Many times you hear about the Judeo-Christian tradition in this country. My problem with this is that the jews crucified Christ, not the arabs. Why do so called Christians give special favor to jews over non-islamofacist arabs?

Love thine enemies.

In their teachings, I don't believe either hate Jesus. They just don't believe he's the Savior.

It's all non mooslimbs that mooslimbs hate.

jews dont hate christians muslims want all christians dead

Jews hate Jesus with some of the vilest commentary you could ever read in some rabbinical writings. The Muslims actually revere Jesus as the second most important prophet and believe he will return in the end times as a good Muslim. Obviously they are wrong.

Aside from theological differences about whether they hate Jesus or not, the more practical difference between Jews and Muslims is that Muslims believe their religion is destined to rule the world and if you don't agree then it's OK to cut off your head. I haven't seen much of that coming out of the Jews.

Okie, you're a [bleep] idiot. Why does anyone even listen to this guy? Is there a biggger moron on the fire than Okie?

I'll give you a clue, you illiterate dolt: Jews don't blow up children. Muslim's do. The latter lack a commitment to Judeo-Christian ethics. BTW, if you want a clue as to who hates Christians (and religious Jews) the most, try atheists you [bleep] idiot.

The Jews did not crucify Christ, the Romans did.

Romans did at the behest of the jews gathered.

DEMORATS,THEY DID NOT EVEN WANT HIS NAME MENTIONED IN THEIR COMMUNIST LIBERAL LEFT ASSHO-E OF A PLATFORM.

Were the actions of the Romans and Jews acts of free will, or were they part of Gods plan?

+1000

The Jews are God's meat. He'll deal with them in his own way and in his own time. In the meantime, we're to keep our hands off of them.
The Judeo-Christian thing is because we all believe in the same God. The Jews 'just' rejected his son Jesus. Allah, OTOH, is a totally different god. He has no relationship whatever to God. Those who say that God and Allah are the same God need to do some reading because they're flat out wrong.

Atheist don't hate Jesus. Depending on the individual Athiest, we just don't see the evidence for his existence, or divinity. How can you hate something if you don't believe it existed?

I should have said "hated Christianity", or have great disdain for Christians and Christianity.

antelope sniper does not hate christians he just doesn't believe in christ

anybody reads his thoughts on the subject should know

Let's set the record straight.

1. Neither the Jews nor the Romans crucified Christ.

2. Jesus was a Jew who preached a Jewish doctrine that the powers-to-be, namely the Pharisees, did not like for political reasons.

3. Jesus was crucified by the Romans on evidence presented by the Pharisees that showed Jesus was a public enemy of the Roman State.

4. Jesus's crucifixion was political in nature and not religious.

5. Jesus was not a Christian.

6. The Jews that followed Jesus after the crucifixion were referred to as Nazarenes.

7. Paul was the one to coin the term Christians to signify Jesus as the Christ (anointed one) and the Savior and to remove the confusion between Nazarenes and Nazirites.

8. Paul established a religion based on the death of a Jewish rebel who was an enemy of the Roman State. Why he did it is anybody's guess.

...or the minimum wage.

The Jews are God's chosen people in the Old Testament. Many Christians believe that all the Jews will convert to Christianity in the tribulation period. Most preachers are fascinated by Jews.

I was taught to pay extra attention to the words "written in red".
Who would have thought that they would re-appear in a lowly hunting forum?

^^^
This

and why would anyone respond to such drivel

Sorry, they're just my words redded in order to distinguish between the individual assertion of DD's to which I was responding.

I thought Christ was a Jew?

Did I say anything that contradicted that?

Here we go...

Quick reply

what you know in your heart trumps the writings of man.

Many Jewish people like creating Christmas music for retail purposes.

I hate greedy jews and ALL muzzies so we're even.

Jews really don't bother me. A bit obnoxious at times. Orthodox Jews can be a real pain. Secular Jews ain't that fond of them either. The moslem belief system is abhorrent. Refer to my avatar.

They ALL suck in their own special way........................

"Let's set the record straight."

Since you are the "campfire philosopher" [albeit SELF APPOINTED] the forum always waits with bated breath to see those words from you appear on our screens.

But what do I know, I'm just a judgmental Missouri Osage injun-Scotch/Irishman.

Let's face it nether jews or muzzies hate Christ as much as the liberials do.

tom

I reckon that's true. The Jews were entrusted with the very words of God.

The Jewish Leaders. Not the Jewish people who responded to the words of Jesus.

The Jewish, Muslim, and Christianity religions are all FUBAR.
All three religions have been killing each other for centuries over what's written in old books. FUBAR

The Bible refers to the Jewish religious leaders as the Jews and that's who wanted him dead. They were a bunch of hypocrites and Jesus called them on it repeatedly and in no uncertain terms. They weren't following their own scriptures or they would have recognized him for who he really was. There were a few of them, most notably Nicodemus, who did recognize him and believed in him.
The common people followed him in droves and that worried the Jews considerably. They had a cushy thing going and they were afraid of losing their power and wealth if the people followed Jesus.

Was it the Jews or the Romans? And, unless Jesus died to repent for original sin, the story would not have been fulfilled.

I'm not hearing this conversation around any campfire I'll be part of..

Clicked on Who hates. Read the rest of the line, and agree with you.

If anyone wants to hear some truth on the matter, watch this.

If Jesus came back today and sinful man could, they would crucify Him again. Would that be Gods plan, or did He just know the ways of man and predict their actions, even though He asked men to follow the Spirit for a better reward.

good thing about topics like this-makes it easier to identify the idiots...

You realize we are in total disagreement here.

Other than Flavius Josephus there is no mention of Jesus in any other written Roman history documents of the time period. Jesus was a minor Jewish rebel nothing more and nothing less. The mythology of Jesus and the religion of Christianity like ALL religions was created out of whole cloth by man.

And the passage in Flavius was a forgery.

Ain't that the truth and it says it all.

A Scotts/Irishman complaining about greed?

Now that's rich. The Scotts/Irish are tighter with a penny then Jews.

Yeah I hear the phrase, "I Irished him down by 100 bucks." all the time!

Religion is just something I watch other people argue,fight,and kill each-other over, myself and my family don't even acknowledge the fantasy world of religion,demons,aliens,loch ness monsters, hairy man,etc,etc

Parallel Verses
New International Version
if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. 2 Chronicles 7:14

Im not holding my breath for this nation to turn around.

But not those like you who believe in zero, huh?

Don't conflate Marxist, who believe in a specific political order, with Atheist who do not believe in the proposition of a God.

we have quite a crowd right here on the 'fire, that don't have much use for Jesus.

if I confess to being a jew will you all hate me and kick me off

John 8:42-47 will tell you all you need to know about the situation if you got enough brains to decipher it,....and it ain't like you got to be a genius to do so.

It's been going on for a long, long, long time,......but the Messiah spelled it out a coupla thousand years ago.

