Now are there pieces of the puzzle that have Mary (his wife) moving to another country? Yes, there are. It seems like a lot of Jesus acquaints left town at the time Rome got new leadership.Who are you talking about here? What sources are there of this? Could it be that it "seems like" those people left town because they never existed in the first place? If the facts are; 1) There are stories about apostles around 30AD, 2) There is no additional information about what happened to them. I could conclude those are just stories. After the change in Roman leadership, did not the disciples spread out to other countries. Yes, one could say that they are made up stories. But what about the churches and graves that followed these disciples? Tomb of Jesus John the Baptist in the Umayyad Mosque Tomb of the Virgin Mary Saint Peter's tomb Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral (Alexandria) Matthew the Apostle in the Salerno Cathedral James, son of Zebedee in the Santiago de Compostela Cathedral Luke the Evangelist in Thebes, Greece Basilica of St. John Simple. Put dates on those. I don't mean carbon dating, I mean when did someone put those titles on those tombs? Pick any one, like, what is the evidence that the Luke in this list is the Luke who wrote the gospel? Spoiler alert: there isn't any
Rhetorically swift move. You were asked to produce some tangible evidence for claims you made. Now with your rhetorical razzle-dazzle it's suddenly your opponent's duty to prove that what you said has no substantive supporting evidence. Then you make pronounces that have all the ring of self-certain wisdom from on high, but that still only boil down to whinny victimology.Typical Mike. Make up something. Introduce it in the middle of something else. Use it as it if is evidence for something. If I asked, “what priests are you talking about and when and how did they change their minds?", Mike will just introduce some other new made up something and talk about me and do anything but answer the question.Is it true that the Vatican now requires all priests to swear belief in the crucifixion to become priests? If so, then when and why did that become a requirement? You yourself just said that data of Jesus is almost none existent. So, instead of being a judge and making the rules. Just take a stance. Say that you don’t believe the Vatican requires priests to believe in the crucifixion instead of making it about me. I should not be the subject matter here. All that does is change direction of the subject thought. Just say that no the Vatican does not require all priests to believe in the crucifixion and we will understand your views on the subject and not your views on Mike. But on Mike’s viewpoints.
Speaking of swift moves and since this thread has drifted, like totally man, away from it intended direction,
I figure it’s time for an apropos break.
Perhaps give everyone a moment to reflect on the greater mysteries.
Monty Python Twit Olympics - YouTube
Gotta admit, I totally never got the intention of the OP
Gotta admit, I totally never got the intention of the OPno body else seemed to either. Guess everyone here has had a peachy creamy life with no genuine crises, or something like. :blank:
I wonder how many people don’t even understand what’s meant by Jesus’ Passion.
I’ll have to give it another try when I’m not in quite so pissy a mood.
The J. Passion as a metaphor for the human spiritual growth process… struggle.
I wonder how many people don't even understand what's meant by Jesus' Passion. I'll have to give it another try when I'm not in quite so pissy a mood. The J. Passion as a metaphor for the human spiritual growth process... struggle.Just re-read it. It's a nice idea, but it requires filtering out a lot of verses, from old and new testaments. The story comes from a time when there were gods and there were sacrifices and they meant something. Historical writing was just developing at that time and the two got mixed. Chronicling history, and mythologizing history has continued up until the present. Despite improvements, the myths remain. Maybe what you are proposing is something I fully support, mythologizing something with the awareness that you are doing it. Just like watching Batman destroy evil is a cathartic experience and a message of justice, an imaginary absolver of sin and forgiver of all is a welcome healing in a world of evil. Dominic Crossan once said that when they put the four gospels in the NT, they knew they were different. They didn't intend anyone to "harmonize" them, they were saying, "here's how you do it". But then they started canonizing and declaring things anathema and no one dared to have a new revelation or write a new myth.
