TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Important Information
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic see..i am not well aware of all the history books

Ya, I had that feeling.

quote:

so i cant comment much..but just to let u know i learned about jesus in a history class when i was younger..does that count? or are they r just teaching us the bible in a MUSLEM country(went to school in egypt where i am originally from)..he was mentioned in there..i know muslems dont doubt his existance since he is mentioned in Quraan..

Well, I think you've just answered your own question. Aside from bible, Jesus is also mentioned in the Quran, so it's not that suprising that he's taught about in history classes. Besides, it's not 100% certain that he didn't exist, as well as it is certain that christianity had a huge impact on history. So, I would say there's a reason for being taught about Jesus, whether he existed or not. The same as I learned in history class the myth about Romulus and Remus being raised in a wolf pack.

quote:

he is established as one of god's profits along with Moses..

Yup, god really made a lot of money with those two

quote:

does that also count or no? and i think but i am not sure Jews believe that he existed..so i pretty much covered the major religions and how he is learned in history classes overseas..any comments questions?

Well, not that long ago everyone believed the earth was flat, although there was plenty of evidence showing the other way. There are no mentions of Jesus from the time he lived, the first ones appear many years later which makes it possible for the whole theory to be false.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Ya, I had that feeling. Well, I think you've just answered your own question. Aside from bible, Jesus is also mentioned in the Quran, so it's not that suprising that he's taught about in history classes. Besides, it's not 100% certain that he didn't exist, as well as it is certain that christianity had a huge impact on history. So, I would say there's a reason for being taught about Jesus, whether he existed or not. The same as I learned in history class the myth about Romulus and Remus being raised in a wolf pack. Yup, god really made a lot of money with those two :P Well, not that long ago everyone believed the earth was flat, although there was plenty of evidence showing the other way. There are no mentions of Jesus from the time he lived, the first ones appear many years later which makes it possible for the whole theory to be false.

iabout no refrence about him..i bet there is refrence to chritianity and the profits and all that stuff..the history books were full of christian movements,the crusaders,the romans..etc..and at that time if u r not a christian why would u write about jesus, to u he is of no signifence just a guy talkin alot and got killed..why would u write about him..his followers werent that many at the time to make a strong movement, so to u he is just another person..jesus's effect came later on when believers increased,the only ones who would be intrested to write about him are his followers hence the bible..other than that what was his significance of the time to others..i dont think at the time of his death people outside israel know he who was..he was only known to hie belivers at the time and they wrote about him in the bible..other than that why should anyone care..

it should also be added that the ones who wrote the four gospels were historians and one of them, John, was one of Jesus' friends and followers. I'm guessing that they were historical records before they became religious ones, which wouldn't differentiate them from any other historical records. just a thought.

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic iabout no refrence about him..i bet there is refrence to chritianity and the profits and all that stuff..the history books were full of christian movements,the crusaders,the romans..etc..and at that time if u r not a christian why would u write about jesus, to u he is of no signifence just a guy talkin alot and got killed..why would u write about him..his followers werent that many at the time to make a strong movement, so to u he is just another person..jesus's effect came later on when believers increased,the only ones who would be intrested to write about him are his followers hence the bible..other than that what was his significance of the time to others..i dont think at the time of his death people outside israel know he who was..he was only known to hie belivers at the time and they wrote about him in the bible..other than that why should anyone care..

Ugh, I addressed this in my first post, which some people have conveniently ignored. There are reasons why he should have been included in the historical records of the time, the ones that I find most compelling are (again), outlined in my first post. If you take the bible as fact, then he should have been mentioned, as should some of the other divine events of the time that the bible claims occurred.

quote:

Originally posted by Palestinian it should also be added that the ones who wrote the four gospels were historians and one of them, John, was one of Jesus' friends and followers. I'm guessing that they were historical records before they became religious ones, which wouldn't differentiate them from any other historical records. just a thought.

If they were career historians, then they must have been pretty damn hopeless at it.

How can you seriously consider the bible a historical reference? It contains so many absurdities, contradictions, ethically questionably commands, and downright lies that I think it's credibility as a historical, or even a 'true' document is virtually non existent. Either way, Jebus should be mentioned in records from the time of his alleged existence. mentioned by people who actually lived when he was supposedly alive.

