If we’re talking scholars and the resurrection of the Christ, the world’s foremost expert on the subject was the late Sir Arthur Streeb-Greebling. He claims to have unearthed evidence for the resurrection(s), the resulting studies at his institute are fascinating. I dare any sceptic to listen to this clip and not be convinced of the Christ and his achievements.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Misc] Christians seem to be really good people
- Thread starter Mustafa II
- Start date
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 36,025
trouble is there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus other than the cruxifiction. its a leap to say because Mr Jesus Nazareth was condemn at a Passover festival, that the life story is true. no evidence of a particular birth 6th Jan 0BC, no evidence of sermon on the mount, no evidence of kicking off against money lenders, and so on. it could all be someone else, a group or prophets attribted to one idea or simply made up. as we know the Bible was essentially Middle Eastern Scripture Greatest Hits complied centruries later, any claims of truth and fact are incredulous and void. just accept the concept of Jesus as an idea, a philosophy and you're on much better ground. then we can move on to more interesting points.
None taken, and no of course it's not my business, it's just a question.
I have made the comment I am about to make before, with some additional bits concerning 'spirituality' prompted by the excellent insight of @Happy Exile. A note to @Tom Hark Preston Park, you are warned that this is a TL : DRer
Bertrand Russell wrote in The History of Western Philosophy about how unpleasant life was for the majority of people from when records began (pre-Greek times). What would happen would be someone with a certain genotype would become top warrior and create a gang of followers. Those that were particularly good at this would soon expand, get into warfare and conquering and all that. Trouble is that people like that have little idea about the gentle pursuits of scavenging for food (later, farming) genuine kinship, and with success giving the warrior and his gang access to the women, with brute strength and the willingness to rape and kill, and the charisma to lead other men, there were a great deal of cowed plebs. As kingdoms and empires were forged by conquest, murder and enslavement, those with different genes became the proletariat. The proles. Servants and slaves. To be grazed upon by the minority.
Russell claims that life was so shitty for the masses (with rebellion always possible, and some of the masses were quite strong owing to all the exercise they did scavenging for food, but life very precarious with pestilence, disease, crop failure and climate issues - floods, heat and that) that some bright spark came up with the idea of Gods. Keep the gods happy and all will be well. This involved all sorts, including human sacrifice, so the masses were not hugely enthusiastic at first.
Then another bright spark came up with the idea of an afterlife.
This was the spark for religion. The warrior elite, along with certain lesser members of the tribe blessed with the gift of the gab, and tons of shamanic charisma, invented all sorts of different rigmaroles and rituals, and if the crops failed it was because 'you didn't pray hard enough', but everything would be fine in the end owing to the afterlife.
In fact it is argued that the idea of an afterlife had been around before organized religion was invented, invented almost spontaneously by the proles, because without the idea of something better, life could be so cruel, brief and brutal that suicide might have been a better option.
The human 'spirit' is therefore our (so far) unerring ability to find solutions, short term and long term, some successful (*cough* Catholicism *cough*) others less so (e.g., witch-hunting and, on the whole, fascism).
As for mysticism (the need some have for a deity in which to believe), this is all simply expression of the operation of the human mind, which creates a need and then creates a solution. As a kid I was brought up C of E and even though by the time I was 8 or 9 it had started to seem a bit . . . .odd....miracles and that (none of my pals had ever seen one), I never dared say 'there is no god' till I was around 15 and doing so made me feel almost sick with butterflies in the stomach. It wasn't till I was in my 30s I could say it without any physiological reaction. And it wasn't till I was in my 50s that I stopped wasting my time getting angry and arguing with people who 'believe' (the evangelical hubris of the former acolyte whose scales had fallen from his eyes - aka a bore).
I consider myself fortunate. Like many I have faced the usual ails that punch us in the guts throughout our lives. Loss, pain, threat. And one day I will be dead. I have long since moved on from prayer. My problems and challenges are for me to deal with. If I need help, I get human help. I feel completely liberated and at ease as a consequence.
However, if you feel that prayer helps, go for it. Meditation is something else people use to cleanse and strengthen the mind. Mental exercises, like reading, sudoku, wordle....they stimulate us to make endorphins that make us feel better. As does prayer for some. Or exercise. Or indeed the judicious use of drugs.