Now are there pieces of the puzzle that have Mary (his wife) moving to another country? Yes, there are. It seems like a lot of Jesus acquaints left town at the time Rome got new leadership.Who are you talking about here? What sources are there of this? Could it be that it "seems like" those people left town because they never existed in the first place? If the facts are; 1) There are stories about apostles around 30AD, 2) There is no additional information about what happened to them. I could conclude those are just stories. After the change in Roman leadership, did not the disciples spread out to other countries. Yes, one could say that they are made up stories. But what about the churches and graves that followed these disciples? Tomb of Jesus John the Baptist in the Umayyad Mosque Tomb of the Virgin Mary Saint Peter's tomb Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral (Alexandria) Matthew the Apostle in the Salerno Cathedral James, son of Zebedee in the Santiago de Compostela Cathedral Luke the Evangelist in Thebes, Greece Basilica of St. John Simple. Put dates on those. I don't mean carbon dating, I mean when did someone put those titles on those tombs? Pick any one, like, what is the evidence that the Luke in this list is the Luke who wrote the gospel? Spoiler alert: there isn't any Who died and made you GOD? You got some nerve telling me what to do when you don’t answer any of my questions to you. Let practice a little reciprocity here!
Now are there pieces of the puzzle that have Mary (his wife) moving to another country? Yes, there are. It seems like a lot of Jesus acquaints left town at the time Rome got new leadership.Who are you talking about here? What sources are there of this? Could it be that it "seems like" those people left town because they never existed in the first place? If the facts are; 1) There are stories about apostles around 30AD, 2) There is no additional information about what happened to them. I could conclude those are just stories. After the change in Roman leadership, did not the disciples spread out to other countries. Yes, one could say that they are made up stories. But what about the churches and graves that followed these disciples? Tomb of Jesus John the Baptist in the Umayyad Mosque Tomb of the Virgin Mary Saint Peter's tomb Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral (Alexandria) Matthew the Apostle in the Salerno Cathedral James, son of Zebedee in the Santiago de Compostela Cathedral Luke the Evangelist in Thebes, Greece Basilica of St. John Simple. Put dates on those. I don't mean carbon dating, I mean when did someone put those titles on those tombs? Pick any one, like, what is the evidence that the Luke in this list is the Luke who wrote the gospel? Spoiler alert: there isn't any Who died and made you GOD? You got some nerve telling me what to do when you don’t answer any of my questions to you. Let practice a little reciprocity here! Your idea of reciprocity is that I do your research for you. I've looked up enough of those to know they are all bogus, as is any piece of archaeological evidence for Jesus ever. The way science, especially history, works is, you create reference classes. The reference class of "things the church say are from the 1st century" includes so many things that have been proven wrong, the odds of any new one someone presents being true are extremely low. No one made me God, I used science. You don't ask questions, you present distractions. You put up lists of things that you know nothing about and then complain because I don't except your un-researched data.
You don't ask questions, you present distractions. You put up lists of things that you know nothing about and then complain because I don't except your un-researched data.That's his MO. He's also cocksure of himself despite being wrong about 90 percent of the things he posts.
Now are there pieces of the puzzle that have Mary (his wife) moving to another country? Yes, there are. It seems like a lot of Jesus acquaints left town at the time Rome got new leadership.Who are you talking about here? What sources are there of this? Could it be that it "seems like" those people left town because they never existed in the first place? If the facts are; 1) There are stories about apostles around 30AD, 2) There is no additional information about what happened to them. I could conclude those are just stories. After the change in Roman leadership, did not the disciples spread out to other countries. Yes, one could say that they are made up stories. But what about the churches and graves that followed these disciples? Tomb of Jesus John the Baptist in the Umayyad Mosque Tomb of the Virgin Mary Saint Peter's tomb Saint Mark's Coptic Orthodox Cathedral (Alexandria) Matthew the Apostle in the Salerno Cathedral James, son of Zebedee in the Santiago de Compostela Cathedral Luke the Evangelist in Thebes, Greece Basilica of St. John Simple. Put dates on those. I don't mean carbon dating, I mean when did someone put those titles on those tombs? Pick any one, like, what is the evidence that the Luke in this list is the Luke who wrote the gospel? Spoiler alert: there isn't any Who died and made you GOD? You got some nerve telling me what to do when you don’t answer any of my questions to you. Let practice a little reciprocity here! Your idea of reciprocity is that I do your research for you. I've looked up enough of those to know they are all bogus, as is any piece of archaeological evidence for Jesus ever. The way science, especially history, works is, you create reference classes. The reference class of "things the church say are from the 1st century" includes so many things that have been proven wrong, the odds of any new one someone presents being true are extremely low. No one made me God, I used science. You don't ask questions, you present distractions. You put up lists of things that you know nothing about and then complain because I don't except your un-researched data. Unsubstantiated data. After all your talk, you post without any back up data! Are you on a one way street? Myself, if there is no scientific data, then one has to use scientific logic. The question then becomes, is it logical that Jesus was a real man? Is it logical that there may have been more than one Jesus? Is it logical that Jesus was a real man and did not see himself as a god? Is it possible that Jesus was doing what he was doing because he was running for a political office? Is it logical that there was no Jesus at all and all this was made up by group of conspiracy theorists? You better start looking at one or two of these theories, if you want to stop spinning your wheels decades after decades in the same rut.
