How would you explain this?

[ILoveTheLordGod]

I’m trying not to get into these kinds of websites, but then I stumbled upon one and found:

"Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs. Following a star would lead you in circles. The genealogies of Jesus are pious fiction. The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimise the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin. That idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses.

Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road. “Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure” ? Don’t believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence. In a nutshell – Nailing Jesus."

Why do they say that Christianity “borrowed” ideas from pagan religions?
Sorry, but it’s hard to keep faith strong, and I’m struggling right now.

And also, why doesn’t everyone believe in God? I mean, isn’t the healing power of Fr. Suarez solid evidence of supernatural events?

Yes, I’m uber-sure that Yahweh is the Almighty Father, but is Jesus really the savior?
I mean, how did the evangelists take note of Mary before she gave birth to Jesus?

 

[Subrosa]

Good morning!

Got a link?

Sub

 

[Church_Militant]

Yeah, you can link us to the specific article in question without violating the rules and it will help us refute this.

 

[ILoveTheLordGod]

jesusneverexisted.com/

I can’t believe I took actually peeked at the site.

 

[Church_Militant]

There never was just one Christianity. Out of the milieu of religiosity that infected the Roman world, dozens of competing and conflicting Jesus/Sun-god/Mystery cults emerged. The first believers in Jesus maintained he was an ethereal spirit, much like other sky/sun-gods. Only later did he acquire a human death, a human life and finally a human birth. The composite ‘Jesus Christ’ character – god, man, king, carpenter, conqueror, peace-maker, dispenser of justice, advocate of love – was assembled to try to unify a fragmented and fractious messianic religious movement. In the mid-2nd century the Jewishness of the faith was purged but apologists had little to say about a human Jesus. They took comfort in noting similarities between their own ideas and pagan myths. The Christians remained a minority until well after one particular faction formed a political alliance with the Roman State. The orthodox creed remained unpopular for centuries and persecution was necessary to impose its will.

This is specious and twisted propaganda.

Their initial statement is untrue and both the New Testament and earliest writings of the prove that to be the case. They are errantly asserting that gnosticism predates the Catholic Church which is a historical misstatement arguably used as support of their anti-Christian agenda. Once you see something like this you can pretty well blow off the entire site since if they will publish this as scholarly fact when it is not shows they have a propensity to lie.

You can walk away from it with a clear conscience at this point. I am.

 

[antunesaa]

I’m trying not to get into these kinds of websites, but then I stumbled upon one and found:

"Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct. Nazareth did not exist in the 1st century AD – the area was a burial ground of rock-cut tombs. Following a star would lead you in circles. The genealogies of Jesus are pious fiction. The 12 disciples are as fictitious as their master, invented to legitimise the claims of the early churches. The original Mary was not a virgin. That idea was borrowed from pagan goddesses.

Scholars have known all this for more than 200 years but priestcraft is a highly profitable business and finances an industry of deceit to keep the show on the road. “Jesus better documented than any other ancient figure” ? Don’t believe a word of it. Unlike the mythical Jesus, a real historical figure like Julius Caesar has a mass of mutually supporting evidence. In a nutshell – Nailing Jesus."

Why do they say that Christianity “borrowed” ideas from pagan religions?
Sorry, but it’s hard to keep faith strong, and I’m struggling right now.

And also, why doesn’t everyone believe in God? I mean, isn’t the healing power of Fr. Suarez solid evidence of supernatural events?

Yes, I’m uber-sure that Yahweh is the Almighty Father, but is Jesus really the savior?
I mean, how did the evangelists take note of Mary before she gave birth to Jesus?

Just ignore the stuff. This is the typical non-serious, militant and folkloric anti-Christian site. Only the most extreme versions of anti-Christians resort to the Christ-never-existed argument. Serious anti-Christians take the trouble to actually show that Christ was not God, or was not holy, or didn’t raise from the dead, etc.

 

[Insight]

jesusneverexisted.com/

I can’t believe I took actually peeked at the site.

Jesus-era home found in Nazareth

news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8425094.stm

Just days before Christmas, archaeologists in Israel unveil first Jesus-era dwelling in Nazareth

articles.nydailynews.com/2009-12-21/news/17941531_1_jesus-israel-antiquities-authority-christian-tradition

“Careful attention has been devoted to historical and archaeological detail. Dr. Stephen Pfann, President of the University of the Holy Land, and his team have provided ongoing research focusing on life in the First Century.”

nazarethvillage.com/research/content/archaeology

Here’s a better site for you:

ArguingWithAtheists.com

God Bless

 

[Subrosa]

Good morning once again -

Just to get this discussion going let me say this: Jesus Christ was an actual historical figure. Only the most argent and hardhearted person will deny this. While there are similarities between Christian belief and other religions, this reality, in and of itself proves nothing.

