Jesus Wuvs Me!

[InTheMoment]

Disclaimer: This poem was pulled from the Rev's website (the poetic archive section) and I thought that it was so beautiful, that I had to share it with the DV community...enjoy!

Jesus Wuvs Me
Jesus wuvs me, yes it's true
And you should know he wuvs you too.
The bible tells us that it's so
And that is all we need to know.


I have a teddy, soft and brown
I cuddle him when I'm feeling down.
But sometimes teddy's not enough
That's when I'm glad of Jesus' wuv.


Jesus wuvs me, yes it's true
He watches everything I do.
Though grown-ups say it is not so,
What the heck do grown-ups know?


The grown-ups say we're not so great,
We're just some kind of evolved ape.
They also say something much worse:
We're not the centre of the universe!


But Jesus wuvs me, come what may
I don't care what the grown-ups say.
I look at the sky, and it is clear
The universe's centre's here!


Yes, Jesus made it all for us
From black holes, to the platypus.
We don't know yet what each thing's for
But it's all for us, of that I'm sure.


'Cos Jesus wuvs me, yes he does
And it gives me such a buzz.
He created everything you see,
And I know Him personally!


It makes me feel so very big
To be friends with such a big bigwig.
I look at the stars, and it's plain to see
The centre of the universe is me.


Oh Jesus wuvs me! Wuvs me! Wuvs ME!
He makes me feel so warm and wuvvely!
I hope that you wuv Him as well,
Or else you're going to burn in Hell.

[Ynot]

*** Tony retreats to the trenches, as he has no intention of being hit by artillery shells ***

[CryoDragoon]

:D


thats the only thing i'm going to say about this...

[Nirvana Starseed]

InTheMoments poem I found on his website.


Away from truth

Who is the father I do not know.
cause I come from wayz down below

did jesus die on the cross for me?
I must have missed that part you see

what is wuv I do not know.
illogic is where I like to go.

What is truth I cannot see
someone pay attention to me

The truth is what I like to fight
somehow I manage to sleep at night.

but sometimes fightings not enough,
thats when I wuv my illusion stuff.

Masters who walk on water and glow
what in heaven would they know?

but mummy said I was to die.
Ofcourse to this I don't ask why.

Elusive is the truth to see
Help me ego comfort me.

I have this society on a place called earth, and its big, and full of illusion.
Thats what I like to cuddle and live in.

when i'm down, It's the world I am apart of, that tells me what to think.

smoking kills, written on smokes....doesn't stop them smoking it folks.
ignore the truth, so you can sin. Treat the earth like a rubbish bin.


No conscience I need to have at all.
My beliefs and denile build me that wall.

[Nirvana Starseed]

inthemoment you are quiet a poet. :D



:pope: <-----Anti religious preacher? yeah same thing....

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by InTheMoment+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(InTheMoment)</div>Disclaimer: This poem was pulled from the Rev's website (the poetic archive section) and I thought that it was so beautiful, that I had to share it with the DV community...enjoy!

Jesus Wuvs Me
Jesus wuvs me, yes it's true
And you should know he wuvs you too.
[/b]

But on the other hand...

<!--QuoteBegin-InTheMoment
I hope that you wuv Him as well,
Or else you're going to burn in Hell.

When I think of love, I think of somebody letting me be tortured forever for not loving him when it is completely understandable that I don't even think he exists. Somehow I think that when Jesus actually did exist he was a fairly good bit more reasonable than that. I haven't met any drunk, fight picking rednecks who overreact quite as much as some say Jesus does.

[kimpossible]

He's a psycho-stalker-type, prehaps? If he can't have you - no one can! [zaaaap! to hell!]

[InTheMoment]

Ok let's play then...

Originally posted by Master of Illusions
did jesus die on the cross for me?
I must have missed that part you see
Jesus Christ
Got sacrificed,
But retained immortality.
Small sacrifice, in reality.

For God gave His only Son,
His only, His pride, His number one.
Forgive me if I pick a bone,
But wasn't it more like a loan?

-----------------------------------------------------------

And a little bonus stanza directed towards your "truth" :roll:

"I have faith," says the Starseed, "and you
Can know God if you just have faith too."
But of course! For it seems
"To have faith" simply means,
To pretend really hard something's true.

[Rakkantekimusouka]

ITM, you have a way with words. :D

How's this for irony? Now the realists are going to be posting a LOT in this section, things just like this, that have to do with "religion/spirituality", just not in the long-winded, preachy sense. The fact that there are no mods translates to the fact that no one cares. So post away, post away, post away, all! :chuckle:

Edit: That means don't get your toga all in a twist, Staashiido...:P I mean, you certainly can if you want, but why would you want to make more work for yourself?

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Rakkantekimusouka
How's this for irony? Now the realists are going to be posting a LOT in this section, things just like this, that have to do with \"religion/spirituality\", just not in the long-winded, preachy sense. The fact that there are no mods translates to the fact that no one cares. So post away, post away, post away, all! :chuckle:
Exactly! I'm just returning the favor that previous theist have done on the other forums. It's time to administer my version of propaganda...muhaha! :evil:

[Nirvana Starseed]

to have faith is not pretending something is true. Get your poems right dam it.


and Jesus sacrificed his life. Thats the biggist sacrifice possible dumb ass.

[Leo Volont]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
to have faith is not pretending something is true. Get your poems right dam it.


and Jesus sacrificed his life. Thats the biggist sacrifice possible dumb ass.

Unfortunately, since Faith was so greately advocated by Paul, and since Paul was indeed the Antichrist, we need to re-evalatute the Doctrine of Faith to see what harm there is in it. And there is harm. Just look at how Faith is used in the New Age Community. The New Age Profiters promise the Heavens and the Earth, but condition all of their Teachings with the proviso that their people need to have Faith. Effectively it allows them to shift the Blame. It is not that their Doctrines and Promises are wrong or unrealistic, it is that the people do not have enough Faith. This is how Paul used the Doctrine of Faith. When he broke away from the Messianic Church of the Jews and set up a separate Gentile Christianity, the miracles stopped. His Congregations, who had heard of the Miracles in the Messianic Church, complained and were on the point of Rebellion with Paul. Some Church's did boot him out, notibly Ephesus, but other Congregations were satisfied with the Excuses that Paul was able to fashion. Those Excuses is what we now understand as the Doctrine of Faith, which are effective blaming the people for the frustrations they experience with False Doctrines in that they do not have enough Faith to activate them.

The True Belief is that a Correct Doctrine requires no Faith. A good Spiritual Technique or Teaching will simply operate Mechanically. The correct actions will be followed by the intended consequences. This is in line with Modern Catholic Thought. For instance, regarding wearing the Miraculous Medal, Our Lady was quite specific, that the benefits would accrue from simply wearing the Medal, and not in having Faith in it. some of the first documented Miracles involved Atheists who wore the Medal on dares, who could have had no Faith, and yet still experienced Miracles.

[spoon]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
and Jesus sacrificed his life. Thats the biggist sacrifice possible dumb ass.I don't think you're getting it here. it's not a sacrifice because the situation was this:

An immortal entity sent himself down to earth to be crucified because of silly rules that the same immortal entity created ~2000 years before and wanted to change. This immortal entity never had to make a sacrifice because, being immortal, he could not die and was always going back to heaven... where he had been all along.

Yeah. Big sacrifice.

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by kimpossible
He's a psycho-stalker-type, prehaps? If he can't have you - no one can! [zaaaap! to hell!]

He won't give it up. I tried a restraining order, but that was a joke. All the cops just worship him. I also changed my locks, but that hasn't kept him out of my bushes. He better knock it off before I have him crucified.

[Rakkantekimusouka]

Originally posted by Universal Mind
He won't give it up. I tried a restraining order, but that was a joke. All the cops just worship him. I also changed my locks, but that hasn't kept him out of my bushes. He better knock it off before I have him crucified.
I just about pissed myself reading that. :laughtillhurts:

I guess this forum isn't so bad. :D Keep these threads comin', Momentai! :nod:

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by Universal Mind


He won't give it up. I tried a restraining order, but that was a joke. All the cops just worship him. I also changed my locks, but that hasn't kept him out of my bushes. He better knock it off before I have him crucified.

I've found stabbing him in the side to be reasonably effective. Just be sure you hang around for a bit and make REALLY sure he's dead. Tricky little bastard...

