Is Christianity something other than a religion?

Well, it certainly enhances the credibility of the claim.

Would you not think so, as regarding the example that I just gave?

If so, then why would you treat Christianity differently?

No, I am not currently certain. That is why I used the words, "assuming that you do." (Bold in original)

Perhaps you will be so kind as to state just what you believe, in this regard...

 

Ever heard of the Bab? His followers also were willing to become martyrs within a generation and suffered under great persecution.

So I assume you believe that Baha'i is as true as you think Christianity is, correct?

I mean why would his followers fabricate any of the writings of Baha'i?

 

So, you don't consider the stories about Jesus true, you simply think they might possibly have some merit to them?

No.

 

We have multiple independent sources for Hannibal.

 

We already know the Gospel writers were willing to fabricate information. Take the examples of the story with Barabas or the entire fabrication of census requiring people to go to the place of their father's birth. Those are total fabrications.

 

No we don't. We have at best third hand accounts. None of the Gospels were written by the people they are named after.

 

Those same writers fabricated an entire "tradition" that had literally never been mentioned in any histories or Jewish religious documents or any other source outside of the Gospels just so they could have a scene where the Jewish authorities release a murderer instead of Jesus.

They fabricated an entirely new system for the Roman census to work that contradicts literally everything we know about the Roman census, just so they could have Jesus be born in Bethlehem.

They also fabricated the story about Herod commanding the deaths of the infants that could be Jesus.

 

Isn't that the same case with buddha, Lao Tzu, even Mohammed? Could it be that writing was just so relatively rare, unlike today, with few being literate, that the few that did record, just had other more important things to write down? Not like these avatars(mohammed wasn't an avatar) existed in times like today. As the line from Jesus Christ Superstar, that rock opera, "if you had come today you would have reached a whole nation. Israel in 1 BC has no mass communication". Or something like that. In regards to the fabrication, I read once long ago that this was common, to fabricate so it would match something else, in this case prophesy. Moses was saved in Egypt by some woman in pharoh's court. Jesus was taken to egypt to escape herod. So there was a borrowing of tales, and it was not frowned upon. Different times and you look at it with today's eyes.

The question for me has been, where did the idea of the kingdom being within man, not outside of man, and that we can all be sons of god come from? This is seen in hinduism. To find god within is to find salvation, to be enlightened, to understand deeply, that as the Hindus say, Tat vsam asi. Thou are That. Tradition says JC went to India after his supposed death. They even have a shrine in northern india devoted to him.

But this is not the religion of christianity, which is a religion about christ, not of christ. Somewhere it got corrupted. By ego driven men. For personal power, prestige, even wealth.

 

The Jews wrote EXTENSIVELY about their religious traditions. The Romans wrote EXTENSIVELY about government matters, especially the census and taxation (which the census supported). The Romans also wrote EXTENSIVELY about Herod and his many crimes and debaucheries.

The Jews never once mentioned this supposedly important Passover "tradition", the Romans never once held a census where they required people travel to the city of their father's birth, and the Romans also never wrote once about Herod commanding his soldiers to murder thousands of babies spread of across his territory, but they did condemn him for far less serious crimes.

These aren't topics that weren't written about. These are topics that were written about a LOT. And the Gospels contradict them with extremely blatant fabrications so that they can make the Jesus story fit earlier prophecies.

 

Originals of any document of ancient history are very rare.

There are no surviving originals of Shakespeares work. Did Shakespeare compose and exist?

Homer composed the Illiad around the 8th century BC, the earliest copy we have is from about the 3rd century BC. Is Homer, Troy, and all of the ancient world non-existent because we don't have original documents?

You argue about "originals" because you are desperate.

 

I edited my reply you quoted above. Read it if interested, which addresses some of this.

If you want to use your info in order to prove christ never existed, I don't think you can get there from here. Try to prove buddha existed as a person. Or Lao Tzu. Or Krishna. No other documents verify their existence.

If JC contradicted the priests, the authority, why would they broadcast it? LOL What he said about them they would not want repeated. LOL

 

Krishna was never a person, Sidharta Gautama was written about by his enemies (not just his followers), as was Lao Tzu. In fact, much we know about Lao Tzu came from his detractors.

People love to write about their enemies. The Jews had no problem writing about others who claimed to be the Messiah.

 

I don't need to prove Christ never existed, but if the story contains such blatant fabrications, why should anyone believe it to be accurate?