So organized religion, then. I used to hate it. Now....some brands of Christianity are excellent and communitarian. These of course do not demand flegellation, the performance of demanding ritual, and the annihilation of unbelievers. The latter practices attract certain types, as we have seen, typically uneducated young males who can't get a woman. And also those who see they can exploit certain types for their gratification, whether it be by giving the spotty male virgin a suicide bomb or, elsewhere, charismatic men creating a harem of adoring vulnerable young women. The Waco nuthouse was of that type, I seem to recall. So beware.
The success of religion other than the gentle versions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam seems now to depend on keeping uneducated people devoted. That is not sustainable as the global information age starts to penetrate the wider more promotive world. People find out things, and once Pandora's box is open it cannot be closed. There will be turbulence of course, and I am thinking maybe another 500 years for change to be near complete, but we do change....humans do that. There may even be a risk that Catholicism becomes marginalized if it sticks with its Victorian values (no homosexuals, no sex before marriage, no abortion, no female cardinals), but it is a smart global business that has been around for almost 2000 years, so don't write it off yet.
The final challenge to religion may be this. Religion demands belief without proof. Humans, oddly, seem comfortable in general to believe things without proof. I, for example have little idea how my laptop works but I am prepared to accept as a working hypothesis that it is doing what I require, and not creating its own malevolent product as a perversion of my intention. I don't do 'believing' as I am a scientist, but I am relaxed about working hypotheses, even those I have no intention of ever testing. However, as we find that the progeny of science, technology, increasingly provides us with our material needs, allowing us to seek spiritual satisfaction via our choices, the requirement to genuflect many times a day, to kneel and to pray, may lose its cachet. As soon as "what was the point of this exactly?" pops into someone's head, the game may be up. How many of us know a 'lapsed Catholic'? How many of us know a 'non practicing Jew'. Etc. On the other hand I have never met a scientist who has abandoned the scientific method. A scientist who has stopped generating hypotheses and testing them, let alone a scientist who has given up experimentation for prayer. Yes, Darwin and Newton seemed to express Christian beliefs while doing science, but they did not use prayer as the primary mechanism of discovery. We all have lots of silly ideas but that doesn't make us all dysfunctional buffoons....... I follow the Albion for example. Silly, perhaps, but it isn't how I get things done.
Bertrand Russell wrote in The History of Western Philosophy about how unpleasant life was for the majority of people from when records began (pre-Greek times). What would happen would be someone with a certain genotype would become top warrior and create a gang of followers. Those that were particularly good at this would soon expand, get into warfare and conquering and all that. Trouble is that people like that have little idea about the gentle pursuits of scavenging for food (later, farming) genuine kinship, and with success giving the warrior and his gang access to the women, with brute strength and the willingness to rape and kill, and the charisma to lead other men, there were a great deal of cowed plebs. As kingdoms and empires were forged by conquest, murder and enslavement, those with different genes became the proletariat. The proles. Servants and slaves. To be grazed upon by the minority.
Russell claims that life was so shitty for the masses (with rebellion always possible, and some of the masses were quite strong owing to all the exercise they did scavenging for food, but life very precarious with pestilence, disease, crop failure and climate issues - floods, heat and that) that some bright spark came up with the idea of Gods. Keep the gods happy and all will be well. This involved all sorts, including human sacrifice, so the masses were not hugely enthusiastic at first.
Then another bright spark came up with the idea of an afterlife.
This was the spark for religion. The warrior elite, along with certain lesser members of the tribe blessed with the gift of the gab, and tons of shamanic charisma, invented all sorts of different rigmaroles and rituals, and if the crops failed it was because 'you didn't pray hard enough', but everything would be fine in the end owing to the afterlife.
In fact it is argued that the idea of an afterlife had been around before organized religion was invented, invented almost spontaneously by the proles, because without the idea of something better, life could be so cruel, brief and brutal that suicide might have been a better option.
The human 'spirit' is therefore our (so far) unerring ability to find solutions, short term and long term, some successful (*cough* Catholicism *cough*) others less so (e.g., witch-hunting and, on the whole, fascism).
As for mysticism (the need some have for a deity in which to believe), this is all simply expression of the operation of the human mind, which creates a need and then creates a solution. As a kid I was brought up C of E and even though by the time I was 8 or 9 it had started to seem a bit . . . .odd....miracles and that (none of my pals had ever seen one), I never dared say 'there is no god' till I was around 15 and doing so made me feel almost sick with butterflies in the stomach. It wasn't till I was in my 30s I could say it without any physiological reaction. And it wasn't till I was in my 50s that I stopped wasting my time getting angry and arguing with people who 'believe' (the evangelical hubris of the former acolyte whose scales had fallen from his eyes - aka a bore).
