The Incredible Edible Jesus

[Smellyoldgit]

Like a twat I clicked 'view post' and Fuck Me - BINGO!! - line, corner to corner, full house - the fucking lot!
The cod-piece rumbles on!

[psychodiva]

lol@Smelly- you should know better

[calpurnpiso]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Like a twat I clicked 'view post' and Fuck Me - BINGO!! - line, corner to corner, full house - the fucking lot!
The cod-piece rumbles on!

Yup, my post is for intellectuals. Sorry to disappoint you with facts. Go back to your cave...


Stern Please study the ORIGIN of a Cod piece. I can teach it to you with abundant pictures idiot

[Smellyoldgit]

smellyoldgit wrote

The codpiece rumbles on

The Resident Bone-Head wrote

my post is for intellectuals.

A few seconds later, the intellectual dolt wrote

Stern Please study .. . .

...is it me?

[calpurnpiso]

Smellyoldgit wrote

Like a twat I clicked 'view post' and Fuck Me - BINGO!! - line, corner to corner, full house - the fucking lot!
The cod-piece rumbles on!

Yes I made a mistake, unlike you folks who NEVER make them...(sorry Stern I confuse the name ). Here is the CORRECTED post.
Yup, my post is for intellectuals. Sorry to disappoint you with facts. Go back to your cave..



Smelly Please study the ORIGIN of a Cod piece. I can teach it to you with abundant pictures....

[calpurnpiso]

Smellyoldgit wrote

...is it me?

Yup, you are the only bone-head here....Go fly a kite & remember if the shoe fits wear it.
I suggest you learn ancient history and also neurology. WHY don't you CORRECT my posts if they do not reflect an accurate knowledge of history?. I appreciate corrections. You seem to ignore the fact that's the BEST way to LEARN...but Bulloks, bone head, Cod-piece,..?

Remember, expletives are an indication of deep ignorance on the subject being discussed. I see that to you when someone discusses something beyond your understanding you refer to it as "rumbling"....really smelly? Are you ok?..and you view yourself as an atheist with such a dysfunctional ignorant & insecure brain?. You simply do not want to learn.
Your lost not mine...

O si tacuisses philosophus mansisses

[Smellyoldgit]

psychodiva wrote

Smelly- you should know better

Yes, entirely my own fault - it won't happen again.
Trying to have any level of reasoned interaction with Cal is like:-



Now I know why hardly anyone bothers.

[ghoulslime]

Ahem! There are people who are trying to make fun of Jesus in here.

[ghoulslime]

There are lots and lots of larger-than-life legendary characters in the annuals of human folklore. Some of them are benevolent beings such as Johnny Appleseed and Snow White. Some of them are manly and mighty and magnificent in their machismo, such as John Henry and Paul Bunyan. Most people seem to understand, without the need for anyone else to explain it to them, that these characters were not real. They were the protagonists of tall tales, meant to entertain and elicit wonderment.

If one were to attempt to make a case for the real John Henry, who hammered himself to death in order to prove the superiority of human energy over industrial technology, where would one start? It is hardly enough to embellish the stories of John Henry with details of what size his hammer head was, and where the wood for the handle was worked, unless to establish the basis for demonstrating any assertions as to where he obtained his hammer, and who sold it to him. If there were even a single oral account from a single hardware store clerk who claimed to have sold a hammer to John Henry, then it would be a piece of evidence to consider in making a case for a real John Henry. But there is no evidence, because the story is a fib.

I have stated before on this forum, that when objective individuals remark, with accuracy, that there is no evidence for the existence of a real Jesus, I don’t mean that there is a lot of evidence that I reject because I am a militant atheist - I mean there is no evidence at all. If there were a single account of any contemporary reference to Jesus, this would constitute evidence. Not even a solitary follower remarked to another person of the day, “Why, after my thirty-seventh messiah, I think I have finally found the real messiah. His name is Jesus, and he claims to be from Nazareth!” This would not be good evidence, and certainly not evidence that said messiah was a divine magician, but it would be evidence.

I have occasionally heard atheists trying to seek a diplomatic middle ground when interacting with Christians on the subject of their zombie lord. I grant that it is difficult to find common ground with someone who insists with frantic apologies, and blood frothing down his chin, that he has found his god, and in fact engages in pseudo cannibalism for Him on a regular basis. It seems a gracious position to allow that perhaps there was a charismatic leader or teacher named Jesus, around whom the stories grew with time. So what evidence of this astounding Jesus do we have? None!

There are no contemporary references to Jesus. In a Roman province, at a time when scrupulous record keeping was the norm, not a single mention of this mind-boggling Jewish magician who claimed to be the messiah. Not a line in a Roman log. “That damn Jesus is disturbing the peace again!” Not a word from the religious authorities of the day. “That heretic Jesus is at his blasphemy again! When are we going to get around to punishing him?” There is not even a single mention of him by any of the many people who allegedly witnessed his miracles and moving speeches. Jesus H Leprechauns! One would expect at least a love letter or a poem by one of his twelve boyfriends. “When Jesus took the love of god, and pulled it from our asses, he formed it into fish and bread, and fed it to the masses!”