[Placebo]

Originally posted by kimpossible


I've found stabbing him in the side to be reasonably effective. Just be sure you hang around for a bit and make REALLY sure he's dead. Tricky little bastard...
ROFL :rolllaugh:
Damn that's funny. For your sake I hope God doesn't exist or is even more understanding than they make out :P
Then again, you're doomed if you don't believe in the right God in the first place... one of those nasty 'you're doomed if you do, doomed if you don't' things.
I think I prefer the lottery...

[Rakkantekimusouka]

Not only is the lottery mathematically and scientifically valid, as it were, it also has much better odds than your average mangod-type miracle these days.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Originally posted by spoon

An immortal entity sent himself down to earth to be crucified because of silly rules that the same immortal entity created ~2000 years before and wanted to change. This immortal entity never had to make a sacrifice because, being immortal, he could not die and was always going back to heaven... where he had been all along.

I think your a little bit confused about who jesus is.Because of all the religious doctrine about it has effected your perception and understanding about the situation. He said himself "he that loses his life for my sake, will gain it." That applies to everyone not just him.

that immortal excuse is silly, mainly because jesus is just like us. Just more evolved.
If you want to call jesus god and somehow different to us, because you think he was so great. It does not alter the fact he was one of us. It obviously was a sacrifice.He could have lived how he wanted to. He didn't have to do it. He was not god anymore than you are. He was perhaps more perfect. But just because he was so evolved is no reason to say, "he was different, so it was nothing for him to do that" You little brat.

In addition the only reason he is said to have gone heaven is because he was evolved enough to come from such a state, as where we are striving to go. and will all go. He merely came down to teach us how to get there more quickly.

but some will probally take a long time to get there because they don't listen or understand. Are not willing to, and are stuborn bastards in general. Similar to you guys.

[spoon]

I think your a little bit confused about who jesus is.Because of all the religious doctrine about it has effected your perception and understanding about the situation. [/b] Oh, I'm sorry, I was talking about jesus the religious character. You were talking about the jesus you just made up to segway into your beliefs.

the immortal excuse is silly, mainly because jesus was just one of us. Just more evolved. [/b]You're familiar with the bible right? Thats where this jesus character comes from. He was an immortal third of the triune christian god. I'm not going to go into how ridiculous the trinity is - thats what he is in the christian mythos. You can't just make up new beliefs and tack them onto an already established mythical character.

And just because he was so evolved is no reason to say, \"he was different cause he was god so it was nothing for him to do that\" You little brat. [/b] I don't believe in jesus. But if you do believe, and believe that he died for our sins, then you believe he's a god. Otherwise you've just made up some character to validate your beliefs.

I'm really confused right now as to how you can completely ditch the biblical jesus, but still hold onto the ol' "he died for your sins" line?

-spoon

[Rakkantekimusouka]

Staashiido, you're an asshole just like the rest of us, and you keep proving it again and again. There is no sacrifice because there is no Jebus, not like that Greek Book says, anyway.

So just stop beating that poor dead horse; besides, it's starting to smell.

Edit: You beat me to it, spooner! :P

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by Placebo

ROFL :rolllaugh:
Damn that's funny. For your sake I hope God doesn't exist or is even more understanding than they make out :P
Then again, you're doomed if you don't believe in the right God in the first place... one of those nasty 'you're doomed if you do, doomed if you don't' things.
I think I prefer the lottery...

You know, life's a gamble, but death is a surety... So since I already have those odds in my favor, I'm willing to play out for the pot-odds.

[Universal Mind]

Doesn't the Bible say that God came to Earth as Jesus, his son? Wasn't Jesus part man, part God? That's what my Presbyterian church drilled into my head every Sunday until I converted to Episcopalianism. Then the Episcopalians drilled it into my head every Sunday, just in a more open-minded and understanding manner.

If God is also Jesus and Jesus is God, then God is the son of Jesus. So Jesus is the father of the father of Jesus, making Jesus his own grandfather, and therefore his own grandson. If he is his own grandson, and his grandson is his grandfather, then his great grandson is also his his great grandfather. This goes on infinitely. Does Jesus look in the mirror and say, "Hello Great Great Great Great Great Great Granddaddy."? Does he then say hello back to himself? If Jesus also has his own separate identity from God, like I was taught, then there are an infinite number of Gods, and an infinite number of Jesuses. So there isn't just one God after all, and Jesus was not his only begotten son. God had an infinite number of children. That's a heavy child support burden. Should he be taken to court and put on a payment plan? I guess if an infinite number of Gods are working together on a payment plan, it can be covered, but it probably takes away each individual's feeling of responsibility and has them all slacking off as much as possible. Send God to jail! Wait... Never mind. God's son already died, for us, by going to where he always had been. I bet God is relieved. But oh yeh... Think of the infinite number of past bills. Well, Jesus is also God, so he is responsible for himself too. An infinite number of Jesuses need to go to jail for not paying what they owe himself.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Half way to Loonville
but some will probally take a long time to get there because they don't listen or understand. Are not willing to, and are stuborn bastards in general. Similar to you guys.
Yah yah...tell that too the men in white coats and butterfly nets that will, undoubtedly be showing up, on your doorstep in the near future.

[Kaimelar]

I think you really don't understand what Jesus really was. ( I hope you did in fact read the bible, since you're talking about it anyway )

Jesus is God born into flesh. He is like us, becuz he was in fact human. He felt pain, suffering and joy, just as we do today. And, most importantly, he is just as immortal as any of us as well, becuz he too had (has) a soul. You too will Live after Death. The only difference is that Jesus' soul was/is different, him being part of the Holy Trinity, so he could resurrect, us being unable to perform such a miracle.

It is indeed a beautiful sacrifice, becuz He gave His life for all of mankind. Humans can perform sacrifices too, such as dying for a loved one, but Jesus' sacrifice is different, becuz he understood the suffering of Humanity as a whole and gave his life for us all.

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by Kaimelar
I think you really don't understand what Jesus really was. ( I hope you did in fact read the bible, since you're talking about it anyway )

Jesus is God born into flesh. He is like us, becuz he was in fact human. He felt pain, suffering and joy, just as we do today. And, most importantly, he is just as immortal as any of us as well, becuz he too had (has) a soul. You too will Live after Death. The only difference is that Jesus' soul was/is different, him being part of the Holy Trinity, so he could resurrect, us being unable to perform such a miracle.

It is indeed a beautiful sacrifice, becuz He gave His life for all of mankind. Humans can perform sacrifices too, such as dying for a loved one, but Jesus' sacrifice is different, becuz he understood the suffering of Humanity as a whole and gave his life for us all.

But what about his infinite number of grandfathers?

[Nirvana Starseed]

In the moment, little suggestion by the way.

your sig makes you look really silly......

why don't you just put something equally degrading to yourself such as.

"lincon introduced freedom from slavery. But I re-establish it."

Or maybe.
Everyone around me is respectful, but I like to beat the shit out of them"

I mean seriously how stupid can u get.
And you put it in your sig like your proud of it......which is even more sad.

and whats that in your avatar? some little demons running around or something.


Sorry tolerating foolishness has been a big hurdel for me.

Another thing is even the non- christians here believe in a biblical jesus and talk about him as such. but when I mention jesus in the proper context people are confused. Like how can u make up new beliefs? They are new beliefs to you because yo've never been taught whats real. Sunday church or scripture or wharever has conditioned even u guys.And you ever think jesus did not exist, or is the biblical character they make him out to be,

Sin is simply missing the mark. In the old days its what you say when you dont hit the bulls eye. I have mentioned that many times. But people continue to miss the mark on this obvious point. Jesus did what he did so you are more able to hit the bulls eye, if you decide to pay attention to his lessons. You will aim correctly and hit the target. Simple.

[bradybaker]

Ok, thats for that Nirvana, now can you please present some evidence supporting the Jesus that you are describing?

[Nirvana Starseed]

what do u want as evidence. Move a mountain or something?

[kimpossible]

>> Sorry tolerating foolishness has been a big hurdel for me.

Have you considered suicide?

[spoon]

Another thing is even the non- christians here believe in a biblical jesus and talk about him as such.[/b] I don't believe in a biblical jesus. You'd have a hard time convincing me that a historical jesus existed. I do, however, know the character of jesus pretty well.

but when I mention jesus in the proper context people are confused. Like how can u make up new beliefs? They are new beliefs to you because yo've never been taught whats real.[/b]Do you know how concieted this is? I supposed "what's real" is what you think, because you're better than us? As brady already asked - where is the evidence for your interpretation of jesus? Here's a little bit of evidence against your interpretation:

The only information we have about jesus is from the new testament, namely the four gospels (matt, mark, juke, john). Since you believe in jesus,you have to have gotten him from these gospels.