You don't ask questions, you present distractions. You put up lists of things that you know nothing about and then complain because I don't except your un-researched data.That's his MO. He's also cocksure of himself despite being wrong about 90 percent of the things he posts. That low? ?
Unsubstantiated data. After all your talk, you post without any back up data! Are you on a one way street? Myself, if there is no scientific data, then one has to use scientific logic. The question then becomes, is it logical that Jesus was a real man? Is it logical that there may have been more than one Jesus? Is it logical that Jesus was a real man and did not see himself as a god? Is it possible that Jesus was doing what he was doing because he was running for a political office? Is it logical that there was no Jesus at all and all this was made up by group of conspiracy theorists? You better start looking at one or two of these theories, if you want to stop spinning your wheels decades after decades in the same rut.That takes some nerve, to call my explanation of your unsubstantiated data, "unsubstantiated data". Here's the introduction Matthew from the NIV Study Bible. ] This is a mainstream Bible. You could find one in just about any church. It is a mainstream view that we have no idea who these people are. It is widely known that Catholics found some bones, put them in a casket and slapped a name on it. In the case of Jesus, they found a stone with that name on it and said, "hey, look, Jesus!" I've tried to tell you things like this many times and you never accept it. You quickly change the subject, so no, I"m not providing any other links. You, on the other hand, could provide just one. One decent, peer reviewed article that shows why any one of those tombs is definitely the same guy as the one in the Bible, and I would be forced to at least consider it.
You, on the other hand, could provide just one. One decent, peer reviewed article that shows why any one of those tombs is definitely the same guy as the one in the Bible, and I would be forced to at least consider it.I can do you better than a stinking study. I got the pictures!
And for the millionth time, there aren't billions of people worshiping Socrates. There aren't end of the world theories coming out every few years that people believe and kill their children as a response to them. Congress doesn't invoke the name of Socrates when suggesting we ban Muslims from coming to America.I disagree with your thinking here. The names used are nothing more than the messenger of an “idea or concept". So when people worship “Jesus". Are they worshiping the name “Jesus"? Or are they worshiping the ideas and concepts that Jesus talks about? Jesus was a teacher. Which means he taught what he had learned. Jesus had almost no original thoughts or concepts of his own. The evolution of religion is older ideas and traditions that are passed down generation to generation and every now and then a new idea or tradition is added. It is a known fact that when older religions traveled to new countries and were adopted by that country that the names, dates and places were changed to reflex the new country. It is said that even when the GODs had different names, that people of different countries were able to relate them to the GODs that they knew even though the names were different. Because the stories were recognized as having the same ideas as gods that they knew. It is very possible that Jesus used some of Socrates ideas and Socrates ideas were ideas that had been passed down to him. https://www.sporcle.com/games/TJL/jesus_or_socrates One should not exclude the research done on Stoicism and how it may have influenced the NT. http://stoicism.biblestudyinfo.com/ http://www.equip.org/article/was-the-new-testament-influenced-by-stoicism/ Both Stoicism and Christianity assert an inner freedom in the face of the external world, a belief in human kinship with Nature or God, a sense of the innate depravity—or "persistent evil"—of humankind,[31] and the futility and temporarity of worldly possessions and attachments. Both encourage Ascesis with respect to the passions and inferior emotions such as lust, and envy, so that the higher possibilities of one's humanity can be awakened and developed. Stoic writings such as the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius have been highly regarded by many Christians throughout the centuries. The Stoic ideal of dispassion is accepted to this day as the perfect moral state by the Eastern Orthodox Church. Saint Ambrose of Milan was known for applying Stoic philosophy to his theology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoicism
I’m going to take it that you have conceded all the points I made in the last 2 pages since you gave up on them and rebooted an earlier part of his thread.