It's about a lot of things,...but as for the modern age, it's about current American politics.

Think what you want,.....justify it any way you want,...but John 8:42-47 told you how it is.

Some people will get it,....some people won't.

Those who are intended to "get it" will.

Those who don't,....well,....you're not part of the plan.

That's just it,....deal with it in the best way that makes you happy.

That's all.

Amen


And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.



King James Bible
For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

That passage nails it and speaks volumes. He that haveth an ear to hear, let him hear.

Someday every man will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Your obviously brain dead!!

Time will tell.

Why should the nation turn around? It's heading in the direction the plutocrats intended.

Now why would you think that those of us not Jews, Christians, or Muslims somehow believe in and support Obama. I can guarantee you that far more Jews, Christians, and Muslims support Obama than non-believers.

Jesus is extremely fair minded. You have your[not you're, which should have been your choice]entire life to say to Him;"Thy will be done".

But if you decide instead to say to Him;"I'll go to Hell first".

Then He says;"Thy will be done".

It's not that we don't have much use for Jesus it's just that we don't recognize Jesus as one the manifestations of God and do recognize Jesus as a radical Jew who was attempting to simplify Mosaic Judaism and give women more authority in Judaism.

This man will not.

Muzzies and atheists.
You'll notice that Jews don't start wars real often, and when they do, they usually stop.

you guys crack me up

somebody has an opinion and states it

someone else disagrees so it turns to name calling you gender preferences called into question or your iq or you good looks

it is always the same be it sports which aint sporting at all or religion or what cartage wont kill mice

open almost any topic and see if i aint right

been lurking here for years and its only getting worse

Who you pointing to?

. DD, I read the book.

HAHAHA, that is funny, since I have given away tens of thousands of dollars.

I read just that, today.

Careful on the Irish crap. My drunken grandpap was from County Cork next to the brewery.

I've known many other tight-ass irishmen that give stuff away.

Me too!

Ma'am, DD tries so hard to be relevant on any topic introduced for discussion here, but lacking any experience in any of the manly pursuits, religion is his last bastion of hope.

Don't be hard on the poor creature by harping on reality.

The rapid expansion of the Christian Church prior to Constantine, against all forces of man and devils, is an empirical fact of history that cannot be denied and only awkwardly accounted for by the materialist unbelievers.

The explanations I have heard by naysayers along the way are absolute absurdity.

AND... why couldn't Julian the Apostate pull off the rebuilding of the Jewish Temple, (to spite the Christians?)

To return to the original question; our common ground as Christians with the Jews is the moral law of God mediated by Moses. And scriptural Judaism in its purist form should aknowledge the fulfilled prophecies of Isaiah concerning the Messiah, and the timing prophesied by Daniel 9, and result in belief in Christ the Messiah. There is no common ground like this with the Moslem.

Unbelieving Jews at times are just as rabidly hateful of Christians as radical Muslims. Why would socialist New York Jewish traitors like the Rosenburgs give the bomb to Stalin? That just blows my mind when you consider the magnitude of that act of betrayal. I would like to hope that some or many American Jews do not support that...

There was no real Christian Church prior to Constantine. There were a lot of Christian sects but no official Church. Constantine formed the official Roman Christan Church and some might say the Christian religion.

But that aside just because a lot of sheeple are willing to follow men and believe in the writing of men doesn't mean the "religion" is the right religion.

Since the Muslims consider Jesus a prophet of their religion, who received divine revelations from Allah, I doubt that they hate him.

Amen, regardless of what they think they will do.

I don't know where you learned about the church but somebody fed you a pile of crap

Jews didn't crucify Jesus. It was a group of Jews who charge him with a crime and the Romans who killed him. You are an insane person full of hate.

The Muslim religion is a religion of war. The big Mo told his followers to spread the faith through the sword of conquest and thats what they did for a thousand of years. The terrorist are the true Muslims and the "peaceful" Muslims are apostates.

Amen. Jesus is Lord.

Yup. In the end everyone will bow before him. Some will be overwhelmed with joy. The rest will be overwhelmed with dread. He is our Lord whether you believe in him or not. Not believing doesn't make him go away.

I couldn't say who hates Jesus the most, but I reckon crooked preachers do the most harm to His religion and His people.

Sycamore

At the time it appeared and for centuries afterwards, Islam was considered as nothing more than a Christian heresy. It was nothing more than a development of the well known Arian heresy.

And really, that isn't surprising. When the Arians were officially suppressed most of them were exiled and some, obviously, fled to Arabia. Likewise, there were plenty of Jews and Christians living in the area as well. Mohammed, as a trader, had plenty of opportunity to come into contact with them and learn about them. Being illiterate, his understanding was somewhat skewed and influenced by what he was told instead of Scripture. There were also allegations at the time that he had come under the tutelage of an Arian monk.

Islam claims, and even more so in those early days, to be merely a perfection of the Word of God. It claims that Jesus was a divine prophet, but that his message was perverted by those who came after, namely Paul, and that it was necessary for Mohammed to come and perfect it. It claims that the Jews desired to crucify Jesus but that God spirited him away and took him to heaven and that the Jews crucified his ghost instead. It claims that Jesus will return in the end and proclaim that he was merely a man and submit himself to the jurisdiction and lordship of the Mahdi.

But anyway, the idea that there is no Trinity and that Jesus was a created being instead of God himself, is straight out of the Arian heresies that began to spring up shortly after the time of Christ. And Islam was considered a Christian heresy right up through the Middle Ages.

Yup. I imagine Santa Claus, Bigfoot, and Jihad will be with us for a while longer as well.

In the beginning the world was without form.
So the creator, being Italian, shaped the world into the shape of a meatball. Which is holy scripture of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monsters.

Neither. Democrats.

Another angle is that Mohammed was an Arab. They have been troublesome ever since Abraham fathered the first one and unless I'm mistaken, the Bible foretold that they would be.

You mean Santa Claus and Bigfoot aren't real?????!!!!!!

The real problems in the world are Judaism, Christianity, and Islam all Semite religions.

You're a bleeder.




Travis

Either Jesus was a man of history or not. Either he was crucified or not. Sounds like the skeptics cannot agree among themselves. First Jesus is only recorded by Josephus and then another skeptic says that passage is spurious -- meaning there is no record at all. So which is it--is Jesus a man of history or not?

Celsus was a contemporary antagonist of early Christianity but he never disputed Jesus' existence or crucifixion--he only disputed the deity of Christ. The pagan emperor Julian wanted to take Rome back to its pagan roots and he derogatorily referred to Christians as Galileans. He never disputed the historicity of Jesus, he only contended that a Jewish carpenter could never be a god. Those critics had access to far more information of their times than we do. They could have investigated the Roman census and criminal records of Palestine. Their antagonism was based on their belief that this mere man Jesus was not divine, it was not based on the belief that He never existed or was never crucified.