It just so happens that your interpretation is completely unbiblical. That's cool, plenty of people believe in a historical jesus (the man at the core of the myth if you will). Not a whole lot of evidence for him existing, but whatever floats your boat.

You've then slapped a load of new-age mumbojumbo on top of the historical jesus character, again making him a religious icon. This is also fine, props to your for inventing your own crazy religion.

The problem occurs when you keep aspects of the christian jesus (he died for your sins) to go along with your newage belief. If you're discarding the entirety of the biblical context of jesus you cannot just arbitrarily decide to include bits of christian mythos in there.

So I'll ask again: what is the evidence supporting your jesus?

-spoon

[Raz]

The crusade:

-We have come to jerusalem and kill you in the name of Jesus, son of god!

-No! Jesus was a prophet in our religon we kill YOU in the name of jesus!

-Do you? Was he? I did not know that... Well I kill you for your dark skin! For Jesus was a white man from Oxford!

-No he was not! He was from Judia! Dark skin! Such as we!

-Really? Look... We have come all this way... Would you mind awfully if we hacked you to pices? Just for the press back home?

----------------

I dont belive in religion... I belive all religions are philosofys with some good ideas and some fu__ing wierd ones...

[Raz]

from one of my previous posts:

as Eddie Izard said so well while doing stand up in new york:

God to Jesus:

-so what did you tell them be for they killed you?

-Well I told them: Drink this wine for it is my blood...

-You did what!? Thats Vampirism! Why did you do that!?

-I was trying to make a ceremony out of it!

-Why dident you just say: Drink this wine for it is a merlot! What did you say more?

-Nothing dad...

-Somthing about bread?

-Well... I said: eat this bread... for... it... is... my favorite! And they loved it! It was still warm and had all those crumbly bitts in the middle!

-What did you say?

-Oh all right: Eat this bread for it is my body!

-Thats Canabalism! And on top of that you celebrate your death on the biggest pagan day of the year! That changes depending on the moon! If they dont work out thats pagan I will eat my hat!

-Dont worry dad... Nobody will notice for 2000 years untill a transvestite points it out in new york...

[Nirvana Starseed]

Raz its more amusing when the jokes based towards the truth in its proper place, rather than the distortion. I didn't find what you said all that funny, but I suppose u could make jokes about it. And maybe I will later cause its a good idea.

Anyway Spoon, my reply to your post.


Originally posted by nirvanastarseed
the non- christians here believe in a biblical jesus and talk about him as such. you either think jesus did not exist, or is the biblical character they make him out to be

Conclusion of my point, here is the important part of what was written. which you did not understand. If jesus to those against christianity is believed or even discussed. it is alot of the time the christain character jesus. And that character is flawed and infected by the church. It is never considered, it seems. That another jesus other than that of the image of the church presents. Exists. That is where you are wrong. What is not seen, or even considered, is that jesus existed, and existed much differently to how the church presents.

lets continue with your post.

I don't believe in a biblical jesus. You'd have a hard time convincing me that a historical jesus existed. I do, however, know the character of jesus pretty well.[/b]

This merely confirms what I said above, and confirms it well. You know the churches character of jesus well, you say. But you don't believe that he existed. When you talk about the character, you are speaking of the churches image of jesus, all the while not even knowing what a real jesus may be because you do not even think a real jesus existed. So you don't know the real jesus, only that of the church's version. And you arn't willing to consider anything but the churches version, because to you there is no other version. This is why to me you are in the same category as the christians. With a closed mind. The only difference with your type is that you think its fiction. but you don't understand anything other than that fiction. So your still in the same group anyway.


Quote:
but when I mention jesus in the proper context people are confused. Like how can u make up new beliefs? They are new beliefs to you because yo've never been taught whats real.[/b]


Do you know how concieted this is? I supposed \"what's real\" is what you think, because you're better than us?[/b]

Here you accuse me of thinking I am better than You. Just because I say something is true. And for that you call me concieted.


As brady already asked - where is the evidence for your interpretation of jesus?[/b]

My evidence is the logic behind my reasoning, which you fail to listen to. One who does not observe the evidence, thinks it does not exist. But in reality such as person has not bothered to see it, nor looked for it.


The only information we have about jesus is from the new testament, namely the four gospels (matt, mark, juke, john). Since you believe in jesus,you have to have gotten him from these gospels.[/b]

Which contains alot more than you think it does. Even if it is hidden amongst symbology, for example it's revelations for the most part symbolic in nature. Like how a dream is interpreted. Yet in other parts where this code was not possible transferable, the writings bias does not stop me from seeing what is real in it, and what is false. but because of your lack of clarity and understanding, you cannot see these things in the writting. but see only the churches version of the writing.

I also have gotten what I know not just from this source. It's not the only source of information about the past and whats true.

It just so happens that your interpretation is completely unbiblical. That's cool, plenty of people believe in a historical jesus (the man at the core of the myth if you will). Not a whole lot of evidence for him existing, but whatever floats your boat.[/b]

What you fail to consider, in your denile. Is Just about all myth stems from a core truth.
In this example that core truth is a entity who is named here Jesus. The bible was created as a result of the life of jesus and the events of that time. It was recorded and memorized by real people then, and of a similar time to that. It would be very strange if such a time was not recorded, memorized in some way, having no effect of humanity in such a short period. (2000 years) when artifacts from beyond this time still exist on earth. The message was extremely strong at first, and difficult to \"forget\" as many wanted it to go away, disturbing the other religious material, as the truth does when it is brought forward, distinguish many illusions. This jesus and what he had done distrupted the boat so much, it just wouln't go away, because it was so amazing. And thats the effect of great truth when it is lived. When others try and bias it and subdue its power.Try anything to make it go away. Then it becomes like \"the character Jesus\" that you know. When the \"character Jesus\" is established over time you have two weapons. Distort the message. And 2nd. Deny the event/teach the message wrong. As a result People like you are born. Who are not capable of seeing whats real and completely ignoring it, not even seeing the message, and calling anything other than the churchs bias of jesus mumb jumbo. You do this In your belief that the church made the character jesus. Yes, they made your image of jesus. But the real image existed before the churchs version. This you cannot accept. but do you really believe that such power of influence of the church's false authority could come from the church itself? Ofcourse it could not do this of itself. It came from something alot more powerful than what the church preaches today. It \"hijackes\" authority from the figure known as Jesus Christ. The reason it is so sucessful is because of this hikacking of authority, which in early times, was not so much hijacked, but was close to the real message. But the real message has been preserved. because I know it, and many others known it.

Overall, There is evidence Of the real jesus, but you fail to understand it. And you do not bother to look for it. As I have already mentioned.

You've then slapped a load of new-age mumbojumbo on top of the historical jesus character, again making him a religious icon. This is also fine, props to your for inventing your own crazy religion.[/b]

Everything can be labeled a religion. I can label your beliefs a religion to. You can label the truth itself a religion. Labelling it \"new age mumbo jumbo\" also does not make its logic and truth of it go away. It merely reveals your denile about it. As you have said nothing constructive here to suggest otherwise.

The problem occurs when you keep aspects of the christian jesus (he died for your sins) to go along with your newage belief. If you're discarding the entirety of the biblical context of jesus you cannot just arbitrarily decide to include bits of christian mythos in there.[/b]

Again you fail to realize that the christian image is tainted,yet great truth is behind it, like the core of many religions.Thus when you see something That to you looks similar to christianity you scream I am borrowing parts of it, and including new bits. Yet I am just revealing to you the original message that it is trying to hide and distort.

And the problem accurs when your not able to understand what I am talking about.
It is obvious the sacrifice jesus made was to help us. If you dedicate your life to helping your children. And if you even sacrifice your life for a child you have. You could say,

\"I sacrificed myself for my childrens sin as they were growing up.\"

you think of it as a guilt trip of some sort. But its not meant like that. It is just explaining that You made a sacrifice to your child because you loved them. And you don't even understand this basic princible, cause the church told you how jesus died for sins, and thats its not like the princible I just described. only what you know about it from the church.



So I'll ask again: what is the evidence supporting your jesus?[/b]

This is just the tip of the iceberg and not even that. If you were seriously asking this question. And wanted to see evidence. You would start by discussing it with me logically.
like you have started to do, but will abandon and give up soon as it requires you to think.

