The Historical Jesus

[Composer]

No,no, no matey, I love to know that godless people such as yourself are interested in listing to what I have to say. The more the better matey, the more the better. I dont care who believes or disbelieve what I have to say, christians hate the truth that I proclaim, Agnostic and atheists aren't real keen on it either, but who cares, as long as I get my message out there. For from the smallest seed, grows the mighty tree.

What is that message and what is it based upon and the evidence you have for it is?

Thanks

 

[McBell]

You see, we can agree on one thing at least, I could not use you.

Thank you captain obvious.

And nothing in My life was predestined,

I never said it was.

until the Son of Man who is born in our future and who is able to descend through time into his living past, informed me as to what he knows of my future life that lays ahead of me, and what the end result of my own decisions in this physical life on earth is, and you are not a part of my future, so you can rest assured that I was never predestined to use you.

Seems that your ego refuses to allow you to read and understand what is actually written.

And my future seems pretty good to me, so I aint ever gonna change what I now know will make me who I will be.

round and round.

 

[S-word]

I was a member of this forum for 3.25 years before S-word started his preaching here.

S-Word relies upon his faith.

Here is what I think of faith:

"Faith is a device of self-delusion, a slight of hand done with words and emotions founded on any irrational notion that can be dreamed up.
Faith is the attempt to coerce truth to surrender to whim.
It is trying to breathe life into a lie by trying to outshine reality with the beauty of wishes. "
​

S-Word does nothing more than provide continuous proof of the above quote.

Matey, matey, matey, nobody continually attacks that which is harmless, only that which is a threat to their belief. If as you say I am no threat to anyones belief, then ignore me child, ignore me if you can.

 

[McBell]

Matey, matey, matey, nobody continually attacks that which is harmless, only that which is a treat to their belief. If as you say I am no threat to anyones belief, then ignore me child, ignore me if you can.

your ego makes your posts rather comical.
Way to go S-Words Ego!

 

[S-word]

Thank you captain obvious.
Seems that your ego refuses to allow you to read and understand what is actually written.

Quote:
Originally Posted by S-word
And nothing in My life was predestined,


quote=Mestemia; I never said it was.

And I never said that you did say that it was. But you did say, “You could not use me even if you were predestined to.”

I simply went on to point out and to get the message across, that nothing is predestined as far as the evolving Alpha of which we are one, is concerned. It is only to “The Omega,” who is the end result of the evolution of the Alpha, in who we are his living past, who knows every single thing that we will do in our lives of this earth. And I thank you for giving to me that opportunity. I then went on to assure you that you have no major role in my future.

So you see, my supposed ego, does not inhibit me from reading and understanding what you had actually written.

But lets get back on topic. What do you have to say about the Historical Jesus.

 

[S-word]

What is that message and what is it based upon and the evidence you have for it is?

Thanks

What is that message for what? And upon what is based that message for what ? And what is the evidence upon what is based that message for what , are you looking for.

 

[Composer]

What is that message for what? And upon what is based that message for what ? And what is the evidence upon what is based that message for what, are you looking for.

You said your purpose here was to proclaim your message?

I was just wondering ' what that message was and upon what do you base it? '

e.g. Harry potter book, bible story book, Qu'ran story book etc?

 

[S-word]

You said your purpose here was to proclaim your message?

I was just wondering ' what that message was and upon what do you base it? '

e.g. Harry potter book, bible story book, Qu'ran story book etc?

Basically the main message that I would lay on the table to be eaten or rejected, Is that you, the mind/spirit is formed in the physical body of universal elements which is animated by the Logos that was in the beginning, which animating force pervades the entire universal body and all therein. You, the mind/spirit are the product of all the experence and information that is taken in through the senses of that body.

If that body were born without the sense of sight, hearig, smell, taste and touch etc, etc, then you the mind/spirit could not have developed. That malformed lump of animated meat, could be kept alive for a time, but it would never develop a personality of godhead to that body.

It is my belief, that after that body has returned to the universal elements from which it was formed, hair, skin, nerves, muscles, bone, brain matter etc, all that will remain is the mind/spirit that had developed within that body, and mind is, what it believes. If mind believes it will be resurrected into a new body and be reborn on earth, that is as it will be, it will enter into a state of peaceful rest as it awaits its new life, which, whether they know it or not, will be in the next resurrection of the eternal cyclic universal body. But If mind believes that the death of the body is the end of life, then so it will be. That mind will enter into a state of fearfull torment as it awaits the inevitable end that it believes will occur.

