Why were we lied to for so long....I used to think the Egyptians were evil when I was a child...I wish I could turn back the hands of time and learn the truth from childhood : (
the bible writers screwed up royally with the words "I am the lord your God who delivered you from Egypt" because science proved long ago that the jews were never even allowed inside sacred Egypt. The bible writers aimed to slander the Egyptians out of spite for never allowing jewish participation but the "exodus" claims have now completely disproved the entire OT. The jewish authors were far too vengeful and ambitious to just leave the words safely alone as simply "I am the lord your God".
ForTheArticles. Who completely disproved the exodus claims? I follow the lastest religion news and missed it. Also I am very skeptical about any thing similar between Jesus and Horus. Found several articles and vids that show very little in common between them. What about the positon that James Tabor, PhD Univ. of Chicago takes that is found in the Talmud (very ancient source) that Jesus was born on earth but his father was a Roman soldier and crucified about 30 CE. Also see Tacitus.
The Exodus has been disproved. No evidence for a migration of any kind taking place. Also Jews weren't slaves of Egyptians and the Exodus is dependent on that. There's actually a large amount of similairities between Jesus and Horus. The Talmud only dates to 300-400 CE.
@danieljliversLXXXIX Exodus was proved, your not up on current events, they even tried to logically debunk it but it made no sense, however, it's a fact though the Hebrew people were in the land of Eygpt, recent discoveries of Eygptian coins depict Joseph and Jacobs stories along with naming the pharoh of the time. As I said this even made it to the history chanel.
Not according to Biblical Archaeological Society it hasn't. No Jewish slaves, no reason for an Exodus. The whole thing was based on Akhenatens rebellion and the plagues that followed and his exile.
@danieljliversLXXXIX You obviously don't keep up with current events and your mind is already biased toward the issue, the fact is there have been recent discoveries proving the Exodus you are too blinded by your religion to see things for what they are and it's sad, go on believing what you believe and hold tightly too it and let everything pass you by in the end it's your life.
lol That's a laugh. What religion do I follow? I think you should look up the term 'projection'.
Any way, it is a known archaeological fact that Jews were never slaves under the Egyptians - They didn't build the pyramids. There is also no evidence for a vast migration of around three million Jews living out in the desert for 40 years. How about the parting of the Red sea? Did that happen?
@danieljliversLXXXIX you are spreading your beliefs and false doctrine, you are a student of your beliefs and that makes it your religion, furthermore who said the Jews built pyramids? Also the proof of the Exodus even made it to the history channel of all places, so you need to keep up with current world events before you spread your false doctrines.
The only one spreading lies and a false doctrine here is you. I am an atheist; I don't have a religion.
I wasn't implying you said that Jews built the pyramids, I was implying that you would state another popular myth. Jews were never held as slaves in Egypt. No slaves, no exodus, no Israel - equals a myth.
The history channel? It's only interested in ratings; they'll show anything. You're crealy misinformed.
@danieljliversLXXXIX Atheism in itself is a religious belief, it has doctrine and beliefs that you follow in a religious way, learn the definition of religion please. Also learn something before it's too late, I truly pity you.
Atheism is not religious. Atheism is not a beliefe in a god or higher power which is what being religious is. So, no, you are the one who needs to learn their definitions before you make an ass of yourself.
Pity is weakness. Take your pity and sholve it right back up where you got it from. I don't want it and I don't need it.
@danieljliversLXXXIX It's still a religious belief, either way you just don't get it. And as for this:
Pity is weakness.
Take your pity and sholve it right back up where you got it from. I don't want it and I don't need it. Whatever, your reply gives me even more reason to pity you.
@danieljliversLXXXIX I understand perfectly, you choose who and what you chose to believe in and I'll do the same, the difference is I'm right I know I'm right. But whatever it is what it is, remember it was you who tried to spread your foolish beliefs on me, I simply voiced my opinion as everyone else. Yet you chose to....... as you probably believe enlighten me......... save that nonsense for someone else, I wash my hands of this.
@thefreejack66 You're full of baloney is what you are. This whole argument has come from you misrepesenting what I said. I said that Jews were never the slaves of Egypt. Not that they were ever in Egypt. And for the record, they weren't slaves in Egypt. Egypy rarely kept slaves.
@thefreejack66 atheisim',a religious belief, you are a prize knob head of the highest order,the champion of the idiot, take a bow youv earned it. lol.
@ForTheArticles You need to do more research on the subject, new information has been discovered and the Hebrew people were infact captives in Eygpt, coins depicting the biblical story of Joseph have been discovered.
This verdict is in...this book seals the deal on the greatest cover up in history in terms of the true origins of the christian religion, but even after all this undeniable evidence, people won't have the mental capacity to accept it and honor it...won't even use the brain that God gave them
Here, Here! Yet it is just a book, heard that somewhere before! Funny how Religion blocks peoples ability to embrace new information hang on old information I mean plane and simply Truth! I guess its hard to admit youvé lived a lie for a long time!
Eh... well I certainly elected to "use the brain that God gave" ME by wondering... why is there no PUBLISHING INDUSTRY devoted to denying that MOSES {say} or THE BUDDHA? ever existed?
I mean, where is THE EVIDENCE that THEY existed?
I reasoned THERE MUST BE SOMETHING SPECIAL (even DANGEROUS) about this 'Jesus' ~ from the Greek, meaning 'Son of Zeus'... that... SUCH EFFORT is expended in DENIAL that YEHOSHUAH Bin YUSEF {His real name} walked among us
thalategreat. I don't find this evidence undeniable at all. I find it unlikely and an extreme minority view that is NOT support by almost all skeptical scholars and historians. Actually there is very little in common between Horus and Jesus. James Tabor, PhD takes postion that Jesus was born out of wedlock and father was Roman soldier. The Talmud (very ancient) says samething. Not that Jesus was a complete myth. I bet this book convinces very few people and still fewer scholars.
if you want to know just how smart god is, and that it isnt about religion at all, just try to debunk "daniels timeline" on here. i challenge anyone that thinks jesus and God are not the absolute undeniable truth.
God is love, God is also within you and is to be relayed/prayed to in spirit, not in word.
Words are of men, Of course all religions have links as we are all linked and many stories are told in a way that only those tribes could understand at their own point in time.
The Roman Church murdered millions and took over the original Christian faith and changed many things within its scriptures to create power over the masses.
I like this video. CHRIST: THE DARK YEARS by Brian D Diederich gives the best account of the Complete life of Jesus. It has a chapter called Adolescent in Asia and one called A Teenager in Tibet. It explains how the secret societies used his church to manipulate the power structure of the world. How they made the world wrong. It tells of all of his travels and ideas.
Peter does a bi-weekly radio address on the Zeitgeist homepage. He often spends 90 minutes or so answering peoples' questions. Please share this info with those interested as well as here on youtube.
just want to point out when christian say amen at the end of a prayer what do you think they really preay? The word amen comme from egyptian god Amon-Ra the sun god by the way the word ray come from their so
do somebody know the name jesus is iesous in hebrew which mean the son of isis like the word genisis mean in hbrew the book of isi and isis is an egyptian godess
in hebrew, you say? please, be so kind and share with all of us your sources from where you've learned this. If it's on paper, scan it, take a picture of with, write it on your computer, find a way to share that with us. Give us fact.
it islike the word ramses if you separate ram qith ses you find ram of isis .ram is a animal and you see the animal all over is palace the word in english didnot chage and beeing use as such to desigante the animal but strangely you fin it in a truck symbole like the dogeram it is the same with moses mo:outsider and isis so the outsider of isis all these you find it if you do the genealogie of langages it is a special book for people who study the origine of languages
@sahure300 so is the one who wants money ?? the Jesus i know said give all your wealth away to the poor and follow me
I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. if it's not Jesus it must be Horus , do you have hard evidence that Horus always wants money? or are you just saying Acharya S is wrong? i have to agree on that one
This means that even ancient egyptian beliefs foresaw and prophecied the life of Christ! Yes folks, even history itself pays homage to God's Annointed Saviour! Thank God! Psalms 22 prophecied Christ's crucifixion 1000 years beforehand in detail! Now this faith enhancer is brought to our attention. Sign of the times, my friends!
Dude! Thats like me sayin that all atheists have a chip on their shoulder for God, and that's why they are atheists. I know that the earth is billions of years old. I know there is a God!
The Passion of Christ is the passion of Atum portrayed as the donkey (or Ass) in ancient Egypt. Atum-Iu. When Jesus rides upon the ass, this is a metaphor for the scapegoat godman overcoming the passions.
It would be so easy for Jesus to prove D. M. Murdock wrong. All that would be needed would be one million miracles that could not be explained away as coincidences. For example, if everyone who died prematurely were resurrected in the name of Jesus, then that would be all of the proof that most people would need. Christians will tell you that Jesus is giving us freewill. But in the absence of definitive proof, the best choice is love. Check out my videos and my website.
Another SLICK ad: it starts with Strauss ~ GOD! ~ what a cliché...
I'm selecting the theme by Schifrin for MISSION: HOPELESS
{but We will try!} HORUS is mythology based on a REAL HUMAN BEING (who was with us recently as Anwar El Sadat ~ TRULY, a Prince of Peace) - just as JESUS is a myth based on a REAL HUMAN BEING, by name: Yehoshuah bin Yusef, meaning, Joshua son of Joseph.
ONE MEANING of "Heaven on Earth" is the Cosmic Archetypes taking on Flesh, over aeons, unto Perfection:
You're 14 years old? You've never really studied comparative religion at all have you. You've only been brainwashed by Christianity.
Did you know the story of Lazarus in the NT came from Egypt? G. John is the most Egyptian of the 4 Gospels. Revelation also has parts of it originating in Egypt.
And i guess because you and i breath and eat we are the same person too ?You look to make any concocted story in all different angles to make them the same.