[spoon]

If jesus to those against christianity is believed or even discussed. it is alot of the time the christain character jesus. And that character is flawed and infected by the church. It is never considered, it seems. That another jesus other than that of the image of the church presents. Exists. That is where you are wrong. What is not seen, or even considered, is that jesus existed, and existed much differently to how the church presents.
[/b] The christian character of jesus is discussed because, as I pointed out, there is no other character of jesus. You just made your version up. I will give more evidence for this later.

You know the churches character of jesus well, you say. But you don't believe that he existed. When you talk about the character, you are speaking of the churches image of jesus, all the while not even knowing what a real jesus may be because you do not even think a real jesus existed. So you don't know the real jesus, only that of the church's version. And you arn't willing to consider anything but the churches version, because to you there is no other version. [/b] You're right: I don't believe in jesus. The thing is, there is not enough evidence for me to even believe in the historical jesus character. I have considered a version of jesus other than the churches', I just find it lacking as well. As above, there will be evidence for this below.

Here you accuse me of thinking I am better than You. Just because I say something is true. And for that you call me concieted.[/b] Yes, that would make you conceited by the first definition of the word:

1. A favorable and especially unduly high opinion of one's own abilities or worth.

Thinking you can \"teach us what's real\" is conceited.

My evidence is the logic behind my reasoning, which you fail to listen to. One who does not observe the evidence, thinks it does not exist. But in reality such as person has not bothered to see it, nor looked for it. [/b] I have seen neither logic nor reasoning from you on this topic. So far I have only seen you label, with no evidence, christianity's interpretation of jesus \"flawed and infected\" in order to discard the christian influence on an entirely christian character. Then you arbitrarily choose to include parts of the \"flawed and infected\" character to fit your new-age beliefs. I will illustrate what I mean by \"entirely christian character\" below.

In this example that core truth is a entity who is named here Jesus. The bible was created as a result of the life of jesus and the events of that time. It was recorded and memorized by real people then, and of a similar time to that.

//snip huge rant

Overall, There is evidence Of the real jesus, but you fail to understand it. And you do not bother to look for it. As I have already mentioned. [/b]

Ok, lets examine the evidence for jesus:

- The gospels; Matt, mark, luke, john. These are named completely arbitrarily, no authors ever signed them. They are not eyewitness accounts. The first gospel (mark) has an earliest date ~65 c.e., and a more likely date of ~75 c.e. That is ~30-40 years after jesus was supposed to have died on the cross. The other gospels are dated from 80-130 c.e. These are not historians chronicling jesus' life. These are extremely biased christian sources. They were written for a specific, religious, purpose.

- .... that’s pretty much it. There is one passage in a text by Flavius Josephus which mentions jesus, written in 93 c.e, but this is commonly held to be a later interpolation into the text. There is a lot of debate on this, and I'd hesitate before ever using this as evidence for the existence of jesus.

- That sums it up. No eyewitness accounts, nothing written by jesus, certainly nothing written by his enemies. No coins, no sculptures, no corroborating evidence from historical characters in the text. None of the \"eyewitnesses\" the bible says were at these events ever wrote them down.

The only real writings of jesus are from christian sources. There is no historical jesus to uncover by stripping away the layers of christianity. This is what I mean by an \"entirely christian character\". For you to discard the christian version of jesus' life you would have to discard the entirety of jesus. You can theorise that there was a historical person behind the myth, but to then add back in events from a purely christian source would be hypocrisy.

So when you say \"there is evidence Of the real jesus\", I would really like to see it.

This is just the tip of the iceberg and not even that. If you were seriously asking this question. And wanted to see evidence. You would start by discussing it with me logically.
like you have started to do, but will abandon and give up soon as it requires you to think. [/b]If you want to start discussing this logically:

- Tell me how the "character [of jesus] is flawed and infected by the church"
- Give me some sort of mechanism for determining what parts are infected
- Show me some evidence for a non-christian jesus
- Demonstrate how the resurrection, an entirely christian event from an entirely christian book about jesus, can be added onto this non-christian jesus.

And please, get a spell checker and start using proper sentences. It's painful to get a meaning out of some of your paragraphs. If for some reason you have a problem "acquiring" microsoft word, http://www.openoffice.org/ is a good alternative that provides all the same functionality.

-spoon

[Raz]

"The christian character of jesus is discussed because, as I pointed out, there is no other character of jesus. You just made your version up. I will give more evidence for this later."

No other character!? Now theres a joke for you... Jesus plays parts other religions (and that was one of my points in my previous "jokes". He is even part of Budism as Buddahs baby brother Benny or somthing like that... And the Muslims have him as Muhameds "backup prophet".

Religions to me are philosophies. Stories used mainly to have people learn how to respect his fellow man... Storys are good. If people need to lable the stories "religion" to listen to them and understanding the morals of the stories, then by all means. it's when a person from one religion is so fanatic about his/hers belife that he/she stops respecting people outside their belife, that I can not respect.

While you are at prooving that Jesus is or is not... Prove to me that whatever country you are from realy exists... USA (as an example)... So far they are mearly stories told told to me from history books, TV and pepople. I have never been to the US. What ever or not USA exists it has had a very big impect on my life, if nothing else, financally with the stock market bowing to its every move.

Now I intruduce the country of sweden! what mythical place is this? It is part of my home and my reality. Is it any part of yours? I belive the USA exists from the information I have recived in my reality... That is called faith. If you want to respect my faith in that the USA exists or not I leave up to you.

You can never realy proove that Jesus did or did not exist... You can have faith in the stories told about him, and let them have a impact on your life or not. What ever makes you happy...

God or no God, Jesus or no Jesus ... The world would be a much better place if people would just respect each others faiths and belifes...

You can lable that last part "common sense" or "new age"... What ever makes you happy...

[Nirvana Starseed]

I'm glad raz said that cause its something I dont have to type now.


If you want to start discussing this logically:

- Tell me how the \"character [of jesus] is flawed and infected by the church\"
- Give me some sort of mechanism for determining what parts are infected
- Show me some evidence for a non-christian jesus
- Demonstrate how the resurrection, an entirely christian event from an entirely christian book about jesus, can be added onto this non-christian jesus.[/b]

I will answer these questions. But the rest of your post is just pretty much confirming your position from my last post. They seem really basic to me.

1) - Tell me how the "character [of jesus] is flawed and infected by the church"

The character jesus is portrayed as the only son of god that came down to save sinful people who were always worth less than the jesus. And could never be as perfect as the Jesus Charcater. Were not to be his equal. And who could not be saved from a burning hell unless they obey this jesus by going to church every sunday, and generally doing what the church says must be done. No eating meat on fridays, remember that one? They changed it. If You do not do what the church says you are sinning against jesus and if you do not go to a confession, and confess your sins every once and a while to a priest who has authority over you, then you will burn in hell. Any sin you do, is inflicting pain on Jesus. You cannot confess your sins to anyone other than the priest of the church to be forgivin. You are naturally born in sin, and you must fear hell and the wrath of god if you disobey our church. We Represent the authority of Jesus and god so everything we say goes. Else you burn in hell forever.

Now to me that is infecting the message that was brought forward originally, and using it as a means of false authority and control over everyone. By saying it comes from god or jesus. When it is just them talking and making orders, and threats about a place which is called hell if you don't do what we say. Surely you understand how the church is a false authority. Else you yourself would be going there every sunday and being a slave to everything they teach and claim, which is bias and silly in general. And surely you can see how the authority of this imaginary Jesus character is taken advantage of to make people do what they say. It's like we are kids and I say to you, your mom told you to do this so do it. And you believe me. Or you believe you mom doesn't exist. one or the other. A sensible child understands his mother or father and knows when another child ses something that does not come from their parents.

2)- Give me some sort of mechanism for determining what parts are infected?

Well use your logic and mind to think for yourself. Why do we need to confess to priest only? What makes the priest so special? Why can we never be an equal to Jesus? Why in their own bible does it say that he said "ye are gods" and yet they teach that we can never be as jesus? And we are not gods. And why does in their own bible it say. "these things are greater will you do" Yet we can never be as great as the jesus character. Why these contradictions? For what reason must we go to a church every sunday. What makes the priest more godly than us? Why do they claim to know about the jesus character. Who gives them authority to teach us about it?

When you ask simple questions of logic, you will find what parts do not make sense, and what parts are infected. When you think about things properly you will come to conclusions about what does not make sense. IF you are capable of discussing and thinking about that, you are then able to see what parts are infected. If the dogma of the material has a hold of you. Your mind will be to closed to any logic about its contradictions
and you will not see the illogic.