Suetonias and Tacitus also speak of Christ.

Most skeptics I have dialogued with have a very minimal or selective understanding of early AD history. Skepticism concerning the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth is largely based on historical ignorance or refusal to accept the historical evidence.

Do you really believe this? Jews rather had a murderer pardoned than Jesus released. I've yet to see a single Muslim remove our Christian God from our government. Jews, including Hugo Black, have been at the vanguard at transforming the USA in to a godless, secular nation.

While you're off runnin' scared of your Sharia Law nightmare, the reality of Talmudic Law is now controlling your life & you ain't got a clue of its subtle stranglehold on our country.

Who killed Jesus? Here's your answer:

They really aren't a great percent of the population here yet, are they.

Tell us about all the Christian churches in Moslem countries, OK.

But most of the World's Jews are not related to Biblical Hebrews. They are Ashkenazi Jews, and they are not Semitic. Hence, they have no valid claim to Israel. However, they are adept at propaganda.

Very good post.

Christians refer to Judeo-Christian values because they accept the divine inspiration of the OT just like the Jews and recognize it as part of the canon of Scripture.

I don't think any of us can comparatively gauge the depth of any anti-Christians group's potential hatred.

Our constitution is clearly based on Biblical morality even though it carefully avoids embracing the Christian faith. Even Thomas Jefferson said that Jesus gave the world the best system of morals that it has ever known. The attempts to tear down our constitution, whether by Jew, or Muslim, or liberal, are largely based the on rejection of the moral foundation which made us who we are. If Biblical morality is completely destroyed in our system of Government, our constitution will also fall and we will no longer be the America conceived by the Founders.
Has anyone ever considered why the 10 commandments were originally placed in many courtrooms before they were removed? Did we evaluate what the impact will be on our nation by representatively destroying that morality. All law is based upon some morality. When that morality is destroyed, the laws will either change or be reinterpreted.

Rob Jordan,

You're either an APAIC/ADL/hasbara shill or illiterate of history. Jews invented terrorism. Israel has declared war on the United States and has murdered not only American soldiers but ordinary Americans as well. An Israeli suicide bomber tried to blow up the US Capitol. And there exists substantial proof that Mossad murdered JFK.

So what's in it for you? Why are you lying to 'fire posters? Are you shillin'?

Let me guess.

You are sitting in the middle of a pentagram on the floor, burning incense in cocobolo nunchuck candle holders, trying to resurrect TRH's account.

This place is too frustrating. Bristoe, Ghost, TRH, Derby, and a few other authentic conservatives whom I have missed, you're stalwart opposition to the 'fire's neocons, liberals, & shills is commendable.

Godspeed.

schwing...

(that's yiddish for "thought so")

RWE,

Why the eff would you deviate from your MO of guessing? You ain't got a clue of factual information, so you remain loyal to your MO of making chit up.

Stick with it. There's no need for light of knowledge when the bag over your head makes you look almost presentable.

What rank have you earned in America's fifth column? Are you a private first class yet?

Yiddish? You speak yiddish? I shoulda known. Yiddish is the bastard language of Ashkenazi Jews, the phony Jews that have duped Americans in to surrendering their country's sovereignty to their control.

I shoulda pegged you as a fraud a long time ago.

This place is academy for America's fifth column indoctrination and reeducation.

Making up schit?

Are you referring to the whole Pentagram comment, because, that, you ignorant [bleep], is called sarcasm.

Certainly nothing I would claim to be an actual event, although in retrospect your subsequent prop to TRH would make one suspect.

By the way, is my MO guessing OR making chit up?

No, doo schnozzle, I was making chit up.

Bristoe will hunt you down and kill you for grouping him with DD.

I'm sure the Mossad will beat him to it....

The name Jesus was a popular name at the time also there were many "saviors" at the time. Crucifixion was also a popular means of execution especially for treason. So there's no doubt that a "Jesus" was "crucified".

Still for all the threat Jesus supposedly posed to the Roman State and the Jewish hierarchy it seems there should be a ton of historical information out there and other than the Bible there isn't, only a mere mention here and there.

Personally, I don't doubt a Jesus was crucified. However, the orthodox Roman Christian religion is a man created religion about Jesus rather than the religion of Jesus.

All religions are man created religions about a God.

you must be stuck on some sort of misguided thought about orthodox roman church being the real church

the church is not
a denomination
a business
a building
a government
a official anything


the church is
people who believe in and follow christ

it was started with christ and not some hot shot a thousand years after christ arose

There is the Church referring to the organization and there is the church referring to the building.

The Church I'm referring to is the the organized Christian Church.

The Roman Christian Church is the official Christian organization. Every other Christian sect is heresy and condemned by the Church. If the Inquisition was still active all you heretics would be condemned to the stake. You are lucky to be alive when you are.

As to Jesus, there is no evidence that Jesus established a new religion. Jesus was a devote Jew from what can be gathered from history. The religion of Jesus was Judaism. What sect is open to speculation although many scholars believe he was an Essene or even a Zealot. No where in any Gospels and I have read a lot of Gospels besides the official four of the Roman Christians does Jesus ever refer to his new Christian religion.

Christianity is a man made religion about Jesus.

Many here are de facto, watered down Jews coming from the dispersion of the 10 northern tribes, over the Caucasus mtns, then via northern Europe, to America, and are now commonly known as 'white folk'.

ymmv

Christianity was a small brotherhood that became a following by means of the Apostles developing a discipleship producing more Apostles that became an Institution.

The Roman Church is "Official" in their eyes only. QED

Roman Christianity became "official" with Constantine's so-called conversion and his making Christianity the "official" religion of the Roman Empire.

Before that Christianity was very disorganized with many different sects. Certainly Christianity was not an organized religion before Constantine.

As I said it's good for many of you heretics to be living now and not facing the inquisition.

So how many Jesus of Nazareths from history who were crucified in Jerusalem under Pontius Pilate are there which are considered the founder of Christianity? Suetonius and Tacitus only wrote of one with regards to the Christians. Apparently you know more about Roman history than they!
Sometimes skeptics are so bent on their agenda that they don't even believe in logic!

Constantine called the Council Of Nicea together to control what was not, obviously, going to go away and was growing almost daily. Again, "official" in their eyes only.

The schism developed between the east orthodox gang and the Roman Catholic gang over one specific line in the Nicene Creed being that the eastern gang didn't recognize the Holy Spirit as one on equal with the Father and Son. Again, "official" in their eyes only.

Before Constantine convened the Council of Nicea, Irenaeus, a prominent writer of the early 200s wrote:

The Church, though scattered throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: One God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth , and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation, and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the administrations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and his appearing from heaven in the glory of the Father "to gather all things in one," and to raise up anew all flesh of the entire human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, "every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess" to him, and that he should execute righteous judgment toward all, that he may send "spiritual wickednesses," and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into everlasting fire, but may, in the exercise of his grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept his commands, and have persevered in his love, some from the beginning, and others from their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory. As I have already indicated, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if inhabiting but one house, carefully guards it.

