What's So Special About Jesus? Nothing. Everything supposedly attributed to Jesus and everything that Christians tout as special and unique about him had already been done many times before.
- He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him.
- He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done by many others.
- He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old Testament prophets.
- He healed ~ that's old news and had been accomplished by so many others.
- He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed to be.
- He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others.
- He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others.
What makes Jesus stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours and messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was the "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate his credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah, and many have.
Jesus said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" or "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of such things.
"When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr
He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. All claims of Jesus derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or self written documents.
There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate executed a man named Jesus. Unfortunately for the Christian faith there is not even a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus.
All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the death of the alleged Jesus and are from either unknown authors, people who had never met the earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds or interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.
Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of Jesus contradict each other and themselves in many places.
- The birth of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times.
- Mark does not mention his birth or childhood.
- Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other.
- He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year before his death, while John says three years.
- Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by Jesus to "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private talk given only to the disciples.
- The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each other, and no one states how old he was when he died.
- Paul never knew Jesus and has almost nothing to say about the historical Jesus ~ he's all about the risen Christ.
- Paul fails to mention Jesus' sayings and doings even when doing so would boost his arguments
- Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for aspiring god-men.
- Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the sick, raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries.
You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The Messiah", "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail.
Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries Christians plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom they could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were competing for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, changed, amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for centuries.
There are no first hand non-biblical references to Jesus.
Flavius Josephus's Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians quote to prove the historical existance of Jesus because in his Antiquities there are two references to Jesus.
He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus' writings remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps they were offended because there was no mention of Jesus and decided to add the references in order to validate their belief.
The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning Jesus are so out of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from from the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, and had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view.
Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus's writings have been embellished to boost the Christians claims about Jesus, leading some scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally fabricated by the copyists.
It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during the time it supposedly occurred.
There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at the time, or just after, Jesus allegedly was born, preached, was crucified and resurrected.
It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the time it occurred.
www.worldzone.net/family/jo...xz31.shtml
;
- He rose from the dead ~ big deal, so had others before him.
- He performed miracles ~ nothing new in that, it had already been done by many others.
- He raised people from the dead ~ so what, so had some of the Old Testament prophets.
- He healed ~ that's old news and had been accomplished by so many others.
- He was said to be the "Son of God" ~ just like so many others claimed to be.
- He was "born of a virgin" ~ just like so many others.
- He was reported crucified ~ just like so many others.
What makes Jesus stand out from the crowd of other godmen, saviours and messiahs? Many have claimed to be the savior but if this one really was the "one and only" where are the concrete, testable proofs that substantiate his credentials? Christian assertions, wishful thinking and subjective experiences prove nothing unless you wish to believe. Anyone can claim to be the Messiah, and many have.
Jesus said little that was new or worthwhile. He introduced no new concepts to ethics apart from hell. He instituted no social programmes although if, as many of his followers believe, he was the "Son of God" or "God made flesh" and not just an invented character, he would have known much more about science, biology or medicine, but he appeared ignorant of such things.
"When we say that the Word, who is the first-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter." Apology 21 by Justin Martyr
He did not leave behind any writings, nor did any of his contemporaries. All claims of Jesus derive from hearsay accounts and there is no physical evidence to support the claim of a historical Jesus; no artifacts or self written documents.
There are no contemporary Roman records to prove that Pontius Pilate executed a man named Jesus. Unfortunately for the Christian faith there is not even a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus.
All the documents pertaining to him were written at least 30 years the death of the alleged Jesus and are from either unknown authors, people who had never met the earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Many have been proven to be outright fabrications, pious frauds or interpolations derived from hearsay accounts and can not possibly serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.
Even the sparse and contradictory histories and genealogies of Jesus contradict each other and themselves in many places.
- The birth of Jesus is depicted as having taken place at different times.
- Mark does not mention his birth or childhood.
- Matthew and Luke claim that he was "born of a virgin," his lineage is traced to the House of David through Joseph, such that he may "fulfill prophecy", but the genealogies in Mark and Luke contradict each other.
- He is said in the first three gospels to have taught for one year before his death, while John says three years.
- Matthew reports that "The Sermon on the Mount" was given by Jesus to "the multitudes". Luke contradicts this by saying that it was a private talk given only to the disciples.
- The accounts of his Passion and Resurrection differ utterly from each other, and no one states how old he was when he died.
- Paul never knew Jesus and has almost nothing to say about the historical Jesus ~ he's all about the risen Christ.