3) - Show me some evidence for a non-christian jesus

I suggest there is infact a very srtong eyewitness account existing today, and his name is John. And perhaps not the only one.

Second. There is claimed to be a spear that was stabbed into jesus, that still exists somewhere and has a history of its own. Maybe that is all myth too. Which we were talking about in another thread.

Then there is that holy grail. Which also has a history of its own, but maybe that is all myth aswell?

Then there is the entire roman empire and its ruins, which was present the time jesus lived, that use to crucify people with crosses. And was the empire in power that was said to have crusified jesus, with a cross. Thatw as also a roman empire.

funny co-incidence but maybe it is all myth. with no truth behind it.

Then there is john the baptist, another connection to Jesus, was another character, whos historic place was said to be found on earth recently. Maybe he is just a myth aswell.

myth generally comes from historic truth.

You'd have to be pretty silly to not consider these things, if only because of the hudge impact "jesus" had on so many people. Is no-where near the impact bugs bunny or any other fictinal character I know has had. And despite all this, Who can prove the truth of What was really taught is not true. After all, If you don't believe in a jesus character you don't have to listen to anything that was taught right, from the church or from me, about jesus.

other than this, which is not even the beginning. There is alot more reason to believe a real Jesus existed. But I'm sick of typing. This is a tiny piece of physical historic evidence off the top of my head. I know their is alot more. but I'm not getting into a debate about the existence of jesus. A person whos mind is not open to the possibility, its pointless anyway, no amount of evidence will convince them.

4) - Demonstrate how the resurrection, an entirely christian event from an entirely christian book about jesus, can be added onto this non-christian jesus

For a start its not a entirely christian event created from the religion.I have already told you this. It's a real event that happened in real life. Which was recorded and then developed into a religion about jesus. Which become 'christanity'. So your question is not even relevant to begin with.

[andorf]

http://rhorn.unixcab.org/images/JesusLovesYou.gif

sorry but it just had to be done

[Nirvana Starseed]

Jesus loves you
But you think we are a cunt? LMAO. Dumbass.

You forgot to post a picture of you thinking others are a cunt. Make sure it is as dorky as the jesus picture you posted.

[bradybaker]

Holy shit. Did you just say that the existence of the Roman Empire proves the existence of a historical figure Jesus?!!?

That is perhaps the single dumbest thing I've ever heard in my enitre life, and believe me, I've heard a lot of dumb things.

Originally posted by Nirvana (why did he have to associate himself with such a good band?)
It's a real event that happened in real life. Which was recorded and then developed into a religion about jesus.
As spoon already stated, the first writings of Jesus appereared 30-50 years AFTER he supposedly died on the cross. And they only came from Christian sources.

My hypothesis:
Some cult at the time was looking for some new members, so they claimed to "discover" these writings about a magical dude named Jesus who came down to earth from heaven to help us out. News of this spread through the middle east like wildfire and boom, Christianity was born.

EDIT: And buddy, he doesn't think 'we' are cunts, as you said, he thinks YOU are a cunt.

[Raz]

Originally posted by bradybaker
Holy shit. Did you just say that the existence of the Roman Empire proves the existence of a historical figure Jesus?!!?

That is perhaps the single dumbest thing I've ever heard in my enitre life, and believe me, I've heard a lot of dumb things.


Ummm... No he did not... Maby you should try and read his entier post and judge it as a whole b4 making your self look silly with rude coments like that...

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by Raz+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Raz)</div>Ummm... No he did not... Maby you should try and read his entier post and judge it as a whole b4 making your self look silly with rude coments like that...[/b]
<!--QuoteBegin-Nirvana
Then there is the entire roman empire and its ruins, which was present the time jesus lived, that use to crucify people with crosses. And was the empire in power that was said to have crusified jesus, with a cross. Thatw as also a roman empire.

funny co-incidence but maybe it is all myth. with no truth behind it.

[spoon]

No other character!? Now theres a joke for you... Jesus plays parts other religions (and that was one of my points in my previous \"jokes\". He is even part of Budism as Buddahs baby brother Benny or somthing like that... And the Muslims have him as Muhameds \"backup prophet\". I've never heard of a jesus character in buddhism. It would be kind of odd, as the buddah was born 623b.c.e, to find his brother was jesus.

The jesus character from the qur'an is just as irrelevant, as it was written 500 years after the fact. As a religion written around the same mythos as christianity was, you can expect them to include a jesus character in it. This is just as made up as nirvana's character of jesus. You cannot get the true, historical, backing for the character of jesus from a text written centuries after he supposedly existed.

While you are at prooving that Jesus is or is not... Prove to me that whatever country you are from realy exists... Lets see. I'm currently in australia. To prove that it exists I can:

- look around and see that it does exist - primary evidence (which jesus does not have).
- go onto the net and obtain news footage from other countries involving australia - corroborating evidence (which jesus does not have)
- go onto the net and obtain news from a country that has been our enemy - corroborating evidence from an opposing source (which jesus does not have)
- go ask some people I meet in the street what country this is - eyewitness accounts (which jesus does not have)

Nirvana:

3) - Show me some evidence for a non-christian jesus

I suggest there is infact a very srtong eyewitness account existing today, and his name is John. And perhaps not the only one. John is neither an eyewitness (as I pointed out twice now) or a non-christian source.

Second. There is claimed to be a spear that was stabbed into jesus, that still exists somewhere and has a history of its own. Maybe that is all myth too. Which we were talking about in another thread. You're right. That's a myth. Like the ossuary of james found a few years back too. And the shroud of turin before that.

Then there is that holy grail. Which also has a history of its own, but maybe that is all myth aswell? Never found, features in mythical tales. Pretty solidly a myth.

Then there is the entire roman empire and its ruins, which was present the time jesus lived, that use to crucify people with crosses. And was the empire in power that was said to have crusified jesus, with a cross. Thatw as also a roman empire. OOOkay. Brady already said how absurd this is. You can validate any fictional tale set in the real world with this.

Then there is john the baptist, another connection to Jesus, was another character, whos historic place was said to be found on earth recently. Maybe he is just a myth aswell. The cave that was found had 4th century drawings of john the baptist. Noone ever established it as his home. And what does this have to do with jesus anyway?

myth generally comes from historic truth. I can accept that. What I can't accept is how you can get a historical character out of the christian mythos, as there is no non christian sources of jesus.

other than this, which is not even the beginning. There is alot more reason to believe a real Jesus existed.You're right. It's not a beginning. None of this is evidence of a non-christian jesus.

2)- Give me some sort of mechanism for determining what parts are infected?

When you ask simple questions of logic, you will find what parts do not make sense, and what parts are infected.Your \"logic\" is just discarding any parts you don't agree with. This is not logic. You're just picking and choosing arbitrarily.

1) - Tell me how the \"character [of jesus] is flawed and infected by the church\"

Surely you understand how the church is a false authority. Yes, but as I've established there is no non-christian jesus to base any sort of belief of. You can hypothesise his existence all you want, but there's nothing to base a belief off. If the character of jesus is flawed and infected by the church, the whole character is - as there is no character outside of the church's version.

4) - Demonstrate how the resurrection, an entirely christian event from an entirely christian book about jesus, can be added onto this non-christian jesus

For a start its not a entirely christian event created from the religion.I have already told you this. It's a real event that happened in real life. Which was recorded and then developed into a religion about jesus. Which become 'christanity'. There is no historical evidence for the crucifixion of jesus. The only reason you know about this "real event" is because you read it in the bible - a christian book.

Because you call the christian character of jesus "tainted", and discard the churches interpretation of his character, you cannot hold onto the resurrection. The resurrection plays a vital part in the christian message of the NT.

So far you've only established this:

- The parts of the bible are flawed and tainted because you don't agree with them
- How you find out if they are flawed and tainted is... picking the parts you don't agree with
- You've shown no evidence for a non-christian jesus
- You've in no way established how the ressurection, an entirely christian event, can be tacked onto a historical (non-christian) version of jesus.

-spoon

[Raz]

bradybaker:

I do not know how you interpeted that to be shown as "proof". He left plenty of wiggle space...

"funny co-incidence but maybe it is all myth. with no truth behind it."

Considering truth is never stupid... Accepting it blindly is...


Originally posted by spoon+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(spoon)</div>I've never heard of a jesus character in buddhism. It would be kind of odd, as the buddah was born 623b.c.e, to find his brother was jesus.[/b]

Buddhas Baby brother Benny...
That was mearly a matter of speach and I'm pretty sure you already know that...
Dont know personaly what part he played but I have faith in my friend that mentiond it...


