Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: jesusneverexisted.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to jesusneverexisted.com.

Comments · 20

  1. Re:What about the dud that came up with fire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Wikipedia Mining Algorithm Reveals the Most Influential People In History

    I had always assumed he did exist, then I looked into it.

    So here we have the gospels portraying Jesus as famous far and wide, a prophet and healer, with great multitudes of people who knew about him, including the greatest Jewish high priests and the Roman authorities of the area, and not one person records his existence during his lifetime? If the poor, the rich, the rulers, the highest priests, and the scribes knew about Jesus, who would not have heard of him?

    here ya go.

  2. Re:Post bigotry here by pwizard2 · · Score: 2 · on US House Science Committee Member: Evolution Is a Lie From Hell

    Doesn't matter. If Biblegod is so far "above us", then its morals should be a superior version of what civilized people know to be right/wrong. However, that is not the case. Rather, it is quite the opposite: a rational purpose would condemn god's atrocious behavior.

    Good resources for people to read:

    http://www.evilbible.com/
    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

  3. Re:I'm a dude who knows God loves you, Jesus is LO by Barsteward · · Score: 1 · on Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage

    I've just discovered this site via an earlier posting . http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ I've only had a small read but the section on Mithras is enlightening, he had 12 disciples, a last supper, died to redeem and came back to life 3 days later. I think he was also born 25 December.

  4. Re:I'm a dude who knows God loves you, Jesus is LO by Barsteward · · Score: 1 · on Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage

    I think you need to take some time out and read http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

  5. Re:Dialog is good and all... by pwizard2 · · Score: 1 · on Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage

    In my case I DON'T want to piss off my family. My dad has been an atheist for most of my life so he wouldn't care but my mom has always been hyper-religious. I was "in the closet" for a long time after I stopped believing, but eventually I couldn't keep up appearances anymore and I came out recently. She took it hard and tried to scare me back into the fold, but after feeling free for the first time in my LIFE I just couldn't go back to it again. I'm certain that time heals all wounds. The Pauline doctrine is basically what "broke" me in the end... I just couldn't take it anymore. All that talk of sin, damnation, and constantly having to beg god for forgiveness is incredibly damaging.

    If there is a god, I'm certain that it isn't the spiteful god in the Old Testament. Even Jesus (somehow the same entity, yet he prays to himself) seems to be a composite of older pagan myths. (another good site is http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ What Jesus taught is so similar to other sources that its essentially plagiarism.

  6. Re:Dialog is good and all... by pwizard2 · · Score: 5, Interesting · on Censored Religious Debate Video Released After Public Outrage

    In my case, I don't WANT to piss off my family. My dad has been an atheist for years so he wouldn't care, but my mom has always been hyper-religious and I don't want to strain that relationship. I was "in the closet" about my beliefs for some time even though I continued to play the part. Eventually I just couldn't take it anymore and I came out. She took it hard and tried to "scare" me back into the fold but time heals all wounds. The Pauline doctrine is a huge part of what broke my faith... to actually adhere to it you would have to essentially stop being human, and telling yourself that you were a worthless "sinner" over and over again and perpetually begging for forgiveness is incredibly damaging.

    If there is a god, I'm very certain that it isn't the spiteful yahweh god of the old testament. Even Jesus seems to be a composite of lots of earlier pagan traditions. Lots of what he said can be traced back to earlier philosophers and the similarities are so uncanny that it's basically plagiarism. (another good site is http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ ) Even when I was still indoctrinated I noticed lots of inconsistencies in the New testament but I was conditioned not to ask questions and just accept it.

  7. Re:Edifying by sir+fer · · Score: 0, Troll · on Dead Sea Scrolls To Go Digital On Internet

    I find it fascinating that you have been modded "troll" for what is essentially the truth. All the members of the Jesus fan-club must be as sensitive as they are stupid.

    here && here are 2 of the best sites on the issue that I have seen .I was raised as a Catholic but have never been very susceptible to brainwashing or cultism. It is still amazing to me that people believe their own set of fairy tales (e.g. Xtianity) but will scoff and mock those of others (Islam, Roman Mythology etc), when they are, in fact, essentially the same thing.

