Crazy Nomad wrote:
> Michelle Malkin wrote:
>> Crazy Nomad wrote:
>>> Tokay Pino Gris wrote:
>>>
>>>> The delusion I had was that I thought that there is NO
>>>> evidence. Which turns out to be wrong. So to speak, the
>>>> "historical" Jesus is pure myth.
>>>
>>> There is evidence in the first century. Don't listen to the
>>> babbling who claim there is no evidence. They simply haven't
>>> heard of Nero and Tacitus.
>>
>> Don't be ridiculous. Of course, we've heard of and read about
>> Nero and Tacitus. Just because there were Christians in their
>> times is not proof that a historical Jesus ever existed. All it
>> shows is that a bunch of people fell for a manmade myth that
>> was a composite of several earlier myths.
>
> You theory that a myth overtook a region within 30 years and the
> romans took this massive cultural shift so seriously as to start
> offing people in mass strains credulity.
What, and your theory that Christianity was more than a tiny
fringe whack-job cult in the mid-sixties doesn't?
> Especially when Jesus, which you claim to be a myth, doesn't fit
> the mythology you are describing. Essentially you are saying
>
> "New theory emerged, overtook zone in 30 years, and was met with
> violent opposition, and the followers were willing to die"
Congratulations. You've just proved that David Koresh was the
Second Coming, that there really were space aliens hiding behind
Hale-Bopp, and that the 9/11 hijackers are all fucking dozens of
eternal virgins as I type.
Besides, the only reason to assume that Christianity got its start
in the mid-30s is because of a tradition that emerged in the
second century that Pilate was responsible for ordering the
Crucifixion. Other extant traditions at that time blamed Herod,
and Paul blamed the princes of some vague and distant age. Indeed,
from how widespread the church already was in Paul's time, it
seems much more likely that it was already well established before
Pilate began his reign, perhaps having its origins in a very
secretive mystery cult -- such were a dime a dozen back then --
that dates back to the first century BCE.
> You claim there was a revolution without a hero. Jesus walked
> as human. Simple as that.
Except, of course, that all the contemporary and near-contemporary
sources mention neither revolution nor hero. Rather like the
massive nuclear attack on Boston Harbor that Albanian hero
Napoleon Washington carried out in 1913, wouldn't you agree?
Cheers,
b&
--
EAC Memographer
BAAWA Knight of Blasphemy
``All but God can prove this sentence true.''
----== Posted via
Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---