Your video about Horus uses a totally unreliable source - that website is from a kid in his 20's who has absolutely no relevant qualifications or credentials whatsoever. He has no idea what he's talking about & has no idea how badly he's embarrassing himself there concerning part 1 of Zeitgeist & Acharya's work.
The Anti-ZG / Anti-Acharya cult will wake-up one day & realize how badly they've been wrong.
The Egypt connection continues through the Old Testament. Example: The 10 commandments are found in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The story of the Garden of Eden is traced through Egypt to Babylon to Masopotamia. And the list goes on and on. Christianity was created in Rome to control the Roman public!
Absolutely true! The Old Testament writers based their religion on Egyptian kingship rituals. Notice how the "land of milk and honey" in the Bible was in fact lower Egypt whose King name was the bee; the bee of the fields of Aarru which led the souls to the afterlife; the promised land. It's all stolen from the pagans!
Indians are a lost Tribe of Israel? Are you a Mormon? "If you read the bible"; That makes you wrong by default. The Bible contains no Truth; No Facts. It is an absurd piece of writing that any thinking man would never follow for knowledge or morals. It is the book that killers use to justify their murders.
"The further one regresses in time, the more obvious it becomes that the principal and singular religious worship found around the globe has revolved around nature. ... So fascinated by the sky, or heavens, has been man that he has created entire religions, with organized priesthoods, complex rituals and massive edifices, in order to tell its story."
find out the story about esau the red man since u kno everthing.. u c the old testemant is th story of the human race but the new testement is the story of the chosen race who r the west indians mexicans and the african hebrew slaves(tribe of judah) from isreal if u read the bible we were everwhere in the land of eden/africa/cannan/ham/egypt witch r all the same place(africa) the word devil means deciever and the white race fits the desription
Indians are a lost Tribe of Israel? Are you a Mormon? "If you read the bible"; That makes you wrong by default. The Bible contains no Truth; No Facts. It is an absurd piece of writing that any thinking man would never follow for knowledge or morals. It is the book that killers use to justify their murders.
The thing is these same unbelieving ROMANS, who didn't believe in the ALMIGHTY nor the SAVIOR took the scriptures when the children of Israel became cursed, and changed certain facts to fit into there beliefs,they took out books, first about how the ALMIGHTY made everything, USING THE STARS THAT HE MADE-ASTROLOGY we call it, all the secrets of heaven, which the angels who were kicked out of heaven TAUGHT MEN. In the Book of ENOCH, Research EVERYTHING before letting them decide YOUR FATE.
i think u need to do more research cracker because i kno u r white but anyway how the fuck ancient humans knew anything about the heavens, ukno the stars and the moon, plus yehawashi who u called jesus crist was born in the spring not in the winter,for one the bible dont even speak of 12 months are a 365 day cycle or december period. first u crackers burn all the books and hide the truth now u say it aint no truth...
Acharya now has 4 books totaling 1,900 pages with 5,555 footnotes/citations to references & primary sources, utilizing over 1,442 bibliographical sources by respected authors/ publishers and peer-reviewed scholarly journals and dozens of illustrations.
"Christ in Egypt" alone contains 600 pages with nearly 2,400 footnotes/citations utilizing over 900 bibliographical sources.
"...As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."
- Merrill C. Tenney, "New Testament Survey," p. 203.
- "Who Was Jesus?" 85-86
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Did NASB and NIV bibles.
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century..."
"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2
..."According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3
""...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2"
you people realy dont remember how many books the holy catholic church put on fire? burning treasure books and sacred libraries to the grownd? there can be no fare discussion.but believe is the point. is it not?
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
- F.F. Bruce, "New Testament History" (163) founder of the modern evangelical movement
""Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
I agree - they don't tell us much. You disagree, since you claim that they essentially don't exist. So again, you've posted a quote that backs me up and disagrees with you. Why do you keep doing that?
Thanks for demonstrating the level of your dishonesty once again. You just said 2 days ago that they were "overwhelming evidence of existence." Even going so far as to claim there's no "evidence against His existence."
LOL, ROTFLMAO - which is it? Make up your mind.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail. What part of that are you not getting?
It looks like your position is changing so I'll commend you for that. When you get tired of being lied to by the xian deceivers & decide to take your fundy blinders off, you can put your feet back on the ground & step away from crazy town.
I've been consistent in my position, and will remain so until you present evidence to convince me otherwise.
However, your position keeps going back and forth between the Suetonius, Pliny and Tacitus references being "xian interpolations" and their not being about Jesus at all. If they're "xian interpolations", then obviously they're about Jesus. If they're not about Jesus, then obviously they aren't "xian interpolations". Your conflicting arguments disprove each other. Pick *one*.
Yes, you're confused as demonstrated by your utter ignorance of this subject.
Emperor Hadrian stated: "worshippers of Serapis are Christians"
It is likely that Pliny's "Christos" or "Anointed" were followers of Serapis - In any case, this was not a man who had been crucified in Judea. There's plenty of reasons not to accept your "overwhelming evidence" for Jesus as evidence at all.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* You fail.
Th fact that you're trying to squirm out of your 2 opposing positions and repeat an already addressed argument accusing me of "conflicting arguments" demonstrates, once again, your level of utter dishonesty.
Plus the fact that you're argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny *YOU FAILED KING D* & there's nothing you can do about that now. Except of course, attempt to repeat the same already addressed BS like you have been all along. I've wasted enough time with you - bye, bye.
LOL, ROTFLMAO - how about you come up with some real *VALID* evidence for a change.
And, realize that they do make books on comparative religion - with valid evidence demonstrating no reason to accept your Christ as anything but a myth. Try to actually read one for a change. And, nobody cares if you understand that or believe it or not - it's your problem.
KD "Yet when Christians ask Christ-mythers to back their claims up with evidence, they're always unable to do so. Why is that, do you think?"
Maybe because nobody cares what you think or believe? Maybe you should actually read the books you pretend to be an expert on while going around the net making claims about works you've never studied. You should have a disclaimer in your sig line & website - you lead people to assume you've studied them when you clearly haven't - that's dishonest.
"Maybe you should actually read the books you pretend to be an expert on"
That's the *third* time you've made that claim. If you're unwilling to back it up, why do you keep making it? Either tell me which books you're talking about and when I claimed to be an expert on them, or admit that you're being dishonest.
Oh, I think you know - the ones you claim contain no evidence yet you've never actually studied - that would be utter dishonesty from a biased, bigoted fundy xian out to shore-up the faith at all costs. The fact that you even have to ask is an inadvertent admission.
You should have a disclaimer on your website that says you've never read a single book by Acharya - you won't because then you'd have to admit you're harassing a single female author.
You've said many times here & on your website that CMers have no evidence - all those lists on your website come from Acharya's 1st book - which you've never read. So, it's *YOU* who are "compounding one lie with another one" but you're a bigoted xian & you can't help it - you'd need therapy to stop all the lying.
"You've said many times here & on your website that CMers have no evidence - all those lists on your website come from Acharya's 1st book - which you've never read."
Providing lists isn't the same as providing evidence for those lists. If her books actually contain the evidence, then why have two of her fans told me that you have to look outside of her books in order to find the evidence?
Furthermore, your claim that my argument conflicts actually demonstrates your ignorance on the subject - you simply have no idea what you're talking about. You rigidly adhere to your bigoted, xian fundy positions w/o knowing all the info.
Hadrian said "worshippers of Serapis are Christians" & that's who Pliny was addressing - you're just oblivious to that. It may not have had anything to do with your mythical Jesus.
KD "You really don't understand how "They're xian interpolations" and "they aren't about Jesus" are conflicting? Wow!"
LOL, thanks for confirming that you really don't know anything about this subject beyond what biased, bigoted xians have told you. And, after having explained this to you several times, I realize your disparate need to be dishonest about it. You've got nothing kiddo - you lose. Go back to church - I hear ignorance is bliss.
"LOL, thanks for confirming that you really don't know anything about this subject beyond what biased, bigoted xians have told you."
Sorry, but I'm just responding to what you're saying. You obviously believe that Christians added these passages into the historical record in order to create fake evidence about Jesus, but weren't writing about Jesus when they wrote them. And, somehow, this makes sense to you.
The fact that you're so reliant upon 2nd, 3rd & 4th century "evidence" coming from 3rd & 4th hand or worse hearsay w/o supportive contemporary evidence suggests an absence of evidence for existence. And this is your best "overwhelming evidence" you claimed.
We've established that your very best "evidence" is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
"Your best "overwhelming evidence" King D, seems to be hearsay, rumor, tradition & a collage of myths."
No, it's the historical record. If we were to treat all of the ancient historical records the way CM'ers treat the references to Jesus, we'd be tossing out over 99% of ancient history. CM'ers discard them for illogical and invalid reasons, and provide no evidence to the contrary.
KD "we'd be tossing out over 99% of ancient history"
Actually, you once again demonstrate your ignorance here. Historians work with an assortment of corroborating evidence which you lack. And as even xian scholars admit - you're in denial about that fact.
Your argument is another fallacy - it's really embarrassing for you to keep repeating it. I feel sorry for you as you dig a deeper hole for yourself here repeating the same talking point w/o back them up w/ *VALID* evidence.
"Historians work with an assortment of corroborating evidence which you lack."
First of all, four historians writing about the same figure *is* corroborating evidence. Even if only one historian wrote about somebody, we wouldn't toss out that reference or assume it's an interpolation without valid reason. Only Christ-mythers engage in that kind of stuff.
Just because something comes out of an historians mouth doesn't necessarily guarantee anything. What you're holding up as "evidence" is empty. Meier doesn't consider Tacitus, Pliny or Suetonius the "overwhelming evidence" you do. In fact, Meier says, they're of "little value."
Christians are well known for fraud, deceit, interpolation, fake artifacts & plagiarizing concepts from other older religions.
You have no credentials, your opinion is worthless. Again, *YOU FAIL* King d.
"Just because something comes out of an historians mouth doesn't necessarily guarantee anything."
