Jesus- the missing years

[Anmon]

[=Magnus;495349]Then what proof would the catholic church have of jesus being married?

Who knows, they probably have a lot of stuff we don't know about.

do you see how you have destroyed your own argument?

Not really.

GG god is dead

In your head maybe.

[Anmon]

Quote by: Technosoul True, children are not like adults. Somewhat like the smallville TV show about Superman. Our modern age cannot really relate to having someone with supernatural abilities walking around on water and so forth. The novelty of all that, if it is to believed, does not fit into any of the evelopes we use for determining our reality. It is all totally outside the box and as alien to our planet as would be some of those ufo sightings. In all honestly we have no bases in our reality by which to say "that makes sense". Because of the paranormal discriptions used by those who wrote the story. None the less, some of his sayings and his philosophy, which writers claim were spoken by this person called Jesus, are well worth concideration and praise. Where other things he said are riddles that go beyond the logic to explore for the "Other". Which we might title the "unexplainable flying objects within the mystery of life, self, and the universe". The Riddles are not facts but rather they act like a springborad to jump off of into a swimming pool of a questioning and seeking mind. The message is not about believing, but about seeking, even if the search goes outside of the box that we use to contain our logical perceptions. Leaving us with the option - freakout or remain secure in the known status of logical deductions. Take your pick. Transforming the unknown into the known is not an easy task because cultural conditioning is well constructed.

I believe its safe to say Jesus did exist, did perform these miracles, and predictions he made before he died and rose, later came true like Jerusalem being destroyed which it was by the Romans in 70 AD.

[Magnus]

Quote by: Anmon Who knows, they probably have a lot of stuff we don't know about. .

Ahahahahaha
Like what man? pedophile preists? proof of god? what the hell are you talkin about?

[Anmon]

Magnus your a poisonous little good for nothing tick, go away.

[Ken Carman]

Read Christopher Moore's Lamb. It may not provide the answer, but it's an amusing take on the topic.

[Anmon]

OK thanks.

[Piscean]

I find this a bit hard to believe, as it sounds like the zeitgeist videos have influenced a lot of people lately, but like my other answer to you, I will go look for some proof, these history's were not just copied. For all you know, you could be hearing history just recently re invented, if enough people got together, and tried to make it so, a wave would spread and gain momentum based on lies. You can of course say the same thing for the birth of Christianity, and you would be entitled too, as a lot of areas seem to be cloudy.

Ahhhhhhhhhh, a fresh breath of common sense.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Anmon Does anyone know what he was doing or where he was, between the age of 12 and 30? There is no account of this time in his life, which is probably the most important and memorable part of it for anyone. I find it strange that this is so.

There is no mention of this part of Jesus' alleged life because it's not essential to the myth. The important parts are that he's from the line of David (so you need to talk about his birth and early childhood) and that what he allegedly did just before his death. Remember also that Christians are trained from an early age to "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

So, the reason there's nothing written about Jesus' alleged missing years is the same reason no one wrote anything about Jesus during his alleged lifetime: he never existed.

[Anmon]

Sorry but you have even less proof that Jesus didn't exist, than I do that he did.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Anmon Sorry but you have even less proof that Jesus didn't exist, than I do that he did.

What a silly thing to say?

First off, there is absolutely ZERO evidence that Jesus existed from the time that he allegedly existed. No one writes about him. No one talks about him. Guys like Philo of Alexandria (who knew Pilate) never even give a hint that he existed. All that contrasts highly with the bible account of the incarnate godman who gets swarmed by mobs of people where ever he goes.

The so-called extra-biblical evidence of Jesus is a joke. Christians are utterly unwilling to even address the issue of where individuals like Tacitus and Josephus got their information. No one is contesting the idea that there were Christians in the first century... but pointing to Christians and concluding there was a Christ is like pointing to flat-earthists and concluding there's a flat earth. Josephus' work was tainted by the church... another issue Christians are loathe to discuss and Tacitus is simply the first in a 18 century line of individuals to see Christians and assume there was a Christ. This leaves us with the gosepls which are very obviously written after the fall of the Jewish temple in 70 ce and very obviously based on earlier myths.

No... there is no mention of Jesus' middle years because they're of no consequence to the christ myth that swept through Judea after the fall of the temple.