Either way, I addressed that in my first post, which you have chosen to ignore as well.

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic iabout no refrence about him..i bet there is refrence to chritianity and the profits and all that stuff..the history books were full of christian movements,the crusaders,the romans..etc..and at that time if u r not a christian why would u write about jesus, to u he is of no signifence just a guy talkin alot and got killed..why would u write about him..his followers werent that many at the time to make a strong movement, so to u he is just another person..jesus's effect came later on when believers increased,the only ones who would be intrested to write about him are his followers hence the bible..other than that what was his significance of the time to others..i dont think at the time of his death people outside israel know he who was..he was only known to hie belivers at the time and they wrote about him in the bible..other than that why should anyone care..

Well of course there are references to the crusades, christian movements, the romans, etc... Those were very signifigant movements at the time and were "history in the making" if you want to call it that. If a bunch of rowdies decided to kill those that did practice the same religion or look like them, you would probably write about it to, especially becasue of the length of the actual crusades, yes both of them. They weren't fighting for jesus, they were fighting for the land and the richness of the land that they conquered, hence the endless quarels amongst the troops after a city had fallen, or land.

Feel free to post the references you refered to, I would like to read them, or did you just make up these "references" off the top of your head.

The point is that the bible wasn't written until 68, I believe it is, years after his death. Think how many stories could get skewed (messed up) in that amount of time. Plus, without jesus, or some kind of savior, then christianity wouldn't be what it is today. Therefore they had to write about it, but again, after many years of nothing.

And you still haven't proved any valid arguements to why the bible is a signifigant historical record. I would like you to address, present (with sources) and arguement just based on that, then go back to artic's first post and refut his statements. This is getting bland.

quote:

Originally posted by priveye03 The point is that the bible wasn't written until 68, I believe it is, years after his death. Think how many stories could get skewed (messed up) in that amount of time. Plus, without jesus, or some kind of savior, then christianity wouldn't be what it is today. Therefore they had to write about it, but again, after many years of nothing.

Another thing that I think should be considered here is the possibility that Jesus was merely invented to 'spice up' Christianity. Without Jesus, Christianity starts to look a lot like another branch of Judaism. I think it's entirely possible that the Church (OR Christian leaders at the time) thought they would gain more converts if they inserted 'the son of god' into the script, so to speak.

Without Jebus, what has Christianity got going that Judaism doesn't?

If it wasn't Jesus then it would have most surely been someone else, like Bob the guy that took a big bath and washed us of all our sins. Or Tombo that slaughtered Pigeons for our sins.

quote:

Originally posted by priveye03 Well of course there are references to the crusades, christian movements, the romans, etc... Those were very signifigant movements at the time and were "history in the making" if you want to call it that. If a bunch of rowdies decided to kill those that did practice the same religion or look like them, you would probably write about it to, especially becasue of the length of the actual crusades, yes both of them. They weren't fighting for jesus, they were fighting for the land and the richness of the land that they conquered, hence the endless quarels amongst the troops after a city had fallen, or land. Feel free to post the references you refered to, I would like to read them, or did you just make up these "references" off the top of your head. The point is that the bible wasn't written until 68, I believe it is, years after his death. Think how many stories could get skewed (messed up) in that amount of time. Plus, without jesus, or some kind of savior, then christianity wouldn't be what it is today. Therefore they had to write about it, but again, after many years of nothing. And you still haven't proved any valid arguements to why the bible is a signifigant historical record. I would like you to address, present (with sources) and arguement just based on that, then go back to artic's first post and refut his statements. This is getting bland.

well i have been all through this read from the beggining..i never used the bible as a historical refrence..palistinian did..i do agree that thr bible is full of contradictions..and i also mentioned that i am not a history buff..i just refered to why I think there is no mention of him, how i read it in history books at school but thats in egypt,how other religion believe in his existance and a bunch of stuff..are we gonna keep goin around in circles or what...i suggest u rea who posted what and start from the beginning

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Another thing that I think should be considered here is the possibility that Jesus was merely invented to 'spice up' Christianity. Without Jesus, Christianity starts to look a lot like another branch of Judaism. I think it's entirely possible that the Church (OR Christian leaders at the time) thought they would gain more converts if they inserted 'the son of god' into the script, so to speak. Without Jebus, what has Christianity got going that Judaism doesn't?

can u tell me then who exactly started christianity..and how he/they spread it..u seem to know alot then plz inform me about the history of christianity from ur view..how do u think it all started and spread..

