Richard Carrier’s “On the Historicity of Jesus” now out

[T.G.G. Moogly]

LOL! FAKE NEWS!

Is there a difference between Fake Jesus and Historical Jesus?

What I'm trying to say is that maybe Humbles actually venerates the only Jesus that has ever truly been, Mark's Fiction Jesus.

 

[humbleman]

LOL! FAKE NEWS!

Is there a difference between Fake Jesus and Historical Jesus?

What I'm trying to say is that maybe Humbles actually venerates the only Jesus that has ever truly been, Mark's Fiction Jesus.

That is a good point if you clarify what you mean with "fake Jesus".

 

[Keith&Co.]

he won't be the nice and cute and passive dude of two thousand years ago...

Heh, And you say OTHER people should get to church to learn them some Jesus stories.

This 'nice, cute, passive' guy tortured a fig tree for not having fruit when he was puckish.
Tore up a temple because they'd made a business out of it.
Came knowing he'd pit father against son.
Got his friends hooked on symbolic cannibalism.
Told his mother to fuck off.

So, not all that cute, not all that nice, nor all that passive...

You ought to read up on Jesus, mumbles, it'll do you some good.

 

[humbleman]

he won't be the nice and cute and passive dude of two thousand years ago...

Heh, And you say OTHER people should get to church to learn them some Jesus stories.

This 'nice, cute, passive' guy tortured a fig tree for not having fruit when he was puckish.
Tore up a temple because they'd made a business out of it.
Came knowing he'd pit father against son.
Got his friends hooked on symbolic cannibalism.
Told his mother to fuck off.

So, not all that cute, not all that nice, nor all that passive...

You ought to read up on Jesus, mumbles, it'll do you some good.

I will respond to each one of your points.

-Torturing? Killing an organism doing pafff! with the hand is not torturing. He touches it and the plant dies right away. WOW! You have read the wrong bible.

-The vendors where outside the Temple, see? the Temple had patios, zones of empty land surrounding the building. Perhaps you are imagining Jesus going inside the Temple with a baseball bat and destroying the candle holders, the statue of Saint Peter, breaking apart the big cross behind the altar, and similar ridiculous imaginations when he pushed out the vendors from the outside patio of the Temple.

-Of course the drunk father will be against his decent son when this man discovers that his son won't be a junky drunk like him because Jesus.

-His friends had the whole freedom of moving to Australia and forget the whole thing about Christ and salvation. If they stayed and fought because their faith, they did it by their own, dying the way they died was at their own risk.

-Jesus knew that liberal feminists of the Democrat party will want 50-50 sharing of the power when the Messiah comes back, so better to make them understand that such is a no no, so f*ck off!

 

[Kharakov]

Sure perhaps there can be many broad uses or claims of the messiah name as you describe but I was meaning in the context for example, Jesus doesn't say to any of His desciples or relatives :" You take over as Messiah when I'm gone!" As you would do ... replacing with a new Pope or Rabbi.

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus Christ apparently appoints Peter as a successor: "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overpower it." But this is clearly not a family succession.

He's a family guy, according to a Fox documentary series about the mishaps of one Peter Griffin, private I.

 

[lpetrich]

-Of course the drunk father will be against his decent son when this man discovers that his son won't be a junky drunk like him because Jesus.

That's not stated or implied. Jesus Christ was rather anti-family:

Matthew 8:21-22, Luke 9:59-62 -- he tells someone who wanted to bury his father "Let the dead bury the dead." Is that supposed to be a joke?

Matthew 10:34-37, Luke 12:51-53, Luke 14:26 -- he announces that he's going to break up everybody's families, and that anyone who prefers their families to him are unworthy of him.

Matthew 12:46-48, Mark 3:31-34, Luke 8:20-21 -- his real family is not his biological family but his followers.

Matthew 19:29, Luke 18:29-30 -- he insists that his followers desert their biological families.

Matthew 23:9 -- don't call your human father your real father.

Luke 2:42-51 -- he was very snotty to his parents. As a boy, he and his parents used to visit the Jerusalem Temple, and one time, he studied with the scholars there and forgot about his parents. And when they find him, he was not the least bit apologetic. "Didn't you know that I had to be in my Father's house?" and he demonstrated how super-learned he was.

-Jesus knew that liberal feminists of the Democrat party will want 50-50 sharing of the power when the Messiah comes back, so better to make them understand that such is a no no, so f*ck off!

Grossly sexist.

 

[humbleman]

-Of course the drunk father will be against his decent son when this man discovers that his son won't be a junky drunk like him because Jesus.

That's not stated or implied. Jesus Christ was rather anti-family:

Matthew 8:21-22, Luke 9:59-62 -- he tells someone who wanted to bury his father "Let the dead bury the dead." Is that supposed to be a joke?

Matthew 10:34-37, Luke 12:51-53, Luke 14:26 -- he announces that he's going to break up everybody's families, and that anyone who prefers their families to him are unworthy of him.

Matthew 12:46-48, Mark 3:31-34, Luke 8:20-21 -- his real family is not his biological family but his followers.

Matthew 19:29, Luke 18:29-30 -- he insists that his followers desert their biological families.

Matthew 23:9 -- don't call your human father your real father.

Luke 2:42-51 -- he was very snotty to his parents. As a boy, he and his parents used to visit the Jerusalem Temple, and one time, he studied with the scholars there and forgot about his parents. And when they find him, he was not the least bit apologetic. "Didn't you know that I had to be in my Father's house?" and he demonstrated how super-learned he was.

-Jesus knew that liberal feminists of the Democrat party will want 50-50 sharing of the power when the Messiah comes back, so better to make them understand that such is a no no, so f*ck off!