It is true the Church was not organized under one hierarchical structure of authority in its primitive days of purity, but it professed the fundamental tenets of the Christian faith with one voice.

Constantine convened the Council of Nicea after making Christianity the official religion of Rome in order to address the growing Arian heresy and to decide if this system of thought should be considered within or outside of true Christianity. The Church made it clear to Constantine that they considered it a heresy. They could not have done so, unless they were previously speaking with one voice prior to the rise of Arianism.

We all crucified Christ, but it was not through force but by His choice. No one took His life from Him, He laid it down for you and I.

Threads like this just amaze me. So little understanding, but then that would get in the way of the bias.

Well,,,it's good to know that we have you here to clarify everything for we the unwashed.

first and foremost, and we've gone through this before, a mere human cannot kill a god. not jews, romans, or the rest of us gentiles.

a god is a god. let's don't try to kill them, ok? their story does get a little screwed up from time to time.

secondly, the Rabbi Jesus was a great teacher. the other mystical components are just that, mystical..,.the virgin birth, the resurrection, the forty days till ascension.

to believe is one thing, to know is another horse of a different color.

the jews at least some of them claimed jesus was the son of a cydonian archer in the roman army, panthea or some such. the google is at your fingertips. surely, the Jews are mistaken?

the muslims knows that jesus is neck and neck with mohammed as a prophet.

I fully agree. God picked that time and place because he knew what the Jews would do. God certainly didn't force them, he just knew they'd do it. Likewise, God picked Judas to betray Jesus not because Judas was forced to do it but because God knew he would use his free choice to do it. No one is forced to sin but God knows we will before we do it.

this so=called God, or YHWH, that so many speak of, was quite the Trickster wasn't he?

i mean, he knew so much beforehand, but never moved a muscle to change the outcomes? i wonder if he had pre-destined it all to be this way? the evidence sure makes it look like he did.

but, why, pray tell?

Really? If you don't agree, just say so and I'll be happy to discuss with you. Backhanded sarcasm does not suit you well.

Because He can. He has a plan. We make the mistake of assuming that plan is about us. I highly doubt that. We are certainly a part of His plan, as far fetched as that sounds, once you consider the depravity of humanity. And that is exactly why we are part of His plan I believe: to use such corruptible beings as people to bring Him Glory is remarkable, indeed. Who else could do such a thing or even consider it than the God of all Eternity?

i could care less what some self centred a$$ hat declared centuries ago

the only church are the followers of christ

i dont need no official anything to follow christ


you seem intelligent or at least well read try thinking for yourself and forgetting official

i matt clark do declare the 270 the official rifle cartridge

all other cartridges are apostate and false


i declared it official so it has to be right mark down this date on all your calendars


so it is said so it is done

Best answer!

liberals hate Jesus more than the jews or muzzies put together.

Here's some wholesome Jew entertainment for kids in Israel.

There is no proof that any Jesus of Nazareth was crucified. A Jesus was crucified but who he was is anybody's guess.

There was never one voice in Christianity until Constantine. There were so many sects that's impossible to count them all.

True that Arianism was a major heresy. But there were many others. There was one voice at the council it was Constantine's. He ran the council and power being what it is the bishops who wanted power sided with Constantine.

Again, Christianity is the religion of man about Jesus who those men made into a god.

Point well taken.

Another good point.

Derby,

The "All" in your statement includes your religion too, right? And, if it's man made, why do you believe it?

So which followers of Christ are the right followers of Christ?

It doesn't work that way. You have to be a emperor with power of life and death to make it work. Can you do that?

Well we know what they think. Love the chick in the bikini.

Because I created my own religion or as I prefer to call it my spiritual path. I march to the tune of my own drummer no matter how near or far away.

The passage in Tacitus is a known forgery, and Suetonius wasn't born for another 40 years after the supposed event, so he wasn't writing about events that occurred within his life time.

So, God knows everything we will do before he makes us, he knows we will sin before he makes us, but God still chooses to makes us in the way that causes us to sin?

Amen, regardless of what they think they will do. [/quote]Amen. Jesus is Lord. [/quote]Yup. In the end everyone will bow before him. Some will be overwhelmed with joy. The rest will be overwhelmed with dread. He is our Lord whether you believe in him or not. Not believing doesn't make him go away. [/quote]
Yup. I imagine Santa Claus, Bigfoot, and Jihad will be with us for a while longer as well.

In the beginning the world was without form.
So the creator, being Italian, shaped the world into the shape of a meatball. Which is holy scripture of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monsters.[/quote]


The bible is the most read book in the world. It truly is the very words of God given to man by the Holy Spirit. You might consider reading the book of John or Romans if you have not taken the opportunity before.

God's word always speaks life. His Holy Spirit will make his Word real to you if you earnestly seek Him. He is faithful and cannot go back on his promises. You can have a personal relationship with God vs. hearing about a religion that you do not agree with and is not appealing to you. Religion without relationship is DEAD. The key is getting to know your/our Heavenly Father. This world is not our home. As Christians, we are just passing through and will someday enter the heavenly realms and be with Jesus and those who have gone before us and we long to see again. We can accept the gift of salvation and live for God, or we can deny it, deny Christ, and be eternally separated from Him in hell. It's our choice.

Tacitus was a known forgery! ... surely you are more intelligent than this when you want to be! The then small persectuted sect of Christians interpolated into Tacitus' writings. How do you know what writings of his are valid and which are not. How do you know it was interpolated?

This is the scholarly consensus:

Most modern scholars consider the passage to be authentic.[42][43] William L. Portier has stated that the consistency in the references by Tacitus, Josephus and the letters to Emperor Trajan by Pliny the Younger reaffirm the validity of all three accounts.[43] Scholars generally consider Tacitus's reference to be of historical value as an independent Roman source about early Christianity that is in unison with other historical records.[5][6][7][43]

Tacitus was a patriotic Roman senator.[44][45] His writings shows no sympathy towards Christians, or knowledge of who their leader was.[5][46] His characterization of "Christian abominations" may have been based on the rumors in Rome that during the Eucharist rituals Christians ate the body and drank the blood of their God, interpreting the ritual as cannibalism by Christians.[46][47] Andreas K�stenberger states that the tone of the passage towards Christians is far too negative to have been authored by a Christian scribe.[48] Van Voorst also states that the passage is unlikely to be a Christian forgery because of the pejorative language used to describe Christianity.[42]
From the Wikkipedia

Your opinions are simply unscholarly. You don't need to be a scholar to simply say all the evidence from all the different historians was just interpolated. You dismiss Suetonius because he was born 40 years later ... really? You think he did not have access to the Roman records? You were born much later and consider yourself an expert over the historian who lived in that era.