- Paul fails to mention Jesus' sayings and doings even when doing so would boost his arguments
- Most Gospel stories are copied from Pagan myths and are standard for aspiring god-men.
- Virgin birth, resurrection, changing water into wine, healing the sick, raising the dead, etc. pre-date Christianity by centuries.
You would think that such an important event as the birth of "The Messiah", "The Son of God", "The Saviour of Mankind", etc. would be recorded in exacting detail with his life and times noted with meticulous detail.
Could it be that the confusion exists because over the centuries Christians plagiarists were attempting to boost the importance of their beliefs by combining practically every myth, fairytale, legend, or bit of wisdom they could steal from innumerable different mystery religions that were competing for converts? In the process they stole, adapted, re-interpreted, changed, amalgamated, forged, interpolated, mutilated and rewrote these texts for centuries.
There are no first hand non-biblical references to Jesus.
Flavius Josephus's Antiquities is a favourite source that many Christians quote to prove the historical existance of Jesus because in his Antiquities there are two references to Jesus.
He was only reporting the second hand myths and legends as told by Christians. There are no original manuscripts of Josepheus' writings remaining. The copies that do remain were made by Christian monks. Perhaps they were offended because there was no mention of Jesus and decided to add the references in order to validate their belief.
The apparently admirable comments of Josephus concerning Jesus are so out of character with the rest his writings and it seems quite obvious from from the general tone of the rest of his work that he was not a Christian, and had little or no sympathy for the Christian world view.
Many serious scholars hold the opinion that Josepheus's writings have been embellished to boost the Christians claims about Jesus, leading some scholars to question whether this passage from Josepheus was totally fabricated by the copyists.
It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by any of the writers living during the time it supposedly occurred.
There is nothing in any of the works of the writers that were around at the time, or just after, Jesus allegedly was born, preached, was crucified and resurrected.
It seems very odd that an event of such significence and so important to the destiny of mankind was not recorded by a single writer living during the time it occurred.
www.worldzone.net/family/jo...xz31.shtml
;
posted by:
|
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Sun, March 27, 2005 - 7:30 AMIt was all in the marketing.
What would have happened if the Greeks had gone out into the world and spread the word of Zeus, would people believe in Greek mythology now? I think yes. -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Mon, March 28, 2005 - 5:28 AMha, good point William.
The "Son" of God is the "Sun" of God
The reason why all these narratives are so similar, with a godman who is crucified and resurrected, who does miracles and has 12 disciples, is that these stories were based on the movements of the sun through the heavens, an astrotheological development that can be found throughout the planet because the sun and the 12 zodiac signs can be observed around the globe. In other words, Jesus Christ and all the others upon whom this character is predicated are personifications of the sun, and the Gospel fable is merely a rehash of a mythological formula (the "Mythos," as mentioned above) revolving around the movements of the sun through the heavens.
For instance, many of the world's crucified godmen have their traditional birthday on December 25th ("Christmas"). This is because the ancients recognized that (from an earthcentric perspective) the sun makes an annual descent southward until December 21st or 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops moving southerly for three days and then starts to move northward again. During this time, the ancients declared that "God's sun" had "died" for three days and was "born again" on December 25th. The ancients realized quite abundantly that they needed the sun to return every day and that they would be in big trouble if the sun continued to move southward and did not stop and reverse its direction. Thus, these many different cultures celebrated the "sun of God's" birthday on December 25th.
The following are the characteristics of the "sun of God":
- The sun "dies" for three days on December 22nd, the winter solstice, when it stops in its movement south, to be born again or resurrected on December 25th, when it resumes its movement north.
- In some areas, the calendar originally began in the constellation of Virgo, and the sun would therefore be "born of a Virgin."
- The sun is the "Light of the World."
- The sun "cometh on clouds, and every eye shall see him."
- The sun rising in the morning is the "Savior of mankind."
- The sun wears a corona, "crown of thorns" or halo.
- The sun "walks on water."
- The sun's "followers," "helpers" or "disciples" are the 12 months and the 12 signs of the zodiac or constellations, through which the sun must pass.
- The sun at 12 noon is in the house or temple of the "Most High"; thus, "he" begins "his Father's work" at "age" 12.
- The sun enters into each sign of the zodiac at 30°; hence, the "Sun of God" begins his ministry at "age" 30.
- The sun is hung on a cross or "crucified," which represents its passing through the equinoxes, the vernal equinox being Easter, at which time it is then resurrected.
