[Al_U_Card]

Abandon hope all ye, with religious faith, that enter here.

This link will open your eyes to a reality that is, to say the least, startling. If you are devout or do not wish to have your faith tested, I would suggest NOT clicking on the link.

http://www.johnalleg...undayMirror.htm

[luke warm]

i'll try to read the rest later, but one of the early premises i read doesn't make sense - he states that the crucifixion was a hoax... that particular act has as much if not more historical evidence as any of the ancient world, written about by two prominent historians of the time - one a jew and one a roman... but who knows, maybe they were in on it (no doubt drug-induced)

[helene_t]

That's what I don't understand .... why would anyone care about this? I mean ... Christianity descends from a fertility cult ... so what? Most schools of thought (whether religious or otherwise) become unrecognizable if you try to trace their roots 2000 years back. Suppose someone claimed that Marxism can be linked to a 2000 YO mushroom cult. Would Marxists feel insulted? I don't think so.

[jonottawa]

As an atheist with a personal interest in the subject, I didn't find this particularly interesting either. Did Jesus exist? Probably. Does that prove anything about the existence of a supernatural creator with a bad temper who craves adulation and carries grudges for eternity? No.

These links (for example) are more interesting, imo.

http://www.atheist-community.org/library/a...read.php?id=700

http://en.wikipedia....ricity_of_Jesus

http://en.wikipedia....od_is_not_Great

[luke warm]

helene_t, on Nov 13 2007, 04:14 PM, said:

That's what I don't understand .... why would anyone care about this? ~~

right... it appears that this caught al's fancy and he takes it as proof of the non-existence of God... we all know such a claim can't be defended, and especially by someone who is a little hazy on historical facts

[ssukaye]

There is one big problem with all religions--the devout want to convert the rest of the world or at the very least make us all live by their rules. Atheists dont send out missionarys or try to dictate how anyone should live.

All religions cant be right --but they can all be wrong.

[mike777]

I guess you could debate just what aethist world leaders do preach but in practice alot of aethist world leaders do tell you what to do...

See Stalin or Mao. or other world leaders throughout history.

Of course if you are talking about aethists who are not leaders.....that is another discussion.

[Al_U_Card]

luke warm, on Nov 13 2007, 06:06 PM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 13 2007, 04:14 PM, said:

That's what I don't understand .... why would anyone care about this? ~~

right... it appears that this caught al's fancy and he takes it as proof of the non-existence of God... we all know such a claim can't be defended, and especially by someone who is a little hazy on historical facts

Don't think it ever once mentions the existence of God anywhere.....but it sure pokes some holes in the religious ethos. It caught my fancy alright. Exactly the kind of flight of fancy that the unscrupulous can use to dominate the credulous. Talk about your basic mythical beings.

[kenrexford]

ssukaye, on Nov 13 2007, 07:47 PM, said:

All religions cant be right.

Well, actually, this is not correct.

If a cat can be both dead and alive, and if an electron can be in more than one place at the same time, then surely all religions can be right.

[helene_t]

kenrexford, on Nov 14 2007, 03:07 AM, said:

ssukaye, on Nov 13 2007, 07:47 PM, said:

All religions cant be right.

Well, actually, this is not correct.

If a cat can be both dead and alive, and if an electron can be in more than one place at the same time, then surely all religions can be right.

Sounds as all religions are wrong in that they don't recognize that everything is right and wrong at the same time. Oh maybe the Thaoists are close to the truth

[luke warm]

Al_U_Card, on Nov 13 2007, 07:56 PM, said:

luke warm, on Nov 13 2007, 06:06 PM, said:

helene_t, on Nov 13 2007, 04:14 PM, said:

That's what I don't understand .... why would anyone care about this? ~~

right... it appears that this caught al's fancy and he takes it as proof of the non-existence of God... we all know such a claim can't be defended, and especially by someone who is a little hazy on historical facts

Don't think it ever once mentions the existence of God anywhere.....but it sure pokes some holes in the religious ethos. It caught my fancy alright. Exactly the kind of flight of fancy that the unscrupulous can use to dominate the credulous. Talk about your basic mythical beings.

i think you might need to read portions again... in any case, he claims the crucifixion a hoax... the bible is not the only ancient document attesting to the historical fact of the crucifixion

[Al_U_Card]

My bad. I consider God to be something other than a manifestation in human form as are we all. Our own personal divinity aside, the paucity of verifiable sources on the contemporary life of Jesus is only surpassed by the lack of veracity of most of the translations available.