Skepticism of this sort is simply based on wilfull ignorance ... but that is your choice.

Is this a confession that God is an omniscient Creator? Your argument is based on this presupposition or you have no argument at all.

Yes! He says in His Word he made the wicked for the day of destruction. You try to understand an Infinite Being with a finite mind and come up short. He hated one guy before he was even born. He says of some twins, "Jacob I love but Esau I hate."

So you created your own gods from your own imagination, and you seem to be OK with this. You freely admit that your gods are just imaginary. I'm truly astonished, Derby!

Thanks for the honest confession. I think all you wrote should be understood within the context of this statement. I prefer to stay with the facts and evidence.

Portier is not exactly a textual critic:

PROFILE

William L. Portier serves as the Mary Ann Spearin Chair of Catholic Theology in the Department of Religious Studies. He came to the University of Dayton in 2003 after teaching for twenty-four years at Mount Saint Mary's University in Emmitsburg, Md., where he served as Chair of the Theology Department (1989-98), Henry J. Knott Professor of Theology (1997-2003), and helped design that school's nationally recognized core curriculum. He is the author of Isaac Hecker and the First Vatican Council (1985) and Tradition and Incarnation (1994), a widely-used undergraduate text in theology. He is also the editor or co-editor of three other books on U.S. Catholicism and has contributed nearly one hundred articles and reviews in the areas of theology, U.S. Catholic history, and Catholic higher education. His graduate courses in the areas of historical and systematic theology generally support the M.A. and Ph.D. programs and treat subject areas such as Americanism, Roman Catholic Modernism, and contemporary issues in theology in the U.S. His article "Here Come the Evangelical Catholics" was chosen by the College Theology Society for the 2005 Award for Best Journal Article

Derby,

The argument in the link below helped me to see a bit more clearly. Perhaps it will help you too. I hope so, Buddy.

A slow-paced, long-winded, but low-key argument for "The Faith"

I'm not sure how to take your astonishment: perhaps sarcasm. It's the nearest thing to reality I've read from him.

So you've found the tip of the infinite iceberg.

Not Gods, a single Deity. Most humans seem to have a need to worship an unknowing supernatural Force or First Cause. All worshipers of one sort or another create a manifestation of their God/Goddess. For Christians their manifestation of a God is Jesus. In my case my manifestation of the First Cause is the Divine Feminine or Goddess.

This doesn't mean there are many Gods or Goddesses just many manifestations of the One Deity that we all worship.

No problem. I prefer reason and empirical evidence.

I'm glad you have something to make you whole.

I live in the real world. I really don't know about the rest of you.

drat

Ask a Jew about the Law of Moser.

He will lie to you of its existence. Jews are forbidden from informing on other Jews to goyim.

Jews will deny until they can no longer speak of the legitimacy of Protocols of Zion.

90% of you guys are hiding under rocks because MSM has you scarred chitless of the nightmare of Sharia Law when the boulder of the Talmud is crushing you. But what are facts to a bunch of liberal neocons who think that they're defenders of the Second Amendment yet it's their beloved Jews that are taking away their guns. Can't have a one-world-government in accordance with the Protocols if Americans have their Second Amendment.

You DO KNOW the Protocols of Zion were a Russian Hoax, right?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion

That is the standard script answer of a Jew that will fight like a schoolgirl biatch in order to protect the Protocols just like they will lie about the Talmud yet their still practice the Talmud (read: nonreligious) ceremony of Hanukkah.

Is your real name Moshe?

Hey Moshe,

Here's a lot more true version than the Law of Moser chit you posted:

The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

[Editor's Note: Update, Sept. 17, 2014. A small booklet published in 1938 titled The Jewish World Conspiracy affirmed the authenticity of the Protocols and identified the author of the Protocols as the work of the 19th century Jewish writer and leader Ascher Ginsberg who adopted the name Achad Haam. The Protocols, believed to be written in Odessa, Russia between 1890 and 1895, include the text of a lecture format divided into 24 headings (protocols) that formed the subject of a lecture presented among the inner circle in French Masonic Lodges. Quoting from the booklet:

"The bases for this supposition are the following, namely: that Freemason policy follows the lines of the Protocols, and that S.A. Nilus tells us that the copy which came into his hands in 1901 bore the following inscription: "Signed by the Representatives of Zion of the 33rd Degree."

The term "protocols" implies a blueprint or strategy to follow in order to achieve the desired goals stated below. The Protocols were a subject of discussion at the First Zionist Congress held in in Basel, Switzerland (spelled Basle at the time) from August 29-31 in 1897. The first Zionist Congress was headed up by Theodor Herzl. Subsequent Zionist congresses were held on an almost yearly basis up to 1913 (World War I from 1914-1918), and then resumed again in 1921. The ideas and beliefs expressed in these protocols are so hideous and repugnant to the sensibilities of any normal person of good will, that the British translator, Victor Marsden, could only work on translating the 1905 Russian text of the Protocols for one hour per day due to his revulsion with the concepts being promoted. The people who embrace these concepts consider themselves a special and separate category of humanity who were chosen by "God" (some Zionists admit they worship Lucifer, while others ask if Judaism itself is a satanic cult) to rule over all other men on this planet and establish a simple two tier feudal society: one with Zionist elites at the top and worker serfs below them. Zionists/Talmudists consider non-Jews to be the equivalent of cattle and therefore afford no more concern for the "rights" of the subhuman Goyim than one would grant to a herd of steer or sheep.

You will notice that the strategies of control expostulated here in the Protocols, written in the first half of the 1890s - such as the use of fiat paper from Zionist owned banks to replace currency backed by gold, along with the destruction of the nuclear family unit, control of school curriculums, the destruction of Christianity and a belief in God, the end of freedoms of any stripe, the creation of "terrorism" to frighten the Goy into clamoring for safety over safeguarding of constitutional rights, etc., etc., etc. is today being followed and employed exactly as laid out by Zionist planners in the 19th century.

Moshe, you do know that the Protocols have been authenticated, haven't you? Oh chit, I've comletely forgotten about that Law of Moser thing you guys have going on; you know, the law that requires that you lie to goyim in deference to other Jews.

Every 'fire poster ought to read The Protocols. While they're off chasing Sharia Law nightmares, their real danger has just about ensnared them.

How about a link, or did you not post one because you got this off of Stormfront?

Moshe,

I did post a link. Read it.

Who's paying you to shill here?

Hey Moshe,

Does this sound familiar:

The claim of the Jews that the Protocols are forgeries is in itself an admission of their genuineness, for they NEVER ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THE FACTS corresponding to the THREATS which the Protocols contain, and, indeed, the correspondence between prophecy and fulfillment is too glaring to be set aside or obscured. This the Jews well know and therefore evade.

It's at the same link for your edification. But you already know that the Protocols are legitimate. Your objective is to deny them consistent with the Law of Moser.