  8. Re:Problem with things like torture by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1 · on ABC/Disney Shuts Down Blog Exercising Fair Use

    I mean, racism, advocating torture, describing how they want to get rid of folks they do not like etc.

    And doesn't Christianity say something about loving one another?

    I dont know you assume torture and murder cant exist within Christianity, be advocated by the church and scriptures, and cant be done by Christians. Its historically false to even assume such a thing. Christianity is no pacifist religion . I really wish people would just accept the scripture and history of their own religions instead of making these little perfectionist strawmen. This has been going on since Jesus walked the earth, except now you can thank secular thinkers for giving you the right to free speech to even question your chosen religion.

    Christian torture. Christian racism. Christian Slavery. Christian Warfare. Inquisitions (more torture). etc

  9. Re:Talk to those that wrote it down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Vatican Rejects Intelligent Design?
    Of course, it'd probably be best if fundmentalists actually talked to, say, the rabbis who wrote the whole thing down. The Orthodox rabbis I've spoken find it amazingly amusing that people take the creation story as literal truth, rather then a story about YHWH's power.
    The writer is falling for the mistaken notion that modern Judaism is somehow the same thing as ancient Judaism or the religion of the ancient Hebrews. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today's rabbis don't have any more of an "inside track" into understanding the intent of the original writers of Genesis than does anyone else; besides, Genesis is simply a retelling of much older, non-Jewish stories. The OT Bible was also in a constant state of flux, being changed and edited for quite some time; the Hebrew Masoretic text itself dates after the time of "Christ" and if you want the oldest extant example of the OT Bible, you have to go to the "poorly translated" (allegedly) Greek Septuagint, which is our earliest window into the OT Bible as we now know it.

    Anyway, everything in the Bible is a myth, not just Genesis. There's no archeological records of the "great empire" of David and Solomon; it's a myth. It was invented by Jewish priests long after it supposedly existed as a way of giving their religion the kind of backstory and foundation myths it was otherwise lacking. So it's rather silly to try to go to modern rabbis and expect to find from them an "accurate" interpretation of the Bible. They weren't there, they didn't write the Bible. They are just as much prisoners of Biblical myths as the Christian fundamentalists are. Different kinds of myths, differently interpreted perhaps, but just as false.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/jews.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/david.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/solomon.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/assyria.htm

    The Bible was never intended to be a work of history as we understand history, although it certainly does present a false history. Asking rabbis however for its meaning is about equivalent to asking modern Egyptians what the Great Pyramid "means". They don't have a clue and simply because they have a closer connection to its history than we do, does not make them experts or give them any special insights. On the contrary it may make them more unreliable.
  10. Re:Talk to those that wrote it down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Vatican Rejects Intelligent Design?
    Of course, it'd probably be best if fundmentalists actually talked to, say, the rabbis who wrote the whole thing down. The Orthodox rabbis I've spoken find it amazingly amusing that people take the creation story as literal truth, rather then a story about YHWH's power.
    The writer is falling for the mistaken notion that modern Judaism is somehow the same thing as ancient Judaism or the religion of the ancient Hebrews. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today's rabbis don't have any more of an "inside track" into understanding the intent of the original writers of Genesis than does anyone else; besides, Genesis is simply a retelling of much older, non-Jewish stories. The OT Bible was also in a constant state of flux, being changed and edited for quite some time; the Hebrew Masoretic text itself dates after the time of "Christ" and if you want the oldest extant example of the OT Bible, you have to go to the "poorly translated" (allegedly) Greek Septuagint, which is our earliest window into the OT Bible as we now know it.

    Anyway, everything in the Bible is a myth, not just Genesis. There's no archeological records of the "great empire" of David and Solomon; it's a myth. It was invented by Jewish priests long after it supposedly existed as a way of giving their religion the kind of backstory and foundation myths it was otherwise lacking. So it's rather silly to try to go to modern rabbis and expect to find from them an "accurate" interpretation of the Bible. They weren't there, they didn't write the Bible. They are just as much prisoners of Biblical myths as the Christian fundamentalists are. Different kinds of myths, differently interpreted perhaps, but just as false.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/jews.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/david.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/solomon.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/assyria.htm

    The Bible was never intended to be a work of history as we understand history, although it certainly does present a false history. Asking rabbis however for its meaning is about equivalent to asking modern Egyptians what the Great Pyramid "means". They don't have a clue and simply because they have a closer connection to its history than we do, does not make them experts or give them any special insights. On the contrary it may make them more unreliable.
  11. Re:Talk to those that wrote it down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Vatican Rejects Intelligent Design?
    Of course, it'd probably be best if fundmentalists actually talked to, say, the rabbis who wrote the whole thing down. The Orthodox rabbis I've spoken find it amazingly amusing that people take the creation story as literal truth, rather then a story about YHWH's power.
    The writer is falling for the mistaken notion that modern Judaism is somehow the same thing as ancient Judaism or the religion of the ancient Hebrews. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today's rabbis don't have any more of an "inside track" into understanding the intent of the original writers of Genesis than does anyone else; besides, Genesis is simply a retelling of much older, non-Jewish stories. The OT Bible was also in a constant state of flux, being changed and edited for quite some time; the Hebrew Masoretic text itself dates after the time of "Christ" and if you want the oldest extant example of the OT Bible, you have to go to the "poorly translated" (allegedly) Greek Septuagint, which is our earliest window into the OT Bible as we now know it.

    Anyway, everything in the Bible is a myth, not just Genesis. There's no archeological records of the "great empire" of David and Solomon; it's a myth. It was invented by Jewish priests long after it supposedly existed as a way of giving their religion the kind of backstory and foundation myths it was otherwise lacking. So it's rather silly to try to go to modern rabbis and expect to find from them an "accurate" interpretation of the Bible. They weren't there, they didn't write the Bible. They are just as much prisoners of Biblical myths as the Christian fundamentalists are. Different kinds of myths, differently interpreted perhaps, but just as false.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/jews.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/david.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/solomon.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/assyria.htm

    The Bible was never intended to be a work of history as we understand history, although it certainly does present a false history. Asking rabbis however for its meaning is about equivalent to asking modern Egyptians what the Great Pyramid "means". They don't have a clue and simply because they have a closer connection to its history than we do, does not make them experts or give them any special insights. On the contrary it may make them more unreliable.
  12. Re:Talk to those that wrote it down? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Vatican Rejects Intelligent Design?
    Of course, it'd probably be best if fundmentalists actually talked to, say, the rabbis who wrote the whole thing down. The Orthodox rabbis I've spoken find it amazingly amusing that people take the creation story as literal truth, rather then a story about YHWH's power.
    The writer is falling for the mistaken notion that modern Judaism is somehow the same thing as ancient Judaism or the religion of the ancient Hebrews. Nothing could be further from the truth. Today's rabbis don't have any more of an "inside track" into understanding the intent of the original writers of Genesis than does anyone else; besides, Genesis is simply a retelling of much older, non-Jewish stories. The OT Bible was also in a constant state of flux, being changed and edited for quite some time; the Hebrew Masoretic text itself dates after the time of "Christ" and if you want the oldest extant example of the OT Bible, you have to go to the "poorly translated" (allegedly) Greek Septuagint, which is our earliest window into the OT Bible as we now know it.

    Anyway, everything in the Bible is a myth, not just Genesis. There's no archeological records of the "great empire" of David and Solomon; it's a myth. It was invented by Jewish priests long after it supposedly existed as a way of giving their religion the kind of backstory and foundation myths it was otherwise lacking. So it's rather silly to try to go to modern rabbis and expect to find from them an "accurate" interpretation of the Bible. They weren't there, they didn't write the Bible. They are just as much prisoners of Biblical myths as the Christian fundamentalists are. Different kinds of myths, differently interpreted perhaps, but just as false.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/jews.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/david.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/solomon.htm

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/assyria.htm

    The Bible was never intended to be a work of history as we understand history, although it certainly does present a false history. Asking rabbis however for its meaning is about equivalent to asking modern Egyptians what the Great Pyramid "means". They don't have a clue and simply because they have a closer connection to its history than we do, does not make them experts or give them any special insights. On the contrary it may make them more unreliable.
  13. christians at work by magitek_zero · · Score: 2, Interesting · on The Decline of Science and Technology in America

    destruction of classical civilisation http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/science.html

  14. Re:Potentially Interesting Finds, and a correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    What's the betting that the one that reads "'The Bible' copyright 134AD, Any resemblance to people past or present is purely coincidental" is quickly covered up?
    Not possible, since the Anno Domini system of dating wasn't invented until many centuries after 134 AD (invented in sixth century by Dionysius Exiguus, IIRC). And of course they didn't have copyrights and seldom dated their writings. But you knew that.