I always like to give scriptural referrences to support my belief: Isaiah 57 1: 1-2; "Good people die, and no one understands or even cares. But when they (Good people) die, no calamity can hurt them. Those who lead good lives find peace and rest in death."

Which leaves another state for those who do not lead good lives, as revealed in Jesus' parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

I thought that I might just add this to show, that long before the scientific community began to search out the possibity of an eternal cyclic universe, it was already believed, and taught by the religious community.

Universe after universe is like an interminable succession of wheels forever coming into view, forever rolling onwards, disappearing and reappearing; forever passing from being to non being, and again from non being to being. In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, is perhaps after all the sum and substance of the philosophy of Buddhism. And this eternal wheel has so to speak, six spokes representing six forms of existence.” ---- Mon. Williams, Buddhism, pp. 229, 122.

The nights and days of Brahma are called Manvantara or the cycle of manifestation, ‘The Great Day,’ which is a period of universal activity, that is preceded, and also followed by ‘Pralaya,’ a dark period, which to our finite minds seems as an eternity. ‘Manvantara,’ is a creative day as seen in the six days of creation in Genesis, ‘Pralaya,’ is the evening that precedes the next creative day. The six periods of Creation and the seventh day of rest in which we now exist are referred to in the book of Genesis as the generations of the universe.

The English word “Generation,” is translated from the Hebrew “toledoth” which is used in the Old Testament in every instance as ‘births,’ or ‘descendants,’ such as “These are the generations of Adam,” or “these are the generations of Abraham, and Genesis 2: 4; These are the generations of the Universe or heavens and earth, etc. And the ‘Great Day’ in which the seven generations of the universe are eternally repeated, is the eternal cosmic period of the eighth eternal day in which those who attain to perfection are allowed to enter, where they shall be surrounded by great light and they shall experience eternal peace, while those who do not attain to perfection are cast back into the refining fires of the seven physical cycles that perpetually revolve within the eighth eternal cosmic cycle.

Origen, , was a Christian writer and teacher who lived between the years of 185 and 254 AD. Among his many works is the Hexapla, which is his interpretation of the Old Testament texts. Origen holds to a series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it

 

[McBell]

But lets get back on topic.

rotflmao
you, worried about being off topic?
rotflmao

What do you have to say about the Historical Jesus.

not really much to say.
Unless you want to delve into fantasy, fiction, and faith.

And all that speculation just can't be healthy.

 

[fallingblood]

How are you going, you little scoundrel? Still stalking me through the threads i see, rubbishing me to any that you can find who will listen to you. Keep up the good work mate, anything that encourages others to read what I have said in past posts, can end up being nothing but good publicity for me.

I'm stalking you? I've been posting in this thread for awhile. It just happens that you've entered ever thread on the historical Jesus and spread around your ignorant ramblings. The fact is still that you have not supported your case. You've only proved it to yourself, and no one else. So to continue to go on showing your ignorance does not mean good publicity for you.

 

[S-word]

I'm stalking you? I've been posting in this thread for awhile. It just happens that you've entered ever thread on the historical Jesus and spread around your ignorant ramblings. The fact is still that you have not supported your case. You've only proved it to yourself, and no one else. So to continue to go on showing your ignorance does not mean good publicity for you.

Whose thread is this? And I believe that you will find in ever other thread in which you have clashed with myself, it is you who first responds to something that I have said, by claiming that it was all rubbish, but I'll have to check up on that, which I can asssure you,i am about to do. But in this thread and your thread "Jesus the Myth" this is shown to be correct, but as I have said, I will check on the others for your benifit.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The Bible old Matey, the Bible. which you don't believe in so don't you worry too much about it mate.

As I said before.....Trying to prove the bible with the bible. This is circular reasoning.

 

[McBell]

As I said before.....Trying to prove the bible with the bible. This is circular reasoning.

what!?
It isn't circular reasoning!!

No no no no NO.

It is FAITH, matey.

 

[S-word]

As I said before.....Trying to prove the bible with the bible. This is circular reasoning.

I not trying to prove the Bible is the word of God old mate, I know that it is. I'm here simply to reveal the truth therein and to remove the yeast that has been added by the liars who would have the world believe that Jesus was not a normal human being born of human parents, who was the first to be chosen of many brothers from the body of mankind, who are to receive their inheritance of a portion of the immortal body of the "Son of Man" which is torn asunder and poured out as fire on all who will belive the truth.

