garrisonjj Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Ive been reading much evidence that doubts the historical evidence of jesus. What do you think? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadoe Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 I've read all the evidence - well, a LOT of evidence - and come to the conclusion that no, he didn't exist. Highlights: The Jesus myth is based too strongly on myths that came before. There is not one instance of a valid extra-biblical mention of Jesus. If he was so popular that the Roman Empire feared him, then surely SOMEONE would have mentioned it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lycorth Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 What Shadoe said. I do not believe that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed. There were many Jesuses, but not good ol' Jeezus Christ. There is no historical evidence for his existence, and nothing to back up the alledged existence of a god who, with his powers of omnipotence and such, ought to show himself regularly to the world to properly encourage belief in him. No evidence = no belief. Either Jeezus of Nazareth was totally made-up, or is some malevolent spiritual being (what an Asatruar might call an "Aetin") - no matter. What is for certain is that Jeezus Never Existed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwc Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Jesus the baby-god? Nope, does not now or ever did exist. Jesus the myth? For certain. One or more proto-jesus preachers? Possibly but probably had little to do with the myths but more the formation of the original groups that grew into early xians (such as John the Baptist whose cult seemed to split into John followers and some later jesus followers after the myth writers "borrowed" him to validate their made up leader). mwc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artur Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 * Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Powerup Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Ever since I have attended Churches, I have always thought there is something missing, or there is something that is not quite right. So when I read the NT, there is a lot of stuff that is not mentioned anywhere else, i.e.; the cross, and proxy sacrifice of a man for our sins. So I have always been looking for who Jesus/Yahshua really is. I believe I have found him! I believe He is Jesus/Yahshua son of Annanis. He was considered to be a mad prophet. About 55 - 70 CE. He is the one who turned over the tables of the moneychangers and was a against all blood sacrifices. He prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple and He got in the Priests faces and called them a generation of vipers and off springs of serpents. He was brought before the Sanhedrin and was whipped and history says they released him and he died during the Roman siege on Jerusalem. A bit too convenient for me, seeing about 500,000 people died in this siege by the Romans. How can we be sure after that? I believe after they whipped Him they then ate him. The Knights Templar spent 9 years digging under the temple mount and found a box and then sometime latter they flew the flag Jolly Roger as the skull and bones. The people present were 12 serpent seed bloodline priests and the thirteenth was Satan himself. This is where the 13 bloodlines of the illuminatti come from. Paul may have been one of the twelve or Satan possessed Paul, as it is very hard to prove that Paul even existed at all. The writers of the Gospels first started with the writing of Paul and Paul never mentions a historical Jesus, but a mythical one. The Gospels come mainly from the teaching of Paul/Satan and are an attempt to cover up the real story, by merging pagan myths into the Gospel and try to deify Jesus by making Him comparable to a Sun God, God men of past mystery religions. Many hearing this in those days, would have accepted this teaching, as it was already believed to be acceptable. I believe that Freemasons constructed Solomon’s Temple, if you look at the design of the temple it looks very similar to masons temples we have today. The Holy of Holies or secret place is where the high priest conducted human sacrifices and where they ate and drank human flesh and blood. While outside they had lambs and bulls sacrificed as a front to what was going on in the secret place. Three temples were destroyed and If this is not an indication that Yahweh does not approve of the sacrifice of humans or animals, son or man. I don’t know what is, three times should be a sign of disapproval. Yahshua son of Annanis had this message to preach, that God requires mercy not sacrifice and that we all (the sons of man) have God within us and that the Serpent seeds love to spill our blood and they bind us up in fear, by the blood shed of war and the brainwashing of religion. Yahshua was against this blood sacrifice stuff and they killed him by whipping him and taunting him in a macabre ritual and then they ate him to consume his knowledge and power. Read psalm 22 and this ritual to me is plain as the nose on your face. His bones still holds some power and are held by secret organisation i.e.; skull and bones. Even in the OT do we see power emitting from dead mans bones when a man was place in the tomb and then he came out he was heeled. The Christian religion empowers Satan and evil on the earth. It does not defeat it. The Blood drinking and flesh eating pagan ritual has an evil power over its participants of this pagan communion. As no Christian can see the real meaning or power of this pagan occultic practise. They are not doing this in remembrance of Jesus but are doing it in remembrance of those who ate him. This has a great deceptive power over the participant and one of the results is disunity, hypocrisy and self-righteousness. This is also the reason why all of Christendom are spit up into denominations, sects and cults and they will never achieve unity as long as this occultic pagan practice continues to be radiated from the pagan church. I have always wondered why they needed, about 500 soldiers to arrest Yahshua. They tried many times and he just turns and walks straight through those who are trying to grab him. Yahshua had great knowledge and knew this world is just an illusion and said things like if you have faith you can say to this mountain, be removed and be cast into the sea. Faith is the power over the temporal or insight into the illusion of the existence of this temporal world. That is what real Faith is, it is not the substance of things hoped for but the power to remove things that exist in this illusion world, like to walk through walls or to just see through lies. They captured Yahshua by getting him pissed or drunk. 