Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
seeder

5 massive lies the Bible tells re Jesus

332 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

simplybill

everyone,,,

just watch ten mins, the first ten mins.... just DO it.... stick with it for JUST 10 mins

:lol:

I live in a remote rural area with dial-up-speed wifi. I might be able to watch that film if I try at 2:00 AM, after all the other wifi users are in bed. But then, I'll be in bed too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck

The point was made, I think you understood just fine.

You quoted the conclusion to the indictment of the Kingdom of Britain.

If you are co-opting those words and applying them to the the god of the OT - then I guess I can understand you are incapable of constructing your own prose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill

This sounds so generalization like. If you believe that, then is there proof, in how you believe that.

I'm not sure how to answer that.

Remember my earlier post about me being a truckdriver? Now all of a sudden I'm getting Truckdriving ads on Facebook. Time for the tinfoil hat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

I live in a remote rural area with dial-up-speed wifi. I might be able to watch that film if I try at 2:00 AM, after all the other wifi users are in bed. But then, I'll be in bed too.

Ok heres a transcript of the opening ten mins

These attributes of Horus, whether original or not, seem to permeate in many cultures of the world, for many other gods are found to have the same general mythological structure.

Attis, of Phyrigia, born of the virgin Nana on December 25th, crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days, was resurrected. [s38] [s39] [s40] [s41] [s42] [s43] [M] [D]

Krishna, of India, born of the virgin Devaki with a star in the east signaling his coming, performed miracles with his disciples, and upon his death was resurrected. [s44] [s45] [s46] [s47] [s48] [M] [M2] [D]

Dionysus of Greece, born of a virgin on December 25th, was a traveling teacher who performed miracles such as turning water into wine, he was referred to as the "King of Kings," "God's Only Begotten Son," "The Alpha and Omega," and many others, and upon his death, he was resurrected. [s49] [s50] [s51] [s52] [s53] [M]

Mithra, of Persia, born of a virgin on December 25th, he had 12 disciples and performed miracles, and upon his death was buried for 3 days and thus resurrected, he was also referred to as "The Truth," "The Light," and many others. Interestingly, the sacred day of worship of Mithra was Sunday. [s54] [s55] [s56] [s57] [s58] [M]

The fact of the matter is there are numerous saviors, from different periods, from all over the world, which subscribe to these general characteristics. The question remains: why these attributes, why the virgin birth on December 25th, why dead for three days and the inevitable resurrection, why 12 disciples or followers? [M] To find out, let's examine the most recent of the solar messiahs.

Jesus Christ was born of the virgin Mary on December 25th [D] in Bethlehem, his birth was announced by a star in the east, which three kings or magi followed to locate and adorn the new savior.[D] He was a child teacher at 12, at the age of 30 he was baptized by John the Baptist, and thus began his ministry. Jesus had 12 disciples which he traveled about with performing miracles such as healing the sick, walking on water, raising the dead, he was also known as the "King of Kings," the "Son of God," the "Light of the World," the "Alpha and Omega," the "Lamb of God," and many others. After being betrayed by his disciple Judas and sold for 30 pieces of silver, he was crucified, placed in a tomb and after 3 days was resurrected and ascended into Heaven.[s59]

continue reading

https://en.wikiversi...ovie/Transcript

the reason I added a smiley under the vid is ...coz Im smiling.. and Im not saying any of it is true...or that I cant find my own research sources to the claims made...

Edited by seeder
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf

You quoted the conclusion to the indictment of the Kingdom of Britain.

If you are co-opting those words and applying them to the the god of the OT - then I guess I can understand you are incapable of constructing your own prose.

Red-Herring1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill

Ok heres a transcript of the opening ten mins

the reason I added a smiley under the vid is ...coz Im smiling.. and Im not saying any of it is true...or that I cant find my own research sources to the claims made...

Interesting research, but I have to ask: Of all the people and gods mentioned in the article, how many have influenced the world as greatly as Jesus Christ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck

Red-Herring1.jpg

Ahhh... the indictment against Britain was a red herring.

