Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
@ JoC
We have explained the reference in Tacitus. He was REPORTING what the small group of Jewish christians believed in 60CE. He was writing some years later.
Josephus was REPORTING in his second reference (book 20) to James being stoned or Leader of the Temple what he had been told that the Jewish christians believed in about 65CE. The Ist reference in book 18 has been discredited. It was a later entry.
Do you understand they BOTH were reporting what they had been told that other people believed. Not witnessed, not confirmed, not believed. REPORTING what someone had told them about events some 20 - 30 years before.
Would you accept that as evidence for anything? No. You would not.
The whole Josephus/Tacitus defence has more holes than a colander.
Yet that is the quandary for theists. There is NO credible EVIDENCE for a Jesus, no credible EVIDENCE for a resurrection, Crucifixion, any of the tales of the New Testament. Nothing nada zilch. Even my best friend some years ago, a Jesuit priest , told me as much.
All the dates for Christian festivals were usurped from native populations, existing pagan or Roman festivals. We KNOW that the Easter dates were changed away from the Passover , why, is as yet unconfirmed yet we know that Constantine and his wife were determined to unite Rome and the provinces under christianity with Constantine as god emperor at its head...he succeeded.
We KNOW Mithras' birthday was 25th December, he was also called the lamb, that he was often pictured carrying a lamb on his shoulders, he was born of a virgin, stop me when this sounds familiar. We KNOW that the Mithraic liturgy is very similar to the post Nicean ceremonies.
We KNOW that December 25 was celebrated as the birth of the SUN. We KNOW that the legions were almost to a man followers of Mithra (Mihr) and that their loyalty had to be considered when imposing a state religion. We KNOW that the post Nicean church adopted the Babylonian (apollonian)sun symbols to mark pictorial representations of the Jesus, Mary, disciples and saints and the pope.
When I type 'know" read "have indisputable evidence from multiple sources"
Don't take my word for this I recommend you read this chapter which is quite neutral about early christian influences but also a good read for someone starting on a journey of discovery about the origins of their faith and its rituals.
http://www.bu.edu/religion/files/pdf/Christians-in-the-Roman-Empire-in-t...
Also this written by a couple of recognised scholars, again a good, unbiased read for you.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312542504_The_Influence_of_Mith...
I recommend you join some online libraries ( like researchgate) the British Library, University of Tel Aviv and others. The truth is out there but most theists find it comfortable to pull their blankets over their ears and hope the boogeyman of truth will go away.
Hint: He will not.
Unless of course the churches go back to burning books.....again....
I think we've reached an impasse. You're not willing to permit the gospel writings, two of which were written by apostles. The other two written by companions of apostles. You dismiss them like that.
You then dismiss Tacitus' reference of Jesus even though he mentions this Christus person in his own writings. I find it hard to believe that a careful historian like Tacitus would add this bit about Christ when (as you said) he wasn't actually talking about Christ but about the Christians.
You then dismiss both passages in Josephus EVEN if the majority opinion of both Christian and non-Christian historians is that the account of Josephus in Book 18 is original and simply had a later interpolation by Christians (something I accept) and he is even referenced again in book 20 relating to James. Again, no reason for Josephus to mention Jesus except to pin down which James he was talking about. See the Arabic version of the text of Josephus:
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
I doubt you could wave this away.
"We KNOW Mithras' birthday was 25th December, he was also called the lamb, that he was often pictured carrying a lamb on his shoulders, he was born of a virgin, stop me when this sounds familiar. We KNOW that the Mithraic liturgy is very similar to the post Nicean ceremonies."
- I'm actually going to stop you there. Do we have any basis for this? All of these have been debunked and we actually have zero evidence of any of these things. Can you please reference ancient writings about this Mithraic religion? Please. I'd want to see it. The most you could come up with would be mosaics and you simply read your own interpretations into it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlF0gVedODE&t=259s
Here's a video so you need not read too much into it.
Christians in the Roman Empire doesn't have anything that undercuts my position, actually.