<!--QuoteBegin-spoon
Lets see. I'm currently in australia. To prove that it exists I can: *

- look around and see that it does exist - primary evidence (which jesus does not have). *
- go onto the net and obtain news footage from other countries involving australia - corroborating evidence (which jesus does not have) *
- go onto the net and obtain news from a country that has been our enemy - corroborating evidence from an opposing source (which jesus does not have) *
- go ask some people I meet in the street what country this is - eyewitness accounts (which jesus does not have)

Ah but you are missing my point... Even if you do manage to prove to a person that has never been to your country that person still needs to have faith to accept that proof. How much proof do you need to accept that a country realy exists? That depends entierly on who you are trying to prove it to. Someone might accept that you mearly tell them: I come from a land called Australia! Things are like this and like so over there... Kangaroos and koalas!

If the person has trust and faith in you he/she will accept that what you say is true...

How do you proove to a person that dose not trust you or your friends? Show them pictuers? Give him "facts" about your country? FAKE, he proclaims! I belive you not! For I am part of the trueman show and there is nothing outside these walls but lies!

A very narowminded man I agree. But I think you get my point...

It is the same consept in any situation where the person you are trying to convinse of something that he/she has not experianced...

I do not know if there was a historical person of Jesus... I accept the posibility that it might be so... If it is or if it is not my life will still go on... I do not need to know for a fact if he did or did not. Just as if there is or is not a Australia my life will still go on... I'm sure there is alot of countries out there that dose exist but is not part of the universe that you are the center of.

How much of the world existed when you where a little kid?

Now prove to a person that has been to australia that it dose not really exist... Think about that one...

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
In the moment, little suggestion by the way.

your sig makes you look really silly......

why don't you just put something equally degrading to yourself such as.

\"lincon introduced freedom from slavery. But I re-establish it.\"

Or maybe.
Everyone around me is respectful, but I like to beat the shit out of them\"
I like your latter suggestion.

Btw, where is the source of all this shit your spewing? You have yet to provide ONE credible source link to your argument. We all know you are creative and all, but your arguments so far wreak from being pulled out your ass.

Spoon, Brady, Universal, etc., have repeatedly and successfully countered every one of your "self proclaimed" logical responses and yet you still humiliate yourself by trying to combat logical reasoning with your New Age mumbo jumbo.

Honestly, get a grip dude...or don't...it just adds to my entertainment to watch you make an ass of yourself. ;)~

[Raz]

I found that sig semai funny =)

But then again I am fairly easy to amuse... Makes life more fun not takeing things TO seuriosly =)

Cant we all just be friends? Or is that to "new age"? :wink:

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Raz
I found that sig semai funny =)

But then again I am fairly easy to amuse... Makes life more fun not takeing things TO seuriosly =)

Cant we all just be friends? Or is that to \"new age\"? *:wink:

Originally posted by Onieronaut
Lol....ITM.....I know this is WAY off subject..and probably old news, but I keep wanting to say something everytime I see it, but never get around to it... *



That damn .gif in that Sig of yours is fuckin Golden!
Thanks guys...it's good to know I'm not the only one with good taste. ;)~

[Nirvana Starseed]

I will try not to waste any more time other than this reply.

Brady, ITM, spoon, universal, all have a similar mentality. A clock that is not ticking. (In the moment?) Anything that does not suit them lazily label it new age and be done with it. (like I don't have to think about that I just labeled it new age)

I dread to respond to the last response that was made because of the shear amount of flaws and misunderstanding in interpreting my other post. It would just be a waste of time if its going to continue to be misunderstood. Again and again you fail to read my post properly. This is the first step to a real discussion.

At the moment you look like children defending your right to play with toys when it is bedtime. (in this case defending your right to ignore any wisdom)

When my posts can be read properly I know we can have a very useful discussion. That does not include any ego defending. And is not a silly argument which is at the same time incapable of understanding my posts.

I know you guys love arguments about christianity. But in the end its nothing to do with christianity or Jesus. It's about what is true.

If I lived 2000 years ago I bet you would not have much evidence of my existence either. unless it was ingrained in consiousness through some sort of religion, That would be they only way it could it survive over such a time period.

look at your history books. I don't see clear illustrations of what happened 2000 years ago.
I get distorted enough infomation on world war 2. Let alone objective evidence of people and events 2000 years ago written in a history book or recorded on cd. Your demand for proof is so unrealistic. Is there really stars beyond our telescopes. You don't know you can not see them. It could be a myth.

The entity named as budda also was effective enough to produce a religion that outlasted his lifespan.

You do not understand this process and announce. There is no proof! because you have no reasoning ability beyond what is infront of your nose that you wish to believe. You are the kind of people who would not find evidence of the sun if you lived in a capsule in the sky that moved along with the dark side of the earth. It is then a comfort to believe this when it requires less study and thinking on your part. Just pretend there is no evidence.

You just live your lives believing whatever you decide suits you. You can make up your own argument about it. And close your mind. It can allow for some immoral and foolish behaviour towards others. And can even justify it as hitler justified the killing of the jews.

ILLUSION. Thats why in such a mentality you can never really achieve anything. Or make any new discoveries.


How can I describe illusion?
Its like when a clock ticks, all the gears are moving together, and the time on the clock moves forward. When a gear is missing, the cogs still turn up until that point where a cog is missing, which stops the clock from ticking, Or in your case stops your brain from thinking.

the cog is a vital piece of reasoning/wisdom/logic needed for understanding of my post.
Without it the light is on but no-one is home. Some of the clocks gears are moving but the clocks not ticking. So it reads 1:30. When that is not even the time. According to the clock it is always half past one. But in relaity its only because the gears are not working.

this is how it is with your denile. And inability to reason and discuss what I am talking about.


What is the obstruction and what has always been in the way of the clock ticking? Illusion is that which removes the gears. Every mistake made in history comes down to those caught in illusion.

When one fails to realize they are in illusion, they can be dangerous. As hitler was pretty dangerous. Ofcourse not everyone is as extreme as hitler, but in many cases is in a similar amoung of illusion about reality.

Try telling someone like hitler there is no evidence or reason for all those jewish to be treated any differently than any race of people. From his response you will find the light is on but no-one is home.

And from your response I can also know this.


Raz wasn't talking about that sig, before he changed it he had one down the bottom below that, that use to say "Jesus loves you. but I think your a cunt". That's the sig I was refering to.

I also find his Mo naked Hoes slightly amusing.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by The funniest guy I know
How can I describe illusion? *
Its like when a clock ticks, all the gears are moving together, and the time on the clock moves forward. When a gear is missing, the cogs still turn up until that point where a cog is missing, which stops the clock from ticking, Or in your case stops your brain from thinking.
I'm guessing your brain is a Cuckoo Clock then?

-----------------------------------------------

And while we're playing the psycho-analytical game, let's take a look at you. You seem to be an angsty teenager, that has never felt the touch of a women.

You live in a delusional reality where video game and Wizard of Oz characters exist.

You live your life in isolation, afraid to experience the outsid world. You have a Zoloft smoothie each morning just to function in the DV chatroom.

You live your life inside of head and use your creativity to develop this "New Age" (and yes it is New Age) mumbo jumbo to justify your life/existance. Now your so wrapped up in this illusion that you've created, that you feel threatened when someone challenges it with specific logic and reasoning.

You over analyze everything. Whether or not this another mental tick or your attempt to defend the aforementioned illusion you believe is anyone's guess.

I can go on...but for the sake of brevity, I'll stop here.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Originally posted by In the moment
I'm guessing your brain is a Cuckoo Clock then?

It's difficult to tell if your serious with your reasoning ability......

In fear that you are seriously contemplating this question. My brain cannot possibly be a Cuckoo Clock I assure you.

Oh you edited your post. There is more conclusions about me.......

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed

In fear that you are seriously contemplating this question. My brain cannot possibly be a Cuckoo Clock I assure you.
Care to prove that?

[Nirvana Starseed]

Originally posted by nirvanastarseed+--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(nirvanastarseed)</div>In fear that you are seriously contemplating this question. My brain cannot possibly be a Cuckoo Clock I assure you.[/b]
<!--QuoteBegin-ITM

Care to prove that?

You are seriously asking me to prove this question?
I can never be sure with you. It would not be the most amusing thing you have concluded.

