearthed quantities of later Roman and Byzantine artifacts,[72] attesting to unambiguous human presence there from the 2nd century AD onward. John Dominic Crossan, a noted New Testament scholar, remarked that Bagatti's archaeological drawings indicate just how small the village actually was, suggesting that it was little more than an insignificant hamlet

it looks like at most the place was tiny (if it was occupied at all) and i dont see any mention of any evidence for occupation before the first century – Jesus of Nazareth some place one ever heard of

reply to post by Starchild23

is religion didn't exist, do you really think we would have the moral fortitude to live decent lives?

Since animals are frequently seen to exhibit kindness to strangers, love of kin, a sense of social duty, mutual cooperation and support for the less fortunate, I am quite certain that humans would, too. And in fact, they have done so wherever they have been given the opportunity.

Here is William Dampier, a seventeenth-century physician and de facto anthropologist, describing the Bardi, a tribe of Australian aborigines he discovered:

Their only food is a small sort of fish, which they get by making weirs of stone across little coves and branches of the sea... In other places at low water they seek for cockles, mussels and periwinkles. Of these shellfish there are fewer still... but be it little or much that they get, every one (receives his portion), as well the young and tender, the old and feeble, who are not able to go abroad, as the strong and lusty...

I did not perceive that they did worship anything.

Source

Morality is not intrinsic to religious belief. Moral codes are grafted onto existing structures of dogma to make it easier for elites to exercise social control over the majority. Since different cultures have different rules of membership, religious morality varies according to these rules. It is a completely artificial construct.

Or would we convert to pure survivalism...kill or be killed?

This has absolutely nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the availability of resources. In times of plenty, only sociopaths adopt the 'kill or be killed' outlook. In times of great scarcity, everyone adopts it, and religious faith is found to be no hindrance to acts of theft, looting, murder and cannibalism. This has been proved over and over again throughout history; we celebrate exceptions to the rule precisely because they are so rare.

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by chr0naut

 

Are we reading the same page?

According to the Israel Antiquities Authority, "The artifacts recovered from inside the building were few and mostly included fragments of pottery vessels from the Early Roman period (the first and second centuries AD)

So the fragments where few and mostly from the first and second century – doesn’t this make them to late to associated with the Jesus character?

unearthed quantities of later Roman and Byzantine artifacts,[72] attesting to unambiguous human presence there from the 2nd century AD onward. John Dominic Crossan, a noted New Testament scholar, remarked that Bagatti's archaeological drawings indicate just how small the village actually was, suggesting that it was little more than an insignificant hamlet

it looks like at most the place was tiny (if it was occupied at all) and i dont see any mention of any evidence for occupation before the first century – Jesus of Nazareth some place one ever heard of

Yes, it was small, but definitely inhabited and was not fictional as attested by the artifacts. That is the point, not how large it was, but that it existed as a small town and Jesus could have spent His youth there.

The nay-sayers were suggesting that there was no such place at the time, until artifacts from roughly that period showed up.

reply to post by chr0naut


I did some googleing and have found mention of a sect called the Nazarenes
en.wikipedia.org...

The name Nazaraios is the standard Greek spelling in the New Testament for a man from Nazareth, the plural Nazaraioi means "men from Nazareth" (see Nazarene (title)).[6] The title Nazarenes, "men from Nazareth," is first applied to the Christians by Tertullus (Acts 24:5), though Herod Agrippa II (Acts 26:28) uses the term "Christians" which had first been used at Antioch (Acts 11:26). The name used by Tertullus survives into Rabbinical and modern Hebrew as notzrim (נוצרים) a standard Hebrew term for "Christian", and also into the Quran and modern Arabic as nasara (plural of nasrani "Christians"). The Arabic word nasara (نَصارى) comes from the Arabic root "n s r" (ن ص ر).

so isn’t it more likely that whoever edited the bible dropped the ball on this one?

Jesus the Nazarene as in Jesus from a sect called the Nazarenes as opposed to Jesus the Nazarene in which Nazarene is take as someone from Nazareth (which is a problem given that the evidence for Nazareth amounts to not much really)?

reply to post by chr0naut

Okay, thanks for that update.

reply to post by jmdewey60

All right, good to know. I had not come across it before. That said, the authors he cites and the sources he gives are numerous, and show that what is commonly called "new age" with such disdain is not new at all, either.

reply to post by Blaine91555

In case you are talking not about the author of that site, but jabbing at me personally, 1) I don't hate Christians, 2) I don't promote hate at all, and 3) just because it's old news to you doesn't mean that others have all seen and know the material. You were new to it once, too, remember?

Gads, people who show up saying, "And you're just now knowing this? sheesh... pfft... ghaa." are so spiteful and arrogant.

How about contribute to the dialogue with some factual, sourced corrections and debunking, rather then just gloating and calling names? Useless.

yes mostly everything from Christianity is Pagan, sad thing is most Christians themselves don't even know that.. even after they finish every prayer with "Amen" they don't realize they're simply praising a pagan god Amen-Ra , one of the Egyptian gods I believe...

as for Jesus not being real... I Don't see how you can say that, simply because some people read the bible and see it as little stories, call it fiction, etc.... etc.... how do you explain all the hidden messages within the bible, how do you explain all the prophecies within the bible, how do you explain the bible being the most blood shed-over book in the history of mankind if it is simply fun and games, how do you explain a handful of great minds of our history deciphering and trying to understand the hidden messages within the bible... people such as Isaac Newton, Leonardo Da Vinci, Arnold of Villonova, Roger Bacon etc...