A seeming similarity cited by many is that in several religions active at the time, goddesses gave birth to men who were then made god. Hercules is a good example.

While this may seem similar, it is not. NO other religion gives us the story of a mortal woman giving birth to GOD. NO other religion tells us that GOD came to earth and became human. NO other religion tells us that God sacrificed His son to save humanity.

It is always the other way around - the human became god. Then that “god” did things for self engrandizement. The ancient Romans and Egyptians deified their leaders as acts of law.

There is much that history can expose… We have for instance the relics of the saints: Peter, Paul, Andrew, and others. Even Mary Magdalen. These physical relics tell their own story…one of truth.

I hope that this will help set the discussion in a good context.

God bless,
Subrosa

 

[ctkrcia]

Let’s look outside both ends of Jesus’ life. In Archbishop Sheen’s book, “Life of Christ”, he lays out a very good case in the first chapter for the authenticity of Jesus. Specifically, he explains how Jesus is the only founder of a major religion who was preannounced. His coming was foretold by numerous prophets. This was not the case for Budda, Mohammed, or any other founder of major religions.

Next, look at the thousands of martyrs who willingly gave their life for Jesus. No one, including the first Christians and eye witnesses, would do that for a myth.

The point here is to dismiss the mis-information on this web site. Being challenged and criticized is to be expected as followers of Christ. It’s in the membership manual (the Bible)! The best we can do is pray for the Holy Spirit to influence them to see the way, the truth, and the life!

 

[dsmantz]

Go pick up a copy of Lee Stobel’s book “The Case For The Real Jesus”. It tackles many of the same assertions and allegations, ranging from Jesus was borrowed from pagan mythology to the bodily resurrection, in a very scholarly and academic manner. It certainly wipes out this website, that’s for sure.

 

[steve_b]

I’m trying not to get into these kinds of websites, but then I stumbled upon one and found:

"Christianity was the ultimate product of religious syncretism in the ancient world. Its emergence owed nothing to a holy carpenter. There were many Jesuses but the fable was a cultural construct …[snip]

Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian ~37 to ~101]

From my copy, “*Complete Works of Josephus”, *of which “*Antiquities ofthe**Jews”*is included

Josephus is not trying TO prove anything. He just records people places and events that happened in history.

he names in his history, others who were called Jesus

• Jesus Christ pg 379
• Jesus son of Phabet pg 467
• Jesus son of Sapphias pg 497
• Jesus son of Ananus pg 582
• Jesus brother of Onias pg 316
• Jesus son of Gamaliel pg 424
• Jesus son of Damneus pg 424
• Jesus son of Gamala pg 10

Since I’m sure you don’t have a copy of this work, and can’t flip to those pages, I found a link where you can read online, what he says about Jesus Christ. On page 381 which isn’t in the following link is a full page drawing of the crucifixion.

from Book XVIII, Ch 3, paragraph 3 Antiquities ofthe**Jews

“3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had fore told these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, …[snip]”

From:
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm

 

[Insight]

Flavius Josephus was a Jewish historian ~37 to ~101]

From my copy, “*Complete Works of Josephus”, *of which “*Antiquities ofthe**Jews”*is included

Josephus is not trying TO prove anything. He just records people places and events that happened in history.

Nice find.

God Bless

he names in his history, others who were called Jesus

• Jesus Christ pg 379
• Jesus son of Phabet pg 467
• Jesus son of Sapphias pg 497
• Jesus son of Ananus pg 582
• Jesus brother of Onias pg 316
• Jesus son of Gamaliel pg 424
• Jesus son of Damneus pg 424
• Jesus son of Gamala pg 10

Since I’m sure you don’t have a copy of this work, and can’t flip to those pages, I found a link where you can read online, what he says about Jesus Christ. On page 381 which isn’t in the following link is a full page drawing of the crucifixion.

from Book XVIII, Ch 3, paragraph 3 Antiquities ofthe**Jews

“3. Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had fore told these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, …[snip]”

From:
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm

 

[JonathonofOhio]

I was looking at my email from the forum and this topic stood out, because last night on the National Geographic Channel they ran an episode of “When Rome Ruled” that took a look at early Christians in Rome up to the time of Constantine. The show was full of what seemed to be unbiased archeologists and historians talking about what they know about the early Christians in Rome.

