So what. Paul didn’t met Jesus, and didn’t write anything about him until long after his supposed death. He can’t be a contemporary source. He could be a secondary source, if you could find a primary source to pair him with.
And your point is? Christus doesn’t mean Jesus. It’s a Jewish Cult that was slaughtered. I think you fucked up on that part. 
1 Like
All are commands to love this god. Those commands could just as easily come from a cruel and insecure psychopath. Sounds like something that could have come from Kim Jong-un the murderous North Korean dictator. There is absolutely no display of love coming from this god, just orders to love it.
[53] Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. [54] Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
That is blood sacrifice. Once again, no display of love coming from a god, just orders and the enticement of an eternal life if one participates in a blood sacrifice.
@Tia_Thompson I will not be diverted, nor will I respond to any other interaction with you until I get proof of …
Which commandment is a manifestation of god’s love?
2 Likes
Paul met Peter and James, Jesus’ brother. Josephus attest to the death of James.
Paul was a primary source of Peter and James. Peter and James were contemporary with Jesus.
Great, but that still leaves you with 0 primary (and therefore 0 secondary) sources for Jesus. Just what I told you originally.
2 Likes
@Nyarlathotep Lycurgus was a ruler of Sparta. I found him quite by accident one day enjoying perusing classical sources.
We don’t have to use him if you are unfamiliar. People often deified rulers. He wasn’t a god.
You are so close… 
2 Likes
@Tia_Thompson
If you’re interested I could spam you with academic sources on the subject saying there are no primary sources for Jesus. But that would require some effort on my part. Is that something you’d be interested in? I don’t want to waste my time if you’re just going to ignore them.
2 Likes
Yes. I am.
2 Likes
@David_Killens The endowment of imperfect beings with freedom unfortunately entails inevitable tragedy.
That would be evolution #justsaying
Agreed.
In my view, @Tia_Thompson has one manacle of religion thrown off, one still yet stubbornly fastened.
3 Likes
(Hey there, Tia. I realize you have been flooded, and that you could have possibly missed this. Therefore, I would hate for you to not have a chance to respond to it. I’m really curious as to what your excu-… uh, what your response will be.)
Divinely kind, even to sinners, huh? But I suppose innocent infant children are shit out of luck. Because the god of which you speak is SO “divinely kind” that it will inflict an infant child with a severe illness, and then sit back and watch it suffer horribly for a full week before it dies. And your god did that as a punishment to the parents of the child who had done something to offend your god.
So, since most Christians always talk about being “more godly”, here is something you can do to be more “divinely kind” like your god. The next time one of your children disobeys you, take their favorite pet and put it in a cage. Then, begin giving small amounts of poison to the pet, so that it gets sicker and sicker each day, until it finally dies a slow horrible death on the seventh day. Oh, and your child must be made to watch this happen, and there is nothing he/she can do to save the pet. And no matter how much they beg and plead for you to stop, you will totally ignore them and allow the pet to suffer and die. THERE is the “divine kindness” your god shows.
3 Likes
So you made your choice. You chose your god over your daughter. You choose to rationalize the decisions of a cruel god over your love for your daughter.
This is one of the major evils of religion, it takes what are essentially decent people and corrupts them to a perverse morality and do heinous acts, all in the name of their god.
@Tia_Thompson I actually thought you had a good moral compass. From our previous conversations I was under the impression that your moral compass would indicate doing the right thing. But your words condemn you.
I am disheartened, I am saddened.
5 Likes
And those “three writers” were who? Writing when? And Peter was first bishop of what? The christian temple in Rome? Of which sect? There were numerous sects and texts circulating throughout the late firsts to 6th centuries. Many traditions. Some writers like Eusebius never met or attested to Peter, he pre supposed, like the Jesus figure, that Peter existed and then wrote stories about him. It is and was a Gnostic tradition.
There is no reliable contemporary evidence for “Peter”, James (Brother of or “in” Jesus?) In fact the closest you are going to get to a disciple is Thomas “Didimus” and his legends of founding the Thomasian Church in Kerala in the late 1st Century. Their Bible did not contain Paul and had the a couple of other books and gospels in their more original form. Of course, declared heretical by the Portuguese in 1549 and as many texts and traditions destroyed as they could reach.