    Of course, this is all moot anyway since Jesus never existed.
  15. Re:The significance of "new" gospels... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    Actually, you are falling for the classic delusion that the "canonical" gospels were chosen because they were the earliest and the most historically accurate. This is nonsense.

    They in fact are not much older than the "spurious" gospels and were not written within the lifetime of any of the alleged persons living in the time of the alleged Jesus. Some of the "spurious" gospels in fact may be older and more historicially accurate, in that they are simply sayings of "Jesus" without attempting to put "his" sayings into a historical context.

    Christianity is in fact much older than the gospels, and older than the alleged historical Jesus. Christianity came first, with a non-historical Christ. The fictitious gospel story was invented, and generations later it came to be believed as historical truth, rather than what it originally was: a fictious salvation story to entertain neophyte Christians not yet ready for the meatier symbolic mysteries that higher Initiates learned.

    http://jesusneverexisted.com

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html

    Jesus wasn't real. Originally the Christ was simply a Judaized version of the universal god-man (Osiris, Dionysus, Serapis, Tammuz, etc) of an initiatory mystery school religion.

    Once some Christians started to believe that the gospels were literally true history, literalist Christianity was born, and that's when things started to get rather nasty.

  16. Re:The significance of "new" gospels... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    Actually, you are falling for the classic delusion that the "canonical" gospels were chosen because they were the earliest and the most historically accurate. This is nonsense.

    They in fact are not much older than the "spurious" gospels and were not written within the lifetime of any of the alleged persons living in the time of the alleged Jesus. Some of the "spurious" gospels in fact may be older and more historicially accurate, in that they are simply sayings of "Jesus" without attempting to put "his" sayings into a historical context.

    Christianity is in fact much older than the gospels, and older than the alleged historical Jesus. Christianity came first, with a non-historical Christ. The fictitious gospel story was invented, and generations later it came to be believed as historical truth, rather than what it originally was: a fictious salvation story to entertain neophyte Christians not yet ready for the meatier symbolic mysteries that higher Initiates learned.

    http://jesusneverexisted.com

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html

    Jesus wasn't real. Originally the Christ was simply a Judaized version of the universal god-man (Osiris, Dionysus, Serapis, Tammuz, etc) of an initiatory mystery school religion.

    Once some Christians started to believe that the gospels were literally true history, literalist Christianity was born, and that's when things started to get rather nasty.

  17. Re:Bibles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    You mean "not preserved" as in "burnt by armed agents of the State acting on orders of the Church" of course.

    http://jesusneverexisted.com

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html

  18. Re:Bibles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    You mean "not preserved" as in "burnt by armed agents of the State acting on orders of the Church" of course.

    http://jesusneverexisted.com

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html

  19. Re:Potentially Interesting Finds, and a correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    Actually, Jesus never existed, and neither did most of the other "historical characters" in the Bible - David, Solomon, Noah, Moses, Daniel, Abraham, etc. They are either ancient gods who have been historicized, or are loosely based on legends of ancient poorly understood persons who may or may not have really existed. This mythical "history" then get edited and reedited to adapt to changing needs and to changing political and religious dogmas.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html

  20. Re:Potentially Interesting Finds, and a correction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Breakthrough Decodes 'Classical Holy Grail'

    Actually, Jesus never existed, and neither did most of the other "historical characters" in the Bible - David, Solomon, Noah, Moses, Daniel, Abraham, etc. They are either ancient gods who have been historicized, or are loosely based on legends of ancient poorly understood persons who may or may not have really existed. This mythical "history" then get edited and reedited to adapt to changing needs and to changing political and religious dogmas.

    http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/

    http://jesusneverexisted.com/chosen-people.html