No sarcasm was intended.

Hahahahahahahahaha....

I don't buy the Warren Report or the government narrative variants thereof, but I gotta admit that the Mossad angle is a new one to me.

Its not just Portier--but many scholars who agree on this. The quote I provided comes from a non-religious source. In fact its just the skeptics who don't want to believe the historical record.

If Christianity disqualifies one from being an historian, then paganism, skepticism, and agnosticism should also. Your line of reasoning is self-defeating as everyone has a degree of presupposition that could influence the interpretation of evidence if there is not a studied attempt to be objective.

If Christians were making interpolations into the ancient historical record, how come there are not other extant copies without those interpolations? How did the Christians ensure only those with interpolations would survive? If we assume that these passages are Christian interpolations how do we know that they are the annals of Tacitus? Why would the interpolation be antagonistic to Christians? You are not logically engaging with the evidence but rather just dismissing it.

You know Rome, Paganism, and Judaism were all hostile to Christianity in its inception. All they needed to do to dispel the "new sect" would have been to prove that Jesus Christ never lived. They had all the powers of force and position and resources on their side to do so. The only thing that stood in their way was the real evidence.

The question has never been whether there was a historical Jesus or not as there probably was, rather the question is the mythology of Jesus which many of us are skeptical about.

No doubt the mythology of Jesus appealed to many of the down trodden and to women which were extremely oppressed under Mediterranean basin philosophy.

There is no evidence to support the mythology of Jesus. There are many of us who do not wish to be followers of the mythology of Jesus and should not have to.

Nervous secret service goober hit jfk in the back of the head with his M-16.

EthanEdwards,

Were you to read the Talmud and Protocols, both of which Jews deny to goyim but adhere to both, it makes much more sense. Never forget that Jews are expected to lie and cheat goyim. The Law of Moser prevents Jews from informing in other Jews to goyim. In essence, Jews are never allowed to tell goyim truth:

"Even though Jewish law expects people to observe the laws of the land, and even imposes that obligation as a religious duty, the Talmud recounts - in a number of places - that it is prohibited to inform on Jews to the secular government, even when their conduct is a violation of secular law and even when their conduct is a violation of Jewish law. While there are a number of exceptions to this prohibition (which are explained further in this section), the essential halacha was that Jewish law prohibits such informing absent specific circumstances. Even is secular government were to incorporate substantive Jewish law into secular law and punish violations of what is, in effect, Jewish law, Jews would still be prohibited from cooperating with such a system. Indeed, classical Jewish law treats a person who frequently informs on others as a pursuer (a rodef) who may be killed to prevent him from informing, even without a formal court ruling."

Law of Moser

BTW, due to the Law of Moser, expect spurious allegations of anti-Semitism. Because of the Law of Moser, Jews have to lie to goyim.

Stay green. You're more useful that way.

Tell me how you know that Mossad was not involved in JFK's assassination?

You sound like that AIPAC/ADL/hasbara shill, Jorge, AKA: Ehud.

R U TAK/sherp?

He's more likely channeled spirit of TRH.

He hasn't used the word "jewry" yet, so my guess is the Ouija board isn't varnished.

Maybe it might be a good idea to figure out whether Mossad had a central role in JFK's murder. I will admit that at one time I chased Israel's false flags over hell & gone before I happened upon Final Judgment.

Nowhere was I ever told that JFK & Israel were in a battle over Israel's nuclear arms development. JFK put the kibosh on it. Israel saw nuclear weapons as essential to its nefarious Operation Samson, which will destroy the world, USA included, were it to lose a legitimate war. Hence, Operation Samson provides Israel with extortion power necessary to force your sons to die for its illegitimate wars. But Americans, many 'fire posters included, ain't bright bulbs, right gunner500? Jorge? Well, we can disregard Jorge because he's an obvious AIPAC/ADL/hasbara shill. He's bound by the law of Moser. By Talmudic law, he must lie to goyim.

You can tell a book by its critics. Final Judgment has millions of Law of Moser critics.

Mossad had motive. Mossad created opportunity, owning thanks to Bloom and his Jewish homeboys in Dallas who had demanded hat JFK speak at the Dallas Trade Mart that took his motorcade right in front of his assassins.

As our Founding Fathers new, most Americans are too dumb to vote, right gunner500?

Keep drinking the Kool Aid. A guy like you can't become too stupid.

With the pits, chickens and agents.

A real sybil badass here. lmmfao

Nope, but you're sure as hell as one dumb sheeple.

So much cooler online, huh?

So, gunner500, are you telling me that you know for a fact that Mossad was not involved in JFK's assassination? And precisely how do you know that fact? Or is it, more appropriately, the concept of fact that eludes you?

I know that for the greenies like you, remaining that hue while drinking Kool-Aid keeps that bag over your head, which, at least, makes you presentable in public. But were you inclined to try knowledge instead of relying on MSM propaganda and the 'fire's shills, and you shoulda learned from the '12 election where MSM propaganda and the 'fire's will take you, here's desperately needed enlightment.

Who is mark lane?

he's the best selling author of "rush to judgement"

Oh, I don't know, kinda like for the same reason I know they weren't involved with the Alien dude in Area 51. Me Ehud? Certified anteater and anti-Semite, ace. That said, I am anti you and every other yellow SOB who posts under different names after their credibility has been so ridiculed and dumb enough to think folks don't catch on.

Then why does trh take his writings as gospel, and how does he know 'the mossad' killed the worthless demotard?

That's TMI for you. You're much more useful looking for goober secret agents and running from nightmares. Knowledge will is as useful as tits on a bull to you.

BTW, Lane's successful defense of Spotlight, the much feared publication of Jews who, on command must allege it's anti-Semitic in order to sully it, the jury did find that the CIA and its Mossads handlers did murder JFK. Why would you suppose that trial, arguably one of the most important jury trials in our nation's history, has been short shrifted by the Jewish-owned American media? Even the 'fire's shills like Jorge will deny what Mark Lane proved.

Stay green. It's a hue for you.

I was joking about this SanSouci being TRH - I can't remember which other doo schnozzle it is, Laguna, Raisuli or whomever - its hard to keep up without my notebook.

As far as the book goes, I don't know. What I quoted was on the front of the book that he linked to.

Just keeping it light.

gunner500,

I was once stupid like you. However, the more I know of the REAL JFK, the more I like him.

You must learn to not fear knowledge, for knowledge is power. and right know you're a weakling.

Ignore him. Just another in the long line of POS around here who, in order to keep posting must keep changing handles lest they be ridiculed out of here.

Yes, me too, his name is Tom and he lives in cali, and coffees on him.

This is classic AIPAC/JDL/hasbara script and right out of Rules for Radicals. Divert attention from truth. Ridicule. Do anything in order to deny access to truth.

So, RWE, how long have you been reading Alinsky?

You would call me Sir with a bowed head in person girl.

Have heart. Somethings do last forever.