I consider myself fortunate. Like many I have faced the usual ails that punch us in the guts throughout our lives. Loss, pain, threat. And one day I will be dead. I have long since moved on from prayer. My problems and challenges are for me to deal with. If I need help, I get human help. I feel completely liberated and at ease as a consequence.
However, if you feel that prayer helps, go for it. Meditation is something else people use to cleanse and strengthen the mind. Mental exercises, like reading, sudoku, wordle....they stimulate us to make endorphins that make us feel better. As does prayer for some. Or exercise. Or indeed the judicious use of drugs.
So organized religion, then. I used to hate it. Now....some brands of Christianity are excellent and communitarian. These of course do not demand flegellation, the performance of demanding ritual, and the annihilation of unbelievers. The latter practices attract certain types, as we have seen, typically uneducated young males who can't get a woman. And also those who see they can exploit certain types for their gratification, whether it be by giving the spotty male virgin a suicide bomb or, elsewhere, charismatic men creating a harem of adoring vulnerable young women. The Waco nuthouse was of that type, I seem to recall. So beware.
The success of religion other than the gentle versions of Christianity, Judaism and Islam seems now to depend on keeping uneducated people devoted. That is not sustainable as the global information age starts to penetrate the wider more promotive world. People find out things, and once Pandora's box is open it cannot be closed. There will be turbulence of course, and I am thinking maybe another 500 years for change to be near complete, but we do change....humans do that. There may even be a risk that Catholicism becomes marginalized if it sticks with its Victorian values (no homosexuals, no sex before marriage, no abortion, no female cardinals), but it is a smart global business that has been around for almost 2000 years, so don't write it off yet.
The final challenge to religion may be this. Religion demands belief without proof. Humans, oddly, seem comfortable in general to believe things without proof. I, for example have little idea how my laptop works but I am prepared to accept as a working hypothesis that it is doing what I require, and not creating its own malevolent product as a perversion of my intention. I don't do 'believing' as I am a scientist, but I am relaxed about working hypotheses, even those I have no intention of ever testing. However, as we find that the progeny of science, technology, increasingly provides us with our material needs, allowing us to seek spiritual satisfaction via our choices, the requirement to genuflect many times a day, to kneel and to pray, may lose its cachet. As soon as "what was the point of this exactly?" pops into someone's head, the game may be up. How many of us know a 'lapsed Catholic'? How many of us know a 'non practicing Jew'. Etc. On the other hand I have never met a scientist who has abandoned the scientific method. A scientist who has stopped generating hypotheses and testing them, let alone a scientist who has given up experimentation for prayer. Yes, Darwin and Newton seemed to express Christian beliefs while doing science, but they did not use prayer as the primary mechanism of discovery. We all have lots of silly ideas but that doesn't make us all dysfunctional buffoons....... I follow the Albion for example. Silly, perhaps, but it isn't how I get things done.
Last edited:
I've got a sofa that he made while he was at the carpenter's when he was about 20.Where are the stories of Jesus when he was 5, 10, 16, 23, 27 etc?
In the children's section?Where are the stories of Jesus when he was 5, 10, 16, 23, 27 etc
Read my post and try and understand it. What I'm saying that, if there was a man called Jesus, he wasn't the son of some omnipresence deity and he did get resurrected a few days after he was killed. So, I don't care whether he lived or not, that's your issue. What I care about is morons claiming there is life after death and the power of prayer. I have a sensible opinion in that I think it is all crap. Live your life to the best of your ability, treat pepole fairly and they die. There's no hidden meaning to life, it's as straightforward as i put in my other post. Steven Yaxley-Lennon is a real person, he preaches and has disciples but that doesn't make him the son of a deity.
Loads of people preach and have others that believe them, that isn't proof they are the offspring of a god or that they know there is life after death.
So, it is completely irrelevant whether or not there was a man called Jesus. To me what is relevant is the garbage about life after death and prayer. Take the those two parts out of religion and there is nothing left.
If believing in all that shite gives you comfort then I'm pleased for you but I'd rather you lived your life being kind because it was the right thing to do rather than you think you'll get some reward once you pop your clogs.
Finally, you invited all this shite on yourself because I posted a comment using an often used phrase suggesting frustration and turned that into an invitation to preach to the rest of us.
Last edited:
“Little Jesus had finally progressed to his GCSEs after a relatively benign school career where the only incident of note was during his first sex education class. Jesus had claimed he’d been born of virgin birth. Tyler had accused him of talking bollocks, since it had taken three vapes, a bottle of WKD and at least six pumps to impregnate Chardonnay.
