Skip to main content

View Diary: Fox News dreams of a Very White Christmas (270 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  funerary area? (0+ / 0-)

    not really.  couple of corpses found a few miles from the city doesn't exactly make the whole city a burial ground

    The Senate has no guts. The House has no brains.

    by gossamer1234 on Fri Dec 13, 2013 at 12:14:49 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  It was a large burial area even in prehistoric. (0+ / 0-)

      times. There's no record of it being a real city until around the 3rd century A.D., way too late for Mr. Jesse of Nazareth to have lived there.

      Just doing my part to piss off right wing nuts, one smart ass comment at a time.

      by tekno2600 on Sun Dec 15, 2013 at 04:26:23 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  not true (0+ / 0-)

        there is proof that  Nazareth existed BEFORE Jesus Christ was on earth as the messiah.  

        And by "record" do you mean recorded history or physical evidence.  Because there is physical evidence.

        And yes, most historians agree that Jesus existed as a man.  As a supernatural being? That's another thing.

        The Senate has no guts. The House has no brains.

        by gossamer1234 on Mon Dec 16, 2013 at 12:06:57 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not historians who have actually looked into it. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tekno2600

          Like Richard Carrier: http://freethoughtblogs.com/...

        •  You don't actually cite any evidence for your (0+ / 0-)

          claims. You just say that evidence exists. However, even religious sources contradict you. According to the Anchor Bible Dictionary: "Nazareth is not mentioned in ancient Jewish sources earlier than the third century AD." There may have been camps of people who came and went in this area, probably never numbering more than a few hundred. But, it is not likely that anyone, including this so-called Jesus character, would have claimed this area as his home "town." As I mentioned previously, it is likely that the entire claim about "Jesus" being from "Nazareth" is based on the misunderstand from Jewish scripture that has the messiah "will be called a nazirite." That is a person who follow Jewish purity laws. It has nothing to do with being from Nazareth. Early Christian scholars did not seem to understand many basic things about the stories they were concocting for their mythical messiah. As the stories spread outside of Palestine, they didn't even appear to have a correct understanding of geography and customs, hence the confusion about the existence of Nazareth at the time they claim.

          Also, there's the more basic issue that's super annoying. "Jesus Christ" is NOT a name. It's like saying Joe the Savior. There are a million guys with that name Joe and even a million messiah stories at the time. A real person would have had a real name. We know about people like Julius Ceasar and Pontius Pilate. But, there were a million people named Jesus. Nobody has even the remotest physical evidence on a person who fits this description at the time. And, the term Christ would have almost certainly not be ascribed to him at the time. So, you might as well just call him some dude that you wish existed to make yourself feel better about your life and your fear of death.

          Just doing my part to piss off right wing nuts, one smart ass comment at a time.

          by tekno2600 on Wed Dec 18, 2013 at 10:08:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site