You’re right, sort of. No god would last beyond a generation if they didn’t have some good ideas, rooted in ancient human wisdom. The purpose of religion is to codify ideas and attach them to characters. Then the illiterate don’t need to remember logic and facts, just names and stories, and “be like Jesus”. So, I’m not sure you were even disagreeing with what I said about Socrates. I was saying what’s important about Socrates IS his ideas, not the man himself.
I'm going to take it that you have conceded all the points I made in the last 2 pages since you gave up on them and rebooted an earlier part of his thread. You're right, sort of. No god would last beyond a generation if they didn't have some good ideas, rooted in ancient human wisdom. The purpose of religion is to codify ideas and attach them to characters. Then the illiterate don't need to remember logic and facts, just names and stories, and "be like Jesus". So, I'm not sure you were even disagreeing with what I said about Socrates. I was saying what's important about Socrates IS his ideas, not the man himself.Your right. I think of Socrates as a philosopher. A philosopher job is to keep mankind’s ideas in context with changing social and political thinking so that the main concepts being passed down remains understood. Where Jesus’s job as a teacher was to take the philosopher’s work and make it understood by the masses. The question becomes, was Jesus real, correct? One has to ask, why there was so many stories about Jesus written. Take the Gospel of Judas for example. It is Gnostic but talks about Jesus being Barbelo. And in the Gnostic Trinity there is the Father, Mother and Son. Each is a perfect aeon. The gospel was written sometime between when the NT Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were written. The parallels of both religions goes back to the OT and the Gnostic dyad ideas are quite old with the Sophia thinking. The NT has a male chauvinism theme where the Gnostic religion doesn’t and women are equal. Where Gnostic is more Egyptian and the NT is more Greek and Roman. Point being, if Jesus’s goal was religious, then why did several religions pop up after Jesus? There should only be one religion. If Jesus was political (and remember political leaders were gods in Jesus’s time) and a teacher that was very popular with the people, then he may have been worshiped after death just like the Buddha’s (teachers only, not gods) of the same time were worshiped. If you look at India for example, they have many religions based on Hindu. Most started by worshiping a Buddha.
There should only be one religion.Where the hell did you pull that one out of? WHO SAYS?
I think of Socrates as a philosopher.So does everyone, Sherlock.
A philosopher (sic) job is to keep mankind’s ideas in context with changing social and political thinking so that the main concepts being passed down remains (sic) understood. Where Jesus’s (sic) job as a teacher was to take the philosopher’s work and make it understood by the masses.There you go again, making up definitions to fit your worldview. As usual, your definition makes no sense.
The question becomes, was Jesus real, correct? One has to ask, why there was so many stories about Jesus written. Take the Gospel of Judas for example. It is Gnostic but talks about Jesus being Barbelo.Judas thought Jesus was a woman? That's new to me. Maybe he was a cross dresser.
Point being, if Jesus’s goal was religious, then why did several religions pop up after Jesus?For the sake of discussion I'll assume Jesus actually existed. Have you ever played the telephone game? Things get changed with each retelling, that's how different religions and sects develop.
There should only be one religion.If there were an all powerful god watching over us and keeping us safe there might be only one religion. Absent that, people will misconstrue things, change them in retelling, project their own desires onto religious teachings and generally develop the religion they want. This is looking at just how different religions could develop in one area in a short time.
If Jesus was political (and remember political leaders were gods in Jesus’s time) and a teacher that was very popular with the people, then he may have been worshiped after death just like the Buddha’s (teachers only, not gods) of the same time were worshiped. If you look at India for example, they have many religions based on Hindu. Most started by worshiping a Buddha.If my feet would fit a railroad track I'd be a train. It is far more productive to look at facts than speculate on what-ifs. Fact is there is no evidence the Jesus presented in the Bible ever lived, so discussing your "if" speculation is a waste of time.
I think of Socrates as a philosopher.Sp does everyone, Sherlock. I know pretty much everyone sees this, but Darron is referring to Mike as "Sherlock". The quoting is a bit off. I wish this forum would be a little easier with it's tags. That's just an idle complaint, nothing personal to you hard working mods. As for Mike, I lose my patience with him pretty quickly these days. I'll do the occasional fact check on him, but I'm not going to discuss theories about religion with him.