As to the Influence of Mithras,
"According to cult of Zoroastrianism, Mithra was born by a
virgin who was named Anahita. When Anahita had washing herself in Hamun Lake, she
became pregnant with Zoroaster’s semen that was spattered in and was protected by the
angels"
- This doesn't sound like a virgin birth to me. This also came from the religion of Zoroastrianism. The Cult of Mithras was a Roman religion and was likely a Roman adaptation of a Indo-Iranian god. This paper actually asserts and asserts without much evidence. It uses words like virgin birth and baptism without so much as giving the source for using these terms. We do have a painting where it looks like they were baptizing but also just looks like they were taking a bath - two different things. I take a bath everyday but I don't get baptized everyday.
JoC,
"You then dismiss Tacitus' reference of Jesus even though he mentions this Christus person in his own writings. I find it hard to believe that a careful historian like Tacitus would add this bit about Christ when (as you said) he wasn't actually talking about Christ but about the Christians."
The word christ is just a title. It's not a name. The original meaning of the word was "the anointed". It was not routinely capitalized until around the 17th Century. https://www.etymonline.com/word/christ
Agreed. Any other person who bore this title that you could mention would be great though. But if the assumption would be made that Christus is Jesus Christ, you see that meshes well with the gospel accounts. We then have an extrabiblical source for the crucifixion and for Christ's existence.
It actually references as well that this Christus was where the Christians got their name from. So who would this Christus be? We can ask the early Christians for that.
@ JoC
"when (as you said) he wasn't actually talking about Christ but about the Christians."
As I said read in the Latin and English version it is quite clear he was talking about the jewish christians belief. That is all. Your conditioning is preventing your comprehension.
"See the Arabic version of the text of Josephus:" See the Latin version and the greek.....
That is the passage that almost every scholar agrees is an insertion by much later christian editors. No question. Once again your wishful thinking is overtaking the opinion of those far more knowledgeable than you or I.
The reference to James in book 20 I explained in a previous reply. The book 20 references are considered 'pure Josephus", but again he was reporting a belief held by others. Some time after the events.
If you actually read some Josephus, or a lot of Josephus and Tacitus you will find the passages inserted stick out like hitch hikers thumbs. They are fairly easy to spot as Josephus style is homogeneous throughout his own writings. Even in translation.
Please stop beating these dead horses they are going nowhere.
Do start reading Jospephus, even though he is an old gossip his writing gives a really good insight into his life and times.
Roman and persian references to Mithras(Mthra)
Herodotus (5th c. BC)
Ctesias (4th c. BC)
Xenophon (4th c. BC)
Duris of Samos (4th c. BC)
Strabo (20 BC)
Pliny the Elder (ca. 50 AD)
Quintus Curtius (40-50 AD)
Plutarch (c. 100 AD)
Dio Chrysostom (50-120 AD)
Statius (80 AD)
Justin Martyr (150 AD)
Lucian (120-200 AD)
Zenobius the Sophist (2nd century AD)
Tertullian (ca. 200 AD)
Cassius Dio (ca. 200 AD)
Origen (200-254 AD)
Ps.Clement (200 AD)
Porphyry (ca.270 AD)
Commodian (3rd c. AD)
Arnobius the Elder (295 AD)
P.Oxy.1802 (2-3rd c. AD)
Ps.Callisthenes (300 AD)
Greek Magical Papyri (3rd c. AD)
Acts of Archelaus (Early 4th c. AD)
Firmicus Maternus (350 AD)
Gregory Nazianzen (370 AD)
Julian the Apostate (361-2 AD)
Himerius (ca. 362 AD)
Libanius (ca. 362 AD)
Epiphanius (late 4th c.)