Contrary to popular belief, the ancients were not an ignorant and superstitious lot who actually believed their deities to be literal characters. Indeed, this slanderous propaganda has been part of the conspiracy to make the ancients appear as if they were truly the dark and dumb rabble that was in need of the "light of Jesus." The reality is that the ancients were no less advanced in their morals and spiritual practices, and in many cases were far more advanced, than the Christians in their own supposed morality and ideology, which, in its very attempt at historicity, is in actuality a degradation of the ancient Mythos. Indeed, unlike the "superior" Christians, the true intelligentsia amongst the ancients were well aware that their gods were astronomical and atmospheric in nature. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle surely knew that Zeus, the sky god father figure who migrated to Greece from India and/or Egypt, was never a real person, despite the fact that the Greeks have designated on Crete both a birth cave and a death cave of Zeus. In addition, all over the world are to be found sites where this god or that allegedly was born, walked, suffered, died, etc., a common and unremarkable occurrence that is not monopolized by, and did not originate with, Christianity.
www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
; -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Tue, March 29, 2005 - 3:16 PMThe Skeptics Society has offered a $10,000 prize -
"I'm making all of you this offer and issuing this challenge: Give me novel, logically consistent and factually correct explanations for any or all of the problems I list above, and I'll put them on this web site. If you can offer me a complete, logically consistent harmonization of the problem of the account of the death and resurrection of Jesus that accounts for all the facts, places and incidents recorded in the four gospels plus Acts, I'll post it here. Don't just tell me it exists, send it to me. I genuinely want to see it, and I am honest enough to post it here and publicly eat crow over it. Furthermore, I'll go even one better, and that will be to help you claim the $10,000 prize that the Skeptics Society has offered for such an account.
When the Bible is examined with dispassion and with objectivity, it soon becomes obvious that it is so hopelessly riddled with errors, impossibilities and contradictions that it is essentially ludicrous to make the claim that it is inerrant.
And so here is my challenge to the fundamentalist Christian who believes in the inerrancy of his scripture: In the light of your claim to biblical inerrancy, how do you explain the following?"
www.bidstrup.com/bible2.htm
"Believing is easier than thinking. Hence so many more believers than thinkers." --Bruce Calvert -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Wed, March 30, 2005 - 5:35 AMWhere are the Faith Healers NOW for Terri Schiavo?
If Benny Hinn & other Faith Healers were for real, why do they
not heal Schiavo? Here is a legitimate patient with a big stage,
where are they NOW? -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Thu, March 31, 2005 - 8:17 PMWhenever I want a good laugh, I watch Benny Hinn. -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Wed, April 6, 2005 - 6:50 AMDid Jesus really exist?
~ NO ~
Many bible scholars and ministers--including one third of the clergy in the Church of England--reject the idea that Jesus bodily came back to life. So do 30% of born-again American Christians! The earliest Christians believed in the "spiritual" resurrection of Jesus. The story evolved over time into a "bodily" resurrection. It is a fact of history and of current events that human beings exaggerate, misinterpret, or wrongly remember events. They have also fabricated pious fraud. Most believers in a religion understand this when examining the claims of OTHER religions. The life of Jesus is not corroborated. Not a single word about Jesus appears outside of the New Testament in the entire first century, even though many writers documented first-hand the early Roman Empire in great detail, including careful accounts of the time and place where Jesus supposedly taught. The little paragraph about Jesus that appears in Josephus' Antiquities (written after 90 CE) is regarded by liberal and conservative scholars to have been either entirely interpolated or drastically altered by a later generation of believers, probably by the dishonest Christian historian Eusebius in the 4th century. (Whichever view is right, they both agree that early Christians tampered with documents, a fact that must bear on the reliability of the New Testament writings.)
The resurrection appears in Mark, the first Gospel, written at least 40 years after the supposed death of jesus. Almost all adults who were alive in the year 30 were dead by then. No one knows who wrote Mark--the Gospels are all anonymous, and names were formally attached to them much later, around the year 180. Whoever wrote Mark is speaking from the historical perspective of a second generation of believers, not as an eye-witness.