True, but we don't assume it was false or an interpolation without a good reason for doing so. If there was evidence that the historian was mistaken, or that he didn't write it, then we'd have cause to question it. But as it is, there's no evidence of either. We don't disregard a historical text just because we *want* to.
Earth to Kd - Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise.
The TF was accepted as a forgery before you were born. The other passages are suspect for good reason. You're in denial about these basic points - xian bib. scholars admit it.
"Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise."
And again, you believe that these are "xian interpolations", which only makes sense if you're acknowledging that they're about Jesus. Why would Christians be making up fake evidence about Jesus, but not making it about Jesus?
Herc "Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise."
KD "And again, you believe that these are "xian interpolations", which only makes sense if you're acknowledging that they're about Jesus. Why would Christians be making up fake evidence about Jesus, but not making it about Jesus?"
Now you're blatantly lying & putting words in my mouth - you resort to this because your arguments have failed miserably.
"Now you're blatantly lying & putting words in my mouth - you resort to this because your arguments have failed miserably. "
So which part of that is wrong? Are you admitting that they aren't "xian interpolations"? Or are you admitting that they're about Jesus? You can't argue both when the two arguments conflict with each other. As I've been saying, pick *one*.
I know, you're so used to being dishonest that it has become a habit now but, your claim that 4 historians are "overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus" is false - Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise. And the TF has was accepted as a forgery before you were born. the other passages are suspect for good reason. You're in denial about these basic points - xian bib. scholars admit it.
"Historical record? Then you might want to show this to the Historians and people living within the years zero to thirty three."
NWO,
Are you saying that unless the historian personally witnessed the events he described, we should disregard what he says? If so, we'd be tossing out 99% of ancient history.
KD "Are you saying that unless the historian personally witnessed the events he described, we should disregard what he says? If so, we'd be tossing out 99% of ancient history."
Ignore him NWO - he just repeats the same fallacies & circular logic even after it has been debunked because he's a biased, bigoted fundy xian who's out to shore up the faith at all costs. Anyone who disagrees with him is considered "irrational" - LOL, seriously!
There you go with your "no rational person" fallacy again, as usual. Even though xian bib. scholars disagree with you.
Ah, the 100's would be the 2nd century - did you not know that?
"zero evidence"
Yes, or course - zero evidence to someone who knows nothing about the subject as is typical with biased, bigoted fundy xians. No surprise there. We already know that the TF was an interpolation. And as scholars have spelled out there's reason to question the other passages too.
KD "Not valid reasons. There's no evidence that they were interpolations or evidence that Jesus didn't exist."
I've given you *VALID* reasons plus factoids like Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus."
The TF was accepted as a forgery before you were born and the other passages are suspect for good reason. Xian scholars call them "tidbits," of "little value" that are "scanty & problematic" and "fantasy." Xianity has clouded your judgment & made you dishonest.
"I've given you *VALID* reasons plus factoids like Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus."
No, you haven't given me valid reasons, just the self-contradicting argument that Christians fabricated these passages in order to provide fake evidence about Jesus, but that these passages aren't about Jesus.
And as I've stated from the beginning - Even *IF* they're all authentic, they still hold no value historically and certainly not as "overwhelming evidence" as you attempted to claim. You can repeat that false claim for another 2,000 years but the fact that it's worthless as evidence will never change. Think about that long & hard until it all sinks in.
"Josephus probably wrote of the death of a Jew ... called James, and a Christian reader thought he meant James the "brother of the Lord" who, according to Christian tradition, led the Jerusalem church about the time in question. This reader accordingly noted in the margin: "James = the brother of Jesus, him called Christ", and a later copyist took this as belonging to the text and incorporated it. Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
Actually, as historians and scholars already know, "Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
The fact that you're so reliant upon 2nd & 3rd century 2nd & 3rd hand hearsay w/o contemporary evidence suggests an absence of evidence for existence. And this is your best evidence, you said.
So, we've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
"Actually, as historians and scholars already know, "Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
True, but in those cases, there was *evidence* of interpolation. We don't just assume that something was interpolated simply because it could have been.
If you knew the subject you'd know that there's no reason to blindly accept Josephus as completely authentic either.
Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day. We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Scholars hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth"
"have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations;"
That's simply wrong. The concensus among scholars is that they aren't interpolations. In fact, since you're arguing that they weren't writing about Jesus, then are you saying that those Christians who interpolated these passages weren't writing about Jesus when they did so? Does that really make any sense to you?
1st I thought you were confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Josephus' TF & the J. passage on accident but now, I think you're doing it on purpose to be deceptive. If you're not sincere then go waste somebody else's time. I've wasted enough time with you. I knew you were only going to do your typical hand-waving dismissal tactic. Why should I bother anymore?
As I've stated all along - Even *IF* we consider the brief mentions by Josephus as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence.
"1st I thought you were confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Josephus' TF & the J. passage on accident but now, I think you're doing it on purpose to be deceptive."
That's you who's confusing them, I'm afraid. As I pointed out, Stein was talking about the TF, not the "so-called Christ" passage, as you stated.
Some info has been pertaining to the TF - such as the Origen comment as well. Nevertheless, the claim that all scholars unanimously accept the other passage as authentic isn't accurate:
"Josephus describes all sorts of historical figures (prophets, would-be kings, priests, agitators), he never calls one of them a Messiah" - That he habitually takes such care to avoid the term makes its role and unexplained use in the two Josephus passages suspect."
"Some info has been pertaining to the TF - such as the Origen comment as well."
Since Origen *did* mention the latter passage, his "lack of mentioning it" is only evidence against the TF. But you were claiming that Origen never referred to the latter passage ("Jesus the so-called Christ"), but you were wrong on that. He mentioned it twice, including in his response to Celsus. That's twice you've mixed the two Josephus passages up.
No, that's twice you misunderstood what I was sharing & mixed them up. The argument between scholars is that there are differences between what Celsus had and what Eusebius had which makes it also suspect of tampering. They admit that there was certainly enough time for interpolation even by Celsus's time.
Again, it still is not valid "evidence" for Jesus. Why are Christians so reliant upon weak non-evidence? You're only trying to shore-up the faith at all costs. Why are you wasting out time?
"No, that's twice you misunderstood what I was sharing & mixed them up."
No. You said that the "so-called Christ" passage was referenced by Eusebius, but not Origen, even though Origen would have used it in his response to Celsus, and that this proves that it didn't exist in Origen's day. I showed you that Origen did reference the passage twice, including in his response to Celsus. Thus your claim that it didn't exist until Eusebius' time was incorrect.
"That he habitually takes such care to avoid the term makes its role and unexplained use in the two Josephus passages suspect."
That's a good example of someone interpreting the evidence to fit the theory. A more logical explanation is that, of all of the people Josephus wrote about, Jesus was the only one to be considered the Christ.
Again, if a Christian had written this, he would have called Jesus "the Christ", not "the so-called Christ". And there's no evidence of interpolation.
That's a biased Christian view of it yes. Not an objective scholarly view. the fact that Josephus avoids the term everywhere else yet never explains it is most definitely suspect as any rational person can see. The fact that you don't even question it & are eager to accept it only demonstrates your dire need for anything to call "evidence." Thanks again for the inadvertent admission that no CONTEMPORARY evidence exists.
"Josephus avoids the term everywhere else yet never explains it is most definitely suspect as any rational person can see."
What's suspect about it? Are you saying that there were other people Josephus wrote about who were considered the Christ, but Josephus refrained from referring to them as such? If so, who?
"(There are 21 Jesus's mentioned by Josephus)...it is hardly in character of Josephus to mention someone, especially someone with such a curious surname as Christos (the only one with that title in all of Josephus), without describing the implications of this word or giving an anecdote to illustrate it..."
- Josephus, J & C (57)
Yeah, it's certainly suspect and questioned by scholars - your claim that it isn't is utterly dishonest. Still, even if authentic - it has no value & you know it.
"there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy."
- JP Meier, "A Marginal Jew," vol. II, 5.
- "Who Was Jesus?" page 86
* Dr. Meier is a Catholic University New Testament professor, Catholic priest and monsignor
""there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits."
Exactly as I've been saying, and as you've been disagreeing with.
Ah, WTF? You've been holding-up Josephus as proof of Jesus this whole time.
Now, it appears you're changing your position - which is fine. Fair enough, I would too if I were you.
I've been consistent throughout saying - even *IF* we consider his brief mentions authentic, they remain worthless as evidence. The historical value is zero - even Christian bib. scholars agree. Same with Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius.
"Ah, WTF? You've been holding-up Josephus as proof of Jesus this whole time."
I've been holding up the latter Josephus reference ("Jesus the so-called Christ") as evidence, not the TF. Stein was talking about the TF, not the latter passage. You mixed the two up. There is no evidence that the latter passage was an interpolation.
The fact remains that even if we consider all of Josephus's references to "Jesus" and "Christ" authentic it still fails as valid evidence for the biblical character Jesus in the bible. why are Christians so reliant upon such a weak argument to prove an historical Jesus in the first place? Why not provide contemporary evidence for the over 20 scriptures in the bible that claim Jesus was famed far and wide? It's essentially an inadvertent admission that no contemporary evidence ever existed.
"why are Christians so reliant upon such a weak argument to prove an historical Jesus in the first place?"
Four historians talking about a person as if he actually existed is not *weak* evidence. To a rational person, this would be overwhelming evidence of existence. One might hypothesize that all four of them were wrong, if there was significant evidence that the person didn't exist. But in Jesus' case, there isn't any evidence against His existence.
Your intellectual dishonesty always amazes me. 3 of the 4 never mention "Jesus" at all. That's inconvenient to you so you ignore it.
Josephus' TF is a forgery so you're totally reliant upon the other passage which is also suspect by even xian scholars. It's inconclusive at best another inconvenient factoid for you that you ignore.
You don't have valid evidence - you have wishful thinking.
"Your intellectual dishonesty always amazes me. 3 of the 4 never mention "Jesus" at all. That's inconvenient to you so you ignore it."