Jerome (ca. 400 AD)
Eunapius (late 4th c. AD)
Augustan History (late 4th c. AD)
Ambrose of Milan (late 4th c. AD)
Claudian (ca. 400 AD)
Prudentius (ca. 400 AD)
Ps.-Paulinus of Nola / Carmen ad Antonium (ca. 400 AD)
Carmen ad Flavianum / contra Paganos (ca. 400 AD)
Augustine (early 5th c. AD)
Ambrosiaster (5th c. AD)
Dionysius the Areopagite (late 5th c. AD
Martianus Capella (5th c. AD)
Socrates Scholasticus (early 5th c. AD)
Sozomen (5th c. AD)
Proclus (5th c. AD)
Hesychius (ca. 400 AD)
Zosimus the alchemist (300 AD)
Zosimus (6th c. AD)
Nonnus of Panopolis (ca. 400 AD)
Lactantius Placidus (5th century AD)
John the Lydian (6th c. AD)
Damascius (6th c. AD)
Cosmas Indicopleustes (ca. 550 AD)
Maximus the Confessor (7th c. AD)
Nonnus the Mythographer (6th or 7th c. AD)
John the Lydian (6th c. AD)
Theophylact Simocatta (ca. 600 AD)
Cosmas of Jerusalem (ca. 750 AD)
Theophanes (650+ AD)
The Suda (9-10 c. AD)
Photius (9 c. AD)
"The most you could come up with would be mosaics and you simply read your own interpretations into it"., uh see above.
"By a virgin who was named Anahita."
"This doesn't sound like a virgin birth to me."
A virgin is a female who has not had penetrative sexual intercourse. Sounds like a virgin birth to me.
"The Cult of Mithras was a Roman religion and was likely a Roman adaptation of a Indo-Iranian god."
Well done. My point exactly. Nearly every religion borrows from pre existing and co existing religions either by conquest or natural assimilation. Christianity is no different. If you had bothered to read the references I gave you in an earlier post you would have found multiple crossovers with Roman christians and existing religious practices. Early gentile Christians worshipped at "pagan" temples while many Romans found it ok to worship in synagogues at passover and other festivals.
Its really quite simple, your religion is not "unique", particularly old, or special in any of its beliefs. No proof can be offered for the existence of your main figures, no records of death, resurrection or miracles,
Not one piece of contemporary evidence.
Anymore than the amount of evidence than can be offered for all the thousands of other gods that continue to be worshipped and the hundreds of thousands that predate christianity by thousands of years.
The overwhelming evidence points to a Christian religion that adopted many of the symbols and practises of older religions in the dominant culture, and only achieved (schismed) monopoly some two centuries after the adoption by the Roman God-Emperors.
(edit added "and other festivals")
(edit added "Christian")
Hearsay based on anecdotal clsims fully three hundred years after the alleged incident. You could believe literally any claim if you're prepared to set the bar that low for "evidence".
@FIG Re: "...because your not living for GOD you are disregarding the Christian message and lifestyle."
Funny, because I am also disregarding and not living the message of the Muslim lifestyle, the Hindu lifestyle, the Jewish lifestyle, the Mormon lifestyle, the Jainism lifestyle, the Babi lifestyle, the Macumba lifestyle, the Scientology lifestyle, nor any of the other thousands of religious lifestyles practiced around the globe. Oddly enough, however, you do not seem too concerned that I might go to whatever hell they may offer by my not believing in them. Oh, wow.... Come to think of it, maybe YOU should start getting a little worried about not believing in them also. Perhaps you should consider using Pascal's Wager toward them like you suggested to everybody about Christianity. Always better to hedge your bets, right?
@ FIG
"The first time Jesus came here to earth he came humbly peacefully "
From Matthew 10
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn
“ ‘a man against his father,a daughter against her mother,a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law—
a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’
That's not exactly peaceful is now FIG/billy?
And again, your Jesus didn't like families did he?
“Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. Whoever does not take up their cross and follow me is not worthy of me. Whoever finds their life will lose it, and whoever loses their life for my sake will find it.
Not a humble word there is there billy my love? A bit arrogant if you ask me...
