According to the New Testament Jesus totally denounced the authority of the Old Testament.

The authority of the Old Testament had people judging one another and stoning sinners to death.

Jesus totally denounced that authority and taught not to judge others and not to throw stones.

The authority of the Old Testament has people seeking revenge and with teh vengence of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

Jesus totally denounced that authorty and taught forgiveness and to turn the other cheek.

So even the Bible confirms that Jesus did not support the authority of the Old Testament.



I also believe that all of the evidence points to something along these lines. And the only "evidence" that is required is contained within the actual mythology.

It's clearly that there are errors, contraditions, and obvious demagoguery just by reading the text.

Clearly Jesus could not have been the son of the God of Abraham and have so drastically changed his commands.

That's a given right off the top.

I do believe that there were preachers (or rabbi in this case) who did teach about the coming of a savior, and very possible more than one of them claimed to be that savior. They probably were crucified, maybe not even by the Romans, but very possibly by the Jew who were mimicking what the Romans did to criminals.

In any case, I think there were 'rumors' around of a 'savior' that at least gave some credence to the mythology.

The idea that the biblical account could be the word of God is truly asburd.

The simplest fact of all is that if our creator was indeed able to become manifest as a human then he could have written down his own message.

The fact that the Bible is nothing but empty hearsay is basically proof positive that there is nothing at all to the claim that Jesus was God.

Zip. Zilch.

The religion has absolutely no more merit than Greek Mythology.

None.

YOUR word is a lamp for my feet and a light for my path.

Your words effect my ears, like a turd in punchbowl effects my eyes.

Thank you.

I also think there might be something to this theory. I want to watch that new movie due out called "The Jesus that Wasn't There" to see if it delves into any of this at all.

Many years back when I used to pick up copies of The Humanist for cheap laughs, I recall seeing a small advertisement among the back-matter ads (for things like atheist joke books that offered such howlers as, "What would you name a Christian dairy in the Holy Land?"; "Cheeses of Nazareth!") that claimed to provide undeniable, irrefutable proof that Josephus had authored the NT. The offerer was the "Abelard Reuchlin Foundation." Well, these guys are still around, and the nuts have not fallen far from the tree.

It would be an overstatement to say that no one takes this group -- whose overall thesis is that the NT was authored by members of an aristocratic Roman family to keep slaves under control and submissive -- seriously. In fact I can find only one writer who has even bothered to address their claims in any detail, and that ironically enough was someone on the other side of the lunatic fringe, Nazi Christ-myther Revilo P. Oliver. All Oliver did was address a couple of technical claims they made (apparently their thesis ignores that the Romans used very few of what we would call "first names"); as for the rest, he didn't consider it worth his time. What few other challenges to these ideas I have found have been to merely describe the theory in one word or less; i.e., "bunkum". I also found a message board, with a message from a member of a Classics Department at Calvin College, which said that he had not looked at the Piso site on angelfire.com, but did say:

...I often use "angelfire.com" sites to illustrate to my students the danger and indeed the absurdity of using websites indiscriminately when they write their term papers. Some of the pages there are real doozies."
Go to the web site for the rest of the article.
http://www.tektonics.org/lp/pisocake.html

I often show my students General Religion Chat forums to point out the dangers of not knowing what you are talking about.

This is the magazine he is talking about. It’s highly esteemed in the secular/Humanist community of course.



What is Humanism?


As Kurt Vonnegut succinctly described: being a Humanist means trying to behave decently without expectation of rewards or punishment after you are dead.

Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without theism and other supernatural beliefs, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.

Well since the authors of the New Testament were very familiar with the "Old Testament" and other scriptures they easily wrote the fictional account of the "New Testament" to "uphold" the authority of the "old testament" or the old Judaic scriptures and laws and prophecies. They made it all up as they went along.... they used the old scriptures to fabricate the New Testament.

You people have all been BAMBOOZLED, (for centuries) lied to and fooled. And to think people 2000 years later are still buying into this fabrication! I can't believe it. It makes no sense. There is no logic in it. Truly. People.... wake up.

Yes ... we take it seriously. Historians have been lying to us for centuries. If the truth gets out, the jig is up, not only with Christianity but with everything we know that we believe to be true .... BUT IS A BOLD FACED LIE.

EVERYTHING.

Imagine that everything you THINK you know is a lie.

Opps, guess all the christians praying for help, who ended up losing their homes and jobs, didn't pray hard enough, seek hard enough and knock hard enough.

Woman this morning was weeping as she packed her 7 bibles into her trunk. I would have told her that her god was a bit flaky and 'maybe next time' god will be home listening again, but considering her state, I said nothing, just gave her a pretty useless hug. She said all I can do is pray...

The 'door that opened' was her front door, stepping out of it for the last time! Credit in the toilet, 3 kids and a layed off dad.

So much for your seek find and knock... Of course if one of the folks up here wins the lottery it will be Gods hand, forget the thousands of others that didn't win... ugh!!

Because that's ALL she has left. Right or wrong, whether it's all a lie or not, it's literally all she has left. You take that from her and suddenly she realizes, she's got nothing. She's here alone. You were right not to say anything. She needs what ever comfort she can get, even if it's false comfort.

You will see more movies like that as we move into the age of Aquarius. They come in the wake of the revelation of the truth, that none of it ever happened, that it was all a lie.

The Tarot card that represents that energy is the Tower. The tower falls and the truth is revealed.

The age of Pisces was the age of Jesus. That age is coming to an end. The age of Pisces is the age of the fish which symbolically represents Jesus and Christianity. The next symbol is the man with the water pitcher. Water represents our connection to our spiritual knowledge and each other will give rise to communication via telepathy and the truth cannot be hidden. The veil will be lifted.

I absolutely agree with you on that score. My hug felt as inadequate and useless as her faith, but again saying something would have caused more grief.

Wow that must be such a threat to some folks.. ugh

Yeah, Darwin is on the cover there because I think his birthday is coming up.

<---- wonders what would happen if we were all actually in the same room

wait a minute, let me grab some stones

Of course it is a threat. If people lived healthy, decent ethical and happy lives look how many people would be out of work!!

OMG it would be a disaster.

Lawyers, Churches and Preachers, Doctors, Psychiatrists, Policemen, Private investigators, counselors, Judges, the Military, and even Politicians.

All these useless professions would no longer exist.

"The supposed parallels are spurious. In his important study The Post- Resurrection Appearance Stories of the Gospel Tradition (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1975), John Alsup has examined all the alleged parallels to Jesus' resurrection and shown them to be apotheosis stories, disappearance stories, etc., not resurrection accounts. The myths of dying and rising gods like Osiris or Adonis, for example, concern merely seasonal symbols for the crop cycle--the plants dying in winter and coming back to life in the spring. (ii) There is no causal link to the disciples' belief. This is evident in Dr. Washington's own examples from ancient Mexico or Nepal. According to Gerhard Kittel, there is "no trace" of myths of dying and rising gods in first century Palestine (Gerhard Kittel, "Die Auferstehung Jesu," Deutsche Theologie 4 [1937]: 159). Thus, no informed scholar would today argue that the original disciples came to believe that Jesus rose from the dead due to pagan influences. It is not surprising that as a philosopher Dr. Washington should be unfamiliar with the field of New Testament studies and historical Jesus research; but it is a shame that this sort of ignorance should be perpetuated among students."


This comes from a debate between Craig and Washington.