Cappster wrote:If it weren't for the Roman Emperor Constantine, the story of Jesus could have been just another fable placed on the bookshelves of all other mythological beings.
Yes, but doesn't Constantine's proximity to Jesus, in history, just lend creedence to his existence, not to mention all the ancient documents about him?
Constantine didn't become emperor until 300 years after the alleged death of Christ. I am not sure how the two are associated other than Jesus was allegedly killed by Romans and Constantine was a Roman.
Cappster wrote:If it weren't for the Roman Emperor Constantine, the story of Jesus could have been just another fable placed on the bookshelves of all other mythological beings.
Yes, but doesn't Constantine's proximity to Jesus, in history, just lend creedence to his existence, not to mention all the ancient documents about him?
Constantine didn't become emperor until 300 years after the alleged death of Christ. I am not sure how the two are associated other than Jesus was allegedly killed by Romans and Constantine was a Roman.
Well, 300 years removed is a lot better than 2000 years removed. And the point still remains, clearly Constantine believed a man named Jesus existed. I think it is much more likely that Jesus existed, than that he is a work of fiction that people just seemed to buy into.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
It seems likely that there was a Jesus of Nazareth who followed John the Baptist and who became a leader after John was killed
- there are several mentions in Flavius Josephus of followers of Jesus of Nazareth. None friendly: Josephus disliked them
- Josephus mentions John the Baptist, who was a popular "preacher" with a considerable following
- Josephus mentions that one of the rulers -- either a Roman governor or Roman puppet -- executed "James the Just", leader of the church in Jerusalem and brother of Jesus. (Not James the son of Zebedee, who was a Galilee fisherman and brother of John, "the beloved disciple"
None of this proves that Jesus was the son of God or God incarnate, but it seems likely that he lived, preached, had followers, was executed by the Romans (it was illegal for any but the Romans to crucify someone), and that the followers stuck together in a community that eventually called itself a church.
Deadskins wrote:Well, 300 years removed is a lot better than 2000 years removed. And the point still remains, clearly Constantine believed a man named Jesus existed. I think it is much more likely that Jesus existed, than that he is a work of fiction that people just seemed to buy into.
A man named Jesus existing at the time of the supposed "King of Kings" really does nothing to prove that he is the Demigod of Yahweh and the savior of mankind. Jesus, himself, the person may not have been a fable, but his miracles are fables which is nothing new to the long lineage of mythological beings.
Cappster wrote:Jesus, himself, the person may not have been a fable, but his miracles are fables which is nothing new to the long lineage of mythological beings.
Acutually it would be. He would be the first of those "mythological beings" to actually be an historically documented person.
Just so I understand, you say his miracles are fables, so how do you account for this one person in all of recorded history, having so many "miracle fables" attributed to him? Why are many of these "miracle fables" commonly described by several different authors? Was he a magician? Did he perform some sort of tricks that were misinterperated as miracles? Why would he have challenged the establishment the way he did, knowing that it would ultimately have to lead to some form of punishment, be it death, flogging, or something else? Did he have a death wish? Was he crazy? Did he want to overthrow the Roman empire's control of his people? Why did John the Baptist acquiesce to Jesus' authority? Was he in cahoots with John the Baptist?
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.
Cappster wrote:Jesus, himself, the person may not have been a fable, but his miracles are fables which is nothing new to the long lineage of mythological beings.
Acutually it would be. He would be the first of those "mythological beings" to actually be an historically documented person.
Just so I understand, you say his miracles are fables, so how do you account for this one person in all of recorded history, having so many "miracle fables" attributed to him? Why are many of these "miracle fables" commonly described by several different authors? Was he a magician? Did he perform some sort of tricks that were misinterperated as miracles? Why would he have challenged the establishment the way he did, knowing that it would ultimately have to lead to some form of punishment, be it death, flogging, or something else? Did he have a death wish? Was he crazy? Did he want to overthrow the Roman empire's control of his people? Why did John the Baptist acquiesce to Jesus' authority? Was he in cahoots with John the Baptist?
I account for Jesus the same way I do others gods in that stories of grandeur have no proof behind them and are subsequently dismissed. Imagine this: Say that Jesus decided instead off appearing 2000 years ago he appeared in front of us today. Imagine that this brown long haired hippie looking Jew came to America and proclaimed that he is the son of man. Would anyone really believe that this person was the son of man or would they walk by him and his cardboard sign on the street corner? He would have to do a lot more than turn water into wine to get people to believe that he is some kind of supernatural being much less god in the flesh.
All a person needs to do is look at the other stories of previously existing gods to know that the fable of Jesus is based off of previous gods and that the story of Jesus is a knock off copy of someone else's god. Jesus, if he existed, could've been a magician, a carpenter, or someone who is full of it such as Joseph Smith. It doesn't relaly matter, because the story of Jesus is not even an original and is plagiarized from gods that came before him.
we should be so lucky I guarantee, if He did make an appearance, He's not going to be at all like you picture Him because you have no clue - no clue at all
Until recently, Snyder & Allen have made a lot of really bad decisions - nobody with any sense believes this franchise will get better under their guidance Snyder's W/L record = 45% (80-96) - Snyder/Allen = 41% (59-84-1)
SkinsJock wrote:we should be so lucky I guarantee, if He did make an appearance, He's not going to be at all like you picture Him because you have no clue - no clue at all
DM is on the right path as Jesus would've been a dark skinned man. I am not sure how the early 90's hip hop look would've worked for the ol' Middle Eastern guy.
It causes nausea to admit... but, yes... very droll, DS...
"That's a clown question, bro" - - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman "But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man That he didn't, didn't already have" - - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America
I guarantee, if He did make an appearance, He's not going to be at all like you picture Him because you have no clue - no clue at all
