The Jesus debate

[boycotteverything]

I posted this yesterday on a forum that many of you are familiar with. For my effort I was summarily banned. Is it that case that alternative views of Christianity merit the hemlock? In this post I was making the case for the Greek overburden on Christianity and that understanding Jesus is trivial lacking this consideration. Apparently that was too much for the resident Christians there to bear. Dr. Exile and Apeci will appreciate this spiel. Behold:


OK. I see where you think you’re going with this- You’re emphasizing the proto-Christian Ha Mashiach quality of Jesus. The problem is that Jesus, himself, was a Jew. In fact most of the teachings attributed to him were nothing more or less than a distillation of Talmud and Deuteronomy. Nothing wrong with that- that body of work is full of wisdom. But there was and is a problem with his Messianism. It failed to fulfill the requirements set down in Talmud. The early church understood this even if you don’t. That’s the reason for the early Catholic redefinition of Ha Mashiach. In a borrowing from the Greeks, Jesus morphed into the Dialectic of God, i.e. the Trinity, essentially causing the his Messianism to become an esoteric mystery in a Socratic sense: the eternal ‘coming to be’ by a teleological synthesis emerging by necessity out of the Dialectical progression. So he incorporates within his process/ being the Father, the child and the spirit. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis- Platonist esoterica. And the Synthesis that he eternally becomes? None other than the Talmudist Shikena or holy spirit that descends (like a dove) upon a minion. Is there then an eschatological quality to the process? Only in the sense that the outcome of creation is always simply here and now. Whatever morally predictive (prophetic) qualities that may flow from Process are only gained through examination and immersion in the life experience per se. And therein also lies redemption. And on a side note, but relevant to this discussion- morality is a shadow of the Ethical that is apperceived by that very redemption. Transcendent Ethics, the Mood of God, is nothing other than the Love as taught in the Beatitudes. So there you have it. Read this with care.

[mur]

Gee...I read that somewhere.

[boycotteverything]

yex predicted 3 days. he was right! hahahaha

[mur]

I'm disappointed I didn't realize it sooner.

[mojo]

no wonder they banned you, i couldn't understand a word of it. :)

seriously, why the fuck would anyone get banned for that?
what site was it?

[pack3tg0st]

LOL I had a different question when I read BE's post mojo...

I thought... There's a site BE hasn't been banned from?

I don't see him as the type to play by the rules, no matter what site he's on...

[boycotteverything]

hahahah that's why i stick with a site that has no rules.

[pack3tg0st]

yah... me too...

I"m the kinda wierdo that when they say not to do something... I ask "why not" which is usually against the rules as well...

most other sites won't let you be critical of the site or staff... thus, why Amkon works for me lol

I can tell every mod/admin on here to take a flying leap off a bridge if I wished... and they'd all reply in unison: "Fuck you"

no bans...

its great :P

[boycotteverything]

I ask "why not" which is usually against the rules as well... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

http://photos-b.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs166.snc1/6210_1085078971152_1351737755_30237441_1714212_n.j pg

[mur]

no wonder they banned you, i couldn't understand a word of it. :)

seriously, why the fuck would anyone get banned for that?
what site was it?

He wasn't banned for the post, but for who he is.

Same thing happened to me...at OMF

[boycotteverything]

He wasn't banned for the post, but for who he is.that says it all...

[skunk]

I see nothing wrong with the OP aside from someone who is using logic to refute religion.

Therein lies the problem. There is no logic in religion.

[boycotteverything]

Very true. The absurd begins where reason ends. I don't refute religion only the attempt to justify it by rational arguments. Such an attempt is only a disingenuous appeal to faith. It's a rippoff and a con. I'm way over the thumpers.

[Jackinthebox]

Jesus was King Tut.

http://www.curledup.com/jesusint.htm

[offsite:2ot0dxog]With the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, new and exciting theories about the historical Jesus have arisen in the form of intriguing books such as Jesus in the House of the Pharaohs, which poses the idea that Jesus was indeed the Teacher of Righteousness referred to in the Scrolls and revered by the Essenes, a secret Jewish sect that removed itself from mainstream Jewish thought and tradition. Author Ahmed Osman also offers up a fascinating argument for a totally new concept of when Jesus actually lived and preached – almost 1400 years before the Christian New Testament places his birth.

In fact, using solid documentation with quotes and references from the Old and New Testaments, the Scrolls, the Nag Hammadi texts, Talmudic sources and the Koran, Osman states his belief that Jesus was, in fact, the same person as Joshua of the Old Testament, and a contemporary of Moses, AND that Jesus was also known as Tutankhamun, the pharaoh ruler of Egypt between 1361 and 1352 B.C.. Now, if this all sounds confusing, you have to read the book, which details the long history of the mythology of the Christ story, and shows how this story has been told again and again throughout “biblical” history with different names attached, told long before even “biblical history,” as in the story of Isis/Osiris and other pre-Christian creation and hero stories.

What is so mind-blowing about this theory is the fact that Osman supports his ideas with actual comparisons of passages in holy texts that often counter the history of Christ that we are most familiar with, yet are there in plain sight for anyone who wants to look them up and see for themselves. The Old Testament is filled with references to a Messiah figure just like Jesus, with exact parallels of the Christ saga, yet uses either no name or different names to portray what the ancient Essenes believed to have been a person who actually had suffered, died and rose from death MANY CENTURIES BEFORE JESUS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. I use capital letters hear because this is a fascinating and provocative concept backed up, again, by plenty of textual evidence, that most orthodox Christians and even Jews will pass off as pure heresy, yet Osman shows again and again how the Old Testament refers to the coming of the Messiah as an event that had already taken place. This is backed up by many other Talmudic sources, and Osman also gives good argument for the fact that some of the stories about Jesus that later appeared on the scene had obviously been doctored to do away with this shocking truth (he is not alone in this - other scholars believe this, as well). After all, what modern Christian would want to believe Jesus was an Egyptian pharaoh, or that the story of his life is not really the story of his life?

But for many scholars who study mythology, comparative religion and objective history, and are not tied to the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church’s demands for revisionism, this book offers a new way of seeing the older stories of the Bible and other religious texts that talk about a Jesus-like figure, born of a virgin, died and risen again, yet without the actual name Jesus attached. Perhaps indeed, as Osman states, Jesus was originally a different person operating his ministry in a much earlier time, but whose presence was utterly needed again 1400 years later, when Jerusalem struggled to be free from Roman rule, and a new Messiah would have come in quite handy in the historical scheme of things. Hmmmm…food for thought.

Osman also digs into the historical background of Moses, whom he believed was a contemporary of Jesus (Joshua) and also the life and importance of John the Baptist, a man whom many still believe to have been the real Messiah. In addition, there is plenty of food for thought about the Essenes themselves, who believed they were the true inheritors of the teachings of Christ, the Teacher of Righteousness mentioned in the Scrolls, as well as the identity of the true King David (there were actually TWO Davids!) of the historical bloodline that led directly to Jesus.

Several interesting photos of the Egyptian pharaohs and ancient art add to this ongoing mystery of the true identity of Christ. One thing is for sure, upon reading Jesus in the House of the Pharaohs, it is hard to think of Christian history in the same way again. Kudos to Osman for his courage and his great research abilities, which will no doubt open the floodgates to more debate, and perhaps, ultimately, to the complete release of the remaining Dead Sea Scrolls, now being kept under wraps, which may once and for all reveal the truth about a man we all seek to know more about.[/offsite:2ot0dxog]

[boycotteverything]

this book offers a new way of seeing the older stories of the Bible and other religious texts that talk about a Jesus-like figure, born of a virgin, died and risen againExcept that no such stories exist in the Old Testament outside the thumpers' wet dreams. The Judaic messiah is a concept that originated in the Talmud- roughly contemporaneous with the Qumran community that was responsible for the Dead Sea Scrolls. While I haven't read the book referred to I can see a few problems based on the above review. That's not say that it's not possible that both Jesus and the Teacher of Righteousness may not have been chimeras conjured of whole cloth by desperate religious fanatics. Who knows? And who can know at this late date?

[Snow Crash]

Pardon my ignorance, but what does OMF stand for? Obnoxious Mother-Fuckers?

[Lexion]

Open Minds Forum.

A true conundrum.

[boycotteverything]

A true conundrum.you mean oxymoron?

[Cogburn]

http://i26.tinypic.com/20ssu1v.jpg

[Alessandra]

har har har i c wut u did thar. :lol: :lol:

[Cogburn]

Collect all three!

http://i27.tinypic.com/n3s1z9.jpg
http://i27.tinypic.com/106lqub.jpg

[skunk]

I only see 2 pictures.

[Alessandra]

:lol:

skunk, look on the last bit of the first page.

[skunk]

What about RU? Got anything bad to say about them? WND? We could become professional shit talkers, modeling our business after fox news and smearing our competitors with claims of homosexuality, socialism, and other ridiculous bullshit.

[Cogburn]

RU is not even worth mentioning in the same breath as those three or even AmKon. The only reason that place exists is to continually stroke themselves off for a hoax they participated in and then "debunked" nearly three years ago. What have you done for me lately?

WND is so tabloid the only thing its missing is upskirt shots of Lindsey Lohan. Not to mention they are still the only thing approximating a "mainstream" news outlet that still publishes hoaxes perpetrated by "Sorcha Faal"/David Booth (http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/).

I am all for hopping all over InfoWars.com and PrisonPlanet.tv and skullfucking their stupid theories into oblivion. All we need to do is to draw a few of them here.

It's safe for you... I promise...

[imgs=400:q2rbawln]http://photos.napalm.net/contest7/RapeAlley_sm.jpg[/imgs:q2rbawln]

[Lexion]

We could become professional shit talkers, and other ridiculous bullshit.

And ?

[pack3tg0st]

by professional, does that mean we get paid?!?!

We've been talking shit for a long while now... might as well start getting a little compensation eh?

hehehe

[skunk]

Yeah, pay day motherfuckers!!!

(Let's be professional hoaxers instead lol.)

[Alessandra]

Hey look, a dark alley! I wonder whats down it...

[Cogburn]

I knew it.

First it was the debate forum...

Then it was plotting hoaxes...

Next comes the ad banners...

Good god what have we done?

:lol:

[Lexion]

Hey look, a dark alley! I wonder whats down it...

Me.

[Alessandra]

Better get the mace ready, then.

[Lexion]

Better get the mace ready, then.

Mace beats Magic Missile.

[Alessandra]

lol. I have Dodge, so I can avoid your "magic missiles" :lol:

[Lexion]

I rolled a natural 20.

[Alessandra]

pff

I've got 2 20's, and they're both natural

[Lexion]

pff

I've got 2 20's, and they're both natural


I prefer 40's.

Unless that is the intent.

Then, giggity.

[mur]

http://i26.tinypic.com/20ssu1v.jpg

Thanks for this.

[Cogburn]

Hahaha... Your welcome.

I made them for that John Lear video.

Should have posted them sooner.

[Alessandra]

40's or DD's?

[Eyeforalie]

Please, no debates outside designated, zoned and policed debate areas.

Violaters will be warned. Habitual violaters will be warned again.

[mojo]

He wasn't banned for the post, but for who he is.



ahhh....well that i can understand.







:P

[Yex]

Three days, that was hilarious!

:lol:

I was looking forward to a bit of Dan Vs Toon sparring too!

Yex

[boycotteverything]

hahah me too. i invited him here but i think he was put off by the chaos. oh well... you called it, bro.

[Snow Crash]

Yeah, pay day motherfuckers!!!

(Let's be professional hoaxers instead lol.)

Nah, the market is too competitive. ATS, that Sorcha Fail person, those tards that Cog and Pack were obsessing over a while back...

Can't we just stick to be overaggressive debaters, en masse?

[mojo]

Can't we just stick to be overaggressive debaters, en masse?


thats a given.

[Martian Exile]

Recovering from the derail for a short while,


Transcendent Ethics, the Mood of God, is nothing other than the Love as taught in the Beatitudes.

"...Upon that lucky night
In secrecy, inscrutable to sight
I went without discerning
And with no other light
Except for that which in my heart was burning.

It lit and led me through
More certain than the light of noonday clear
To where One waited near
Whose presence well I knew,
There where no other presence might appear.

...Lost to myself I stayed
My face upon my lover having laid
From all endeavour ceasing:
And all my cares releasing
Threw them amongst the lilies there to fade."

BE knows the poet.


As to the book that Jackinthebox was referring to.

I studied under the Jesuits for six years. I have all of the dead sea scrolls, as well as most of the so called "Lost Books".

It's funny, the old man I studied under used to read them to me from photos of the text in the native tongue. And in my books (translated into English I must confess) I have never heard nor read in the texts any mention of King Tut.

Jack, if you have read the gentleman's book, post a few of the passages so I can look them up myself.

Not that I think it's hogwash or anything.

[Cogburn]

Jack, if you have read the gentleman's book, post a few of the passages so I can look them up myself.

Not that I think it's hogwash or anything.
Potential awesomeness detected.

[mojo]

Jack, if you have read the gentleman's book, post a few of the passages so I can look them up myself.

Not that I think it's hogwash or anything.

he may be refering to ahmed osman.
i happen to agree with a few of osman's theories myself though not all.
amongst the most salient points osman compares the ark of the covenant and other relics to relics found in tutankhamen's tomb, as well as other similarities, but it's not just the similarities of jesus and tutankhamen that osman explores, more noticeably links between moses and akhanaton and others.
personally i prefer the link between sargon the great and moses but thats beside the point.
you may not agree with all of osman's hypotheses but many of them are thought provoking and in many instances i believe well researched with accompanying evidence.
i have some links bookmarked somewhere, i'll see if i can't find them amongst the thousands i have. :D

[mojo]

he has many critics, not surprisingly considering the subject matter and the field but amongst the rubble there are some gems.

http://ahmedosman.com/home.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Osman

Books by Ahmed Osman (http://books.google.com.au/books?as_auth=Ahmed+Osman&source=an&ei=Y3eoSpm4FoSwswPAxpD8BA&sa=X&oi=book_group&ct=title&cad=author-navigational&resnum=9)

[skunk]

Can't we just stick to be overaggressive debaters, en masse?

Nope, just aggressive masturbators.

[boycotteverything]

he has many critics, not surprisingly considering the subject matter and the field but amongst the rubble there are some gems.

http://ahmedosman.com/home.html
ave to save the links for tomorrow
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Osman

Books by Ahmed Osman (http://books.google.com.au/books?as_auth=Ahmed+Osman&source=an&ei=Y3eoSpm4FoSwswPAxpD8BA&%20.sa=X&oi=book_group&ct=title&cad=author-navigational&resnum=9)I'm interested to read Osman's take on ancient history. I'll have to save the links for tomorrow though because I'm exquisitely fucking tired.

[boycotteverything]

Recovering from the derail for a short while,


Transcendent Ethics, the Mood of God, is nothing other than the Love as taught in the Beatitudes.

...Lost to myself I stayed
My face upon my lover having laid
From all endeavour ceasing:
And all my cares releasing
Threw them amongst the lilies there to fade."


It's been a while since I've considered San Juan de la Cruz. Thanks for bringing him back into my life.

[Snow Crash]

Can't we just stick to be overaggressive debaters, en masse?

Nope, just aggressive masturbators.

As was implied lol.

[boycotteverything]

wank wank wank blah blah blah, philosophy...

[Foxtrot Oscar]

wank wank wank blah blah blah, philosophy...

QFT.

Fox

[Cogburn]

he has many critics, not surprisingly considering the subject matter and the field but amongst the rubble there are some gems.

http://ahmedosman.com/home.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Osman

Books by Ahmed Osman (http://books.google.com.au/books?as_auth=Ahmed+Osman&source=an&ei=Y3eoSpm4FoSwswPAxpD8BA&sa=X&oi=book_group&ct=title&cad=author-navigational&resnum=9)
Osman puts Moses in the 14th century BC, half the time which we now know that Jerusalem was a settled, fortified community.

Unfortunately his time lines go up in flames with the rest of them in the face of reality.

[boycotteverything]

wank wank wank blah blah blah, philosophy...shoplifted that from Mojo.

[boycotteverything]

Osman puts Moses in the 14th century BC, half the time which we now know that Jerusalem was a settled, fortified community.And the point?

[Cogburn]

Who are you suggesting built that wall?

Maybe I missed something, but I don't recall anyone other than the Israelites being accused of that in the material regarding the find that I have come across.

[boycotteverything]

I don't know who built the wall. The Canaanites I'd suppose. The Israelites and the Canaanites are the same people. There was no Exodus in 1350 BC or any other time. And there was no Judaism until the 7th century BC under King Josiah. The biblical history is a cultural myth. When they're finished excavating and studying the wall it will probably turn out to be Chaldean. Only the discovery of certain architectural elements will allow for dating- i.e. gates, columns and capitols. Maybe some scattered shards. It's a process.

[Cogburn]

Osman puts Moses in the 14th century BC, half the time which we now know that Jerusalem was a settled, fortified community.

Unfortunately his time lines go up in flames with the rest of them in the face of reality.

I don't know who built the wall. The Canaanites I'd suppose. The Israelites and the Canaanites are the same people. There was no Exodus in 1350 BC or any other time. And there was no Judaism until the 7th century BC under King Josiah. The biblical history is a cultural myth. When they're finished excavating and studying the wall it will probably turn out to be Chaldean. Only the discovery of certain architectural elements will allow for dating- i.e. gates, columns and capitols. Maybe some scattered shards. It's a process.
What the hell are we arguing about again?

:lol:

[boycotteverything]

fuck if i know. it's late.

[pack3tg0st]

Who are you suggesting built that wall?

Fuckin' aliens man!!! isn't it obvious!

amidoingitright?

[mojo]

I don't know who built the wall.

Bob.

[KIWI]

seen on T-shirt....

"Jesus is coming!".....quick!....everyone look busy

[BE2]

The OP-
I posted this yesterday on a forum that many of you are familiar with. For my effort I was summarily banned. Is it that case that alternative views of Christianity merit the hemlock? In this post I was making the case for the Greek overburden on Christianity and that understanding Jesus is trivial lacking this consideration. Apparently that was too much for the resident Christians there to bear. Dr. Exile and Apeci will appreciate this spiel. Behold:OK. I see where you think you’re going with this- You’re emphasizing the proto-Christian Ha Mashiach quality of Jesus. The problem is that Jesus, himself, was a Jew. In fact most of the teachings attributed to him were nothing more or less than a distillation of Talmud and Deuteronomy. Nothing wrong with that- that body of work is full of wisdom. But there was and is a problem with his Messianism. It failed to fulfill the requirements set down in Talmud. The early church understood this even if you don’t. That’s the reason for the early Catholic redefinition of Ha Mashiach. In a borrowing from the Greeks, Jesus morphed into the Dialectic of God, i.e. the Trinity, essentially causing the his Messianism to become an esoteric mystery in a Socratic sense: the eternal ‘coming to be’ by a teleological synthesis emerging by necessity out of the Dialectical progression. So he incorporates within his process/ being the Father, the child and the spirit. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis- Platonist esoterica. And the Synthesis that he eternally becomes? None other than the Talmudist Shikena or holy spirit that descends (like a dove) upon a minion. Is there then an eschatological quality to the process? Only in the sense that the outcome of creation is always simply here and now. Whatever morally predictive (prophetic) qualities that may flow from Process are only gained through examination and immersion in the life experience per se. And therein also lies redemption. And on a side note, but relevant to this discussion- morality is a shadow of the Ethical that is apperceived by that very redemption. Transcendent Ethics, the Mood of God, is nothing other than the Love as taught in the Beatitudes. So there you have it. Read this with care.

