Conquer Club

Sound off.

aye says me

Ok, a thread, what the hell is it about?

wait for jay to come to tell us we're all sinners and going to hell...

though i absolutely recognize its personal importance to some people. i feel its a perfect outlet for some people. i also thing weve had this thread but it was called "continuation of the christianity debate" and the same thing will happen. no one will agree, everyone will accuse the other side of not being flexible and NOTHING HAPPENS, not even spiritually, emotionally or rationally for ourselves.

Boing.

s.xkitten wrote:wait for jay to come to tell us we're all sinners and going to hell...

yes, you are all sinners and will go to hell.

Which one? There are so many myths regarding Jesus.

That he existed? We'll never know, any records of that time which have not been recovered are most likely lost to antiquity. I do believe that a possibility exists that a man named Jesus did exist at one time, since so many various stories talk about him. However, all of these stories are in one source: The canonical and gnostic gospels. We don't have any other source material to draw from, so my judgment is mostly reserved.

Is he the son of God? Probably not.
Was he wise? Most definitely.
Did he perform miracles? Well, I saw Criss Angel walk on water and Penn & Teller did a neat water-to-wine illusion. I think he was an illusionist.

Does it matter? Probably not.
Regardless of Jesus' divinity and whether or not he's linked to a god, the man (as related through stories) was pretty profound. He was a realistic pacifist who saw a use for combat in some situations (hence his call to both "turn the other cheek" and to "beat ploughshares into swords").

I don't believe that Jesus was God or the son of God. If he claimed to be such then we should treat it like we'd treat any other "messiah" who comes around.

This is the paradox of the Messiah:
A man comes to you, he says that he is the son of God and that he has returned as prophecied.

Now, how do you react?

Given that this would probably happen on a street corner and there was no great battle raging around, you'd call him crazy and walk away. Even if this person really was the Messiah, you'd most likely dismiss him as a nut.

He can't prove that he's the Messiah, because you're supposed to have faith. However, in this jaded and bitter world, would anyone believe a guy who claimed to be the second coming? Even if he was?

Jesus Christ is mentioned by the Jewish historian Josepheus in one of his texts, and in a letter from Pliny the Younger to the Roman emperor of the time.

Hitman079 wrote:Jesus Christ is mentioned by the Jewish historian Josepheus in one of his texts, and in a letter from Pliny the Younger to the Roman emperor of the time.

Ok, so we have some historical proof of a guy named Jesus, that takes care of a bit of the issue.

BTW, you think you could link me to a source, preferrably one that doesn't cost money.

The Josephus reference is pretty heavily disputed, but I'm be reasonably convinced there was some kind of faith leader around whose cult got blown out of all proportion compared to his contemporaries. Miricles get added later, as does Holy Books etc.

Guiscard wrote:The Josephus reference is pretty heavily disputed, but I'm be reasonably convinced there was some kind of faith leader around whose cult got blown out of all proportion compared to his contemporaries. Miricles get added later, as does Holy Books etc.

Absolutely. I have no doubt that Jesus existed, but his divinity certainly came later...

So: Jesus goes around preaching revolutionary ideas to the Jews, who were all suffering under the yoke of Rome. Could this guy be the messiah everyone has been waiting for? Jesus rides into jerusalem, as prophesied... and ends up being executed like a common criminal.
This last fact is the clincher. The jews were (and still are) expecting a warrior messiah, a figure who will set them free. Jesus wasn't a warrior, and a criminal's death is no way for a messiah to go. So the myths and the miracles spring up around his memory, the crucifixion itself is explained in terms of universal atonement and all this is written down for the first time 40 years after his death. Word of mouth for 30 years... that's a long time, especially back then. One big game of chinese whispers.

it's a powerful myth, that's for sure.

My personal opinion?

I think thre was a dude called jesus who was particularly clever for his time period. He healed people or invented something or something and sotries developed from this.

Jesus built my hotrod.

Genghis Khant wrote:Jesus built my hotrod.

Suddenly I found myself in love with the world...
So there was only one thing left to do:
Was ding a ding dang my dangalonglinglong

Oh, you mean Chuy?

Hitman079 wrote:Jesus Christ is mentioned by the Jewish historian Josepheus in one of his texts, and in a letter from Pliny the Younger to the Roman emperor of the time.

Are you for serial?

Josephus lived as the earliest non-Christian who mentions a Jesus. The majority of knowledgeable scholars who have studied Josephus' life work think that Josephus' short accounts of Jesus came from interpolations perpetrated by a later Church father (Eusebius is thought to be the main culprit of this), as they do not match up with the style of writing Josephus used and are often grammatically incorrect, when compared with the rest of this works.

Furthermore, we may take into account that Josephus' birth is in 37 C.E., well after the alleged crucifixion of Jesus, which puts him out of range of an eyewitness account. Moreover, he wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E., nearly 20 years after the first gospels were written. Therefore, even if his accounts about Jesus came from his hand, his information could only serve as hearsay, which is not a valid method of recording objective history.

Pliny the Younger, on the other hand, was born in 62 C.E. His letter about the Christians only shows that he got his information from Christian believers themselves. Irrespective, his birth date puts him out of the range of eyewitness accounts, for which we still lack.


Frankly, I think Jesus is a myth, no more valid then Mithras or Horus.

s.xkitten wrote:wait for jay to come to tell us we're all sinners and going to hell...

Thats not my call. Thats each person's individual choice. Jesus asked Peter "Who do they say I am?" Peter responded, "A teacher and a Prophet". Then Jesus asked Peter, "Who do you say that I am." Peter replied, "You are the Son of God, the Messiah".

The question remains.... are you like "them" or Peter.

i am ready to prove almost all religions are bull

PE24 wrote:i am ready to prove almost all religions are bull

Good luck.

PE24 wrote:i am ready to prove almost all religions are bull

Almost all? Which ones get spared the axe?

Dariune wrote:My personal opinion?

I think thre was a dude called jesus who was particularly clever for his time period. He healed people or invented something or something and stories developed from this.

this is wut i believe too, but i still dont doubt that he is what the Bible says he is

jay_a2j wrote:

s.xkitten wrote:wait for jay to come to tell us we're all sinners and going to hell...

Thats not my call. Thats each person's individual choice. Jesus asked Peter "Who do they say I am?" Peter responded, "A teacher and a Prophet". Then Jesus asked Peter, "Who do you say that I am." Peter replied, "You are the Son of God, the Messiah".

The question remains.... are you like "them" or Peter.

umm...them...but just a teacher and a healer, not a prophet...

Pliny the Younger was talking about the problem of Christianity, and know where it came from. He was not talking DIRECTLY about Jesus. As for Josepheus, I don't know.

I think he could qualify as a prophet, he was wise and people followed him around. And if the Biblical accounts are accurate, he was just vague enough to convince later peoples that he could see the future.