How do you explain why the pope saw the bible as such a great threat and for centuries you got burned even for possessing a bible, yes "In the name of god" the pope burned people for reading or possessing the bible, he encouraged the Catholics to see the bible readers as Satan worshippers, and following the word of the devil...

I am NOT religious. but I KNOW that the bible has yet to teach us so many things.

Several people have pointed out that the author of that site exaggerates, misleads, is jumbled and out of date. This may be the case, I don't know. Being made aware that it may be outdated exaggeration only begs the main question.

Some are yawning with "old news" boredom, some are squawking with "the Bible says so", some are wincing with "oh my, that site is a danger to believers"....
some are calling the hate and bigot and lying card. ALL OF THAT is useless and negative.

FACTS:
The site exists.

I did not write it.

I do not know what to believe.

I want answers.

POINT:
WHY IS THE BIBLE NOT UPDATED TO REFLECT RECENT ARCHAEOLOGY, DOCUMENT DISCOVERIES, SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATIONS, AND EVOLUTION? Why is there more than one? Why can't people get along?

The TRUTH will be the TRUTH for EVERYONE.

Isn't it time we worked together to find the TRUTH, so we might move on to more pressing problems?

I appreciate those of you who have brought other sources to the table, and other ideas, critical thinking, suggestions for further study, and reviews of some of the ideas represented in that site.

I actually finished reading the book last week.
It's well researched and a bit heavy going in places. Like any treatise that opposes an entrenched belief system it's bound to attract vitriol from believers but I think if you read it with an open mind you'll find a lot of interesting ideas in there. But please, read the book before commenting on the website or the ideas.

reply to post by wildtimes


Interesting question, why the bible isn't being updated, but I'm certain the bible isn't being updated because it is a finished story which we as humans are fulfilling, & will lead us into a new beginning once we accept the message of it.

reply to post by Astyanax

This has absolutely nothing to do with religion and everything to do with the availability of resources. In times of plenty, only sociopaths adopt the 'kill or be killed' outlook. In times of great scarcity, everyone adopts it, and religious faith is found to be no hindrance to acts of theft, looting, murder and cannibalism. This has been proved over and over again throughout history; we celebrate exceptions to the rule precisely because they are so rare.

Brilliantly stated.

And, we have plenty....NOW...but we also have sociopath hoarders; unfortunately only the really common lowly ones show up on the A&E series Hoarders....
they ought to do a few on people like Jamie Dimon, the Pope/Vatican, the super-rich families and conglomerations....the consumer-driven nations....the few who own the most of everything....and don't want to share...

that would really wake people up.

And how about we just toss the Bible out and begin again? It's a mess. Just go with the I'Ching. All the same messages, much easier going. Reopen the case with the evidence in hand. Declare a mistrial or a tie; start over.
*sigh*
I'ma call the Dalai Lama. Maybe he can help me; I choose him as my sponsor for the time being, along with the author of my SIGNATURE below: The Abrahamic faiths are chaos. As ecclesiastical institutions, they're so out of control with their bickering and "nuh-unh-ing" that they ALL seem largely incoherent, unorganized, and worth little attention. The problem seems to be they are all recipes for trouble-makers.

Just my observation.

reply to post by Thinkingmagpie

But please, read the book before commenting on the website or the ideas.

I have only seen the website.

I brought it here for some dialogue. Does the book override any of the site? The site is huge enough; but, suggestion noted. Thanks.

reply to post by wildtimes


Shock! The Bible is fabricated and Christianity is a sham!

You should go hang out in the atheism part of Reddit.

Anyone with half a brain and a desire to spend 30 minutes researching knows this already Dear.



T

Originally posted by wildtimes

"And how about we just toss the Bible out and begin again? It's a mess. Just go with the I'Ching. All the same messages, much easier going. Reopen the case with the evidence in hand. Declare a mistrial or a tie; start over.
*sigh*
I'ma call the Dalai Lama. Maybe he can help me; I choose him as my sponsor for the time being, along with the author of my SIGNATURE below: The Abrahamic faiths are chaos. As ecclesiastical institutions, they're so out of control with their bickering and "nuh-unh-ing" that they ALL seem largely incoherent, unorganized, and worth little attention. The problem seems to be they are all recipes for trouble-makers.

Just my observation."

I apologize that i don't understand whether you meant this sarcastic or not but how can you say that... simply because we do not understand something we chose to throw it away?, isn't this..one of humanities biggest problems?, instead of fixing something we rather remove it completely and attempt something new simply until the point comes that when the generation that understood the meaning of what they created dies out and the new generation fails to see the point and throws it away again, continuing this vicious cycle...

I think we as people need to change the point of view we're standing in right now :/

humanity has been around for 100,000 yrs,

its gullible to think that only in the past 2,000 yrs has God finally "decided" to deliver a message to mankind and manifest a "saviour" who finally died for us so late in the human timeline.

anyways, i see a distinct parallel in the Christian saviour of 2000 yrs ago,

and America masquerading as a world saviour to Americans most of which are Christians, likewise.

people are so functional, larval, CHILDISH in their thinking.

for once, grow up,,