Jesus had a wife

[CID1990]

Well…maybe. Interesting in nerdy, Indiana Jones kind of way.

BTW, how many "gospels" like Thomas were left out of the bible?



http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/0 ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The odds were against Jesus being a bachelor.

unless he was queer

i mean, the guy only hung around with other dudes and his mother

plus he was liberal and talked openly about loving your fellow man and all

[Chizzang]

Jesus has returned (it's a fucking indisputable fact) and he's a back up quarterback in the NFL...

[D1B]

There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus.

The mythological accounts Christian and catholic idiots put their faith in are riddled with inaccuracies, errors, contradictions.

It's all silly bullshit to placate the weak and delusional.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-vuqTWGGlA[/youtube]

It's true and you know it. 55 years of child abuse and forced indoctrination has eliminated your capacity to think critically about your cult. Your so deep you advocate for pedophiles.

No one expects you to understand.

[JoltinJoe]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-vuqTWGGlA[/youtube]

It's true and you know it. 55 years of child abuse and forced indoctrination has eliminated your capacity to think critically about your cult. Your so deep you advocate for pedophiles.

No one expects you to understand.

So, you don't like the Kinks?

[houndawg]

The odds were against Jesus being a bachelor.

unless he was queer

i mean, the guy only hung around with other dudes and his mother

plus he was liberal and talked openly about loving your fellow man and all

Jewish mother, no way...

[D1B]

I'd think we all would want a messiah we could sit down and have a beer with...

no i agree- i think he was just a dude- probably an admirable one

the snark was in the consensus part

Hey, JSO1990, what makes you think he was even a dude? Every shred of evidence, or lack thereof, points to him being a fabricated pastiche of pagan, oriental and Egyptian deity myths.

[JoltinJoe]

Not true. The assessment of all credible historians is that Jesus of Nazareth lived in the First Century in the Roman province of Judaea; that he gained a reputation as a preacher, healer and miracle worker in the Jewish tradition; and that he was crucified at the direction of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect for Judaea, under the charge that he was an insurrectionist.

There is no credible historian who disputes the historicity of Jesus.

[Vidav]

Not true. The assessment of all credible historians is that Jesus of Nazareth lived in the First Century in the Roman province of Judaea; that he gained a reputation as a preacher, healer and miracle worker in the Jewish tradition; and that he was crucified at the direction of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect for Judaea, under the charge that he was an insurrectionist.

There is no credible historian who disputes the historicity of Jesus.

What non-biblical primary sources do we have for Jesus?

[JoltinJoe]

Not true. The assessment of all credible historians is that Jesus of Nazareth lived in the First Century in the Roman province of Judaea; that he gained a reputation as a preacher, healer and miracle worker in the Jewish tradition; and that he was crucified at the direction of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect for Judaea, under the charge that he was an insurrectionist.

There is no credible historian who disputes the historicity of Jesus.

What non-biblical primary sources do we have for Jesus?

As I said, no credible historian doubts the existence of Jesus.

Not even worth having a discussion over this point. It's like debating whether the sky is blue.

[Vidav]

What non-biblical primary sources do we have for Jesus?

As I said, no credible historian doubts the existence of Jesus.

Not even worth having a discussion over this point. It's like debating whether the sky is blue.

But what if your blue is not the same as my blue?

[houndawg]

What non-biblical primary sources do we have for Jesus?

As I said, no credible historian doubts the existence of Jesus.

Not even worth having a discussion over this point. It's like debating whether the sky is blue.

Translation: None.




Every fourth person in Judea was claiming to be the messiah at the time.

[JoltinJoe]

Yea, yea, Jesus never existed.

[kalm]

Yea, yea, Jesus never existed.

Sky is kinda light grey here.

[D1B]

Not true. The assessment of all credible historians is that Jesus of Nazareth lived in the First Century in the Roman province of Judaea; that he gained a reputation as a preacher, healer and miracle worker in the Jewish tradition; and that he was crucified at the direction of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect for Judaea, under the charge that he was an insurrectionist.