In short the “jesus of the Gospels” and his entourage are not historically evidenced by any contemporary documentation or archeological sundries at all. You are living in a fools world of wish fulfilment.
The Historical Method:
Depending on the degree of importance of knowing the truth of something we make sure we are being told the truth by checking such things as:
- who is telling us this?
- how do I know if I can trust them?
- can their claims be confirmed somehow?
- how do I know if this document is genuine?
Using this method you will find that the historicity of your favourite magic jesus legend is left empty.
That a very human jesus figure lived in the first thirf of the 1st century is possible, that it is the figure as described in the gospels is improbable.
3 Likes
There has to be a way to retain the vocabulary learned. My experience is that when it is not used on a regular basis it slips away. Then there is the whole problem of different kinds of memory. There are words you know when you hear them but never use. There are words you can recall and use commonly in speaking but almost never use in writing. Then there are words you use in writing but never use when speaking. Antipodally, there are a plethora of words that under no circumstances befall upon our waking consciousness, and yet upon regarding their printed systematization we ‘tout de suite’ call to mind the context and connotation of their essence.
4 Likes
“DIVINELY ORDAINED PLAN”… Meaning: Everything that will ever happen has been PRE-DETERMINED. Anything and everything anybody will ever do has already been planned waaaaay in advance, and there is nothing that can be done to change it. Everything you have ever done, ever thought, ever said, and everything you will ever do, think, and say has ALREADY BEEN PLANNED. You cannot change it. Is that sinking in yet?
1 Like
Raphael Lataster; atheist; PhD in Studies in Religion from U of Sydney
Before critiquing the sources, it is worth identifying what scholars do not have access to. There are no primary sources (contemporary and eyewitness sources) for the life of the historical Jesus. Primary sources are vital to historians, not only as they provide direct evidence, but also serve as the benchmark by which secondary sources are measured. Unfortunately, biblical scholars do not have access to primary sources, arguably rendering all of their conclusions about the historical Jesus as susceptible to doubt. That there are no primary sources for Jesus is generally accepted by ardent historicists.
R. Joseph Hoffmann; humanist; PhD in Christian Origins from Oxford
Historically, then, the reality of Jesus cannot be indubitable because his existence does not meet the high standard of proof we set for other historical figures.
Benjamin Rush Rhees; Baptist Minster; Hartford Theological Seminary graduate; president of the University of Rochester for 35 years.
Our knowledge of the founder of Christianity rests almost wholly upon writings by his own disciples. Strictly contemporary records there are none; and the references in secular and Jewish history are late and meager
Mark Damen; [unknown if they believe]; PhD ancient history from UT Austin;
With all this, savvy historians tend to steer a wide course around Jesus himself. Particularly given the yawning vacuum of external sources for primordial Christianity, scholars cannot speak—certainly not with any sense of comfort—about the original stimulus producing this religion. That is, no contemporary Jewish or Roman account constitutes primary, external evidence of the actual events of Jesus’ life…So if the New Testament does not transmit Christ’s words literally—which is not the same thing as saying it’s not the “Word of God”—the situation encompasses a hopeless conundrum for those intent on deciphering what-really-happened-in-the-past. On the other hand, believers and theologians who have freedom to traffic in mysteries or miracles may find easy and ready solutions to this problem—or difficult ones, but solutions all the same—by calling on resources historians do not find on their menu of executable options. So, without external sources to contradict, corroborate or give dimension to the testimony of its authors, the gospels of the New Testament do not admit history as such, which exempts the life of Christ itself from the direct scrutiny of historical investigation.
The first four historical books of the New Testament are supplied with titles (Euangelion kata Matthaion, Euangelion kata Markon, etc.), which, however ancient, do not go back to the respective authors of those sacred writings…Hence, it may be inferred that they were prefixed to the evangelical narratives as early as the first part of that same century. That, however, they do not go back to the first century of the Christian era, or at least that they are not original, is a position generally held at the present day.
Now of course you can find all kinds of people casually stating that there is contemporary sources for Jesus. The problem is 5 seconds of research always reveals the source they tell me was written LONG after the death of Jesus (just like you did). So if you want to retort with a bunch of quotes from believers about contemporary sources for Jesus, don’t bother. Just tell me the name (or whatever) of the contemporary source.
2 Likes