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic can u tell me then who exactly started christianity..and how he/they spread it..u seem to know alot then plz inform me about the history of christianity from ur view..how do u think it all started and spread..

Well, I know you directed the question to arctic, but I'll add my opinion too if you don't mind.

Before christianity, there was a similar movement in Egypt, the Cult of Osiris. Its teachings were quite different from the teachings in Torah, infact they were very similar to the teachings of the new testament. Osiris was a solar god that was killed and resurrected, and after his resurrection he opened up the doors to heavenly afterlife to all the mortals. He was the god of sun and light, the two themes often mentioned in the new testament. The idea about the cult of Osiris spread into jew populated territories and sprawned an essene cult. But the doctrines of the cult were partially misinterpreted and mixed up with the teachings in the old testament so the cult ended up as the jewish version of Cult of Osiris. The more ortodox jews, pharizees, expected a messiah that would be a human descendant of king David. The essens, however, modified that belief and assigned their messiah godly attributes, or to be more specific, the attributes of Osiris. Now, the political happenings during that time were really complicated, so it would take me hours of research and a few pages of text to describe them. Instead I'll redirect you to the site I've mentioned in another thread that covers the development of early christianity and it's relation to the cult of Osiris:http://www.geocities.com/pagancx/cover_page_osiris.htm.

will read later but u do know that ISIS and OSIRIS and Horus are myths..they r not a true story..it is a story that doesnt have any effect on US EGYPTIANS and never did...just brings us alot of money from tourism..and a stroy we love to tell forigners about and show them some statues in abu simble temple..so u mean to tell me christianity is based on OSIRIS hahahaha if us egyptians knew that we would have used it to make more money off tourism

this story is more far fetched than the story of jesus wouldnt u say?

No shit, I thought they were real! Well, that's it then, I'll go and dismantle taht Osiris altar I've built in my backyard. Too bad, I've just bought a sheep to sacrifice it. Oh well, I guess I now at least have some meat for the barbecue...

u will be surprised how many people believe those stories..

quote:

Originally posted by rizen I hope the film answers my question about Jesus and the last supper... was is it kosher!?!

Affirmative!

A handfull of us here are well aware of the contradictions that line both the books of the Christians and the Muslims, I'd like to know if any of you believe there are contradictions in the Torah with some sort of supporting arguements/sources.

Where is Occrider???????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by dj_ilan_yosef A handfull of us here are well aware of the contradictions that line both the books of the Christians and the Muslims, I'd like to know if any of you believe there are contradictions in the Torah with some sort of supporting arguements/sources. Where is Occrider???????????????????

Well, since the Torah is just the old testament of the christian bible, the same could be applied to it. Go to www.skepticsannotatedbible.com and there you'll find all the contradictions.

quick question? is the Torah same as the old testiment? who exactly wrote it? was it moses? and if the old testement similar Torah isnt it subject to the same crticism as the bible? also do jews doubt the existance of jesus?

edit looks like me n Tit0 posted at the same time

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic u will be surprised how many people believe those stories..

You mean the Stargate movie and tvseries are all fiction

quote:

Originally posted by tranceaholic can u tell me then who exactly started christianity..and how he/they spread it..u seem to know alot then plz inform me about the history of christianity from ur view..how do u think it all started and spread..

To be honest I don't know, quite frankly I don't think anyone knows. Unless someone can present evidence of the existence of a historical Jebus to me, then I don't think it really matters. Probably someone/people who wanted control over people. I hold the view that religion is mind control, but that's another topic altogether. Alternativley, it could have been someone who wanted money, a lot of religions have no qualms about taking money to 'further their doctrine', who knows if the people or person who started Christianity did so with cash in mind. On the other hand, it could have been a complete whacko, and when one critically examines the beliefs of the major mono (and poly) theistic religions, it's hard not to come to that conclusion.