There is no credible historian who disputes the historicity of Jesus.

Catholic apologist bullshit.

Liar fucking cult Joe strikes again.

[D1B]

Yea, yea, Jesus never existed.

Prove he did, Joe.

[D1B]

No eyewitness.

No one knows when he was born or when he died.

Gross in consistencies in key gospel accounts.

He didn't leave a written record even thought he was tasked with delivering the word if god and saving the world.

Original manuscripts of the gospels do not exist, if they ever did.

The earliest surviving gospel accounts are in Greek, not Aramaic.

Jesus' birth and death coincide with pagan celestial events.

Savior of the world and this is what we have to prove it!?

[JoltinJoe]

Look, if you want to ay Jesus never existed, and place yourself outside the realm of all credible history and historical thought, go for it.

You'd be like a birther, or one of those people who think the earth was formed 6,000 years ago. Fine.

But I don't have to dignify your position by debating it with you. If someone told me the world was flat, should I debate him?

From the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bart-d-eh ... 49544.html

Few of these mythicists are actually scholars trained in ancient history, religion, biblical studies or any cognate field, let alone in the ancient languages generally thought to matter for those who want to say something with any degree of authority about a Jewish teacher who (allegedly) lived in first-century Palestine. There are a couple of exceptions: of the hundreds -- thousands? -- of mythicists, two (to my knowledge) actually have Ph.D. credentials in relevant fields of study. But even taking these into account, there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts that anyone holding them is as likely to get a teaching job in an established department of religion as a six-day creationist is likely to land on in a bona fide department of biology.

....

Moreover, the claim that Jesus was simply made up falters on every ground. The alleged parallels between Jesus and the "pagan" savior-gods in most instances reside in the modern imagination: We do not have accounts of others who were born to virgin mothers and who died as an atonement for sin and then were raised from the dead (despite what the sensationalists claim ad nauseum in their propagandized versions).

Moreover, aspects of the Jesus story simply would not have been invented by anyone wanting to make up a new Savior. The earliest followers of Jesus declared that he was a crucified messiah. But prior to Christianity, there were no Jews at all, of any kind whatsoever, who thought that there would be a future crucified messiah. The messiah was to be a figure of grandeur and power who overthrew the enemy. Anyone who wanted to make up a messiah would make him like that. Why did the Christians not do so? Because they believed specifically that Jesus was the Messiah. And they knew full well that he was crucified. The Christians did not invent Jesus. They invented the idea that the messiah had to be crucified.

One may well choose to resonate with the concerns of our modern and post-modern cultural despisers of established religion (or not). But surely the best way to promote any such agenda is not to deny what virtually every sane historian on the planet -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, pagan, agnostic, atheist, what have you -- has come to conclude based on a range of compelling historical evidence.

Whether we like it or not, Jesus certainly existed.

[mrklean]

I would make since, he was married. To be a Rabbi in the jewish faith, one has to be a man. Being a man means, that your are married to a women. I asked this lady, if Jesus was married, does it take away the wonderful things that he has done. She said no, but I wont belive it. People are such Sheep.

What the ****? There are so many things wrong with your post. Let's break them down.

I would make since, he was married.

What? English, do you speak it? You don't make any SENSE.

To be a Rabbi in the jewish faith, one has to be a man. Being a man means, that your are married to a women.

Rabbis and Men are allowed to be single. There are plenty of unmarried men that are men and Rabbis.

I asked this lady, if Jesus was married, does it take away the wonderful things that he has done. She said no, but I wont belive it.

So, you asked a woman if Jesus being married makes his "achievements" less than wonderful. She says no and you think she's wrong. Did I read that correctly? Why couldn't a married man do great things?

What difference does this make, if he was married???

[Ibanez]

What non-biblical primary sources do we have for Jesus?

As I said, no credible historian doubts the existence of Jesus.