Could make a ton of jokes about you with your bio aswel but I can't be bothered defending my ego cause I couldn't care less about it. I dont want to hurt yours though it's already out of control.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed


You are seriously asking me to prove this question?
I can never be sure with you. It would not be the most amusing thing you have concluded.
Actually, I'm just trying to show you how your argument appears to most everyone else.

See I can come up with all kinds of assumption (eg. your brain is a cuckoo clock) and you really have no way of disproving that statement. Off the fly theories and assumptions (like those you have been trying to serve as the "truth") come across as absurd as the aforementioned assumption.

It would really be good for your image to just admit that your ideas/views are only based on whatever thoughts your brain has manifested on the subject.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed

why did you make me a brief *biography? I guess it was to try and make yourself look less foolish.Havin the opposite effect as usual.

I'm not suprised it is not accurate. Coming from you. Even if you did know anything about me.
I think I hear your mother calling.

[Nirvana Starseed]

tell me what I have said that is not logical?

they must be just voices in your head, cause my mother is not calling.

[Nirvana Starseed]

lmao.

how petty do u want to get anyway? this is not a discussion. where is your ability to have one?

I'm still waiting for your clock to start ticking. However long it takes to fix it.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
tell me what I have said that is not logical?
I would say about 85% (rough estimate) of what you try to pass off as the \"truth.\"

Here's one example:
For a start its not a entirely christian event created from the religion.I have already told you this. It's a real event that happened in real life. Which was recorded and then developed into a religion about jesus. Which become 'christanity'.[/b]
The only documented source that affirms the life of Jesus is the Bible. You've yet to provide any other evidence (outside of the Bible) that proves that Jesus ever existed.

Universal, Brady, Spoon, Kim, Ex and others have repeatedly challenged your positions with \"true\" logic and you consistently fail to prove your argument.

how petty do u want to get anyway? this is not a discussion. where is your ability to have one? [/b]
Petty is my middle name. ;)~

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by NirvanaStareed
look at your history books. I don't see clear illustrations of what happened 2000 years ago.
I get distorted enough infomation on world war 2. Let alone objective evidence of people and events 2000 years ago written in a history book or recorded on cd. Your demand for proof is so unrealistic. Is there really stars beyond our telescopes. You don't know you can not see them. It could be a myth.

The entity named as budda also was effective enough to produce a religion that outlasted his lifespan.

You do not understand this process and announce. There is no proof!
So you admit that there is no evidence (outside of the Bible) that Jesus ever existed?

[Nirvana Starseed]

Lets end this discussion. Sick of debating the existence of Jesus.

Call it a night and come back tommorow for another battle.

[Raz]

Seriously... When I read some of the posts in this thread I se alot of inteligant points on boath sides that are worth thinking about. But I also se alot of button pushing and people blowing of steam at each other for no other reason then you do not agree. Name calling and atemts to "intelectly" push down each other just creating more anoyence and frustration.

I'm not saying I'm mr perfect but you dont need to be perfect to se that some mutal respect for each other would make this conversation alot more plesent...

Just my 2 cent...

[Nirvana Starseed]

I agree raz

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
Lets end this discussion. Sick of debating the existence of Jesus.

Call it a night and come back tommorow for another battle.
A Grade 'A' cop-out.

[spoon]

I dread to respond to the last response that was made because of the shear amount of flaws and misunderstanding in interpreting my other post.[/b]Umm.. cop out?

look at your history books. I don't see clear illustrations of what happened 2000 years ago.
I get distorted enough infomation on world war 2. Let alone objective evidence of people and events 2000 years ago written in a history book or recorded on cd. [/b]Well, lets look at a historical character from a little while before jesus (~50B.C.E) - Julius Ceasar.

- We have a first hand account (The Civil War) written by ceasar and one of his generals.

- We have many inscriptions, coins and the like commemorating events detailed in Ceasar's book.

- We have a number of Ceasar's enemies reporting events detailed in Ceasar's book.

- We have numerous historians of the time reporting on these events, and these historians have been reliable on other accounts.

Compare this with jesus, where we have nothing aside from second/third hand accounts written 30-40 years after the fact, and written with a large bias towards christianity. Jesus is not even examined by an established historian until centuries later. And even then it's by christian historians.

History on important historical characters is available to us. History on completely made up characters isn't.

Your demand for proof is so unrealistic[/b] Not so unrealistic it seems. Especially when you've labelled the only source of the jesus character "tainted". As I've said a few times now, I have no problem with people hypothesising about a historical "man behind the myth". I do have a problem when you arbitrarily add back, onto this man, parts of a purely christian story - and a story which you have labelled tainted.

I'm not going to respond to your rant about how I can't/didn't understand your post. If you didn't make your point clear enough that is your problem (and your sentance structures problem). Make yourself clearer and this will be easier on everyone.

I've detailed a few times now how I feel that it is impossible to get a non-christian jesus out of the writings we have available for us. I'd like you to show how you can arrive at a non-christian jesus. Also can you please show how the his "sacrifice", which is an entirely christian event, can be tacked back onto this non-christian jesus.

-spoon

ps. I'm going pretend you didn't compare me with hitler. Debate by bad analogy doesn't really work you know.

And I have to say this, it's been pissing me off. Princible = principle. Denile = denial.

[Placebo]

Heh. Julius Caesar was a bloody emperor. Of course he is well documented.
While Jesus, at the time, was one of many people claiming to be the messiah. Of course he won't get attention.

Thus your entire argument is a bit moot.

Argue it again from the standpoint of a farmer who claimed to find a better way of growing his crops, compared to Jesus. Good luck finding lots of historical writing on him.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Julius Caesar was a bloody emperor.[/b]

An entire empire leaves more evidence than 1 person. That's why Caesar is documented being an emperor of it. If it was Just caesar by himself with maybe 12 or so ordinary other followers, without a empire or wealth. I doubt it would be so well documented. Nor would there be much physical evidence to draw from and get information out of. As there is with an entire empire who looks up to their leader.

It's not that important to prove about Jesus. Think what you want. I am just telling you the conclusion is logical to know Jesus existed. I will not explain why because from what I have seen posted we are not ready to discuss it without misinterpreting what I am saying.

what is important to prove is what was taught by Jesus. Even if one does think it is fiction.

And I will explain it logically one step at a time.

I am not coping out. Just knowing what is appropriate to be discussed.

If someone in grade 6 asks you to explain and give him grade 8 work, and then he is not able to handle it. It is not coping out by taking the work away and replacing it with something easier to understand. It's just building him up to the grade 8 or so work.

People did not understand or agree with what jesus taught. Many were religiously against him. Thus the crusifiction. It is not suprising that only those few who believed in the truth he spoke of are the ones to managed to preserve anything about it, by creating a religion of their own as was done with moses. Those against it seek to destroy its message. Thus you end up with no solid evidence of a Jesus, and a Jesus character that is as hollow as the people who were against him in the first place. The problem is the character is to much of an authority to completely erase. And you fix that problem by changing the character, and or making it fiction. Which is just as good as erasing it. But there are traces of the truth left. Which can never be eliminated. And that is the eternal words that were spoken by him, And the effect of his life lived.

There is a general pattern...
Buddha
Moses
Jesus
Elijah
Eyptian gods.
etc etc and more......

Religions stem from these entitys.
These who are elevated into high places. Who are just ordinary entitys who understand more than the collective. And all carry the same message in their own individual way, perhaps more polarized in wisdom or love aspect, teaching a certain aspect of that truth. To the point where they are considered "gods".In that aspect.

For example buddha was the wisdom aspect.

The religion while strong with the message first, of itself is corrupted over time to the point where it is disregared altogether. At the core all religions carry one truth. It is the people who distort it and change it over time with their lack of understanding about it.

[InTheMoment]

The religion while strong with the message first, of itself is corrupted over time to the point where it is disregared altogether. At the core all religions carry one truth. It is the people who distort it and change it over time with their lack of understanding about it. [/b]
So what makes your take on Jesus any better than what is already out there? What are your sources of reference? I mean anyone can come up with an idea on who/what/where/when/why Jesus was.

I believe that Jesus was Caesar and here is my supporting evidence:

Here is the investigative report:

http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte/jwc_e...e/contents.html (http://www.carotta.de/subseite/texte/jwc_e/contents.html)

..and here are the FACTS on the Life of Caesar, writen by historians:

http://www.livius.org/caa-can/caesar/caesar00.html

Where are your source references on your views?

[Nirvana Starseed]

Why do u ask for more information from me?