They're clearly talking about Jesus, which you obviously agree with since you consider them "xian interpolations". Why would Christians have added these passages, yet not made them about Jesus? Sorry, but your argument makes no sense.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
I'm very confused. I'm confused about how someone can argue that the Suetonius, Pliny and Tacitus passages were "xian interpolations" and also argue that they weren't about Jesus. I've seen different CM'ers argue each, but I've never seen *one* CM'er argue *both*. In order to provide a coherent argument, you have to drop one claim or the other, so which will it be?
Yes, you're confused as demonstrated by your utter ignorance of this subject.
Emperor Hadrian stated: "worshippers of Serapis are Christians"
It is likely that Pliny's "Christos" or "Anointed" were followers of Serapis - In any case, this was not a man who had been crucified in Judea. There's plenty of reasons not to accept your "overwhelming evidence" for Jesus as evidence at all.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* You fail.
No contemporary historians write about Jesus at all. Rational folks would consider this evidence *AGAINST EXISTENCE* That's why you're reliant upon 2nd c. hearsay & tradition rather than valid evidence with value.
"No contemporary historians write about Jesus at all."
Your argument might work if there were contemporary historians writing about the events in and around Jerusalem in Jesus' time, but failed to mention Him. There aren't any, though.
Even if your argument was sound (which it's not), rational people would only consider it evidence against Jesus' *fame*, not His *existence*. There are many people who lived but weren't mentioned by contemporary historians.
"Again, your ignorance is demonstrated as the 1st century was one of the best documented in history. "
That it was. But it doesn't change the fact that there are no historical texts on which a reference to Jesus is conspicuously absent. There are no historical writings, still existing, about Jesus' time and place, written while Jesus was alive.
KD "no texts which a reference to Jesus is conspicuously absent"
LOL, you're preaching to the choir -we know that xians also copied & translated those texts and we know that Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day.
Your comment is either utterly dishonest representing more fantasy or you're just ignorant of the facts - maybe both.
Sure. I'm 41, live in Michigan, work in medical billing, am married with four daughters (ages 11-21). I was an atheist until I was 20, was a deist/agnostic until I was 27, and have been a non-denominational Christian since. I have an apologetics website. Just google "kingdavid8", you'll find it (titled "ye olde royalle webbe page"). If you scroll down to "My Christian Page" and click that, you'll get to the apologetics hub.
King D, Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day.
Your Holding school of xian apologetics cannot taken seriously. Anything to shore-up the faith at all costs - I know the drill.
Even *IF* we consider the brief mentions by Josephus as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence. Why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value? What part of that are you not getting?
Ummm...if none of those references are about Jesus, then why do you insist that they're Christian interpolations? Why would Christians add stuff to those historians' text, but make it about someone other than Jesus? You do realize that your argument makes no sense, right?
King D, I think you're confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Jospehus - understandably in these short YT posts.
Nevertheless, you're holding them up as evidence in the first place makes no sense. They've been thoroughly debunked long before you were ever born.
So, the question is why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value? At what point do you get tired of being lied to? There is no evidence for Jesus because he's a mythological character.
"King D, I think you're confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Jospehus - understandably in these short YT posts."
You're the one who's been saying that they're "xian interpolations". And the consensus of historians is that they aren't interpolations (except the TF, of course) and that they were talking about Jesus. It's just a few fringe scholars who argue against either of them, with no evidence to back them up.
Ah, JP Holding is not a historian nor would I trust the school of xian apologetics. Please explain how you presume that they're talking about Jesus when his name never comes up?
Even *IF* we consider their brief mentions as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence.
Why you're so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value?
"Why didn't contemporary historians write about Jesus?"
We don't know who did and who didn't, since about 99% of the texts from that era didn't survive to this day.
Again, your argument boils down to the idea that four historians referencing a person aren't enough to confirm that person's existence, though I doubt you'd say that's true for anyone but Jesus. To a rational person, four historical references is more than enough. Only if there was opposing evidence could we doubt them.
KD "99% of the texts from that era didn't survive to this day."
LOL, that's your best argument? Seriously? There are over 20 passages in the bible claiming that Jesus was famed far & wide & that is the best you can come up with? I thought you were an apologetics school grad. That was your opportune moment to provide real, valid historical evidence for Jesus & you blew it.
Why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence with no historical value?
Do you honestly think we have everything that was written in the first century? Seriously? If you do, then you're wrong. If you don't, then you can't say that no contemporary historian wrote about Jesus, since you can't possibly know.
All we know is that four historians, all within a century of Jesus, wrote about Him. To rational people, that's evidence of existence.
this book was over kill on the site and sources.
great job acharia
pistolpete667 1 year ago
Why were we lied to for so long....I used to think the Egyptians were evil when I was a child...I wish I could turn back the hands of time and learn the truth from childhood : (
buhleke 1 year ago
the bible writers screwed up royally with the words "I am the lord your God who delivered you from Egypt" because science proved long ago that the jews were never even allowed inside sacred Egypt. The bible writers aimed to slander the Egyptians out of spite for never allowing jewish participation but the "exodus" claims have now completely disproved the entire OT. The jewish authors were far too vengeful and ambitious to just leave the words safely alone as simply "I am the lord your God".
ForTheArticles 1 year ago
ForTheArticles. Who completely disproved the exodus claims? I follow the lastest religion news and missed it. Also I am very skeptical about any thing similar between Jesus and Horus. Found several articles and vids that show very little in common between them. What about the positon that James Tabor, PhD Univ. of Chicago takes that is found in the Talmud (very ancient source) that Jesus was born on earth but his father was a Roman soldier and crucified about 30 CE. Also see Tacitus.
boblackey1 1 year ago
The Exodus has been disproved. No evidence for a migration of any kind taking place. Also Jews weren't slaves of Egyptians and the Exodus is dependent on that. There's actually a large amount of similairities between Jesus and Horus. The Talmud only dates to 300-400 CE.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX Exodus was proved, your not up on current events, they even tried to logically debunk it but it made no sense, however, it's a fact though the Hebrew people were in the land of Eygpt, recent discoveries of Eygptian coins depict Joseph and Jacobs stories along with naming the pharoh of the time. As I said this even made it to the history chanel.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
Not according to Biblical Archaeological Society it hasn't. No Jewish slaves, no reason for an Exodus. The whole thing was based on Akhenatens rebellion and the plagues that followed and his exile.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX You obviously don't keep up with current events and your mind is already biased toward the issue, the fact is there have been recent discoveries proving the Exodus you are too blinded by your religion to see things for what they are and it's sad, go on believing what you believe and hold tightly too it and let everything pass you by in the end it's your life.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
lol That's a laugh. What religion do I follow? I think you should look up the term 'projection'.
Any way, it is a known archaeological fact that Jews were never slaves under the Egyptians - They didn't build the pyramids. There is also no evidence for a vast migration of around three million Jews living out in the desert for 40 years. How about the parting of the Red sea? Did that happen?
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX you are spreading your beliefs and false doctrine, you are a student of your beliefs and that makes it your religion, furthermore who said the Jews built pyramids? Also the proof of the Exodus even made it to the history channel of all places, so you need to keep up with current world events before you spread your false doctrines.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
The only one spreading lies and a false doctrine here is you. I am an atheist; I don't have a religion.
I wasn't implying you said that Jews built the pyramids, I was implying that you would state another popular myth. Jews were never held as slaves in Egypt. No slaves, no exodus, no Israel - equals a myth.
The history channel? It's only interested in ratings; they'll show anything. You're crealy misinformed.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX Atheism in itself is a religious belief, it has doctrine and beliefs that you follow in a religious way, learn the definition of religion please. Also learn something before it's too late, I truly pity you.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
Atheism is not religious. Atheism is not a beliefe in a god or higher power which is what being religious is. So, no, you are the one who needs to learn their definitions before you make an ass of yourself.
Pity is weakness. Take your pity and sholve it right back up where you got it from. I don't want it and I don't need it.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX It's still a religious belief, either way you just don't get it. And as for this:
Pity is weakness.
Take your pity and sholve it right back up where you got it from. I don't want it and I don't need it. Whatever, your reply gives me even more reason to pity you.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
@thefreejack66 No. You don't get it.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@danieljliversLXXXIX I understand perfectly, you choose who and what you chose to believe in and I'll do the same, the difference is I'm right I know I'm right. But whatever it is what it is, remember it was you who tried to spread your foolish beliefs on me, I simply voiced my opinion as everyone else. Yet you chose to....... as you probably believe enlighten me......... save that nonsense for someone else, I wash my hands of this.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
Comment removed
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@thefreejack66 You're full of baloney is what you are. This whole argument has come from you misrepesenting what I said. I said that Jews were never the slaves of Egypt. Not that they were ever in Egypt. And for the record, they weren't slaves in Egypt. Egypy rarely kept slaves.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@thefreejack66 You're full of baloney is what you are.
danieljliversLXXXIX 1 year ago
@thefreejack66 atheisim',a religious belief, you are a prize knob head of the highest order,the champion of the idiot, take a bow youv earned it. lol.
kram83au 1 year ago
@ForTheArticles You need to do more research on the subject, new information has been discovered and the Hebrew people were infact captives in Eygpt, coins depicting the biblical story of Joseph have been discovered.
thefreejack66 1 year ago
This verdict is in...this book seals the deal on the greatest cover up in history in terms of the true origins of the christian religion, but even after all this undeniable evidence, people won't have the mental capacity to accept it and honor it...won't even use the brain that God gave them
thalategreat 2 years ago 5
@thalategreat
Here, Here! Yet it is just a book, heard that somewhere before! Funny how Religion blocks peoples ability to embrace new information hang on old information I mean plane and simply Truth! I guess its hard to admit youvé lived a lie for a long time!
djmattviva 2 years ago
Hello thalategreat ~ YOU WILL LIVE AGAIN!