Not even worth having a discussion over this point. It's like debating whether the sky is blue.

No, you can't say that. When we are so far removed from the primary source, it's imperative to have other sources of information to verify the validity of claims, dates, events,etc... What non-biblical, non- Christian sources do we have?

[Ibanez]

What the ****? There are so many things wrong with your post. Let's break them down.

What? English, do you speak it? You don't make any SENSE.



Rabbis and Men are allowed to be single. There are plenty of unmarried men that are men and Rabbis.



So, you asked a woman if Jesus being married makes his "achievements" less than wonderful. She says no and you think she's wrong. Did I read that correctly? Why couldn't a married man do great things?

What difference does this make, if he was married???

It makes no difference. However, your post says that you don't believe him being married takes away from "the wonderful things he's done." That implies that you think his marriage WOULD make his actions less meaningful. I'm not surprised you don't understand what you wrote.

[JoltinJoe]

As I said, no credible historian doubts the existence of Jesus.

Not even worth having a discussion over this point. It's like debating whether the sky is blue.

No, you can't say that. When we are so far removed from the primary source, it's imperative to have other sources of information to verify the validity of claims, dates, events,etc... What non-biblical, non- Christian sources do we have?

Not only can I say it, I'll say it again. The issue of Jesus' existence is settled. Over.

People who say Jesus never existed are like birthers -- they are kooks. They are trying to create a debate when there is no debate to be had. So knowledgeable people just don't play along.

[D1B]

No, you can't say that. When we are so far removed from the primary source, it's imperative to have other sources of information to verify the validity of claims, dates, events,etc... What non-biblical, non- Christian sources do we have?

Not only can I say it, I'll say it again. The issue of Jesus' existence is settled. Over.

People who say Jesus never existed are like birthers -- they are kooks. They are trying to create a debate when there is no debate to be had. So knowledgeable people just don't play along.

You're in a cult. No one expects you to get it.

[houndawg]

No, you can't say that. When we are so far removed from the primary source, it's imperative to have other sources of information to verify the validity of claims, dates, events,etc... What non-biblical, non- Christian sources do we have?

Not only can I say it, I'll say it again. The issue of Jesus' existence is settled. Over.

People who say Jesus never existed are like birthers -- they are kooks. They are trying to create a debate when there is no debate to be had. So knowledgeable people just don't play along.

If Jesus did exist, he must have been a nobody in his own time or we'd have some first-hand accounts of him. Like I said before, he was only one of hundreds trying to fit themself into the messiah role at that time. The only thing exceptional about the Jesus version of the dying and resurrected sun god myth is that it was written down.

[GannonFan]

Not only can I say it, I'll say it again. The issue of Jesus' existence is settled. Over.

People who say Jesus never existed are like birthers -- they are kooks. They are trying to create a debate when there is no debate to be had. So knowledgeable people just don't play along.

If Jesus did exist, he must have been a nobody in his own time or we'd have some first-hand accounts of him. Like I said before, he was only one of hundreds trying to fit themself into the messiah role at that time. The only thing exceptional about the Jesus version of the dying and resurrected sun god myth is that it was written down.

Not true, there are plenty of written down accounts from other people purporting to be messiah's as well. The exceptional thing is that billions of people have accepted Jesus as a true savior, even 2 milleniums after he lived, despite his personal reach at the time of his life being little more than the people around him. Pretty impressive for a nobody.

[Ibanez]

No, you can't say that. When we are so far removed from the primary source, it's imperative to have other sources of information to verify the validity of claims, dates, events,etc... What non-biblical, non- Christian sources do we have?

Not only can I say it, I'll say it again. The issue of Jesus' existence is settled. Over.

People who say Jesus never existed are like birthers -- they are kooks. They are trying to create a debate when there is no debate to be had. So knowledgeable people just don't play along.

Think of it this way, if I told you I saw a mermaid, you'd want proof. If I showed you a picture I took of a "mermaid" you'd want it to be independently verified. Same thing.