So you can make another fuss? No thanks.

.......Caesar was not jesus you fool. Get a grip.

[bradybaker]

Thus you end up with no solid evidence of a Jesus[/b]
Ok, that's the sencond time you've admitted that there is no solid, unbiased evidence that Jesus ever existed. Yet you still claim that your position of 'knowing that he did exist' is logical.

:eh:

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed

.......Caesar was not jesus you fool. Get a grip.
My sources say otherwise. What evidence do you have that Jesus was not Caesar?

[Nirvana Starseed]

Truly, both of you. Get a grip.

No solid evidence= no artifacts remaining for us to look at, Or objective evidence in general. This doesn't mean it is illogical to come to a conclusion about what is obvious from putting pieces of the puzzle together and using your own logic about it. Can't you read. I told you you don't understand what i say. That's why its a waste of time even talking to you guys about it.

[bradybaker]

Unfortunately, you still haven't provided any references or supporting facts for you position..leading me to the conclusion that it comes from your own hollow skull. Too bad I don't respect you as a human being.

[Nirvana Starseed]

your head was up your ass the entire time. I did not lead you into anything. Least of all a conclusion.

[bradybaker]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
I did not lead you into anything. Least of all a conclusion.
Damn straight, I didn't need the help.

[InTheMoment]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
your head was up your ass the entire time. I did not lead you into anything. Least of all a conclusion.
Finally admittance that you've been talking out your ass the whole time. See that wasn't so hard was it?

[Placebo]

I almost asked you guys to be nice, until I saw what section this was in. So go ahead... :P

[Nirvana Starseed]

Originally posted by placebo
I almost asked you guys to be nice, until I saw what section this was in. So go ahead...

I thought mods asked us to be nice out of an understanding, and respect for others. Maybe its just because of the rules they were following about the forum. :(

[spoon]

End of semester so I couldn't reply for a while.

Placebo:
Heh. Julius Caesar was a bloody emperor. Of course he is well documented.
While Jesus, at the time, was one of many people claiming to be the messiah. Of course he won't get attention.[/b] I'm just showing that there are historical characters frmo 2000 years ago. If nirvana wants to tack religious beliefs onto a historical character, why not just choose ceasar?


Nirvana:
It's not that important to prove about Jesus. Think what you want. I am just telling you the conclusion is logical to know Jesus existed. I will not explain why because from what I have seen posted we are not ready to discuss it without misinterpreting what I am saying.

what is important to prove is what was taught by Jesus. Even if one does think it is fiction.

And I will explain it logically one step at a time.

I am not coping out. Just knowing what is appropriate to be discussed.[/b]I would say that establishing jesus' existance (as a historical, real, character who was teaching people) is the most important part of your entire argument, as everything that come after presupposes jesus' existance.

People did not understand or agree with what jesus taught. Many were religiously against him. Thus the crusifiction. It is not suprising that only those few who believed in the truth he spoke of are the ones to managed to preserve anything about it, by creating a religion of their own as was done with moses. [/b] As I have said before the writings we have preserved are not by eyewitnesses, thus they could not have been preserved by the \"few who believed in the truth he spoke of\".

As I said above, unless you can establish that there was a historical teacher character at the core of this myth than all you have is a fictional tale. A fictional tale that you have labelled tainted no less.

How is it logical to jump from something written decades after the fact with a definiate religious bias to a historical character?

The problem is the character is to much of an authority to completely erase. And you fix that problem by changing the character, and or making it fiction. Which is just as good as erasing it. But there are traces of the truth left. Which can never be eliminated. And that is the eternal words that were spoken by him, And the effect of his life lived. [/b] What are the traces of the truth? How can you logically identify them, and logically how can you seperate them from a piece of writing where you admit the character was changed and/or made into fiction.


Just because you see authority in a piece of writing does not mean that it is built around truth. You might identify authority in Yoda's character (from star wars). Jesus was the son of god, yoda was the last living jedi master. Both are positions of high authority. Is there a core truth to both tales?

The religion while strong with the message first, of itself is corrupted over time to the point where it is disregared altogether. At the core all religions carry one truth. It is the people who distort it and change it over time with their lack of understanding about it. [/b] And I suppose you are qualified to get this core truth out of christianity? Please, since I've asked so many times, tell me how you did this. Demonstrate how a jesus character can be completely taken out of the christian context (which you called tainted) and how you still come up with some god-figure who sacrificed himself for us, and went to heaven.

Despite saying that you would step this out \"logically one step at a time\" you have demonstrated no logic. You start with a presupposition that jesus, as a teacher and a religious figure, exists - yet you have never provided any evidence to support this. You have said that a few who believed jesus \"preserved the truth\" - yet you have not demonstrated that there are any eyewitness accounts. You have called the jesus character an authority, stepping from this to he must be historical truth - yet you provide no mechanism for this. Plenty of fictional characters are authority figures.

This doesn't mean it is illogical to come to a conclusion about what is obvious from putting pieces of the puzzle together and using your own logic about it. [/b] Ok then. Show the evidence for the pieces of this puzzle, then provide the logic you used to piece it together.

-spoon

[kimpossible]

Originally posted by InTheMoment

My sources say otherwise. What evidence do you have that Jesus was not Caesar?

"We are all god's children"

Therefore, Caesar was god's son.

"Jesus was the son of god"

If Caesar is the son of god, we can then logically conclude (proofs of equalities):

If A=B and B=C then A=C

Therefore

Caesar = Jesus. QED

[Placebo]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
I thought mods asked us to be nice out of an understanding, and respect for others. Maybe its just because of the rules they were following about the forum. :(
Sure, I want everyone to be nice and respect each other. But asking people to do it tends to have them tell me how I'm a bad moderator and I should get a life (or something along those lines).
This section is unmoderated, so I turn a blind eye. Be nice if you're a nice person. If you're not a nice person you sure as hell aren't gonna listen to me...

[eXistenZ]

Let's play a game: let's suppose that tomorrow one receives the historical, logical, experimental proof that Jesus existed and existed in the terms established in the Bible.

What would you do? You would start to worship Jesus tomorrow? If yes, this means that you are wrong today; if you won't worship you'll wrong tomorrow.
So, one is wrong anyway.
It sounds paradoxical, as everything that is supported only by rationality: paradoxical games that cannot prove or disconfirm anything about religion.

I think that discussing about religion is not related to proofs, but to peacefully sharing views.

Peace to everyone,
eXistenZ

[Ex Nine]

Mary was Jesus' grandmother.

Mary is the mother of God.
Jesus is the son of God.
Mary --> God --> Jesus

Everyone ready for this?



God is a motherfucker.

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by Ex Nine
Mary was Jesus' grandmother.

Mary is the mother of God.
Jesus is the son of God.
Mary --> God --> Jesus

Everyone ready for this?



God is a motherfucker.

God should have used a condom.

God is Jesus.
Jesus is God.
God is the father of Jesus.
Jesus is the father of God.
God is the father the father of God.
Jesus is the grandson of the father of Jesus.
Jesus is the father of the father of God.
God is the great great great grandson of Jesus.
Jesus is the great great great great grandfather of God.

Jesus should have used a condom on his mother before she had his great grandfather.

[Nirvana Starseed]

And I think both of your parents should have used a condom.

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by Jesus
And I think both of your parents should have used a condom.

Would Jesus really say something like that? It must have been one of his hypocrites.

[Nirvana Starseed]

Actually a healthy sense of humour is a side effect.

[Universal Mind]

Originally posted by Nirvana Starseed
Actually a healthy sense of humour is a side effect.

Glad to make you laugh. :-P

[Nirvana Starseed]

Even if its at you?

[eXistenZ]

Why we cannot discuss peacefully about religion? In another thread for instance (this is gone definitely adrift).

I mean: what's the point to make jokes about one's beliefs or saying slanderous things? The discussion doesn't advance an inch. Everything becomes a race for the most outrageous thing to say.

I know that this is an unmoderated forum, but for me this would mean that we posters have the responsibility to moderate our posts by ourselves.

eXistenZ

[starfire]

Mary was Jesus' grandmother.

Mary is the mother of God.
Jesus is the son of God.
Mary --> God --> Jesus

Everyone ready for this?



God is a motherfucker.

:banana: :rolllaugh:

[Rakjavik]

ok, who's on thread resurrection duty? Love the original post though :D

[starfire]

ok, who's on thread resurrection duty? Love the original post though :D

:boogie:

I posted it on christianforums.com to see what they had to say about it :D