 

[fallingblood]

Whose thread is this? And I believe that you will find in ever other thread in which you have clashed with myself, it is you who first responds to something that I have said, by claiming that it was all rubbish, but I'll have to check up on that, which I can asssure you,i am about to do. But in this thread and your thread "Jesus the Myth" this is shown to be correct, but as I have said, I will check on the others for your benifit.

Rubbish is the word you use. I have refrained from attacking you. Maybe, a comment does come up from me that can be deemed insulting, but that was only after you started attacking me personally, which has been a common theme of your arguments. Instead of attacking the message, you attack the messenger. One more logical fallacy to add to your techniques of debating.

And yes, I respond to your posts when I see error in them. That happens in a discussion. If you look at the threads I primarily frequent, they are on Jesus. To say that I'm stalking you is completely ridiculous. You posted in the "Jesus Myth Thread" only after I created it. So there is no way I can stalk you there. I didn't stalk you over to this thread either, I simply responded as to show how your "facts" were not factual at all. Maybe you need to learn what the term stalking actually means.

Finally, you still have yet to proven anything you've said. You still have no evidence that the Bible states that Jesus was not born of a virgin, that Herod had all the infants massacred, or even that Mary was a woman who slept around with men named Joseph just so she could get pregnant by one, marry the other, and then divorce him to marry another guy. We have another S-word to describe women like that.

 

[Composer]

Basically the main message that I would lay on the table to be eaten or rejected, Is that you, the mind/spirit is formed in the physical body of universal elements which is animated by the Logos that was in the beginning, which animating force pervades the entire universal body and all therein.

What legitimate evidence to you think you have for the literal existence of a ' Logos ' ?

You, the mind/spirit are the product of all the experence and information that is taken in through the senses of that body.

Your alleged evidence is?

If that body were born without the sense of sight, hearig, smell, taste and touch etc, etc, then you the mind/spirit could not have developed.

So people born deaf, dumb and blind can't develop properly?

That malformed lump of animated meat, could be kept alive for a time, but it would never develop a personality of godhead to that body.

So people who are deaf, dumb and blind have no worthwhile personality?

Where do you get a ' developed godhead personality ' from?

It is my belief, that after that body has returned to the universal elements from which it was formed, hair, skin, nerves, muscles, bone, brain matter etc, all that will remain is the mind/spirit that had developed within that body, and mind is, what it believes. If mind believes it will be resurrected into a new body and be reborn on earth, that is as it will be, it will enter into a state of peaceful rest as it awaits its new life, which, whether they know it or not, will be in the next resurrection of the eternal cyclic universal body. But If mind believes that the death of the body is the end of life, then so it will be. That mind will enter into a state of fearfull torment as it awaits the inevitable end that it believes will occur.

And your alleged evidence is?

I always like to give scriptural referrences to support my belief: Isaiah 57 1: 1-2; "Good people die, and no one understands or even cares. But when they (Good people) die, no calamity can hurt them. Those who lead good lives find peace and rest in death."

Ah! so quoting a story book forms your entire alleged evidence?

Which leaves another state for those who do not lead good lives, as revealed in Jesus' parable of Lazarus and the rich man.

So a babe that dies or is still born or miscarried has no hope because it had no opportunity of leading any kind of life?

In short, the constant revolving of the wheel of life in one eternal cycle, according to fixed and immutable laws, . . . .

Bang goes the alleged miracles that defy those alleged immutable laws?

You've just decimated the story book Jesus, thanks, i agree!

Origen, , was a Christian writer and teacher who lived between the years of 185 and 254 AD. Among his many works is the Hexapla, which is his interpretation of the Old Testament texts. Origen holds to a series of worlds following one upon the other,-- each world rising a step higher than the previous world, so that every later world brings to ripeness the seeds that were imbedded in the former, and itself then prepares the seed for the universe that will follow it

That's one man's opinion for sure. What is typically lacking is legitimate evidence?

Thanks for your comments allbe they without any legitimate support.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What legitimate evidence to you think you have for the literal existence of a ' Logos ' ?

How do you measure legitimacy?

 

[gnostic]

Ignoring the gospel of Luke. And ignoring the 2 genealogy given by 2 gospels (for Matthew's, it is 1:1-17). And ignored Herod in Matthew's and Quirinius in Luke's. We just take a look at Matthew's.

From Matthew 1:18, right up to 2:20:

• There is no mention of Joseph and Mary living in Galilee, and no where does it mention in the town of Nazareth.
• From 1:18-25, Joseph decided to divorce Mary, but changes his mind, because of the angel.

1. Joseph decided to stay with Mary, and brought her to his house, and they stayed together and had no sex, until Jesus was born.