Thanks for clearing that up. :tu:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
seeder

Interesting research, but I have to ask: Of all the people and gods mentioned in the article, how many have influenced the world as greatly as Jesus Christ?

In what way? do we live without war? Money? Greed?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf

Ahhh... the indictment against Britain was a red herring.

Thanks for clearing that up. :tu:

Keep trying to redirect it, but tyrant describes your "god".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
simplybill

In what way? do we live without war? Money? Greed?

seeder- it seems as though you're expecting Christianity to prove itself by ridding the world of war, money and greed. It doesn't work that way. Judeo/Christian ideology only works to the extent that individual citizens choose to follow those standards.

To me, by far the best proof of God and the truth of Christianity is when society chooses to stop honoring the tenets of Judeo/Christian ideology. The Western world is still nominally immersed in Christian values, but it's that very immersion that makes us unable to imagine life under another ideology. If Western Civilization falls and we find ourselves under Shariah Law, that's when we'll start to think, "Gee, that Christian stuff wasn't so bad after all." Look at life in any of the countries that have an outright ban on Christianity; would you want to live in Somalia, Saudi Arabia, China (China does allow State-approved churches that toe the Communist Party line)?

We have it good here. I like freedom of speech and freedom of religion. But as the song says, "You don't know what you got 'til it's gone."

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck

Keep trying to redirect it, but tyrant describes your "god".

See you can construct a sentence; and make a point without your inane cutting and pasting.

You really do have a way with [other peoples] words. Quoting from The Declaration of Independence is indeed distracting and not at all apposite. All it shows is you may have read a little and comprehended even less.

Now you have clearly stated your conjecture - see if you can justify it [in your own words of course].

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
barbco196

So the harrowing of hell never happened?

No. Not unless you call the Earth, hell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf

See you can construct a sentence; and make a point without your inane cutting and pasting.

You really do have a way with [other peoples] words. Quoting from The Declaration of Independence is indeed distracting and not at all apposite. All it shows is you may have read a little and comprehended even less.

Now you have clearly stated your conjecture - see if you can justify it [in your own words of course].

I've never understood that. The militant atheist brigade spend so much time pointing out what a genocidal despotic tyrant the Old Testament God is, and then they say "well of course, it doesn't exist..." So why spend so much time pointing out how evil and vile something that doesn't exist is ? It doesn't make any sense. :unsure2:

The construct of your guy's imagination is very real. I will quote the U.S. declaration of independence:

A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”.

Another thing:

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Exodus 15:3

The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

How can the first amendment ever work? War is the antonym of peace. Don't you guy's get it?

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

You understood nothing what I have said, and you won't. It is a defense mechanism against shame. You guy's are a mirror for a tyrant, trying to project your ugliness onto your enemies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hammerclaw

we talking.. world wide or just the states?

because I have a small feeling your facts at 75%.. might be just a wee bit out

Would depend on the year as it does fluctuate some. I leave it to you to provide statistics for your own country. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c3/c3s2.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GoldenWolf

No. Not unless you call the Earth, hell.

Actually I do. Look beyond yourself, The wars, famine, etc, The Abrahamic God has magnified 100 fold with his biblical commandments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arbenol

seeder - I understand a non-believer's concerns about the authorship and legitimacy of the Bible. My point is that, even if the Bible were completely fabricated, it's still the best overall ideology to follow to change society for the better.

I agree. There's a lot in the Bible that would contribute towards a fair, just and equitable society.

There's also a lot that wouldn't.

We can both probably come up with several examples for each.

My questions are: what criteria do you use to judge which bits are productive and which to leave alone? And, where does that criteria come from?

Edited by Arbenol
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Galactic Goatman

Atheism, the new religion. :rolleyes:

Atheists are just as bad, if not worse, than those who follow various religions. Why protest so much against something you don't believe even exists?

Atheism is not a religion. It is simply the following of the truths of the real world.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck

You understood nothing what I have said, and you won't.

...

That is because you never say anything. You cut and paste quotes at random.

You've conveniently ignored the post to which Otto von Pickelhaube was responding.

Why is there such a rage to disprove the historicity of The Bible? The same emotion doesn't go into trying to disprove Aesop, Grimm's Faiytales or the tales from Hans Christian Andersen.

These tales are told to introduce appropriate behaviour and lay a foundation for common sense. Then most of us grow into adults and we become accountable for our morals.

Common sense is what we use so we can make a decision swiftly and without the need to gather and carefully consider evidence. It allows humans to get day-to-day stuff done.

Is that why you just cut and paste - so you can actually complete a post?

You don't use your own words, because...

...

It is a defense mechanism against shame.

...

... and hides your lack of ability to convey a cogent thought.

...

You guy's are a mirror for a tyrant, trying to project your ugliness onto your enemies.

Have you got any coherent and original examples to back up your vitriol? Edited by Mangoze

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rlyeh

But if this Tyrant doesn't exist, why do people get so angry about it? It still doesn't make sense.

Does that mean his followers don't exist?
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

If you look throughout history, there was never restraint. There was merely the illusion of restraint.

Not entirely true. When an entire nation or civilization held to restrained moralities and beliefs then there was a lot more restraint within the activities of individuals and societies.

I grew up in the pre pill, pre women's emancipation era, where individual rights were deliberately less than the responsibility of an individual to their society.

I lived THROUGH the social,sexual, economic and political revolutions of the sixties and the seventies, and there is adequate objective evidence to see the consequences of freedom from restraint which occurred in those two decades, especially among the young.

For example before the pill a young woman would almost never approach a young man for a casual sexual encounter. Sex was a "gift" or more cynically a payment of a woman given on marriage to ensure the man's faithfulness and financial support. and our laws and social behaviours reflected this. A young ( or even an older single) girl pregnant out of wedlock, was put into a home to have the child which was then adopted out immediately, and the girl came home with no one knowing her secret shame.

By the end of the sixties it was common for casual sexual liaisons, with no intent of a long term relationship, and young women (16 plus) were as likely to approach a young man for sex as vice versa.

Edited by Mr Walker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mr Walker

In what way? do we live without war? Money? Greed?

Many of us do, or at least with as little money as is needed for basic comfort and clean living.

Christianity teaches (among other religions) that happiness comes from within, that no material possessions can bring the comfort and joy which an inner spiritual awareness gives for free, and that, because we are all one in god, we should love each other, not make war on each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nuclear Wessel

Many of us do, or at least with as little money as is needed for basic comfort and clean living.

Christianity teaches (among other religions) that happiness comes from within, that no material possessions can bring the comfort and joy which an inner spiritual awareness gives for free, and that, because we are all one in god, we should love each other, not make war on each other.

Christianity also teaches a lot of nasty things that tend to be conveniently overlooked in favour of the more "happy" things...

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Liquid Gardens

Why is there such a rage to disprove the historicity of The Bible? The same emotion doesn't go into trying to disprove Aesop, Grimm's Faiytales or the tales from Hans Christian Andersen.

Of course not, are there millions of people claiming these fables and fairy tales are true in some way like there are for the Bible? Are there millions of people whose view and attitude towards other people are heavily influenced by Aesop and Grimm?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat

I'd suggest the advertising industry world-wide peddles more untruths and false values than any church, but doesn't raise a whimper from the usual suspects here. Take the blinkers off, advertising is omnipresent compared to the dreaded "proselytizers". Probably because the advertisers know how to massage egos, and pander to immaturity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Holmesian

I'd suggest the advertising industry world-wide peddles more untruths and false values than any church, but doesn't raise a whimper from the usual suspects here. Take the blinkers off, advertising is omnipresent compared to the dreaded "proselytizers". Probably because the advertisers know how to massage egos, and pander to immaturity.

You should maybe take that up in the advertising v skepticism section. It may be that it doesn't raise a whimper here because it is not relevant. You can be skeptical about more than one thing. The failure to mention one does not invalidate the argument against the other. Expressio unius est exclusio alterius is such a blunt instrument for argument.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.