Eh... well I certainly elected to "use the brain that God gave" ME by wondering... why is there no PUBLISHING INDUSTRY devoted to denying that MOSES {say} or THE BUDDHA? ever existed?
I mean, where is THE EVIDENCE that THEY existed?
I reasoned THERE MUST BE SOMETHING SPECIAL (even DANGEROUS) about this 'Jesus' ~ from the Greek, meaning 'Son of Zeus'... that... SUCH EFFORT is expended in DENIAL that YEHOSHUAH Bin YUSEF {His real name} walked among us
HughHue 2 years ago
thalategreat. I don't find this evidence undeniable at all. I find it unlikely and an extreme minority view that is NOT support by almost all skeptical scholars and historians. Actually there is very little in common between Horus and Jesus. James Tabor, PhD takes postion that Jesus was born out of wedlock and father was Roman soldier. The Talmud (very ancient) says samething. Not that Jesus was a complete myth. I bet this book convinces very few people and still fewer scholars.
boblackey1 1 year ago
acharya took her sweet time to release this book
but religion is going down you cant cover it up fovever
micap20078 2 years ago
if you want to know just how smart god is, and that it isnt about religion at all, just try to debunk "daniels timeline" on here. i challenge anyone that thinks jesus and God are not the absolute undeniable truth.
2skullscrushing 2 years ago
God is bigger than any one religion.
The sun is a dimensional portal.
God is love, God is also within you and is to be relayed/prayed to in spirit, not in word.
Words are of men, Of course all religions have links as we are all linked and many stories are told in a way that only those tribes could understand at their own point in time.
The Roman Church murdered millions and took over the original Christian faith and changed many things within its scriptures to create power over the masses.
Honeysucklebommie 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
I like this video. CHRIST: THE DARK YEARS by Brian D Diederich gives the best account of the Complete life of Jesus. It has a chapter called Adolescent in Asia and one called A Teenager in Tibet. It explains how the secret societies used his church to manipulate the power structure of the world. How they made the world wrong. It tells of all of his travels and ideas.
idleedsel 2 years ago
Peter does a bi-weekly radio address on the Zeitgeist homepage. He often spends 90 minutes or so answering peoples' questions. Please share this info with those interested as well as here on youtube.
itrainsinoctober 2 years ago
why don't you show the hieroglyphics?
the original writings from where you get all this? so that we may all translate them?? how is this video helping?
MikeDole1 2 years ago
just want to point out when christian say amen at the end of a prayer what do you think they really preay? The word amen comme from egyptian god Amon-Ra the sun god by the way the word ray come from their so
mystisme 2 years ago 2
Joseph and later Jesus and almost all other so called Prophets is taken from the life of HORUS THE Egyptian GOD.
Kuculcangod 2 years ago
thats right even seth come from them , were do you think the word sun set is from , seth is the god of darkness
mystisme 2 years ago
"The difference between Jesus and Horus? One of them always wants money. "
LMAO :)
interesting vid btw
<3 archarya
MiguelGasRa 2 years ago 14
do somebody know the name jesus is iesous in hebrew which mean the son of isis like the word genisis mean in hbrew the book of isi and isis is an egyptian godess
mystisme 2 years ago
in hebrew, you say? please, be so kind and share with all of us your sources from where you've learned this. If it's on paper, scan it, take a picture of with, write it on your computer, find a way to share that with us. Give us fact.
I hope you will answer,
Be well
trikpa 2 years ago
it islike the word ramses if you separate ram qith ses you find ram of isis .ram is a animal and you see the animal all over is palace the word in english didnot chage and beeing use as such to desigante the animal but strangely you fin it in a truck symbole like the dogeram it is the same with moses mo:outsider and isis so the outsider of isis all these you find it if you do the genealogie of langages it is a special book for people who study the origine of languages
mystisme 2 years ago
The difference between Jesus and Horus? One of them always wants money.
sahure300 2 years ago 12
Yeah, Jebus does!!
fairguynova 2 years ago
@sahure300 so is the one who wants money ?? the Jesus i know said give all your wealth away to the poor and follow me
I tell you the truth, it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God. if it's not Jesus it must be Horus , do you have hard evidence that Horus always wants money? or are you just saying Acharya S is wrong? i have to agree on that one
kimura2Loc 1 year ago
This means that even ancient egyptian beliefs foresaw and prophecied the life of Christ! Yes folks, even history itself pays homage to God's Annointed Saviour! Thank God! Psalms 22 prophecied Christ's crucifixion 1000 years beforehand in detail! Now this faith enhancer is brought to our attention. Sign of the times, my friends!
shepherdschapelDOTco 2 years ago
Yeah and God put dinosaur fossils on earth to test our faith!! HHAHAAHAH
Tolaanto 2 years ago
Dude! Thats like me sayin that all atheists have a chip on their shoulder for God, and that's why they are atheists. I know that the earth is billions of years old. I know there is a God!
shepherdschapelDOTco 2 years ago
did noah have polar bears and seals on the ark?
RebelAllianceMedia 2 years ago
and that god is the sun. not this "jesus character". just letting you know
roycegracie11 2 years ago
The theme song used reminded me of the pc games Chicken Invaders.
8YawningBoy8 2 years ago
The Passion of Christ is the passion of Atum portrayed as the donkey (or Ass) in ancient Egypt. Atum-Iu. When Jesus rides upon the ass, this is a metaphor for the scapegoat godman overcoming the passions.
martynblackburn1977 2 years ago
hey it's ric flairs music lmmfao
JAMIE6SUPERSTAR 2 years ago
I can't put the book down.
Every library needs this book.
eretzsus 2 years ago
I just got my copy today... I'm excite:-D
conciousgood 2 years ago
It would be so easy for Jesus to prove D. M. Murdock wrong. All that would be needed would be one million miracles that could not be explained away as coincidences. For example, if everyone who died prematurely were resurrected in the name of Jesus, then that would be all of the proof that most people would need. Christians will tell you that Jesus is giving us freewill. But in the absence of definitive proof, the best choice is love. Check out my videos and my website.
LifeIsABigPuzzle 2 years ago
Yes - love is the best choice :)
spaceagebachelor 2 years ago
I'm glad that you agree!! :D:D:D
LifeIsABigPuzzle 2 years ago
Another SLICK ad: it starts with Strauss ~ GOD! ~ what a cliché...
I'm selecting the theme by Schifrin for MISSION: HOPELESS
{but We will try!} HORUS is mythology based on a REAL HUMAN BEING (who was with us recently as Anwar El Sadat ~ TRULY, a Prince of Peace) - just as JESUS is a myth based on a REAL HUMAN BEING, by name: Yehoshuah bin Yusef, meaning, Joshua son of Joseph.
ONE MEANING of "Heaven on Earth" is the Cosmic Archetypes taking on Flesh, over aeons, unto Perfection:
CHRIST JESUS
HughHue 3 years ago
The claim that these myths were based on actual people is absurd.
danieljliversLXXXIX 3 years ago
Nevertheless, TRUE. What is your understanding of reincarnation?
HughHue 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The idea that Jesus was based on Horus was abandoned by New Testament scholars a century ago, and theres a good reason. Watch my video on it.
aaronk1994 3 years ago
You're 14 years old? You've never really studied comparative religion at all have you. You've only been brainwashed by Christianity.
Did you know the story of Lazarus in the NT came from Egypt? G. John is the most Egyptian of the 4 Gospels. Revelation also has parts of it originating in Egypt.
"Origins of Christianity"
truthbeknown. com /origins. htm
; )
Hercules2345 3 years ago 2
And i guess because you and i breath and eat we are the same person too ?You look to make any concocted story in all different angles to make them the same.
pricelesspam 3 years ago
Your video about Horus uses a totally unreliable source - that website is from a kid in his 20's who has absolutely no relevant qualifications or credentials whatsoever. He has no idea what he's talking about & has no idea how badly he's embarrassing himself there concerning part 1 of Zeitgeist & Acharya's work.
The Anti-ZG / Anti-Acharya cult will wake-up one day & realize how badly they've been wrong.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
The Egypt connection continues through the Old Testament. Example: The 10 commandments are found in the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The story of the Garden of Eden is traced through Egypt to Babylon to Masopotamia. And the list goes on and on. Christianity was created in Rome to control the Roman public!
heymantake5 3 years ago 3
Absolutely true! The Old Testament writers based their religion on Egyptian kingship rituals. Notice how the "land of milk and honey" in the Bible was in fact lower Egypt whose King name was the bee; the bee of the fields of Aarru which led the souls to the afterlife; the promised land. It's all stolen from the pagans!
martynblackburn1977 3 years ago 5
WOW i was thinking same thing . it was made by man to conrtol a certain peoples ..i feel more free to kno this WOOW
faness1 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Indians are a lost Tribe of Israel? Are you a Mormon? "If you read the bible"; That makes you wrong by default. The Bible contains no Truth; No Facts. It is an absurd piece of writing that any thinking man would never follow for knowledge or morals. It is the book that killers use to justify their murders.
TheNWOlnquisition 3 years ago 2
Astrotheology of the Ancients
"The further one regresses in time, the more obvious it becomes that the principal and singular religious worship found around the globe has revolved around nature. ... So fascinated by the sky, or heavens, has been man that he has created entire religions, with organized priesthoods, complex rituals and massive edifices, in order to tell its story."
truthbeknown. com /astrotheology. html
; )
Hercules2345 3 years ago
this is what your afraid of.. genesis 25:25
find out the story about esau the red man since u kno everthing.. u c the old testemant is th story of the human race but the new testement is the story of the chosen race who r the west indians mexicans and the african hebrew slaves(tribe of judah) from isreal if u read the bible we were everwhere in the land of eden/africa/cannan/ham/egypt witch r all the same place(africa) the word devil means deciever and the white race fits the desription
travwhite2 3 years ago
Indians are a lost Tribe of Israel? Are you a Mormon? "If you read the bible"; That makes you wrong by default. The Bible contains no Truth; No Facts. It is an absurd piece of writing that any thinking man would never follow for knowledge or morals. It is the book that killers use to justify their murders.