1Pe 5:8 Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Jesus the baby-god? Nope, does not now or ever did exist. Jesus the myth? For certain. One or more proto-jesus preachers? Possibly but probably had little to do with the myths but more the formation of the original groups that grew into early xians (such as John the Baptist whose cult seemed to split into John followers and some later jesus followers after the myth writers "borrowed" him to validate their made up leader). mwc Agree. Son of God: No Jesus Christus: No Miracle man: No A regular guy that was very smart, had some good ideas, teaching many and his name was Bob, and later they changed his name to "Superman" or "The Savior Anointed By God", and he was the foundation they built the mythology on: Possible. Troll? Message to all members: JasonWhatever (blocked), Eightman (blocked) and now this dude Powerup (warned), all considered to be Trolls. Based on IP# and behavior. No need to respond or react. Just FYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGJ@ReligionisBullshit Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 I believe that Freemasons constructed Solomon’s Temple, if you look at the design of the temple it looks very similar to masons temples we have today. And the ancestors of the architects in Memphis Tennessee who designed the Pyramid Arena also designed the Great Pyramid of Giza. Yes, yes! Why didn't I see the logic of it before! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomniac Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 not so sure here. anyone seen the documentary that was just released? "the god that didnt exist" or something like that? it supposedly argues that jesus never existed. got good reviews from what ive seen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lothartx Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Ive been reading much evidence that doubts the historical evidence of jesus. What do you think? Thanks Short answer is "No". I've read a lot of different opinions on the subject. My conclusion is that "Jesus of Nazereth" as described in the bable is a montage of several other "Jesus". I found it very interesting how many Jesus's existed prior to the formation of the church. Some are mentioned in several ancient texts, but not as miracle men, but as rebels against the Romans. I'm at work, so I don't have my sources in front of me. I'll try to add them later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Ive been reading much evidence that doubts the historical evidence of jesus. What do you think? Thanks I think there are strong and compelling reasons to view the story of Jesus as one that evolved from a mystical-only Christ Being, to a human personification of the Christ as an evolved foundational figure of the Christian faith, set in a historical context and told as a hero's tale as a vehicle for the Christian message. Though there is no hard evidence of this any more than for a bonafide historical Jesus, I feel it is a more consistent explanation with the facts of an ever evolving story of the Christ, from Paul's writings to later Gospel stories about him. If there was a real historical person as the basis for the Christian teachings, he most certainly did not approximate the tales told in the Gospel accounts. If these were true accounts, considering the magnitude of the events that are told, they are more silent than the grave in all records of contemporary historians who were meticulous in detail with the events of the day in the surrounding areas where these tales are set in. At best, this would mean the "miracles" the "triumphant entry" the "trial", and likely the execution either never occurred, or we greatly exaggerated. I could go either way for a mythological Christ or a historical person as the basis for the Gospel, though I do lean toward the purely mythological Christ more. Certainly however, the Gospel accounts are not real history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Let's take away the Bible as "historical" evidence? Then what do we know about Jesus, his miracles, his trail, his crucifixion, his resurrection and all the other wonderful tales these fiction writers spun? No, we would no nothing about him, because he doesn't turn up in history until the middle to late second century. And actually the same goes for the Paul. Where is Paul in history? Where is the historical evidence for all the Christians he supposedly killed before having this wonderful experience on a dusty road to Damascus? Why do "Luke" who supposedly wrote the Acts of the Apostles give three different versions of his "conversion?" If you add up everything, the accumulation of the lack of evidence, then sadly I have to conclude - he is as much a myth as Zeus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kryten Posted April 21, 2006 Share Posted April 21, 2006 Jesus of Nazereth? No and no. (The town of Nazereth wasn't created until in the second century or so.) Why do so many assume he DID exist? Because that's been the story for centuries and anyone who did the research to actually find out the TRUTH was scoffed at or ignored. Christians would hate, fear, and reject such a person, and non-believers wouldn't care. Only since the MASSIVE exchange of information (internet) has the Christian LIE that "there's more evidence that Jesus existed than Julius Ceasar" (or George Washington- take your pick) been exposed as total crap. There IS NONE-- other than tales and myths that multiplied and refined over time, and were eventually trimmed down to the NT as voted on by the majority of religious leaders of the time. (All very smart men I'm sure-- the equivilant of PhDs...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted April 22, 2006 Share Posted April 22, 2006 Ive been reading much evidence that doubts the historical evidence of jesus. What do you think? Thanks The total lack of contemporary historical references indicates that Jesus is entirely mythical. The Gospels are simply a new version of the ancient myth of the dying and resurrecting Sun god. But I really don't care one way or the other. I left Xianity because I could no longer accept a cruel and vengeful god who would sentence His children to eternal punishment simply for not believing in Him. Jesus and Yahweh can both kiss my ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted April 22, 2006 Share Posted April 22, 2006 I found this site here ---> The Unspoken Bible to be the most informative piece(s) of information that I ever found that show why and how the story of Jesus evolved the way it did. Yes, the message does indeed come from the Heavens, but not how you've been told it did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted April 22, 2006 Share Posted April 22, 2006 Yeah. I've kind'a being knowing that Christianity and Judaism came from astrology for a while. I learned it on this site! For me it was enough to think about these things: 1. why was there 12 tribes, and one of them (Judah) had a Lion as their symbol, and one of them a Ram (IIRC) 2. why 12 disciples, and when they lost one, had to be replaced so it was 12 again? 3. All the references to fish in the Bible, but also the symbol everyone uses now. We're now in the age of Aquarius (IIRC), but it changed recently. Before that we had the age of pisces (fish), and it started a few years BC, just about the time Jesus supposedly was born. Those are the ones I can remember now, but I'm sure I'll remember more when going to Fwee's link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts