Brumerican Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think it is possible to be both fictional and homosexual. I am no expert mind you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I believe he existed. There are "messiahs" and "prophets" born all the time. Some attract dozens of followers, some hundreds, etc. Doesn't make any one of them more holy than another. I don't have faith. I believe in things which can be proven. For everything he is supposed to have done and the large number of contemporary commentators, there isn't a single reference. Mainly because the stories weren't invented (well, "re-imagined" from earlier stories) until a couple of generations later. Perfectly reasonable. To say I believe he existed doesn't mean that I'm 100% convinced either way, it's just that considering how many messiahs there are throughout history, it's likely that there was at least one in Judea 2,000 ears ago. It certainly isn't a basis for embarking on a life of fairy-worship. The gospels are probably based on accounts of things that happened to one or more individuals (with some added fire, brimstone and fairy dust to awe potential customers). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think it is possible to be both fictional and homosexual. I am no expert mind you. Don't be so modest. You're quite right. There's Sherlock Holmes, Jesus...heaps of 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted February 28, 2013 Administrator Share Posted February 28, 2013 Perfectly reasonable. To say I believe he existed doesn't mean that I'm 100% convinced either way, it's just that considering how many messiahs there are throughout history, it's likely that there was at least one in Judea 2,000 ears ago. It certainly isn't a basis for embarking on a life of fairy-worship. The gospels are probably based on accounts of things that happened to one or more individuals (with some added fire, brimstone and fairy dust to awe potential customers). But he wouldn't have been called Jesus. Also it's highly unlikely he was crucified (staking was the usual Roman punishment at the time). He wasn't a zombie. He wasn't made of bread and wine. So if you are saying that someone existed and claimed to be the messiah, that's fair enough (there were many), but the figure from modern myth didn't exist. The gospels are heavily edited fables based on fables from preceding religions/cults which is why they are often contradictory and even self-contradictory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted February 28, 2013 Share Posted February 28, 2013 Well 3 gospels are plagiarisms of a long lost original text and nobody knows who the authors are actually supposed to be. Then you have to factor in all the doctoring and translation errors that occurred over the years too. It's crazy that so many people believe that they are accurate and truthful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted February 28, 2013 Administrator Share Posted February 28, 2013 I think it is possible to be both fictional and homosexual. I am no expert mind you. Don't bring homosexuality into this. It's about "well Gay". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 1, 2013 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2013 (edited) Well 3 gospels are plagiarisms of a long lost original text and nobody knows who the authors are actually supposed to be. Then you have to factor in all the doctoring and translation errors that occurred over the years too. It's crazy that so many people believe that they are accurate and truthful. I think that every believer should have this pointed out to them on a daily basis until the penny drops. Of course, I know that they would stick their fingers in their ears and go "Ner, ner, ner, ner, I can't hear you". Edited March 1, 2013 by mjmooney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 1, 2013 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2013 Funnily enough, I lifted that from a Christian FB page. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Perfectly reasonable. To say I believe he existed doesn't mean that I'm 100% convinced either way, it's just that considering how many messiahs there are throughout history, it's likely that there was at least one in Judea 2,000 ears ago. It certainly isn't a basis for embarking on a life of fairy-worship. The gospels are probably based on accounts of things that happened to one or more individuals (with some added fire, brimstone and fairy dust to awe potential customers). But he wouldn't have been called Jesus. Also it's highly unlikely he was crucified (staking was the usual Roman punishment at the time). He wasn't a zombie. He wasn't made of bread and wine. So if you are saying that someone existed and claimed to be the messiah, that's fair enough (there were many), but the figure from modern myth didn't exist. The gospels are heavily edited fables based on fables from preceding religions/cults which is why they are often contradictory and even self-contradictory. Jesus was (and stlll is) a very common first name and so given the prevalence of messiah figures during that historical period it's pretty likely that roughly 2000 years ago, there was at least one Jesus in Judea, probably more. So in that sense, there was probably at least one "historical Jesus." Whether any of these Jesuses formed part of the basis for the gospels, I'm not sure. Nobody on here's saying that he was divine or was made of bread and wine though (unless you're Julie or steaknchips, I guess) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackpotForeigner Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Agree, Legov, although Jesus being a common name today is definitely inadmissable evidence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 Jesus being a common name today is definitely inadmissable evidence! That was just a side remark, not part of my argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I doubt that there were any people named Jesus knocking about the middle east during 0 - 33 AD Jesus is just the end point of line of transliterations that began with Yehosua (Hebrew) then Yesua (Aramaic) then Lesous (Greek) and penultimately Lesus (Latin). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted March 1, 2013 Author VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2013 Of course, the language variant of the name doesn't matter. Which is doubtless why stupid Christians and stupid Muslims can insist that they worship different gods, one called "God", and one called "Allah". Obviously not the same imaginary being at all, oh no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted March 1, 2013 Share Posted March 1, 2013 I think it is possible to be both fictional and homosexual. I am no expert mind you. Don't bring homosexuality into this. It's about "well Gay". One is a subset of the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 1, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 1, 2013 I think it's laughable that the all-powerful, all-knowing, jealous, petty god of the bible doesn't mind people pronouncing his name wrong. He sent bears to kill children for calling someone "baldy". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 1, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2013 I think it's laughable that the all-powerful, all-knowing, jealous, petty god of the bible doesn't mind people pronouncing his name wrong. He sent bears to kill children for calling someone "baldy". A common misconception. The Greek word for bear can be translated from Hebrew via Klingon to mean 'big cuddly puppies', and the word 'kill' has been shown to be a typo in Atlantician translated from Judean slang relating to the verb 'to hug'. So Jehovah was actually showing understanding and compassion when he sent those big cuddly puppies to hug those cheeky kids. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
limpid Posted March 1, 2013 Administrator Share Posted March 1, 2013 A bit like he sent his vicar on earth to protect the kiddie fiddlers then? and I don't mean people from Kidderminster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted March 1, 2013 VT Supporter Share Posted March 1, 2013 A bit like he sent his vicar on earth to protect the kiddie fiddlers then? and I don't mean people from Kidderminster. Exactly! Tsk, they'll be telling us that 'sphere' and 'circle', or 'indefinite period of time' and 'day', aren't the same next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legov Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I doubt that there were any people named Jesus knocking about the middle east during 0 - 33 AD Jesus is just the end point of line of transliterations that began with Yehosua (Hebrew) then Yesua (Aramaic) then Lesous (Greek) and penultimately Lesus (Latin). Fair enough, but doesn't affect my argument one bit tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumerican Posted March 2, 2013 Share Posted March 2, 2013 I doubt that there were any people named Jesus knocking about the middle east during 0 - 33 AD Jesus is just the end point of line of transliterations that began with Yehosua (Hebrew) then Yesua (Aramaic) then Lesous (Greek) and penultimately Lesus (Latin). Fair enough, but doesn't affect my argument one bit tbh. I never said or even implied that it did. In fact I never even replied to you specifically . I was just sharing some knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts