XPost: alt.atheism, alt.politics, aus.politics   
   XPost: aus.religion, alt.politics.republicans, uk.politics.misc   
   From: darstec@neo.rr.com   
      
   HD wrote:   
      
   >   
   > "Darrell Stec"  wrote in message   
   > news:6ulodpFg2offU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >> HD wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> "Darrell Stec"  wrote in message   
   >>> news:6ul8riFfu61jU1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>> HD wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> "Darrell Stec"  wrote in message   
   >>>>> news:6ujnk1Ffmpm9U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>>>>> HD wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> "Seon Ferguson"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>> news:49840f73$0$14863$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> "HD"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>> news:IsTgl.16012$cu.974@news-server.bigpond.net.au...   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> "Seon Ferguson"  wrote in message   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   news:4983fd52$0$14899$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> "Peter Webb"  wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>> message news:4983e8a8$0$20975$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...   
   >>>>>>>>>>> Atheists have done lots of bad things, but not because they are   
   >>>>>>>>>>> atheists, but because they are bad people.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> Your dead right. Stalin murdered millions of people because he   
   >>>>>>>>>> was a communist not an Atheist.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> Jesus Christ was a Communist.   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> Just because he told his followers to give up everything and follow   
   >>>>>>>> him? (you don't see the super rich religious right doing that today   
   >>>>>>>> now   
   >>>>>>>> do you?)   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Neither did the Pharisees (Seperatists) the super rich who seperated   
   >>>>>>> themselves from the poor. They didn't like His communist teachings   
   >>>>>>> so they   
   >>>>>>> had Him Crucified.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> There are several problems with that scenario, the least of which is   
   >>>>>> that   
   >>>>>> Jesus is a fictitious character of the second century CE.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> When He comes again He will tell you otherwise.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Nymshifting again, I see.  Since he never came before, your use of   
   >>>> "again" is erroneous.   
   >>>   
   >>> And you know that How?   
   >>> Have you been there?   
   >>> Do you have prove?   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> It is encubent upon the person making the positive statement to offer   
   >> evidence.  You assert the positive, i.e. that Jesus lived.  So it is you   
   >> who must provide the evidence.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > No-no-no, everyone knows that Jesus lived, You are the one claiming that   
   > he did not live. You are the one going against popular believe.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >> First of all there is not one contemporary account of Jesus nor of any of   
   >> the apostles.  Secondly, it is evident from the gospels themselves that   
   >> the   
   >> stories were written at least 100 years after the period in which Jesus   
   >> was   
   >> said to have been alive.   
   >   
   >   
   > My gread grandfather died 100 years ago. I can tell you everything about   
   > his life and can write it down. Eg, the name of his father and mother, his   
   > brothers and sisters, the place were he was born, where he grew up, when   
   > he got married what work he did during his life etc. etc. 100 years is a   
   > short time.   
   >   
   >   
      
   But can you be specific about what he ate for breakfast during the summer of   
   1884?  The gospels give such facts.  Can you repeat verbatim any   
   conversations he had with his parents, the court, private meetings when he   
   was alive?  The gospels give such facts.  Can you tell us briefly about his   
   life given an exact sequence of events and conversations using Chiasm>   
      
      
   >   
   >   
   >>   
   >> None of the gospels knew first century Jewish customs, nor did they know   
   >> anything about the geography of the Holy Land.   
   >>   
   >> In addition, the first gospel written, that according to Mark, can trace   
   >> the   
   >> entire life of Jesus to some other story told of some other individuals   
   >> in   
   >> the Old Testament.  Also Mark wrote in a literary form almost exclusively   
   >> used for story telling or fables called chiasm.   
   >>   
      
   If those NT writers did not make that stuff up because they too far removed   
   in time and location then why did they get the geography wrong and Jewish   
   customs wrong?  And why can we trace every line in the gospel according to   
   Mark to some other event and person that is in the Old Testament?  And if   
   they knew anything about Jesus why did the gospels according to Matthew and   
   Luke copy so copiously, word for word, from Mark?   
      
   Did you know that a story that is told over and over again gets larger and   
   larger with each retelling.  It gets embellished and has facts added not in   
   the original.  That is what we see with Matthew and Luke with Luke being   
   the last in the synoptic gospels and the most embellished.  Then there is   
   the gospel according to John which basically contradicts that which is in   
   Mark, Matthew and Luke.  And John's timeline is completely skewed from the   
   synoptics.  Why would that be, if those authors were writing an accurate   
   history rather than a fiction much like the growth of the Santa Claus   
   legend which got enhanced as time went on?   
      
      
   Will your book about your great grandfather be equally wrong and   
   anachronistic?   
      
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> First of all, the Pharisees were not reviled in the first century.   
   >>>>>> That   
   >>>>>> occurred in the second century.  Secondly, the Jewish people had the   
   >>>>>> authority to administer capital punishment on their own.  This is   
   >>>>>> evident   
   >>>>>> from the passages (at least three) where they tried to stone Jesus in   
   >>>>>> public but he got away.  The Jewish people had to give up that right   
   >>>>>> to   
   >>>>>> the   
   >>>>>> civil authority after 70 CE in part, and finally in 135 CE when they   
   >>>>>> were   
   >>>>>> totally driven from their Holy Land.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> As to the Pharisees, while they were of a special class and powerful,   
   >>>>>> they   
   >>>>>> were not necessarily rich.  The correlation between power, class, and   
   >>>>>> wealth was a complex one.  Wealth did not necessarily equate to   
   >>>>>> class, but the upper class were allowed to acquire wealth, while for   
   >>>>>> the most part,   
   >>>>>> that was denied to the lower classes.  For a fuller explanation of   
   >>>>>> the topic see http://tinyurl.com/b535eu.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I do agree, that the Jesus portrayed in scripture was a communist.   
   >>>>>> Acts   
   >>>>>> clearly demonstrates that.  Most people confuse the militaristic   
   >>>>>> feudalism of modern (relatively speaking) communists with real   
   >>>>>> communism to the point   
   >>>>>> where that is now the de facto definition of communism.  Strictly   
   >>>>>> speaking,   
   >>>>>> it is not.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> --   
   >>>>>> Later,   
   >>>>>> Darrell   
   >>>>   
   >>>> --   
   >>>> Later,   
   >>>> Darrell   
   >>   
   >> --   
   >> Later,   
   >> Darrell   
      
   --   
   Later,   
   Darrell   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)