I don't think your sententious lecturing is very compelling, you have shown repeatedly on here that facts and evidence are anathema to you, you strike me as utterly brainwashed. As for you throwing insults like arrogance and ignorance at other posters you'd do well to desist, and for fairly obvious reasons given the woefully ignorant nature of most of your posts, and the nauseating arrogant tone of nearly all of your posts.
" Sometimes he answers prays and some times things don`t come out as we would like."
So indistinguishable from a none existent fiction then. Luckily there have been double blind clinical trials of the efficacy of intercessory prayer, and they all showed that it had no positive effect, in fact the only effect the trials detected was a negative correlation in the recovery of post op heart patients where they were theists who knew they were being prayed for.
There is no more evidence for your deity than there is for Zeus.
"It sounds silly to you because your not living for GOD you are disregarding the Christian message and lifestyle. "
You're begging the question again Billy, it sounds silly because it is silly, as do your endless disjointed diatribes and veiled threats of posthumous consequences of taking your disbelief in thousands of deities just one diety further.
"He is very real and very present."
Hitchens's razor - slash, unless you can muster some objective evidence, which you failed dismally to do in the thread for evidence. Hell, your posts showed again and again that you don;t even know what objective evidence is, or how it differs from argument. Your posts also show you have no conception of logical fallacy or what these mean when they are present in any argument, as you use common logical fallacies again and again, even after people have taken the time to explain this to you, so you're dishonest as well Billy.
How mistaken you are my brother!!! the 325 figure is used but the word of the resurrection was right after the resurrection Paul sites it and that took place when written in the 50`s. He got it from Peter and the Lords brother James right after the resurrection. Tell me myk why are you boxing with GOD. Don`t you know by now that it`s a losing proposition. You will never win and most of all you will eventually die in your sins and unbelief. I tell you out of my concern not to see anyone lost .The information that you have acquired comes from ignorant and arrogant people here. They are not looking out for your best interest of heart .The books by Hitchens, dawkins, Dennett,and Harris are leading people astray. they like you are gullible .They couldn't care less about you or your state in life.
Oh Bullshit FIG. The oldest known bible is the Codex Sinaiticus which was written at the council of Nicea in 325 ADE. Guess what FIG? No resurrection!
You can't prove Paul wrote anything let alone the LIE YOU posted. You can't prove Peter wrote anything. You can't even prove there was a jesus.
I am not "boxing with god" because there is no fucking god.
As far as "gullible" goes, I am not the one that believes in a myth. A myth that ZERO facts to back it up.
Yes but I`m talking about before we arrived at the Codex Sinaiticus It was orally passed on the events pertaining to Jesus his life and ministry. Then made into a book that we call the new testament .it was loose writings it wasn`t in any particular order here .that`s what the council of Nicea helped contributed to .under Constantine. Along with the resolving of the Deity of Jesus Christ. There were two schools of thought so the council was established to deal with argument of weather Christ was divine or just a person It was the councils conclusion that Arius was incorrect. So you see the nicean council had a few things to consider not only the composition of the Codex Sinaiticus .Arius of Alexandria.The council at Carthage in 397 helped come to a decision on the canon .Before that 21 new testament manuscripts were acknowledged by the earl Christians.While eventually Arius was exiled and he lost his claim that Jesus was just a created being.
@ billy/FIG/AB
An of course you are conveniently leaving out the destruction of texts, churches, homes and towns of those that followed the Arian "Heresy"...more blood on the Roman church's hands, billy. More blood of innocents.
Justify that one. Why did they have to die to prove the divinity of your jesus?
Billy says "The information that you have acquired comes from ignorant and arrogant people here."
Billy says "established to deal with argument of weather (sic) Christ was divine "
Sigh.
Ah, Billy, you are dead wrong. The council of Nicea was to consolidate the authority of Constantine and for no other reason. The "loose" writings you speak of don't exist. If they did they would be sacred but they just don't exist. Plus the fact that they are just based on old campfire stories and aren't verified or corroborated.
The fact the sacrifice of a living god exists in stories that preceded the myth of jesus by decades.
The fact of a "holy ghost" also preceded jesus for decades.
In fact, every miracle, every story that christians cling to actually comes from cultures that came WAY before the jesus myth.
mykcob4,
"The oldest known bible is the Codex Sinaiticus which was written at the council of Nicea in 325 ADE."
The Codex Sinaiticus is a fake. The con man admitted that he forged it. The intent was to discredit the KJV. You can also see that it's a fake because it is written in the modern Greek alphabet and is bound in a book. And it's written in paragraphs. Such things didn't exist in 325 AD.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4Xkv2gjzZw
" the resurrection Paul sites"
Jesus wept Billy, are you claiming Paul placed the the resurrection on an area of ground? How many times must you be told you cite evidence, you don't site (sic) evidence.
"The information that you have acquired comes from ignorant and arrogant people here. "
Irony overload.
"The books by Hitchens, dawkins, Dennett,and Harris are leading people astray. they like you are gullible .They couldn't care less about you or your state in life."
Hitchens's razor applies - slash, unless for once Billy you'd like to leave your sententious rhetoric alone and show some evidence by citing something they have written that is erroneous and why? I'm guessing not as your self righteous and sententious preaching act hasn't deviated into evidence based facts even once since I've been here, and I am highly dubious that you have read any books by any of those authors, but please prove me wrong by all means.
It is no small coincidence that Easter falls on April Fools Day this year.
@Chimp Re: Easter/April Fools Day
Hey, I actually started a thread on that a couple of months ago. Let me see if I can find it. *scurries off to the archives*
Well Billy you've had 3 days to come up with any pretence of evidence for your absurdly idiotic claim that Richard Dawkins, Stephen Hawking, Danniel Dennet, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchen are ignorant and gullible individuals leading people astray with their books? Yet the silence is deafening, quelled surprise...
Jesus rose from the dead? I’ve seen more old posts rise from the dead around here than humans. And some of those strings have been dead for years...yet mysteriously, they come back with renewed vigor. ;)
I probably wouldn't believe it if the magical stories of the Bible had (supposedly) taken place during the time the bible was written, and been witnessed by the authors. I mean, it's magic for crying out loud.
But what we have in reality is even less credible.
The wheels on the bus go round and round.
And here's another pagan Easter tradition that has been swallowed (literally) by Xtians.
http://www.missfoodwise.com/2013/03/hot-cross-buns-through-paganism-html...
Hang a hot cross bun up in your kitchen to prevent fires. Share one with someone and you will enjoy eternal friendship. Take one on a sea voyage to prevent shipwrecks. Or just leave one lying around. It will never rot because of the holy cross symbol. You can test that effect by inviting some Xtians around and offering them year-old hot-cross buns preserved by their holy savior's death logo.
There is an old joke :
Two psychoanalysts are having lunch.
One says : "The other day I made the most the most blatant Freudian slip. My mother said "Pass the hot cross buns!'
And I said "You ruined my life, you fucking bitch!"
Jesus had a bad weekend
Note how Billy has yet again posted his rhetoric and verbiage, then left without any pretence of discussion. Best of all are his ad hominem attacks on the intelligence of others. I do wonder other theists don't take him to task? If this were an atheist I'd be embarrassed by the rank hypocrisy and breathtaking ignorance in his posts.
Tell me and please list my arguments that I made on posts and threads that you find aren`t objective evidence. You cite things like logical fallacy. I mentioned objective moral values and as far as I can see you gave no response. Give details please, Just don`t criticize with nothing to refer to. Be specific here, And I will gladly review and give an detailed answer.
@ FIG
"Tell me and please list my arguments that I made on posts and threads..."
I don't think anyone has that much time on their hands; to list all your fallacies, non sequiturs, hysterical posturings, errors in history, fact and quotations.
You are a kind of typing miasma of all the horrible things theists have done to the art of communication.
Well then if you can`t point out my arguments I made on my recent post and threads then you have no case in point here. You are avoiding my question here. So just take one or two to begin, I will gladly review it and give a detailed response .so please take the time.
Pages