Oh Ehud, your handlers are going to have to replace you due to lack of utility.

Oh, we know. You ain't yet been able to extricate yourself from the tentacles of stupidity.

Which testicles are you stuck to?

Are you importin' that good chronic chit from Colorado?

Are you looking to buy some?

No, after the free coffee and dojo visit, right Bigsqueeze?

When are one of you masters of the universe going to refute Mark Lane and Final Judgment's thesis? Or are you acquiescing to the FACT that Mossad had a crucial role in the murder of an American president?

Someone is teaching a Rules for Radicals online course for 'fire posters. Probably Jorge. He has AIPAC/ADL/hasbara indoctrination training.

Refute the thesis that Mossad murdered JFK.

I'll be reading.

Boy, you're desperate.

BTW, Bigsqueeze and I did do breakfast. I found him to be honorable, a trait sorely missing in your personality inventory.

Do you eat while staring into a mirror?

Give it up,Jorge.

Since he has outed you as a Jew and has informed us gentiles that you are required to lie to us, he has boxed you in.

Even if you posted a picture of your un-circumsised dick, he'd claim it was grafted back on.

Face it, he's just too smart for all of us, even if he didn't have Derby Dude in his corner.

Next you'll be asking us to refute the thesis as to why Jaysus SAVES!..but Moses INVESTS. FOAD

Also, I'm pretty sure it's highly illegal to 'dine with the dead' you may want to read up on that.

LMMFAO

Raisuli/bigsqueeze/Sansucksalotofcock/Laguna... They're all the same freak.




Travis

gunnar500,

Are you calling me a liar?

Make no mistake, I have called you stupid because you are. But I have not called you a liar. Just because you're a dim bulb doesn't make you stupid.

There is a reason why I rarely come here. It's a bastion of neocons & liberals. They undermine their own interests; that is, if liberty is one of their interests.

When they awake sans a Second Amendment, they will be the cause of its demise.

And he we have the gay porn stunt fluffer whose preoccupation with male genitalia has stretched his mouth to the point of vomiting inanity.

Here's another theory I postulated years ago after a port call in Haifa; Jewish chicks grow tits before the grow arms...

I gotta run.

In the mean time, one of you on the Phi Beta Kappa debate team come up with a cogent refutation of the thesis found in Plausible Denial and Final Judgment.

Pepto Bismol. Probably invented by a jew scientist though...

Rules for Radical No. 17:

Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can �argue� with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues.

Based upon your rap sheet here, Jorge, I figured you'd be teaching Rules for Radicals to 'fire posters. Keep it up. You have managed more than a few converts. However, the wise can see that you have yet to attempt to refute the thesis of Plausible Denial & Final Judgement; in the case of the former, Lane's thesis was proved factual. So let's call it what it really is: Lane's FACT.

Vaya Con Dios

I guess the Pepto worked. Pepto Bismol, the new jew wonder-drug, it even cures diarrhea of the mouth in gentiles..

Yes, and she's a riot too.

The Holocaust, with good reason, has made anti-Semitism unpopular in the extreme. The horror experienced by the world was well founded. However, it has also blinded us to some of the discussions and ideas that were common BEFORE WW II throughout the world, not just Germany

For instance, before WW II, Bolshevism was most often referred to as Jewish Bolshevism and understood to be a Jewish Revolution as that both Marx and Engels were Jews and four of the seven members of the original Politburo were Jews. Whether or not in the light of history, that understanding of the day was founded is debatable, but it was the common understanding EVERYWHERE.

Further, this conception that Bolshevism and Jewry were one and the same was IN LARGE PART behind much of the NAZI anti-Semitism. Germany had narrowly survived Bolshevik revolutions of its own and indeed, the Bavarian Soviet had ruled that state for a time in the early 20s and the people in charge of it were what? Jewish, of course.

Now you can make all sorts of arguments as to why such ideas were wrong and explain it all away. And, in fact, you might very well be right. But that doesn't change the fact that in those days, such things were the accepted wisdom.

So much was it the accepted wisdom that none other than Winston Churchill was willing to pen an article for a London newspaper in the 1930s in which Bolshevism and the "International Jew" were the main subjects. Churchill

Of course, Jorge's head will probably explode as that Churchill was one of his self professed heroes, yet there he is expressing beliefs Jorge says are "kooky".

Hatred like the following from spiritual leaders like Martin Luther set the stage and laid the groundwork, too, about 400 years earlier. The Jew has seldom been welcome in Europe unless they had wealth to steal. Too bad Luther didn't state his opinion plainly. Sounds a bit indictful and inciteful.

Christ called Jewish leaders "...open sepulchers" and it is to be presumed that those Jews who rejected him and continued to follow those leaders and their traditions come under that condemnation. So, I think it is to be expected, but not condoned, that at various points in history Christians have taken that as a mandate for ill treatment of said Jews. That said, we understand that as Christ said, "...his Kingdom was not of this world" and as Paul said, "...we do not fight flesh and blood." So, of course, a Christian is forbidden to commit violence on anyone for any reason other than legitimate self-defense or defense of others.

This is pretty typical of skeptics--deny the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified by Pilate, and then if the Christian provides good evidence, shift the argument to the denial of the deity of Jesus.

The shift in position shows the weakness of a position which changes for a more convenient defense. The record certainly shows a man called Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified under Pontius Pilate. Whether that man rose again from the dead would be a consideration beyond the scope of this thread.

But again, all the antagonists of Christianity needed to do on order to dispel the resurrection/deity of Christ myth was to produce the body of the man they crucified.

OUCH. Curdog, you made me cringe at even the thought of a knife down there. As a Naval Aviator, I have a big watch to compensate, and I need every bit I can

-----------

I read the Jews and their Lies about 20 years ago. Being a huge fan of Luther the Reformer I was horrified. I want no parts of that treatise and I would not defend it. Nonetheless it has to be understood in the context of the times that Luther lived. The Jewish banking house, (Fuggers) collected the indulgence funds as Tetzel hawked them, because Fuggers had loaned the money to the Biship of Mainz to purchase his third Bishopric and a seat as an elector.

The Jews were involved in the corruption of the Church that Luther was life and death trying to reform. It does not justify the intensity of "The Jews and their Lies" but it throws some light on the context.

For the record...again as it appears there is a common trait with those here who have multiple logins are also devoid of reading comprehension:



There is a reason as to why Jews have been persecuted by AT LEAST the following:
Egyptians
Greeks
Romans
Spaniards
Russians
Germans

The way I look at it from a historical perspective, there HAS to be a reason. Further:
Marx, although a self-confirmed atheist, was a jew.
I am extremely familiar with the writings of Churchill and his views on jews (my son's middle name is Spencer. As a young lad and before we came to the US, I spent a summer at a small school in England called Winchester. WLSC is my personal hero) as well as writings by other known historical figures (Henry Ford comes to mind) and of the close relationship of the origins of Marxism and jews.