The silence of Paul is also a problem. Paul wrote his letters many years before the Gospels, and it appears he was unaware of anything said in them about Jesus, except for some wording from a Last Supper ritual. Paul never met Jesus and never quoted the Jesus of the Gospels, even when that would have served his purposes. He sometimes disagreed with Jesus. He never mentioned a single deed or miracle of Jesus. If Jesus had been a real person, certainly Paul, his main cheerleader, would have talked about him as a man. The "Christ" in Paul's epistles is mainly a supernatural figure, not a flesh and blood man of history. Christianity appears to have been cut from the same fabric as pagan mythology, and some early Christians admitted it. Arguing with pagans around 150 CE, Justin Martyr said: "When we say that the Word, who is the first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)."
www.ffrf.org/about/bybarker/rise.php
-------------------------
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations...
The gospel of Mark describes the first written Bible gospel. And although Mark appears deceptively after the Matthew gospel, the gospel of Mark got written at least a generation before Matthew. From its own words, we can deduce that the author of Mark had neither heard Jesus nor served as his personal follower. Whoever wrote the gospel, he simply accepted the mythology of Jesus without question and wrote a crude an ungrammatical account of the popular story at the time. Any careful reading of the three Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) will reveal that Mark served as the common element between Matthew and Luke and gave the main source for both of them. Of Mark's 666 verses, some 600 appear in Matthew, some 300 in Luke. According to Randel Helms, the author of Mark, stands at least at a third remove from Jesus and more likely at the fourth remove.
We do have an abundance of evidence supporting the mythical evolution of Jesus. Virtually every detail in the gospel stories occurred in pagan and/or Hebrew stories, long before the advent of Christianity. We simply do not have a shred of evidence to determine the historicity of a Jesus "the Christ." We only have evidence for the belief of Jesus. So if you hear anyone who claims to have evidence for a witness of a historical Jesus, simply ask for the author's birth date. Anyone who's birth occurred after an event cannot serve as an eyewitness, nor can their words alone serve as evidence for that event.
www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Fri, April 8, 2005 - 8:34 AMThe Pope & the Solar connection -
In an eerie coincidence, John Paul II was born on the day of a solar eclipse. Pope John Paul II will be buried today during another solar eclipse. Solar eclipses are not unusual. But what makes today's eclipse notable is the fact that there was a near total eclipse of the sun seen across Europe on May 18, 1920, the very day that John Paul II was born in Poland. Please check out the prophecy of St. Malachy & the 112th prophecy.
The knowledge that the stories in the Bible are actually allegories rooted in Solar Mythology is nothing new. There is evidence that people were well aware of it at the time of the formation of the Catholic Church. There is also evidence that these people were eliminated by the Catholic Church and all books exposing the allegory were burned.
www.aloha.net/~mikesch/sunburst.htm
www.bluehoney.org/SunWorship.htm
www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
Lesson 1 - home1.gte.net/deleyd/reli...yth/day.html -
-
Re: What's So Special About Jesus?
Sat, April 16, 2005 - 11:55 AMThe Book of Revelation is Egyptian and Zoroastrian
One can find certain allegorical place names such as "Jerusalem" and "Israel" in the Book of Revelation. Massey has stated that Revelation, rather than having been written by any apostle called John during the 1st Century C.E., is a very ancient text that dates to the beginning of this era of history, i.e. possibly as early as 4,000 years ago. Massey asserts that Revelation relates the Mithraic legend of Zarathustra/Zoroaster. Hotema says of this mysterious book, which has baffled mankind for centuries: "It is expressed in terms of creative phenomena; its hero is not Jesus but the Sun of the Universe, its heroine is the Moon; and all its other characters are Planets, Stars and Constellations; while its stage-setting comprises the Sky, the Earth, the Rivers and the Sea." The common form of this text has been attributed by Churchward to Horus's scribe, Aan, whose name has been passed down to us as "John."
The word Israel itself, far from being a Jewish appellation, probably comes from the combination of three different reigning deities: Isis, the Earth Mother Goddess revered throughout the ancient world; Ra, the Egyptian sungod; and El, the Semitic deity passed down in form as Saturn. El was one of the earliest names for the god of the ancient Hebrews (whence Emmanu-El, Micha-El, Gabri-El, Samu-El, etc.), and his worship is reflected in the fact that the Jews still consider Saturday as "God's Day."
Indeed, that the Christians worship on Sunday betrays the genuine origins of their god and godman. Their "savior" is actually the sun, which is the "Light of the world that every eye can see." The sun has been viewed consistently throughout history as the savior of mankind for reasons that are obvious. Without the sun, the planet would scarcely last one day. So important was the sun to the ancients that they composed a "Sun Book," or "Helio Biblia," which became the "Holy Bible."
www.truthbeknown.com/origins.htm
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