[Anmon]

Well I believe he existed, there is no reason to make up something like that in the first place, I mean if you were going to make something up, it would be a lot grander than born in a stable, died nailed to a piece of wood like a criminal.
No I believe there are other accounts of his life between boyhood and later adulthood that have been kept back by the Catholic Church for their own reasons.
The basic simple teachings of Jesus- love and brotherhood rather go against creating a huge lie, a world wide empire/religon with millions of followers, pretty good going for a person you claim never existed.

[Morality Games]

Well I believe he existed, there is no reason to make up something like that in the first place, I mean if you were going to make something up, it would be a lot grander than born in a stable, died nailed to a piece of wood like a criminal.

An aesthetic approach like this doesn't really trump a large compilation of historical evidence gathered through rigorous study.

No I believe there are other accounts of his life between boyhood and later adulthood that have been kept back by the Catholic Church for their own reasons.

There is little to no reason to believe that.

The basic simple teachings of Jesus- love and brotherhood rather go against creating a huge lie, a world wide empire/religon with millions of followers, pretty good going for a person you claim never existed.

Except that has never really been the form of the Christian religon on earth. I can't confidentily state any predominantly Christian society in the centuries leading up to our modern age was a nice place to live most of the time, and that they have become nice places today has more to do with the rise of ultilitarian-style democracies than any innovation within the faith.

[Zhavric]

Quote by: Anmon Well I believe he existed, there is no reason to make up something like that in the first place, I mean if you were going to make something up, it would be a lot grander than born in a stable, died nailed to a piece of wood like a criminal.

This tells me that you're not in touch with what was going on in Judea in the seventh decade of the first century or Jewish history/folklore.

Understand that things sucked for the Jews back then.

The Romans had conquered them (the latest in a long line of oppressors). The temple had been destroyed. The Romans had levied an EXTRA tax on the Jews for the burning of Rome. All in all, it was a really terrible time to be a Jew.

If Jewish history/mythology has anything consistant about it, it's that the Jews always have a hero show up to save the day. Always. Look at any point in Jewish history and you'll see it.

So, if you were a Jew living circa 70ce, you REALLY wanted to see god send you that hero to save everyone.

Into this mix of desperation comes a story of a messiah. God sent his only son (who bears a STRIKING resemblence to all the rabble rousing rabbis who opposed the Romans decades ago) who was killed by the Romans/corrupt Jewish authority. He did rock-star-like magic tricks and was allegedly going to show up again any second to put the smack down on the Romans. Add into this a healthy dose of guilt and you have the beginnings of the Christ myth.

No I believe there are other accounts of his life between boyhood and later adulthood that have been kept back by the Catholic Church for their own reasons.

Nope. You're wrong. The church has no motivation to hold onto these. If they existed and they portrayed Jesus positively, we'd have seen them. If they exist and portrayed him negatively, they'd have destroyed them. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion?

The basic simple teachings of Jesus- love and brotherhood rather go against creating a huge lie, a world wide empire/religon with millions of followers, pretty good going for a person you claim never existed.

Again, this tells me you haven't studied up on your world history.

We owe the world wide empire on Constantine's and Rome's bloodthirsty greed for world domination. The great irony of Christianity is that this religion of "love and brotherhood" was spread by force throughout Europe and the rest of the world. The rise of Christianity in Rome has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and everything to do with the greed of Rome for world domination.

Imagine for a moment that it wasn't Christianity that rose to prominence in ancient times, but was instead Scientology. Do you think that Scientologists today would talk about L. Ron Hubbard's little quote about starting religions for money? Do you think the Scientologists would record history as it happened or put their own spin on it? Do you really think Christianity was any different?

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Morality Games Except that has never really been the form of the Christian religon on earth. I can't confidentily state any predominantly Christian society in the centuries leading up to our modern age was a nice place to live most of the time, and that they have become nice places today has more to do with the rise of ultilitarian-style democracies than any innovation within the faith.

What society in the past ages was a nice place to live?

Portions of Italy were once among the most enlightened regions for learning after the dark ages, all under the sphere of the roman catholic church. You'd have to have a fairly well off and accepting society to allow a painting called "School of Athens" to be done right inside the Vatican.

[Morality Games]

What society in the past ages was a nice place to live?