[Lexion]

Dude.

You're talking to yourself.

[Ducky]

BE's original OP:

"I posted this yesterday on a forum that many of you are familiar with. For my effort I was summarily banned. Is it that case that alternative views of Christianity merit the hemlock? In this post I was making the case for the Greek overburden on Christianity and that understanding Jesus is trivial lacking this consideration. Apparently that was too much for the resident Christians there to bear. Dr. Exile and Apeci will appreciate this spiel. Behold:"


OK. I see where you think you’re going with this- You’re emphasizing the proto-Christian Ha Mashiach quality of Jesus. The problem is that Jesus, himself, was a Jew. In fact most of the teachings attributed to him were nothing more or less than a distillation of Talmud and Deuteronomy. Nothing wrong with that- that body of work is full of wisdom. But there was and is a problem with his Messianism. It failed to fulfill the requirements set down in Talmud. The early church understood this even if you don’t. That’s the reason for the early Catholic redefinition of Ha Mashiach. In a borrowing from the Greeks, Jesus morphed into the Dialectic of God, i.e. the Trinity, essentially causing the his Messianism to become an esoteric mystery in a Socratic sense: the eternal ‘coming to be’ by a teleological synthesis emerging by necessity out of the Dialectical progression. So he incorporates within his process/ being the Father, the child and the spirit. Thesis, antithesis and synthesis- Platonist esoterica. And the Synthesis that he eternally becomes? None other than the Talmudist Shikena or holy spirit that descends (like a dove) upon a minion. Is there then an eschatological quality to the process? Only in the sense that the outcome of creation is always simply here and now. Whatever morally predictive (prophetic) qualities that may flow from Process are only gained through examination and immersion in the life experience per se. And therein also lies redemption. And on a side note, but relevant to this discussion- morality is a shadow of the Ethical that is apperceived by that very redemption. Transcendent Ethics, the Mood of God, is nothing other than the Love as taught in the Beatitudes. So there you have it. Read this with care.

Why he mixed the paragraphs up like that, we'll never know.

Otherwise, then Yes, Lex, it sounds as though he was talking to himself.

I've frequented OMF probably a handful of times within the last couple of years. May be less than that. Pretty sure I registered there as well.

They're quite the lot over there.

Edit to add:

Would have liked to seen a few quoted links from whom in particular... BE was referring to.

[BE2]

Dude.

You're talking to yourself.Probably.

[mojo]

Dude.

You're talking to yourself.

sometimes thats the only person that listens, i know that feeling well. :lol:

[pack3tg0st]

http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/optimus_prime_vs_jesus.jpg

[BE2]

RE: BE's original OP:





Why he mixed the paragraphs up like that, we'll never know.

Otherwise, then Yes, Lex, it sounds as though he was talking to himself.


Would have liked to seen a few quoted links from whom in particular... BE was referring to.
BE was quoting himself in both instances. Lex is right. No-one in particular either read it or gave a shit. :lol:

[Alessandra]

http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/optimus_prime_vs_jesus.jpg

ROFL