On Sun, 24 Dec 2017 05:50:32 -0500 John Newman <jnn@synfin.org> wrote:
On Dec 23, 2017, at 12:06 PM, juan <juan.g71@gmail.com> wrote:
On Fri, 22 Dec 2017 22:26:24 -0500 grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com> wrote:
http://beyondthemarquee.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/902274_10153332384195... https://img00.deviantart.net/580e/i/2012/043/5/a/giant_hammer___drow_by_zeph... https://i.pinimg.com/236x/f8/83/87/f883877b2cc9804048c3ef982500e86e--harly-q...
Found some holiday gifts for my friend Juan ;)
and speaking of thor and odin...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christmas
"Christmas is an annual festival commemorating the birth of Jesus Christ," - except that the fucking jesus turd was never born.
"Although the month and date of Jesus' birth are unknow..." but that motherfuking joo turd was never born so there's nothing to be known.
Now the very interesting thing is that the source of All Scientfic Progressive Wisodm known as "WIKIPEDIA" is actually a tool of fascist theocratic joo-kristian propaganda.
I agree, Wikipedia is badly skewed on this, but it seems like they are probably just following conventional thought on the issue.
Well yes but that's what a lot of wikipedia content is. Copypasta from mainstream media or copypasta from popular western superstitions and western political propaganda. The wikipedia 'policy' that regards mainstream media as a 'legitimate' 'source' of truth ranks very very high in the self parody category. It should also be pointed out that clown j. wales is an american 'libertarian'. Granted, some articles do have some more truthful content in them, side by side with the propaganda, but that's consistent with controlled opposition and fake 'free speech' which give people the illusion of freedom and 'objectivity' A couple more nuggets from that jesus joke piece (which by the way is locked - wikipedia, any admin can edit it haha) "Jesus chose to be born on the shortest day of the year for symbolic reasons, according to an early Christmas sermon by Augustine" That ^^^ lunatic vomit is prsented as 'fact'. There are also mentions of the fact that the zombie jesus charade is actually a rebranding of pagan customs but that is also 'explained' away here "it has been argued that, on the contrary, the Emperor Aurelian, who in 274 instituted the holiday of the Dies Natalis Solis Invicti, did so partly as an attempt to give a pagan significance to a date already important for Christians in Rome" "on the contrary", war is peace.
Which I feel is coming around to be more widely accepted that there was no Jesus as described in the gospels that started the early Christian church (though it was a common Jewish name - Yeshua - at that time in history, and there are a few other Yeshuas with messianic delusions described in the talmud from around the same time).
I think that's been going on for a long time. A lot of anti jew-kristian stuff and contemporary criticism was of course destroyed (and the authors prolly killed) by the jew-kristians, so the 'historical record' is mostly propaganda but still there's a tradition of free thinkers. Yet I don't see the jew-kristian cultural cancer becoming any less extended. On the contrary, western imperialism keeps spreading. See for instance south korea.
They do have a “historicity of jesus” page, which at least has the following info -
"Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain" I don't think I need to add much to that self-evident truth do I? =)
More recently Richard Carrier argues in his book On the Historicity of Jesus: Why We Might Have Reason for Doubt, that there is insufficient Bayesian probability,
like I said, there's an old tradition of people telling the truth and they don't use pseudo scientific jargon like "bayesian probability".
that is evidence, to believe in the existence of Jesus. Furthermore, he argues that the Jesus figure was probably originally known only through private revelations
....?
and hidden messages in scripture which were then crafted into a historical figure, to communicate the claims of the gospels allegorically. These allegories then started to be believed as fact during the struggle for control of the Christian churches of the 1st century.[106] Philip R. Davies has opined that a recognition that the historicity of Jesus is not entirely certain would nudge Jesus scholarship towards academic respectability[103] and R. Joseph Hoffmann at the Jesus Project noted that Jesus is getting more vague, ambiguous, and uncertain the more scholars study him, rather than the other way around.[116
as if that was a new thinng that now some 'progressive' 'scientists' discovered....