Few or none, but that just demonstrates the non-exceptionalism of Christianity in practice. Functionally, it amounts to much the same thing any other religion.

Portions of Italy were once among the most enlightened regions for learning after the dark ages, all under the sphere of the roman catholic church. You'd have to have a fairly well off and accepting society to allow a painting called "School of Athens" to be done right inside the Vatican.

I'm not sure which era exactly you are talking about, but if we are talking about the Renaissance, only the upper classes were acccepting, and their acceptance was never unconditional. Genuine acceptance posits no or only a few stipulations. Moreover, many of the artists and their patrons went rogue, abandoning Christianity in favor of pantheism, deism, and atheism. That they were 'accepted' derives largely from the fact they didn't go into detail about the content of their beliefs outside a few very exclusive channels -- however, everyone can enjoy a work of art, be the maker religious or non-religious. That they produced marvelous works of architecture, literature, sculpture, and art played a large role in a lack of rigorous investigations in the piety of many nobles, merchants, and artists. However, in such instances where a lack of piety was found (if someone upset the wrong clergymen), the outcome was rarely nice.

In particular, there is nothing accepting about a portrait called, "The School of Athens," because Platonism was a steady influence on the growth of early Christianity -- not hard to accept people whose ideas you agree with.

[Anmon]

[=Zhavric;495692]This tells me that you're not in touch with what was going on in Judea in the seventh decade of the first century or Jewish history/folklore.

I know about the diaspora.

Into this mix of desperation comes a story of a messiah. God sent his only son (who bears a STRIKING resemblence to all the rabble rousing rabbis who opposed the Romans decades ago) who was killed by the Romans/corrupt Jewish authority. He did rock-star-like magic tricks and was allegedly going to show up again any second to put the smack down on the Romans. Add into this a healthy dose of guilt and you have the beginnings of the Christ myth.

The only thing wrong with your fairytale, is that Christs apostles were preaching about Jesus's word long before this happened, Paul was converted to Christianity around 35 AD.

Nope. You're wrong. The church has no motivation to hold onto these. If they existed and they portrayed Jesus positively, we'd have seen them. If they exist and portrayed him negatively, they'd have destroyed them. Do you have any evidence to support your assertion?

Have you seen the Da Vinci code? I believe the Catholic Church tailored Christs life to suit their purposes, and your right they may have destroyed any other records, I think Mary Magdalene was his girl, and being a prostitute that Christ in his decent nature loved as a person and rescued, she was dissociated from him later on by writers, not wanting Christs name smeared, I think this is at the heart of the cover up.

Again, this tells me you haven't studied up on your world history.

I have read up on a lot of world history, I haven't spent years pouring over it in universitys for exams and in seminars like you may have.

We owe the world wide empire on Constantine's and Rome's bloodthirsty greed for world domination. The great irony of Christianity is that this religion of "love and brotherhood" was spread by force throughout Europe and the rest of the world. The rise of Christianity in Rome has nothing to do with the teachings of Jesus and everything to do with the greed of Rome for world domination.

Yes it was spread this way, but I guess that was just part of Gods plan to begin with, have a brutal hard conquering empire first well placed around where Christ was born, thus Christianity later has a ready made network of roads and conquered territorys to spread their faith by.
The message of Christ although spread forcibly, and not always the case, wouldn't have stuck so well, if its basic nature and message of hope, forgiveness and love had not appealed to the average person, which it did, and still does.

Imagine for a moment that it wasn't Christianity that rose to prominence in ancient times, but was instead Scientology. Do you think that Scientologists today would talk about L. Ron Hubbard's little quote about starting religions for money? Do you think the Scientologists would record history as it happened or put their own spin on it? Do you really think Christianity was any different?

Your just using conjecture, I doubt if Scientology went world wide over the next few century's, that a huge cover up would take place to alter it as something else.

[HelioPrime]

Quote by: Morality Games Few or none, but that just demonstrates the non-exceptionalism of Christianity in practice. Functionally, it amounts to much the same thing any other religion. .

Then what are you getting at? The original comment by Anmon follow basic christian principle. I don't see where commenting on poor conditions in the past takes away from christianity at all. Would you expect a pure utopia and years of peace? Aside from that there are all sorts of other factors, disease, war, economics, power, greed, etc that likely made life what it was.