There were a few things I found interesting in that show:

• Christians during that time period had a longer life span than pagans. The historian attributed this to better nursing and care since Christians cared for each other better than pagans supposedly. I do wonder if this is evidence though of the miracles that occurred in the early church.
• They showed places where archeologists are certain Paul and Peter actually stayed in Rome. They showed one site where there is a carving, which dates to that time period, where Peter had stayed just before he was executed. The carving is of an upside down cross. Historical accounts state that Peter was crucified upside down.
• The pagan and christian religions were so different and at odds, that this difference is what primarily what caused the Romans to persecute them. It’s not that they believed in one God that got them into trouble, it’s that the Christians refused to have anything to do with or accept the Roman gods. The pagans did not separate state and religion. They also mentioned that very early on when Christians first appeared in Rome they were not looked upon favorably, because they followed a man that had been considered by Romans to be a criminal. If Jesus had not existed, I would think the Romans wouldn’t have considered him to be a criminal.
• When Constantine came into power Rome officially became the center of Christianity. Also they said that it was during his reign that the Church in Rome established the cannon and it was sent out to all the Churches (probably because of the confusion as to what was authentic and what was not). IMO this shows that even then Rome was the center of Christianity and bishops in Rome had authority over all the other churches-- though they were scattered, they were not operating independently under their own authority like some people claim. Constantine’s legalization of Christianity and recognition of it is where the idea comes from Catholicism has pagan origins and that things that Catholics do are pagan rituals mixed with christian beliefs. This is obviously false, because…
• During the first 200-300 years BEFORE Constantine Christians had to worship in secret for risk of being persecuted. Pagans would would see the early Christians performing baptisms and other rituals started gossiping about this newer secret religion. Oe of the things that pagan Romans accused Christians of was cannibalism (sound familiar?), because they didn’t understand what Christians were doing-- they had heard that they were eating the body and blood of a man, and didn’t understand the breaking of bread and the sharing of the cup. There are quite a number of protestant churches that claim the Catholic Church is a mixture of paganism and Christianity, and that Catholics are cannibals.
• It seemed that the historians on that show all agreed that the early Christian Church operated more “underground”, but that it always had some sort of structure that quickly evolved into something that was similar to the Roman government of the time (none of them seemed surprised by this, and suggested that it was necessary for Christianity to survive). This is probably where some get the wild claim that Christians borrowed from pagans, and that Constantine invented the modern Catholic Church. This is false according to the historians on this show, who indicated that the structure existed prior to Constantine, and that it only became more publicly known after he passed legislation legalizing the religion.

On the whole it was a good show to watch since it was full of interesting factual information about the early church. It’s too bad it was only an hour long, because I’m sure they could have fit more into the show if it was longer.

Point is, a smart person will listen to the educated historians and archaeologists, who have evidence that shapes our understanding of history and what really happened and what did not, instead of listening to some fool who setup a website and filled it full of recycled myths and legends.

 

[Big_Dummy]

Pliny the Younger was governor of Pontus/Bithynia from 111-113 AD. We have a whole set of exchanges of his letters with the emperor Trajan on a variety of administrative political matters. These two letters are the most famous, in which P. encounters Christianity for the first time.

Pliny, Letters 10.96-97

Pliny to the Emperor Trajan
It is my practice, my lord, to refer to you all matters concerning which I am in doubt. For who can better give guidance to my hesitation or inform my ignorance? I have never participated in trials of Christians. I therefore do not know what offenses it is the practice to punish or investigate, and to what extent. And I have been not a little hesitant as to whether there should be any distinction on account of age or no difference between the very young and the more mature; whether pardon is to be granted for repentance, or, if a man has once been a Christian, it does him no good to have ceased to be one; whether the name itself, even without offenses, or only the offenses associated with the name are to be punished.

Meanwhile, in the case of those who were denounced to me as Christians, I have observed the following procedure: I interrogated these as to whether they were Christians; those who confessed I interrogated a second and a third time, threatening them with punishment; those who persisted I ordered executed. For I had no doubt that, whatever the nature of their creed, stubbornness and inflexible obstinacy surely deserve to be punished. There were others possessed of the same folly; but because they were Roman citizens, I signed an order for them to be transferred to Rome.

Soon accusations spread, as usually happens, because of the proceedings going on, and several incidents occurred. An anonymous document was published containing the names of many persons. Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ–none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do–these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

I therefore postponed the investigation and hastened to consult you. For the matter seemed to me to warrant consulting you, especially because of the number involved. For many persons of every age, every rank, and also of both sexes are and will be endangered. For the contagion of this superstition has spread not only to the cities but also to the villages and farms. But it seems possible to check and cure it. It is certainly quite clear that the temples, which had been almost deserted, have begun to be frequented, that the established religious rites, long neglected, are being resumed, and that from everywhere sacrificial animals are coming, for which until now very few purchasers could be found. Hence it is easy to imagine what a multitude of people can be reformed if an opportunity for repentance is afforded.

Trajan to Pliny

You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it–that is, by worshiping our gods–even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.

www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/jod/texts/pliny.html

tektonics.org/copycathub.html

The early christians were considered to be atheists because they would not worship pagan gods. If Jesus was simply a mixture of their gods, then the Romans would have no problem with Jesus. Follow the second link to refute the copycat thesis.