TheNWOlnquisition 3 years ago 4
The thing is these same unbelieving ROMANS, who didn't believe in the ALMIGHTY nor the SAVIOR took the scriptures when the children of Israel became cursed, and changed certain facts to fit into there beliefs,they took out books, first about how the ALMIGHTY made everything, USING THE STARS THAT HE MADE-ASTROLOGY we call it, all the secrets of heaven, which the angels who were kicked out of heaven TAUGHT MEN. In the Book of ENOCH, Research EVERYTHING before letting them decide YOUR FATE.
QueenofQueens187 3 years ago
i think u need to do more research cracker because i kno u r white but anyway how the fuck ancient humans knew anything about the heavens, ukno the stars and the moon, plus yehawashi who u called jesus crist was born in the spring not in the winter,for one the bible dont even speak of 12 months are a 365 day cycle or december period. first u crackers burn all the books and hide the truth now u say it aint no truth...
travwhite2 3 years ago
Acharya now has 4 books totaling 1,900 pages with 5,555 footnotes/citations to references & primary sources, utilizing over 1,442 bibliographical sources by respected authors/ publishers and peer-reviewed scholarly journals and dozens of illustrations.
"Christ in Egypt" alone contains 600 pages with nearly 2,400 footnotes/citations utilizing over 900 bibliographical sources.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Christ in Egypt" PREFACE
stellar house publishing. com/ciepreface. html
;)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
oh guys ur other serious source must be erich von daenikken... hahaha unbelievable shit ...e.t. calling home .... acharya s fantastic hahaha
Thorsten41 3 years ago
CONT
"...As a matter of fact, the amount of information concerning him is comparatively meager. Aside from the four Gospels, and a few scattered allusions in the epistles, contemporary history is almost silent concerning him."
- Merrill C. Tenney, "New Testament Survey," p. 203.
- "Who Was Jesus?" 85-86
* Dr. Tenney is a conservative evangelical Christian who was a professor of Theological Studies and the dean of the school of Theology at Wheaton College. Did NASB and NIV bibles.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"One would naturally expect that the Lord Jesus Christ would be sufficiently important to receive ample notice in the literature of his time, and that extensive biographical material would be available. He was observed by multitudes of people, and his own followers numbered into the hundreds (1 Cor. 15:6), whose witness was still living in the middle of the first century..."
CONT
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2
..."According to Form Criticism the Gospels are more like folklore and myth than historical fact."3
1. Metzger, HLS, 8.
2. Meier, II, 536.
3. Geisler, CA, 320.
- "Who Was Jesus?" (259)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
""...Christian scholars over the centuries have admitted that ... "there are parallels between the Mysteries and Christianity"1 and that "the miracle stories of the Gospels do in fact parallel literary forms found in pagan and Jewish miracle stories,"2"
Like who?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "Like who?"
Here's a thought *READ THE BOOK* for a change!!! Are you that daft - I just gave you the sources...
1. Metzger, HLS, 8.
2. Meier, II, 536.
3. Geisler, CA, 320.
- "Who Was Jesus?" (259)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
you people realy dont remember how many books the holy catholic church put on fire? burning treasure books and sacred libraries to the grownd? there can be no fare discussion.but believe is the point. is it not?
latinjoy 3 years ago
"Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
- F.F. Bruce, "New Testament History" (163) founder of the modern evangelical movement
- Who Was Jesus? page 84
Hercules2345 3 years ago
""Apart from the New Testament writings and later writings dependent upon these, our sources of information about the life and teaching of Jesus are scanty and problematic"
I agree - they don't tell us much. You disagree, since you claim that they essentially don't exist. So again, you've posted a quote that backs me up and disagrees with you. Why do you keep doing that?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Thanks for demonstrating the level of your dishonesty once again. You just said 2 days ago that they were "overwhelming evidence of existence." Even going so far as to claim there's no "evidence against His existence."
LOL, ROTFLMAO - which is it? Make up your mind.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail. What part of that are you not getting?
Hercules2345 3 years ago
It looks like your position is changing so I'll commend you for that. When you get tired of being lied to by the xian deceivers & decide to take your fundy blinders off, you can put your feet back on the ground & step away from crazy town.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
I've been consistent in my position, and will remain so until you present evidence to convince me otherwise.
However, your position keeps going back and forth between the Suetonius, Pliny and Tacitus references being "xian interpolations" and their not being about Jesus at all. If they're "xian interpolations", then obviously they're about Jesus. If they're not about Jesus, then obviously they aren't "xian interpolations". Your conflicting arguments disprove each other. Pick *one*.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Already been addressed:
Yes, you're confused as demonstrated by your utter ignorance of this subject.
Emperor Hadrian stated: "worshippers of Serapis are Christians"
It is likely that Pliny's "Christos" or "Anointed" were followers of Serapis - In any case, this was not a man who had been crucified in Judea. There's plenty of reasons not to accept your "overwhelming evidence" for Jesus as evidence at all.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
Th fact that you're trying to squirm out of your 2 opposing positions and repeat an already addressed argument accusing me of "conflicting arguments" demonstrates, once again, your level of utter dishonesty.
Plus the fact that you're argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny *YOU FAILED KING D* & there's nothing you can do about that now. Except of course, attempt to repeat the same already addressed BS like you have been all along. I've wasted enough time with you - bye, bye.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"I've wasted enough time with you - bye, bye."
That's OK with me. Maybe come back when you have actual evidence to support your claims, though. That's the one Christ-mythers are always short of.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "come back when you have actual evidence"
LOL, ROTFLMAO - how about you come up with some real *VALID* evidence for a change.
And, realize that they do make books on comparative religion - with valid evidence demonstrating no reason to accept your Christ as anything but a myth. Try to actually read one for a change. And, nobody cares if you understand that or believe it or not - it's your problem.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"And, realize that they do make books on comparative religion - with valid evidence"
Yet when Christians ask Christ-mythers to back their claims up with evidence, they're always unable to do so. Why is that, do you think?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "Yet when Christians ask Christ-mythers to back their claims up with evidence, they're always unable to do so. Why is that, do you think?"
Maybe because nobody cares what you think or believe? Maybe you should actually read the books you pretend to be an expert on while going around the net making claims about works you've never studied. You should have a disclaimer in your sig line & website - you lead people to assume you've studied them when you clearly haven't - that's dishonest.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Maybe you should actually read the books you pretend to be an expert on"
That's the *third* time you've made that claim. If you're unwilling to back it up, why do you keep making it? Either tell me which books you're talking about and when I claimed to be an expert on them, or admit that you're being dishonest.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "which books you're talking about"
Oh, I think you know - the ones you claim contain no evidence yet you've never actually studied - that would be utter dishonesty from a biased, bigoted fundy xian out to shore-up the faith at all costs. The fact that you even have to ask is an inadvertent admission.
You should have a disclaimer on your website that says you've never read a single book by Acharya - you won't because then you'd have to admit you're harassing a single female author.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Oh, I think you know - the ones you claim contain no evidence yet you've never actually studied"
Okay, so which books did I "claim contain no evidence"? You realize that you're just compounding one lie with another one, right?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
You've said many times here & on your website that CMers have no evidence - all those lists on your website come from Acharya's 1st book - which you've never read. So, it's *YOU* who are "compounding one lie with another one" but you're a bigoted xian & you can't help it - you'd need therapy to stop all the lying.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"You've said many times here & on your website that CMers have no evidence - all those lists on your website come from Acharya's 1st book - which you've never read."
Providing lists isn't the same as providing evidence for those lists. If her books actually contain the evidence, then why have two of her fans told me that you have to look outside of her books in order to find the evidence?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Furthermore, your claim that my argument conflicts actually demonstrates your ignorance on the subject - you simply have no idea what you're talking about. You rigidly adhere to your bigoted, xian fundy positions w/o knowing all the info.
Hadrian said "worshippers of Serapis are Christians" & that's who Pliny was addressing - you're just oblivious to that. It may not have had anything to do with your mythical Jesus.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Furthermore, your claim that my argument conflicts actually demonstrates your ignorance on the subject"
You really don't understand how "They're xian interpolations" and "they aren't about Jesus" are conflicting? Wow!
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "You really don't understand how "They're xian interpolations" and "they aren't about Jesus" are conflicting? Wow!"
LOL, thanks for confirming that you really don't know anything about this subject beyond what biased, bigoted xians have told you. And, after having explained this to you several times, I realize your disparate need to be dishonest about it. You've got nothing kiddo - you lose. Go back to church - I hear ignorance is bliss.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"LOL, thanks for confirming that you really don't know anything about this subject beyond what biased, bigoted xians have told you."
Sorry, but I'm just responding to what you're saying. You obviously believe that Christians added these passages into the historical record in order to create fake evidence about Jesus, but weren't writing about Jesus when they wrote them. And, somehow, this makes sense to you.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
You're still rigid about being dishonest - typical xian. I've already explained it to you several times - maybe this subject isn't for you.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
The fact that you're so reliant upon 2nd, 3rd & 4th century "evidence" coming from 3rd & 4th hand or worse hearsay w/o supportive contemporary evidence suggests an absence of evidence for existence. And this is your best "overwhelming evidence" you claimed.
We've established that your very best "evidence" is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
Your best "overwhelming evidence" King D, seems to be hearsay, rumor, tradition & a collage of myths.
Even the earliest Christians were never able to produce positive evidence of the biblical Jesus existence. Same as today.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Your best "overwhelming evidence" King D, seems to be hearsay, rumor, tradition & a collage of myths."
No, it's the historical record. If we were to treat all of the ancient historical records the way CM'ers treat the references to Jesus, we'd be tossing out over 99% of ancient history. CM'ers discard them for illogical and invalid reasons, and provide no evidence to the contrary.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "we'd be tossing out over 99% of ancient history"
Actually, you once again demonstrate your ignorance here. Historians work with an assortment of corroborating evidence which you lack. And as even xian scholars admit - you're in denial about that fact.