As for how it spread, ignorance. Before modern science was around, how else would one explain all the amazing things that are found on the earth. It would have seemed entirely plausible to credit anything you couldn't explain or understand to a greater power or supreme deity. One could ask exactly the same question about Islam, Hinduism or Judaism.

I could be wrong about this but if I remember corretly the first five books of the Old Testament which are the five books that Moses wrote are the Torah. The distinction between the Old Testament and the Torah starts after the first five books. The Old Testament includes more than five which are not part of the Torah.

And Illan, I believe most (not all) of the contradictions that people speak of in the Bible are in the first five books of the Old Testament which means the Torah, sorry to break it to ya. It's just like Tit0 said.

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Well, since the Torah is just the old testament of the christian bible, the same could be applied to it. Go to www.skepticsannotatedbible.com and there you'll find all the contradictions.

quote:

Atheist have put up a web site, called Skeptics Annotated bible They pose several contradictions and things that are against logic. Most of these so called contradictions are from a lack of reading on the Atheist part, however there are a few complex things mentioned. I answer all this contradictions with the Torah, to show the Torah is Perfect. This is only answering Contradictions of Torah vs Torah, and the difficult questions concerning Torah. I try my hardest not to address any of the contradiction of Torah vs NT, or Torah vs prophets, etc. You will be amazed at some of the very simple answers given in this book. This book makes the skeptics annotated bible look like it was written by children. You will not find these answers in your Christian commentaries. Just start to read to find out.

http://home.earthlink.net/~eeshgeeb...tradictions.htm

quote:

Originally posted by dj_ilan_yosef http://home.earthlink.net/~eeshgeeb...tradictions.htm

Well, I must say that the additional explanation of the story of creation was reallly hilarious. Now, I do agree that some arguments in the SAB are nitpicking, but some of the counterarguments here are really totally weak, like these few examples. However, some of the key points are conviniently ignored or modified, as the author obviously didn't find an answer to them.

quote:

Science problem The Genesis 1 account also conflicts with the order of events that are known to science. In this account the earth is created before light and stars, birds and whales before reptiles and insects, and flowering plants before any animals. From science, we know the true order of events was just the opposite. If you had read Genesis study for chapter 1 and 2, you know this is not true. The earth existed in another galaxy and was moved to this galaxy which already existed. So the earth is not said to be older or younger then all the stars. For some stars might be older, and some younger, for stars are even being formed as you read this. And light before stars is a fact of science. As I pointed out birds and whales are in the same day as anything with wings. The very next day animals without wings are created. Science is always changing, so how do they know what is taught now, will be taught years from now? The fact is they do not. So God can easily cause the earth to revive very quickly. If you still have not read the Genesis study 1 and 2, then DO NOT keep reading. Stop right now, do not read any more until you go read those you lazy person. Hehe.

Yes, very good explanation. So the earth was formed in another galaxy...riiiight...

quote:

Gen.1:29 "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." Dt.14:7-8 "Nevertheless, these shall ye not eat, of them that chew the cud or of them that divide the cloven hoof; as the camel and the hare, and the coney; for they chew the cud, but divide not the hoof; therefore, they are unclean unto you. And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass." Gen.9:3 "Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you." In time the rules God had for man changed. Before the flood they were vegetarians, after the flood they were able to eat meat. But to miss quote the scripture and say they could eat anything they want is not right. It is clear Noah understood what was clean and not clean for sacrifices, for God tells him take clean and unclean. But this does not mean at this time they could not eat certain animals, matter of fact Rabbis teach at that time they could eat pig, it was not until God gave a perfect Torah to Moshe, did God expect man to follow the food laws as given to Moshe. So from Awdom to Moshe, the rules went through lots of evolution. This is clearly not a contradiction. That is like saying if USA makes a law in 1967 saying it is illegal to be a homo, but in 1999 USA makes a law and says it is okay to be a homo. That the USA contradicted them selves. No they change with time, so God changed the rules with time.