However, it was clear from then on that biology, physics and logic were not Jesus’s strong suit, though he scored an A+++ in RE and ultimately got into BHASVIC after his Dad smote the headteacher for having a pint on Sunday.
He was thrown out again after a fight on the basketball court, during which he threatened to get His Dad onto Terry. When Terry asked where His Dad was, Jesus pointed up to the court lights and replied, “up there somewhere”.
Last edited:
Sirnormangall
Well-known member
- Sep 21, 2017
- 3,184
So true - there have been plenty of ‘religious’ warmonger hypocrites over hundreds of years including up to the present day.
Yep.
Blues Guitarist
Well-known member
Some serious scholars do doubt that Jesus ever existed.
Jesus may or may not have been a historical character. But where is the evidence that he was god? Where is the evidence that the historical Jesus is the Jesus that is described in the bible and is worshipped by Christians? Please show us your evidence.
My view is that a character called Jesus probably did exist, but much of the description of Jesus in the gospels (written many decades later) is fiction. My evidence? The bible! Read the stories and follow the chronology (this is important). The first stuff written about Jesus was from Paul (who never met Jesus except for in visions and dreams), then Mark (who has no virgin birth story and the last we see of Jesus is dead on the cross), then Matthew, Luke and John tell their more colourful versions of the story of Jesus. And remember that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are all dishonest names applied to these anonymous stories. Why does the word of god need so much deceipt?
You want a serious discussion - ok. Was Jesus man or god or both? If divine, when did he become divine? Was he an eternal divine being, or did he become divine at his birth or his baptism or his crucifixion or his alleged resurrection? Whatever your answer to this - on what evidence do you base it?
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,222
I think most people understand that there was a guy called Jesus around at the time the bible is set.
What is in despite is the question of him being a god/son of God. You are clearly convinced that he is but from what I can see your evidence for this is flimsy.
This is why one of the most important parts of religion is 'faith', faith doesn't need proof. Well unless you are trying to convince others of your beliefs.
Without decent evidence though, this is a waste of time. This is why they used to use gun to persuade people of God's love when Christianity spread across the globe with the empire(s).
BadFish
Huge Member
- Oct 19, 2003
- 18,222
Last edited:
Insel affe
HellBilly
Jebus at 5 was a Shepard watch goats.Where are the stories of Jesus when he was 5, 10, 16, 23, 27 etc
Jebus at 10 had 5 years experience of shepherding goats.
Jebus at 16 sometime during puberty was fired from his shepherding job, ask no questions, it’s better you don’t know.
Jebus at 23 was still unemployed and wondering from village to village, due to his lack of education he became a confidence trickster and preyed on the vulnerable.
Jebus at 27 had become quite successful with his ruse, he had managed to have a flock of unstable, social awkward followers, hanging on to his every word, they even believed his mum Mary was a virgin (yeah they were actually that stupid).
The whole thing got quite out of control, with more and more elaborate tales, tricks and cons, eventually this led to his downfall, and he was nailed to a cross as was the custom at the time for conmen and trickster (much like hanging got really popular from about the 15th century) anyway as was also the custom at the time, just before death he was taken down and buried alive, however his followers at the time decided to remove the burial stone before he died.
Jebus, survived another 5 days after he was rescued by his mates, but rather unfortunately Jebus whilst drunk on wine (he was always banging on about, even came with an excuse why he was always drunk, body of Chisps or something)
he choked on a donor kebab made by his mate Judus.
true story dat.
I was asking a serious question and you post that dribble??Seriously??
You must have met an engineer at some point?
Insel affe
HellBilly
Ask a stupid question and you get a stupid answer.
I can’t take bullshite seriously.
How the feck is someone on NSC or this planet supposed to answer your questions.
when it’s debatable if he actually existed, and the scriptures have been altered so many times.
They are not even original teachings, they are taken from other beliefs.
Baldseagull
Well-known member
The shit God has done, according to his own word, the Bible, God is the one that should be seeking forgiveness.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Depends on whether those in positions of power within a group allow the abuse to continue, move it around to hide it. Not many would. The church did though, allowing thousands to be victims to cover its own reputation. Abusers likely exist in every walk of life, whether they are tolerated, protected and allowed to continue to abuse is another matter.That’s like me accusing you of being an abuser because you’re human? Or a hooligan because you like football? We all belong to groups, and there’s rot in everyone of them. The what aboutery line of argument is endless, and is best filed under boring insulting ignorant and/or sweeping…a bit like your reply!