I am not asking for coins with Jesus on them. I am not asking for statues, or biographies, or even a single written statement by Jesus. I am asking for just ONE single contemporary reference to this alleged son of god and master of the universe. There is no evidence for building a case for a real Jesus, because there never was a real Jesus. The truth is there is more evidence for Santa Claus than for Jesus. There are many first-hand accounts of encounters with Santa. There are sugarplums and candy canes left in stockings, allegedly by Santa. This is evidence that needs to be examined for validity. There is no evidence for a real Jesus, not even bad evidence.

Jesus is the stuff of complete mythology, but you are welcome give all of your worldly possessions to me, if you truly love Him.

[ghoulslime]

The blood drinkers of the Christ zombie cult obviously have no proof of their imaginary friend, even as a real person who once walked around the Holy Land, telling vivid tales and performing magic tricks. Why would they? Jesus was the invention of Romans, who based this new version of a resurrected god on many other versions gone before. They invented Jesus many years after the supposed time period for the life of this remarkable resurrected god. The apologists for Christ insanity must rely on fabrications and distortions of fact in order to posture as having some basis for a real Jesus character.

Let’s take a look at some of the sources that the wily Jesus eaters have tried to use as evidence of their savory redeemer.

If you are of the inclination that there is any historical evidence of Jesus Christ as a real person, then you probably also believe that angels are watching over you, and there is a big jolly man with a fluffy white beard who hears you mumble unto the side of your bed at night. Granted, there is a lot of obfuscating bullshit cranked out by the Christian apologist propaganda mills. For the willfully deluded, the “evidence” that the liars for Jesus attempt to use to build their deception might look like sometime of value. For a mighty Christian soldier marching onto war, any fact that can be twisted to look like it supports the cause of god-eating righteousness is used as a weapon. When you have no real bullets to shoot, you have to fling poo. But it is still only poo, like the rest of Christianity.

[ghoulslime]

Let’s briefly examine the meaning of the word “Contemporary”, so that we don’t end up in a situation with a mealy-mouthed fabrication artist for Him trying to wield semantics as an ad hoc weapon against truth.

con·tem·po·rar·y

1. existing, occurring, or living at the same time; belonging to the same time: Newton's discovery of the calculus was contemporary with that of Leibniz.

2. of about the same age or date: a Georgian table with a contemporary wig stand.

3. of the present time; modern: a lecture on the contemporary novel.

4. a person belonging to the same time or period with another or others.

5. a person of the same age as another.


(So if I say, my grandfather, like, totally rode up San Juan Hill with Teddy R, and shit, and like, totally threw his pocket knife and killed 17 Spanish riflemen, my account would not be contemporary evidence of my grandfather’s proficiency at war. Get it?)

As far as evidence is concerned, I am willing to accept any contemporary reference to Jesus as sufficient evidence that there may have been a real person around whom the stories were built - “A witch turned me into a newt, but Jesus of Nazareth made me better!”

[ghoulslime]

Lucian was born in 125 CE. He was a writer, sometimes considered the father of science fiction, who briefly mentioned Christians. Nobody doubts the existence of Christians in the 2nd century. Not contemporary evidence of Jesus! Wonk! Please try again!

[ghoulslime]

Tacitus was a Roman historian, who was born in 54 CE. While writing about the account of Nero persecuting the early Christians as scapegoats for Nero’s own political problems, Tacitus explained in his account that the Christians are the followers of a Christ. "Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius..."

He also said that this belief in the Christian Christus was a "pernicious superstition."

He wrote all of this in 115 CE, based on the few details that were available to him at the time.

Not only was Tacitus not a contemporary witness for a real Jesus, he was a historian who stated that Christianity’s Christus is a pernicious superstition. Go figure!

[ghoulslime]

Suetonius was born in 41 CE. In 115 CE, he wrote a biography of Claudius. In this book one line says, "Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome." Sorry to step on your sugarplums, blood drinkers, but “Chrestus” is a title that means leader, king, or anointed one. This is only evidence of Christian desperation. Lol!

Nobody doubts that there were trouble makers in Judea and Rome in the first century CE. We have reliable, historical accounts of charismatic leaders leading rebellions against the political and religious powers of the day. Nobody doubts the expulsion of troublemaking Jews from Rome. Nobody doubts the existence of radical religious and political leaders in Rome during this time.

The writings of Suetonius were not contemporary to the alleged historical Jesus, and they had absolutely nothing to do with him.

[ghoulslime]

And this concludes my atheist raving for this evening. Leprechauns bless you!