Just sifting through the apocrypha and the gnostic texts gives pause for thought. Mr. Allegro's cogent perspective on the origins and developments of religious fervor just helps to illuminate the bankrupt nature of the historical content of organized religion. Were they only philosophical treatises, open for debate and conjecture, it is likely that a lot fewer violent deaths would have been the result.

[HeavyDluxe]

kenrexford, on Nov 13 2007, 08:07 PM, said:

ssukaye, on Nov 13 2007, 07:47 PM, said:

All religions cant be right.

Well, actually, this is not correct.

If a cat can be both dead and alive, and if an electron can be in more than one place at the same time, then surely all religions can be right.

I think it is correct.

An electron doesn't 'claim' anything. The cat doesn't declare it's state of being. We observe their state and apply definition.

Christianity in particular makes absolute, exclusive truth claims... Therefore it sets up a position in which it is either correct or bunk. We aren't left with the 'both/and' option.

[luke warm]

HeavyDluxe, on Nov 14 2007, 10:07 AM, said:

ssukaye, on Nov 13 2007, 07:47 PM, said:

All religions cant be right.
Well, actually, this is not correct.

If a cat can be both dead and alive, and if an electron can be in more than one place at the same time, then surely all religions can be right.

I think it is correct.

An electron doesn't 'claim' anything. The cat doesn't declare it's state of being. We observe their state and apply definition.

Christianity in particular makes absolute, exclusive truth claims... Therefore it sets up a position in which it is either correct or bunk. We aren't left with the 'both/and' option.

cs lewis couldn't have said it better

al said:

Our own personal divinity aside, the paucity of verifiable sources on the contemporary life of Jesus is only surpassed by the lack of veracity of most of the translations available.

as i said earlier, the historical sources for Jesus' birth and death are as great as if not greater than any occurrence in antiquity... the historians josephus, a jew, and tacitus, a roman, both report his death by crucifixion in the time of pilate... of course they could have been part of this mushroom cult also, who knows

[jtfanclub]

luke warm, on Nov 14 2007, 12:29 PM, said:

as i said earlier, the historical sources for Jesus' birth and death are as great as if not greater than any occurrence in antiquity... the historians josephus, a jew, and tacitus, a roman, both report his death by crucifixion in the time of pilate... of course they could have been part of this mushroom cult also, who knows

The trick here is, it is one of those very historians who you were claiming supported the crucifixion story that's now now contradicting it.

[luke warm]

jtfanclub, on Nov 14 2007, 12:33 PM, said:

luke warm, on Nov 14 2007, 12:29 PM, said:

as i said earlier, the historical sources for Jesus' birth and death are as great as if not greater than any occurrence in antiquity... the historians josephus, a jew, and tacitus, a roman, both report his death by crucifixion in the time of pilate... of course they could have been part of this mushroom cult also, who knows

The trick here is, it is one of those very historians who you were claiming supported the crucifixion story that's now now contradicting it.

you'll have to refresh my mind on this

[helene_t]

As far as I can see in wikipedia, the evidence for the crucification is only the gospels and Saint Paul's letters. However, Tacitus links Pilatus with the condemnation of Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia....cation#_note-20

[Al_U_Card]

Just like any evidenciary study, it is often what is not included in the body of evidence that determines the applicability of the cited sources. The MSM was hard at work even back in the olden times......there was much to gain, as today.

[Gerben42]

Well at least he has hit a small target: He managed to get atheists and deists on one side of an argument about religion, with him on the other side

[Al_U_Card]

Just another Noah was Gilgamesh was folklore about the expansion of the Black Sea.......it all comes from somewhere.