 

Shakespeare isn't really the best example to bring up since more scholars on the topic believe most of his plays were written by someone else.

 

Because the fabrications and borrowing were common in that world? Hell, some of the OT was borrowed from the Sumerians. Right? There was apparently no qualms in doing this. Their view of reality was different from yours.

 

It is written that messiahs were popping up all over the place over the years in that time frame and not all were noted down.

I will believe buddha had enemies when I see the ancient text, written in his time to evidence that.

In regards to Krishna, he was worshipped as a god and yet he had a birthday, and stories of his youth and later stages in life. So he walked the earth? As a god? Sounds like something other than a god to me. Even had a companian, Radha. Hey, those kinds of gods I can dig.

So, how did the shrine in northern india, to christ come about? It is said he lived there in that part of india. Weird huh? Two places on earth that claimed he existed. Not good enough? Of course not. You got to have ancient documents, even if thousands are lost to time.

We would have known so little about the gnostic texts if not for Nag Hammadi. Wonder how many more lost texts or the ones the jews and early church destroyed can be found hidden in those sands? Seems like the destruction of such texts benefits your arguments.

 

So similarly, the entire "the savior died for our sins" part of Jesus's story was just lifted from earlier Death and Rebirth god cycles and thus we should consider it as accurate as those myths, yes?

 

1. They wrote about all the major ones. They definitely would have written about Jesus if even have the stories in the Gospels are even half true.

2. Buddha was considered a serious heretic and blasphemer by the Hindu authorities at the time.

3. The church in northern India came from the same place churches in China did: the Nestorian Christian Church. They travelled East. Founded lots of churches.

4. When you have evidence from those destroyed texts, I'll consider it.

 

back then they did not have the internet and all the fact checkers to keep reminding everyone of the truth, people like Trump could lie away and get away with it... "there is only one true God... he has the most believers, Period", then kill anyone that disagrees, and time goes on

 

I am familiar with the teachings of JC and he never said he came to die for sin. This was written by some other people. If you just read his teachings, he was all about the good news. Good news was, the kingdom is accessible, but you must seek it, and it is within consciousness. Once you discover it, a rebirth in consciousness happens, and you are basically enlightened. This was what he taught, the core. Yet the idea of jewish sacrifice was added, and he was turned into a blood sacrifice, falsely, IMO.

 

Like the RCC mass killed the Cathars in france, who believed like the gnostics, and who make women equal, etc. Now, is the the religion of christ, that wiped out the Cathars and so many other heretics? No way. So, christianity has always been a false religion, and not based upon what their founder actually taught. Christianity should have been more of a mystical religion, with no authority. No men interposed to control.

 

You realize "his teachings" were written by some other people too, right? Jesus never wrote word of the Bible.

 

No, I never crossed that in my studies. So, who in that part of the world, maintained that the kingdom was within, and one must search for it? We know this is in the eastern religious tradition, which is one thing that has separated western religion and eastern religion.

Right, if his teachings were recorded, they were recorded at the time it took place, and not decades later. And I think they were. And some of them appeared in the gospel of thomas and the 4 gospels, but I do not think everything said to have been said by him, was. I suspect others added to what he said. But I also think that what he said was so important that some but not all was recorded by someone, one of his apostles, and none of the 4 gospels were written by any of his apostles.

 

The Gospel of Thomas and the 4 main Gospels were all written decades later by other people. Your "I think they were" is not backed by any evidence.

 

I think you know that some scholars believe there was a Q gospel which was the source for the other gospels. That is all I have to go on. I am not surprised, given this was an insignificant religion until later on, decades later Truth is, we really have no clue what happened in the 10 years post supposed death of christ. You do not know, I do not know, no one knows. It is a mystery. You project on it, as I do. For you do not know when the gospel of thomas was written, and neither do orthodox scholars who are biased since they do not like what that gospel says. I live in hopes that more ancient texts are discovered, that shed light on the first couple of decades post death, which BTW if it contradicts christian orthodoxy, including scholars, it will be rejected, since they can no longer destroy them. LOL

I think if texts in regards to christ are discovered from the first decade or two, they will contain no history only his teachings. And I would bet, you will find the gospel of thomas with those discoveries. For that gospel is nothing but the words of christ. It is pure, no history, no stories of miracles, which looks more genuine to me than the 4 gospels.