Your argument is another fallacy - it's really embarrassing for you to keep repeating it. I feel sorry for you as you dig a deeper hole for yourself here repeating the same talking point w/o back them up w/ *VALID* evidence.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Historians work with an assortment of corroborating evidence which you lack."
First of all, four historians writing about the same figure *is* corroborating evidence. Even if only one historian wrote about somebody, we wouldn't toss out that reference or assume it's an interpolation without valid reason. Only Christ-mythers engage in that kind of stuff.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Just because something comes out of an historians mouth doesn't necessarily guarantee anything. What you're holding up as "evidence" is empty. Meier doesn't consider Tacitus, Pliny or Suetonius the "overwhelming evidence" you do. In fact, Meier says, they're of "little value."
Christians are well known for fraud, deceit, interpolation, fake artifacts & plagiarizing concepts from other older religions.
You have no credentials, your opinion is worthless. Again, *YOU FAIL* King d.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Just because something comes out of an historians mouth doesn't necessarily guarantee anything."
True, but we don't assume it was false or an interpolation without a good reason for doing so. If there was evidence that the historian was mistaken, or that he didn't write it, then we'd have cause to question it. But as it is, there's no evidence of either. We don't disregard a historical text just because we *want* to.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Earth to Kd - Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise.
The TF was accepted as a forgery before you were born. The other passages are suspect for good reason. You're in denial about these basic points - xian bib. scholars admit it.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise."
And again, you believe that these are "xian interpolations", which only makes sense if you're acknowledging that they're about Jesus. Why would Christians be making up fake evidence about Jesus, but not making it about Jesus?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Herc "Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise."
KD "And again, you believe that these are "xian interpolations", which only makes sense if you're acknowledging that they're about Jesus. Why would Christians be making up fake evidence about Jesus, but not making it about Jesus?"
Now you're blatantly lying & putting words in my mouth - you resort to this because your arguments have failed miserably.
It's time for you to go KD.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Now you're blatantly lying & putting words in my mouth - you resort to this because your arguments have failed miserably. "
So which part of that is wrong? Are you admitting that they aren't "xian interpolations"? Or are you admitting that they're about Jesus? You can't argue both when the two arguments conflict with each other. As I've been saying, pick *one*.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
I know, you're so used to being dishonest that it has become a habit now but, your claim that 4 historians are "overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus" is false - Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" - a factoid you omit because it destroys your premise. And the TF has was accepted as a forgery before you were born. the other passages are suspect for good reason. You're in denial about these basic points - xian bib. scholars admit it.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
Historical record? Then you might want to show this to the Historians and people living within the years zero to thirty three.
TheNWOlnquisition 3 years ago
"Historical record? Then you might want to show this to the Historians and people living within the years zero to thirty three."
NWO,
Are you saying that unless the historian personally witnessed the events he described, we should disregard what he says? If so, we'd be tossing out 99% of ancient history.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "Are you saying that unless the historian personally witnessed the events he described, we should disregard what he says? If so, we'd be tossing out 99% of ancient history."
Ignore him NWO - he just repeats the same fallacies & circular logic even after it has been debunked because he's a biased, bigoted fundy xian who's out to shore up the faith at all costs. Anyone who disagrees with him is considered "irrational" - LOL, seriously!
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"The fact that you're so reliant upon 2nd, 3rd & 4th century "evidence"
The Josephus reference is from 93 A.D., Pliny from 112, Tacitus from 116, and Suetonius from around 120. Did you not know that?
And, again, there's zero evidence that any of them were interpolated, and no rational person just assumes interpolation without evidence.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
There you go with your "no rational person" fallacy again, as usual. Even though xian bib. scholars disagree with you.
Ah, the 100's would be the 2nd century - did you not know that?
"zero evidence"
Yes, or course - zero evidence to someone who knows nothing about the subject as is typical with biased, bigoted fundy xians. No surprise there. We already know that the TF was an interpolation. And as scholars have spelled out there's reason to question the other passages too.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Ah, the 100's would be the 2nd century - did you not know that?"
Yeah, I was questioning where you were getting "3rd and 4th century" from. What was your reason for that?
"And as scholars have spelled out there's reason to question the other passages too."
Not valid reasons. There's no evidence that they were interpolations or evidence that Jesus didn't exist.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "Not valid reasons. There's no evidence that they were interpolations or evidence that Jesus didn't exist."
I've given you *VALID* reasons plus factoids like Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus."
The TF was accepted as a forgery before you were born and the other passages are suspect for good reason. Xian scholars call them "tidbits," of "little value" that are "scanty & problematic" and "fantasy." Xianity has clouded your judgment & made you dishonest.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"I've given you *VALID* reasons plus factoids like Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus."
No, you haven't given me valid reasons, just the self-contradicting argument that Christians fabricated these passages in order to provide fake evidence about Jesus, but that these passages aren't about Jesus.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
There you go again with your typical tactic of avoiding the issue at hand by using a distraction fallacy.
LOL, you don't think the fact that Tacitus, Pliny nor Suetonius ever mention "Jesus" is a valid reason? LOL, ROTFLMAO!!!
Thanks for another example of your dishonesty & clouded judgment.
No really, it's time for you to go Kd - take your biased, bigoted, fundy xian view with you back to crazy town.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
cont.
And as I've stated from the beginning - Even *IF* they're all authentic, they still hold no value historically and certainly not as "overwhelming evidence" as you attempted to claim. You can repeat that false claim for another 2,000 years but the fact that it's worthless as evidence will never change. Think about that long & hard until it all sinks in.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Josephus probably wrote of the death of a Jew ... called James, and a Christian reader thought he meant James the "brother of the Lord" who, according to Christian tradition, led the Jerusalem church about the time in question. This reader accordingly noted in the margin: "James = the brother of Jesus, him called Christ", and a later copyist took this as belonging to the text and incorporated it. Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
- G.A. Wells "TJL" (53)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Josephus probably wrote of the death of a Jew ... called James, and a Christian reader thought he meant..."
Is there evidence to support this claim, such as an early copy without the "him called Christ" bit? No.
Besides, Christians would almost certainly have referred to Jesus as "the Christ" not "him called Christ" or "the so-called Christ".
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Actually, as historians and scholars already know, "Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
The fact that you're so reliant upon 2nd & 3rd century 2nd & 3rd hand hearsay w/o contemporary evidence suggests an absence of evidence for existence. And this is your best evidence, you said.
So, we've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Actually, as historians and scholars already know, "Other interpolations have originated in precisely this way."
True, but in those cases, there was *evidence* of interpolation. We don't just assume that something was interpolated simply because it could have been.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
If you knew the subject you'd know that there's no reason to blindly accept Josephus as completely authentic either.
Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day. We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"The only definite account of his life and teachings is contained in the four Gospels. All other historical records of the time are silent about him. The brief mentions of Jesus in the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations; in Jewish writings there is no report about Jesus that has historical value. Scholars hold that the entire Jesus story is a myth"
- Uni Jewish Enc (v.6,83)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"have been generally regarded as not genuine and as Christian interpolations;"
That's simply wrong. The concensus among scholars is that they aren't interpolations. In fact, since you're arguing that they weren't writing about Jesus, then are you saying that those Christians who interpolated these passages weren't writing about Jesus when they did so? Does that really make any sense to you?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
1st I thought you were confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Josephus' TF & the J. passage on accident but now, I think you're doing it on purpose to be deceptive. If you're not sincere then go waste somebody else's time. I've wasted enough time with you. I knew you were only going to do your typical hand-waving dismissal tactic. Why should I bother anymore?
As I've stated all along - Even *IF* we consider the brief mentions by Josephus as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"1st I thought you were confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Josephus' TF & the J. passage on accident but now, I think you're doing it on purpose to be deceptive."
That's you who's confusing them, I'm afraid. As I pointed out, Stein was talking about the TF, not the "so-called Christ" passage, as you stated.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Some info has been pertaining to the TF - such as the Origen comment as well. Nevertheless, the claim that all scholars unanimously accept the other passage as authentic isn't accurate:
"Josephus describes all sorts of historical figures (prophets, would-be kings, priests, agitators), he never calls one of them a Messiah" - That he habitually takes such care to avoid the term makes its role and unexplained use in the two Josephus passages suspect."
- G.A. Wells "The Jesus Legend" (54)
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Some info has been pertaining to the TF - such as the Origen comment as well."
Since Origen *did* mention the latter passage, his "lack of mentioning it" is only evidence against the TF. But you were claiming that Origen never referred to the latter passage ("Jesus the so-called Christ"), but you were wrong on that. He mentioned it twice, including in his response to Celsus. That's twice you've mixed the two Josephus passages up.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
No, that's twice you misunderstood what I was sharing & mixed them up. The argument between scholars is that there are differences between what Celsus had and what Eusebius had which makes it also suspect of tampering. They admit that there was certainly enough time for interpolation even by Celsus's time.
Again, it still is not valid "evidence" for Jesus. Why are Christians so reliant upon weak non-evidence? You're only trying to shore-up the faith at all costs. Why are you wasting out time?
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"No, that's twice you misunderstood what I was sharing & mixed them up."
No. You said that the "so-called Christ" passage was referenced by Eusebius, but not Origen, even though Origen would have used it in his response to Celsus, and that this proves that it didn't exist in Origen's day. I showed you that Origen did reference the passage twice, including in his response to Celsus. Thus your claim that it didn't exist until Eusebius' time was incorrect.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
"That he habitually takes such care to avoid the term makes its role and unexplained use in the two Josephus passages suspect."
That's a good example of someone interpreting the evidence to fit the theory. A more logical explanation is that, of all of the people Josephus wrote about, Jesus was the only one to be considered the Christ.
Again, if a Christian had written this, he would have called Jesus "the Christ", not "the so-called Christ". And there's no evidence of interpolation.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "if a Christian had written this..."