Grossly sexist.

Drinking with a co-worker at his house, we were having fun watching a movie, when the wife came with members of her church. They started to read the bible, and when my friend tried to tell them to be quiet, they started to sing religious songs about Holy Holy Holy God, and the more my friend tried to tell them Shut up, the wife and the members of her church sang louder.

To me, that scenario became more funnier than the movie.

I told my friend we can watch the movie at my house.

In my house, he told me that when he met his wife, both drink and smoke, but after she knew "Jesus" she changed and both were living in the same house but "separated" because he never accepted quit drink and smoke.

 

[Keith&Co.]

-Torturing? Killing an organism doing pafff! with the hand is not torturing. He touches it and the plant dies right away. WOW! You have read the wrong bible .

You were claiming he was nice. Torture is not the salient detail here.
Punishing a tree for not bearing fruit outside of fruit season is not a nice thing to do, whether it was instant or prolonged. And the tree 'withered,' never to bear fruit again. It does not say that it was dead. Just fucked up.

-The vendors where outside the Temple, see?

Your claim was that he was passive. The bible says he was violent.
You're moving the goalposts to say he was violent OUTSIDE of the temple, as if that supports your original claim.

It really doesn't. Rather, it shows you to be wrong.

-Of course the drunk father will be against his decent son when this man discovers that his son won't be a junky drunk like him because Jesus.

Drunk?

You're not supposed to add to the gospels. That's in the bible in at least three places.
And even if you were, you're not supposed to just make shit up.
That would be lying, and that's an abomination to God, according to the bible.

-His friends had the whole freedom of moving to Australia and forget the whole thing about Christ and salvation.

No, they did not have a chance to move to a part of the world they'd never heard of.

If they stayed and fought because their faith, they did it by their own, dying the way they died was at their own risk.

Fought? Dying? This is not a response to one of my points. Once more, you're just making shit up.

-Jesus knew that liberal feminists of the Democrat party will want 50-50 sharing of the power when the Messiah comes back, so better to make them understand that such is a no no, so f*ck off!

Wow. Just a trip through non sequitur land, there.
Your promise to respond to my points is like the cake. The cake is a lie.

I'll have to take that as a tacit admission you cannot justify Jesus' reaction in the light of the commandment to 'honor thy father and mommy.'

- - - Updated - - -

In my house, he told me that when he met his wife, both drink and smoke, but after she knew "Jesus" she changed and both were living in the same house but "separated" because he never accepted quit drink and smoke.

And this means you're NOT sexist...?

 

[funinspace]

So what you're saying, humbleman, is that the show has started, and it's sort of the interval. In which case I'll change my question to 'when is the second (coming) part gonna start? The audience has been in the theatre for over 2000 years already.'

Never was the popcorn icon more appropriate. If only I could find the bloody thing. It's almost as elusive as the historical Jesus at the moment.

It is right beside the velvet paisley-covered Chesterfield sofa. Just don't try to look straight at it...then you will see it.

 

[humbleman]

You were claiming he was nice. Torture is not the salient detail here.
Punishing a tree for not bearing fruit outside of fruit season is not a nice thing to do, whether it was instant or prolonged. And the tree 'withered,' never to bear fruit again. It does not say that it was dead. Just fucked up.
Your claim was that he was passive. The bible says he was violent.
You're moving the goalposts to say he was violent OUTSIDE of the temple, as if that supports your original claim.

It really doesn't. Rather, it shows you to be wrong.

-Of course the drunk father will be against his decent son when this man discovers that his son won't be a junky drunk like him because Jesus.

Drunk?

You're not supposed to add to the gospels. That's in the bible in at least three places.
And even if you were, you're not supposed to just make shit up.
That would be lying, and that's an abomination to God, according to the bible.

-His friends had the whole freedom of moving to Australia and forget the whole thing about Christ and salvation.

No, they did not have a chance to move to a part of the world they'd never heard of.

If they stayed and fought because their faith, they did it by their own, dying the way they died was at their own risk.

Fought? Dying? This is not a response to one of my points. Once more, you're just making shit up.

-Jesus knew that liberal feminists of the Democrat party will want 50-50 sharing of the power when the Messiah comes back, so better to make them understand that such is a no no, so f*ck off!

Wow. Just a trip through non sequitur land, there.
Your promise to respond to my points is like the cake. The cake is a lie.

I'll have to take that as a tacit admission you cannot justify Jesus' reaction in the light of the commandment to 'honor thy father and mommy.'

- - - Updated - - -

In my house, he told me that when he met his wife, both drink and smoke, but after she knew "Jesus" she changed and both were living in the same house but "separated" because he never accepted quit drink and smoke.

And this means you're NOT sexist...?

I'm going to use the "relativistic style" of interpreting things...

You are OK, you are never affected regardless of the several answers given to you... you don't feel anything when you read opinions against yours... again, those are not affecting you... you are the same but the answers against your opinions cause your thoughts to f*ck up...

 

[none]

looks like I am going to be able to read this book, ready for pick up tomorrow

 

[none]

the ironic thing about this book is that a christian apologist got it before me and you are never going to guess that yep, they interpolated the text
all along the margins are christian apologetic nonsense

 

[none]

on page 48 it mentions that 1 corinthians 2:9 cites the ascension of Isaiah 11:34
apparently jerome and I guess origen both said that 1 corinthians 2:9 copies ascension of isaiah, but that factoid seems to not be favored by modern apologists
biblegateway seems to ignore this information and says 1 corinthians 2:9 cites the OT book isaiah, biblehub also