   When Joseph woke up, he did what the angel of the Lord had commanded him and took Mary home as his wife. 25But he had no union with her until she gave birth to a son. And he gave him the name Jesus.

   This above passage is quite telling, because it suggest that Mary stayed in Joseph's house, until Jesus was born.
2. And in the very next chapter, it mentioned Bethlehem as being the birthplace of Jesus.
3. And lastly at the end of chapter, Joseph decided to leave Egypt, but his decision was not to return to Bethlehem, but to move further north in Narazeth.

Another point, I'd like to make, is that not only Mary stayed in Joseph's house, until Jesus was born.

• At no point, does Matthew says that they moved to Bethlehem, from Nazareth (only Luke mention this move, south from Nazareth, not Matthew).
• At no point, does Matthew says that they stayed in manger, barn or stable, because there were no room in the inn, at Bethlehem (that's only found in Luke).
• At no point, does Matthew says that the magi visited Mary and Jesus in manger.

  On coming to the house, they saw the child with his mother Mary, and they bowed down and worshiped him.

  Again, only Luke mentioned this manger.

The only logical conclusion with Matthew's gospel is that Mary gave birth in Joseph's house, in Bethlehem (Matthew 1:24), the very same house that the magi visited (Matthew 2:11).

In Matthew, Joseph only decided to move to and live in Nazareth, after Herod's death, while they were still in Egypt.

You can only justify your argument, s-word, by mixing Matthew and Luke together, but as I have already pointed out to you, there are seriously flaws in such interpretation, because you are taking both gospels completely out of context, when you combined the 2 gospels.

Sorry, s-word. Your argument is not convincing, just full of speculations and twisting the texts to suit your own agenda.

 

[S-word]

The bible is a story book written by mortal men and you and every one else have NO legitimate evidence to demonstrate it is anything more.

Perhaps then you would care to show your legitimate evidence that the Biblical statement in Mark 16: 9-20; is incorrect?

quote=Composer; Well Mr self acclaimed ' serious student ' you will therefore be able to confirm or refute Mark 16:9-20 by telling us (with legitimate evidence) whether it is legitimate or not, because scholars even now don't know whether it is or should be considered legitimate


Which I believe you will find it extremely hard to refute Mark 16:9-20 by telling us (with legitimate evidence) whether it is legitimate or not, because scholars even now don't know whether it is or should be considered legitimate or not legitimate.


Your words, not mine matey, but go ahead and reveal your (legitimate evidence) that Mark 16: 9-20 is incorrect, or your (legitimate evidence) that the Biblical Jesus did not exist, because scholars even now don't know whether it is or should be considered legitimate. By faith you disbelieve God's Holy word, not by legitimate evidence.

 

[S-word]

Ignoring the gospel of Luke. And ignoring the 2 genealogy given by 2 gospels (for Matthew's, it is 1:1-17). And ignored Herod in Matthew's and Quirinius in Luke's. We just take a look at Matthew's.

My computer has been down for two days, so It'll take a while to catch up with these posts, but I will.

quote=gnostic; Ignoring the gospel of Luke.

2nd Peter 1: 21; “For no prophetic message ever came from the will of man, but men were under the control of the Holy Spirit as they spoke (or wrote) the message that came from the Lord.” Now I know that without any credible evidence whatsoever, you believe that the Holy Scripture cannot be accepted as the truth, which is of no concern of mine. But you cannot prove that the life of Jesus was not in accordance to the records of the gospel writers, and as the Bible has but one author, then Luke, who is but one of the scribes that the Lord used, cannot be ignored.

quote=gnostic; And ignoring the 2 genealogy given by 2 gospels (for Matthew's, it is 1:1-17)

Matthew 1: 1-17; is that of the Joseph who was to marry Mary after she had given birth to the first of her three sons. This Joseph as recorded in Matthew has no genetic connection to Jesus whatsoever and he is the son of Jacob and the 24th descendant of Solomon of the tribe of Judah.

The other Joseph, who is the son of Heli, (Heli, being the Greek adaptation of the Hebrew “Eli” the high priest, and there were many, many men by the name Joseph at that time) as spoken of in Luke 3: 23; is recorded as the Father of Jesus, and this Joseph, who is of the tribe of Levi, is about the 40th descendant of Nathan the half-brother of Solomon. And any person who believes that these two completely different genealogies, belong to one single man named Joseph, have got rocks in their heads, and these two genealogies cannot be ignored either..


quote=gnostic; And ignored Herod in Matthew's and Quirinius in Luke's.

Here you go; I had Googled this up for your further education
Archaeologist Dr. Clifford Wilson writes:
[Critics] challenged the Bible’s claim that Quirinius [the Latin spelling of Cyrenius] was governor of Syria at the time. He was governor at the time of the census fourteen years later, in AD 6, but, it turns out that he was also a high official in central Asia Minor in 8 BC, actually being in charge of the Army in Syria. It appears that he was able to repulse a local uprising that proba­bly delayed the implementation of the poll tax in Syria for some time” (Wilson, C. 1980. Rocks, Relics and Biblical Reliability. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 116).

Luke 2:3-5 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of Nazareth, into Judaea, unto the city of David, which is called Bethlehem; (because he was of the house and lineage of David To be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great with child.

Early in the twentieth century, a papyrus was discovered which contained an edict by G. Vibius Maximus, the Roman governor of Egypt, stating:
Since the enrollment by households is approaching, it is necessary to command all who for any reason are out of their own district to return to their own home, in order to perform the usual business of the taxation… (Cobern, C.M. 1929. The New Archeological Discoveries and their Bearing upon the New Testament. New York and London: Funk & Wagnalls, p. 47; Unger, M.F. 1962. Archaeology and the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 64).
The same papyrus also confirms Luke’s assertion that a man had to bring his family with him when he traveled to his place of ancestry in order to be properly counted by the Roman authorities (Lk. 2:5). The document reads:
I register Pakebkis, the son born to me and my wife, Taas­ies and Taopis in the 10th year of Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator [Emperor], and request that the name of my aforesaid son Pakeb[k]is be entered on the list” (Boyd, R.T. 1991. World’s Bible Handbook. Grand Rapids, MI: World Publishing, p. 415).

This sheds light on why Joseph had to bring his highly pregnant wife along with him when he went to Bethle­hem. Such discoveries caused the late George A. Barton, Ph.D., Professor of Biblical Literature and Semitic Languages at Bryn Mawr and former Director of the American School of Oriental Research in Jerusalem, to comment:

Luke’s statement, that Joseph went up from Nazareth to Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to enroll himself with Mary (Luke 2:4, 5), turns out to be in exact accord with the governmental regulations as we now know them from the papyri. (Barton, G.A. 1917. Archaeology and the Bible. Philadelphia: American Sunday-School Union, p. 435).



From Matthew 1:18, right up to 2:20:
quote=gnostic; There is no mention of Joseph and Mary living in Galilee, and no where does it mention in the town of Nazareth.


Luke 2: “Joseph (Who became the step father of Jesus) went from the town of Nazareth in Galilee to the town of Bethlehem of Judaea.” Matthew 2: 1; which states that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea, simply verifies that Luke is correct in saying that Mary from the town of Nazareth in Galilee was brought to Bethlehem of Judaea by Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, where she gave birth to her first born son. This Joseph was not genetically connected to Jesus, for Matthew 1: 25; clearly states, that Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, had no sexual relations with Mary until she had given birth to her first son, who Luke tells us, is Jesus the son of Joseph the son of Heli from the tribe of Levi. Matthew states only that Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea and makes no mention of where Joseph and Mary came from, for that information, you will have to go to Luke 2: 4.

quote=gnostic; From 1:18-25, Joseph decided to divorce Mary, but changes his mind, because of the angel.


The more you open your mouth, the more it becomes obvious that you have never read the Bible. So let me read the scripture in question and perhaps under the guidance of one who does know the Word of God, you might eventually understand, Matthew 1: 18; Mary was engaged to Joseph the son of Jacob from the tribe of Judah, did you get that young fellow, “Mary was only engaged to Joseph.” But before they were married she was found to be pregnant. One cannot divorce someone to whom they are not married.

quote=gnostic; Joseph decided to stay with Mary, and brought her to his house, and they stayed together and. This above passage is quite telling, because it suggest that Mary stayed in Joseph's house, until Jesus was born.


You are incorrect once again as can only be expected from one who is totally ignorant to the Holy Scriptures. Nowhere in scripture does it say that Joseph took Mary to his house, I only wish that it did, as the very first place that Joseph is recorded in scripture as being in, is the town of Nazareth in Galilee from where he took the woman to whom he was still only engaged, (See Luke 2: 5; “He went to register with Mary, who was promised in marriage to him.&#8221 to the town of Bethlehem of Judaea. But you are correct, in that he had no sex with Mary, until Jesus was born, and it was only then that they were truly married after he had consummated their union.