Oh, well, this pretty much admits there's a contradiction and tries to dodge it.

quote:

Against Logic 6:4 "There were giants in the earth in those days." And they (or the sons of God) had sex with "the daughters of men." Well, I suppose it's good to know that. But why is there no archaeological evidence for the existence of these giants? I guess someone claims to have found giants bones, but I have seen no real proof of this. Men that were about 16 feet tall or so. Because no one has found any of these giants does not mean they did not exist. We do however see the degenerate gene still around, the tallest man in the records is 9 feet something.

Riight...the giant genes are among us!

quote:

12:13 Abram makes his wife lie for him, by telling the Egyptians that she is his sister. But at least it was half-true, since she was his half-sister. Such incestuous marriages are condemned elsewhere in the Bible, but god makes an exception for Abram and Sarai. (See Gen.17:15-16 where God blesses their marriage.) Torah calls half sisters, sisters. Gen 20:12 And yet indeed she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother; and she became my wife. As far as the commandment of not being with your sister, that is not until Moshe brings the Torah down from the Eternal, which was more pure and perfect ways of life. At the time of Avraham it was not wrong.

So again god changes his perfect stance into a more perfect one.

quote:

15:16 "In the fourth generation they [Abraham's descendants] shall come hither again." But, if we count Abraham, then their return occurred after seven generations: Abraham, Issac (Gen.21:1-3), Jacob (Gen.25:19-26), Levi (Gen.35:22-23), Kohath (Ex.6:16), Amramn (Ex.6:18), and Moses (Ex.6:20). Generation is not used often to mean how many sons between so and so. Like these are the generations of the heaven and earth. But a generation was a good 100 years at this time. It is saying what it said earlier, that around 400 years later they would come back to the land.

Interesting definition of the word generation.

quote:

Gen.22:14 And Abraham called the name of that place Jehovahjireh: as it is said to this day, In the mount of the LORD it shall be seen. Ex.6:3 And I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, but by my name JEHOVAH was I not known to them. Avraham knew the name, but did not KNOW the name, meaning the understanding of the name. Say out loud Michael, do you understand what you just said? In Hebrew you said, who is like God.

Really? He knew the name, but he didn't know it?

quote:

1:5,7 The Israelite population went from 70 (or 75) to several million (Ex.12:37, 38:26) in a few hundred years. There were 600,000 men, so there had to be about 700,000 woman, and about that many children, this does not make several million. That is shy of 2 million, several million would be at least 3. It is not against logic that this kind of population could amount from so little, if they had more then one wife, and several kids, some men had hundreds of kids.

Hehe, this game of words is really funny. 2 is not several million. Besides, the author makes a faulty assumption that a family has 1 single child and then in the next sentence he mentions that some families have hundreds of kids.

quote:

Originally posted by arctic To be honest I don't know, quite frankly I don't think anyone knows. Unless someone can present evidence of the existence of a historical Jebus to me, then I don't think it really matters. Probably someone/people who wanted control over people. I hold the view that religion is mind control, but that's another topic altogether. Alternativley, it could have been someone who wanted money, a lot of religions have no qualms about taking money to 'further their doctrine', who knows if the people or person who started Christianity did so with cash in mind. On the other hand, it could have been a complete whacko, and when one critically examines the beliefs of the major mono (and poly) theistic religions, it's hard not to come to that conclusion. As for how it spread, ignorance. Before modern science was around, how else would one explain all the amazing things that are found on the earth. It would have seemed entirely plausible to credit anything you couldn't explain or understand to a greater power or supreme deity. One could ask exactly the same question about Islam, Hinduism or Judaism.

The planets were aligned the day that Jesus was born, called the star of bethleham that is proven by astronomical charts which dated jesus's birthday 6 years before the gregorian calendar.

quote:

Originally posted by albertoR The planets were aligned the day that Jesus was born, called the star of bethleham that is proven by astronomical charts which dated jesus's birthday 6 years before the gregorian calendar.

Oh so an allignment of planets which happened near the time of Jesus's supposed birth is evidence enough to confirm his existance?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.