I also know that about 80% of the jews in this country vote democrat and I also opine the majority of jews-regardless of what their passport says, consider themselves jews first. Jonathan Pollard, the Rosenbergs etc are examples. There are myriad other examples, but even the most moronic multiple login users, I think get the drift.

All that said, I have to laugh at idiots like that blame EVERYTHING on jews and portend the Holocaust did not happen. Arguably, one of the DUMBEST theories on record.

I am also a believer in a famous quote by a British PM: "England has no eternal friends or enemies, just eternal interests." While I would have opposed the formation of the state of Israel in 1947, Israel became a useful tool for us in keeping the Soviets at Bay during the post-war era, and today as a buffer against Islam, and even though the Protocols of Zion said a lot of things, to believe the jews rule the world IS kooky.

I don't need history lessons from you.

Edited to add: I'd still sell my soul for Nigella Lawson...

I'd suggest the church was involved in the corruption of the church and some Jews were available to take their money.

Then you should probably put me back on ignore, because I'm going to keep schooling your ignorant ass right and left.

Well, take heart all you anti-Semites, Jews are on a path toward extinction of their own volition. They are being assimilated, and will lose their identity. Krauthammer spells it out:

http://www.freeman.org/m_online/aug98/krauthmr.htm

Well I can't speak for all the skeptics on the planet but this skeptic believes that there probably was a historical Jesus if for no other reason that all myths and legends are based on some truth but I doubt the mythology of Jesus.

As to the body of Jesus who knows what happen to the body. It was quite common to leave the body on the cross and let the birds pick the flesh from the bones. Certainly, the mythology of a resurrection sounds good if you are creating a new religion. I wonder how many resurrections can be found among the pagan religions of the Mediterranean basin. Heck, the Celts had many resurrections for their gods, goddesses, heroes long before Christianity came on the scene.

BTW: It's Christians who usually change the direction of these threads as Christians have to stretch long and hard to come up stuff to prove the mythology.

Nah, not so much.

They just have to stretch long and hard to convince others.

Not that they should even try.

Horse+water<>drink.

Israel may disappear but the Jews will be with us for a very long time.

I know and I have no idea why they think they have to.

Yeah, one more thing I don't really agree with Krauthammer on. I suspect that if Israel were to be erased, there would be a new diaspora and the Jews in America and other countries would suddenly become much more "Jewish" than they are right now.

That's the last thing I need, schooling from an ignorant, inbred jerk like you, who needs to keep changing logins like the rest of the losers here with no credibility. FOAD, butthole.

I really don't know what you're talking about, but you are very sensitive. So, school is in session. You are hilarious. Are all the old Jewish Cubans so sensitive? Or is it just you? I had a Jewish Cuban law professor once, he was actually a funny guy. I can't imagine him being swelled up like a Latin toad as you are.

That is patently obvious.

Keep puffing toad. One of these days you will blow up and spew sanctimoniousness all over everyone.

Christianity is not based on the life of Jesus but His resurection. If the local officials had proven He was dead on the third day Christianity would never have started. After all His disciples were hiding in fear when Jesus went to them!

Mythology.

You are special!

I don't know about that.

Well its both--without a life there is no death or resurrection. I mention the resurrection in a later post as the key point in proving the deity of Christ. His life and death demonstrate His humanity and His resurrection demonstrates His deity.

Derby has admitted that such a man probably lived and was crucified - because the historical record is quite clear. What he has not and cannot answer is this: If He was crucified and claimed to be risen again by His disciples, why didn't His antagonists produce the body to stop the spread of the story? He mentions other "pagan resurrection myths." However there is a big difference between Jesus' resurrection and those myths in that the followers of the other myths were not being persecuted. They were not the target of annihilation. All manner of pagan religions were acceptable to Rome, but Christianity was not.

Both Rome, the pagans, and the Jews were trying to annihilate Christianity. All the major powers of the world were united against the Christian sect for 3 centuries to suppress and exterminate them. All they had to do was to prove that the man Jesus who was crucified never rose again.
Their criminal records would have recorded the crucifixion. Rome had the body in its possession. All Rome needed to do was to prove that He died and His remains were still left behind in order to dispel the "hated superstition." If they could have--they would have done so. Derby has not honestly engaged with the evidence... and he won't until he is willing to give up his own man-made religion.

If anyone can create their own religion, anyone can create their own truth ... anyone who believes they can create their own truth will not seek or come to the truth.

There are many scholars that believe that Christ was never crucified or if he was he was taken down long before he died. I personally don't know the answer because one, I wasn't there and two, there is no historical evidence to back up if he truly died on the cross or not.

Historical evidence both ancient and modern does suggest that one can be crucified and live for days and even weeks on the cross before dying. It's quite possible although there is no real evidence as of yet that the Romans could have been paid off to take Jesus down from the cross provided that Jesus leave the territory and cause no more trouble.

If in fact this is what happened it could explain why there was no body and how a religion could have been founded. One of those laws of unintended consequences.

If any of that happened antagonists or skeptics would have made these claims years ago and provided the evidence and proof. If Rome was persecuting Christians and trying to dispel the crucifixion and resurrection story they would not have been paid off sufficiently by a handful of poor Galilean fishermen to allow the resurrection story to continue when they were trying to stop it..

The harder you try the more evident it becomes that your truth is self-made.

We don't know what happen immediately after the crucifixion. The closes documents we have to the event are the Gospels and the earliest Gospels are 60 to 70 years old after the event and those are copies of copies.

I went back and re-read my post that you are responding to and I said it was all guess work on the part of the scholars. No one knows because it was a non event at the time. All we have is oral tradition that was finally written down decades after the event and the documents, as I've said, are copies of copies with the earliest copies being 60 to 70 years old.

You are free to believe anything you want as long as you are not harming me. For me, it will take a lot more empirical evidence for me to change my opinion or beliefs if that is even possible.

Many reputable historians don't chronicle events in real time nor do eye-witnesses. The evidence we do have supports the gospel accounts. Most people don't memoirs till the end of their life. Again your truth is self-made.

Whatever. Believe whatever you want to as long as it doesn't hurt me.

" prove the mythology."

You are probably too stupid to see your oxymoron.

Yes time will tell. Amen.

New Testament Canon was completed prior to 70 AD so that makes the Gospels written with 30 years or so from the actual crucifixion.

No, it wasn't.

According to William F. Albright, who was not a believer, the entire New Testament was finished by the year 70AD. What is your support for your "No, it wasn't,"?

42 Jesus said to them, �If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me. 43 Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. 44 You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father�s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. 45 Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! 46 Can any of you prove me guilty of sin? If I am telling the truth, why don�t you believe me? 47 Whoever belongs to God hears what God says. The reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God.�

Do you say that because of the prophesy assigned to Jesus regarding the destruction of the Temple which didn't occur until then?