That's a biased Christian view of it yes. Not an objective scholarly view. the fact that Josephus avoids the term everywhere else yet never explains it is most definitely suspect as any rational person can see. The fact that you don't even question it & are eager to accept it only demonstrates your dire need for anything to call "evidence." Thanks again for the inadvertent admission that no CONTEMPORARY evidence exists.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Josephus avoids the term everywhere else yet never explains it is most definitely suspect as any rational person can see."
What's suspect about it? Are you saying that there were other people Josephus wrote about who were considered the Christ, but Josephus refrained from referring to them as such? If so, who?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
"(There are 21 Jesus's mentioned by Josephus)...it is hardly in character of Josephus to mention someone, especially someone with such a curious surname as Christos (the only one with that title in all of Josephus), without describing the implications of this word or giving an anecdote to illustrate it..."
- Josephus, J & C (57)
Yeah, it's certainly suspect and questioned by scholars - your claim that it isn't is utterly dishonest. Still, even if authentic - it has no value & you know it.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits. Claims that later apocryphal Gospels and the Nag Hammadi material supply independent and reliable historical information about Jesus are largely fantasy."
- JP Meier, "A Marginal Jew," vol. II, 5.
- "Who Was Jesus?" page 86
* Dr. Meier is a Catholic University New Testament professor, Catholic priest and monsignor
Hercules2345 3 years ago
""there are very few sources for knowledge of the historical Jesus beyond the four canonical Gospels. Paul and Josephus offer little more than tidbits."
Exactly as I've been saying, and as you've been disagreeing with.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Ah, WTF? You've been holding-up Josephus as proof of Jesus this whole time.
Now, it appears you're changing your position - which is fine. Fair enough, I would too if I were you.
I've been consistent throughout saying - even *IF* we consider his brief mentions authentic, they remain worthless as evidence. The historical value is zero - even Christian bib. scholars agree. Same with Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Ah, WTF? You've been holding-up Josephus as proof of Jesus this whole time."
I've been holding up the latter Josephus reference ("Jesus the so-called Christ") as evidence, not the TF. Stein was talking about the TF, not the latter passage. You mixed the two up. There is no evidence that the latter passage was an interpolation.
David
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
The fact remains that even if we consider all of Josephus's references to "Jesus" and "Christ" authentic it still fails as valid evidence for the biblical character Jesus in the bible. why are Christians so reliant upon such a weak argument to prove an historical Jesus in the first place? Why not provide contemporary evidence for the over 20 scriptures in the bible that claim Jesus was famed far and wide? It's essentially an inadvertent admission that no contemporary evidence ever existed.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"why are Christians so reliant upon such a weak argument to prove an historical Jesus in the first place?"
Four historians talking about a person as if he actually existed is not *weak* evidence. To a rational person, this would be overwhelming evidence of existence. One might hypothesize that all four of them were wrong, if there was significant evidence that the person didn't exist. But in Jesus' case, there isn't any evidence against His existence.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Your intellectual dishonesty always amazes me. 3 of the 4 never mention "Jesus" at all. That's inconvenient to you so you ignore it.
Josephus' TF is a forgery so you're totally reliant upon the other passage which is also suspect by even xian scholars. It's inconclusive at best another inconvenient factoid for you that you ignore.
You don't have valid evidence - you have wishful thinking.
"overwhelming evidence" = FANTASY
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Your intellectual dishonesty always amazes me. 3 of the 4 never mention "Jesus" at all. That's inconvenient to you so you ignore it."
They're clearly talking about Jesus, which you obviously agree with since you consider them "xian interpolations". Why would Christians have added these passages, yet not made them about Jesus? Sorry, but your argument makes no sense.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
You're still confused I see.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* even *IF* we consider all 4 authentic & to be specifically discussing the Jesus of the bible. You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"You're still confused I see."
I'm very confused. I'm confused about how someone can argue that the Suetonius, Pliny and Tacitus passages were "xian interpolations" and also argue that they weren't about Jesus. I've seen different CM'ers argue each, but I've never seen *one* CM'er argue *both*. In order to provide a coherent argument, you have to drop one claim or the other, so which will it be?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Yes, you're confused as demonstrated by your utter ignorance of this subject.
Emperor Hadrian stated: "worshippers of Serapis are Christians"
It is likely that Pliny's "Christos" or "Anointed" were followers of Serapis - In any case, this was not a man who had been crucified in Judea. There's plenty of reasons not to accept your "overwhelming evidence" for Jesus as evidence at all.
We've established that your very best evidence is inconclusive *AT BEST* You fail.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
King d, There are over 20 passages in the bible claiming that Jesus was famed far & wide: Mt 4:23-25, 5:1, 8:1, 8:18, 9:8, 9:31, 9:33, 9:36, 11:7, 12:15, 13:2, 14:1, 14:13, 14:22, 15:30, 19:2, 21:9, 26:55; Mk 1:28, 10:1; Lk 4:14, 4:37, 5:15, 14:25 -
No contemporary historians write about Jesus at all. Rational folks would consider this evidence *AGAINST EXISTENCE* That's why you're reliant upon 2nd c. hearsay & tradition rather than valid evidence with value.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"No contemporary historians write about Jesus at all."
Your argument might work if there were contemporary historians writing about the events in and around Jerusalem in Jesus' time, but failed to mention Him. There aren't any, though.
Even if your argument was sound (which it's not), rational people would only consider it evidence against Jesus' *fame*, not His *existence*. There are many people who lived but weren't mentioned by contemporary historians.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Again, your ignorance is demonstrated as the 1st century was one of the best documented in history.
The fact remains that your best evidence for Jesus fails the tests.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Again, your ignorance is demonstrated as the 1st century was one of the best documented in history. "
That it was. But it doesn't change the fact that there are no historical texts on which a reference to Jesus is conspicuously absent. There are no historical writings, still existing, about Jesus' time and place, written while Jesus was alive.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "no texts which a reference to Jesus is conspicuously absent"
LOL, you're preaching to the choir -we know that xians also copied & translated those texts and we know that Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day.
Your comment is either utterly dishonest representing more fantasy or you're just ignorant of the facts - maybe both.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
Give a little bio on yourself - ie,.
age/where live/occupation/marital status, religion (if any -affiliation) etc.
Blessings, Arhata
ArhataFreeSpeech 3 years ago
To David (see last post)
Arhata
ArhataFreeSpeech 3 years ago
"Give a little bio on yourself"
Sure. I'm 41, live in Michigan, work in medical billing, am married with four daughters (ages 11-21). I was an atheist until I was 20, was a deist/agnostic until I was 27, and have been a non-denominational Christian since. I have an apologetics website. Just google "kingdavid8", you'll find it (titled "ye olde royalle webbe page"). If you scroll down to "My Christian Page" and click that, you'll get to the apologetics hub.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
King D, Christians are well known for fraud, forgery, interpolation, fake artifacts, deception etc, from the beginning even to this day.
Your Holding school of xian apologetics cannot taken seriously. Anything to shore-up the faith at all costs - I know the drill.
Even *IF* we consider the brief mentions by Josephus as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence. Why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value? What part of that are you not getting?
Hercules2345 3 years ago
Herc,
Ummm...if none of those references are about Jesus, then why do you insist that they're Christian interpolations? Why would Christians add stuff to those historians' text, but make it about someone other than Jesus? You do realize that your argument makes no sense, right?
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
King D, I think you're confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Jospehus - understandably in these short YT posts.
Nevertheless, you're holding them up as evidence in the first place makes no sense. They've been thoroughly debunked long before you were ever born.
So, the question is why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value? At what point do you get tired of being lied to? There is no evidence for Jesus because he's a mythological character.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"King D, I think you're confusing Pliny, Tacitus & Suetonius with Jospehus - understandably in these short YT posts."
You're the one who's been saying that they're "xian interpolations". And the consensus of historians is that they aren't interpolations (except the TF, of course) and that they were talking about Jesus. It's just a few fringe scholars who argue against either of them, with no evidence to back them up.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
Ah, JP Holding is not a historian nor would I trust the school of xian apologetics. Please explain how you presume that they're talking about Jesus when his name never comes up?
Even *IF* we consider their brief mentions as authentic, they remain worthless as evidence.
Why you're so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence w/no historical value?
Hercules2345 3 years ago
King d, There are over 20 passages in the bible claiming that Jesus was famed far & wide: Mt 4:23-25, 5:1, 8:1, 8:18, 9:8, 9:31, 9:33, 9:36, 11:7, 12:15, 13:2, 14:1, 14:13, 14:22, 15:30, 19:2, 21:9, 26:55; Mk 1:28, 10:1; Lk 4:14, 4:37, 5:15, 14:25 -
Why didn't contemporary historians write about Jesus? Why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence?
At what point do you finally get tired of being lied to? There is no evidence for Jesus as he's a mythical character.
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"Why didn't contemporary historians write about Jesus?"
We don't know who did and who didn't, since about 99% of the texts from that era didn't survive to this day.
Again, your argument boils down to the idea that four historians referencing a person aren't enough to confirm that person's existence, though I doubt you'd say that's true for anyone but Jesus. To a rational person, four historical references is more than enough. Only if there was opposing evidence could we doubt them.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago
KD "99% of the texts from that era didn't survive to this day."
LOL, that's your best argument? Seriously? There are over 20 passages in the bible claiming that Jesus was famed far & wide & that is the best you can come up with? I thought you were an apologetics school grad. That was your opportune moment to provide real, valid historical evidence for Jesus & you blew it.
Why are you so reliant upon outdated already debunked non-evidence with no historical value?
Hercules2345 3 years ago
"LOL, that's your best argument? Seriously?"
Do you honestly think we have everything that was written in the first century? Seriously? If you do, then you're wrong. If you don't, then you can't say that no contemporary historian wrote about Jesus, since you can't possibly know.
All we know is that four historians, all within a century of Jesus, wrote about Him. To rational people, that's evidence of existence.
David
kingdavid246 3 years ago