ITT we discuss the teachings of Christ and the Bible, and find out why Kikes hate those so much.
Last Threads
Doctrines, Teachings and Guidelines
Origin of Kikes
Pagan deities in the Bible
Origin of whites
Historical Framework
Satanism
Symbolism
Extra Canonical evidence of Jesus
Other urls found in this thread:
youtu.be
tertullian.org
icr.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikisource.org
documentacatholicaomnia.eu
livescience.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtu.be
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
documentacatholicaomnia.eu
twitter.com
>and find out why Kikes hate those so much
This is not a kike free first post.
All of those were produced outside Hollywood FYI
>kikes never betray their own ideals in order to make money
Its almost like their whole talmudic religion is based around loopholes, semantics and grey areas in the law to follow it only where it fits them completely ignoring the intended purpose of such which they extent to every field, wether its the judical system or a basic discussion and their lifechoices.
JESUS WAS REAL BECAUSE EARTHQUAKES!
>pic related
>still not understanding
>still not bringing up any points of that faggy book
The Bible says Jesus died 33 AD while under Pilates governence, the sun was darkened and the earth shook when he died.
We have records of Jesus outside the bible.
We have records of him dying by sentence of Pilates outside the Bible.
We have geological evidence of an heavy earthquake happening around 33AD in the area.
We have records of the Sun darkening itself 33AD.
Together all these sources confirm it happened pretty much exactly as the bible told it did, but since you get but mad about it Im reposting the records around Jesus.
Extra Canonical Evidence for Jesus and the narrative.
Mark 15
>And the sixth hour having come, darkness came over the whole land until the ninth hour
Matthew 27:51:
>"And the earth shook and the rocks were split"
The secular Roman historian Phlegon documented an eclipse and earthquake around the exact same time, matching the Gospel account:
>in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad, an eclipse of the sun happened, greater and more excellent than any that had happened before it; at the sixth hour, day turned into dark night, so that the stars were seen in the sky, and an earthquake in Bithynia toppled many buildings of the city of Nicaea
tertullian.org
Africanus in 221 AD
>On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun. And it cannot happen at any other time but in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last of the old, that is, at their junction: how then should an eclipse be supposed to happen when the moon is almost diametrically opposite the sun
He references here Thallus who wrote his work "around 52 AD" which has been lost in time though, but is referenced by Africanus.
Also geological evidence of a heavy earthquake in/around 33 AD
icr.org
King Abgar V had an exchange of words with Jesus
en.wikipedia.org
Historian Eusebius quotes the Edessan archives:
>Abgar, ruler of Edessa, to Jesus the good physician who has appeared in the country of Jerusalem, greeting. I have heard the reports of you and of your cures as performed by you without medicines or herbs. For it is said that you make the blind to see and the lame to walk, that you cleanse lepers and cast out impure spirits and demons, and that you heal those afflicted with lingering disease, and raise the dead. And having heard all these things concerning you, I have concluded that one of two things must be true: either you are God, and having come down from heaven you do these things, or else you, who does these things, are the son of God. I have therefore written to you to ask you if you would take the trouble to come to me and heal all the ill which I suffer. For I have heard that the Jews are murmuring against you and are plotting to injure you. But I have a very small yet noble city which is great enough for us both
Jesus:
>Blessed are you who hast believed in me without having seen me. For it is written concerning me, that they who have seen me will not believe in me, and that they who have not seen me will believe and be saved. But in regard to what you have written me, that I should come to you, it is necessary for me to fulfill all things here for which I have been sent, and after I have fulfilled them thus to be taken up again to him that sent me. But after I have been taken up I will send to you one of my disciples, that he may heal your disease and give life to you and yours.
en.wikipedia.org
>Christus, from whom the name [Note by OP: Christians] had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa
From the Ante-Nicene Fathers, a letter from King Abgar to Tiberius Caesar
en.wikisource.org
>Abgar, king of Armenia, to my Lord Tiberius, emperor of the Romans, greeting:—
>I know that nothing is unknown to your Majesty, but, as your friend, I would make you better acquainted with the facts by writing. The Jews who dwell in the cantons of Palestine have crucified Jesus: Jesus without sin, Jesus after so many acts of kindness, so many wonders and miracles wrought for their good, even to the raising of the dead. Be assured that these are not the effects of the power of a simple mortal, but of God. During the time that they were crucifying Him, the sun was darkened, the earth was moved, shaken; Jesus Himself, three days afterwards, rose from the dead and appeared to many. Now, everywhere, His name alone, invoked by His disciples, produces the greatest miracles: what has happened to myself is the most evident proof of it. Your august Majesty knows henceforth what ought to be done in future with respect to the Jewish nation, which has committed this crime; your Majesty knows whether a command should not be published through the whole universe to worship Christ as the true God. Safety and health.
The answer from Tiberius
>Tiberius, emperor of the Romans, to Abgar, king of the Armenians, greeting:
>Your kind letter has been read to me, and I wish that thanks should be given to you from me. Though we had already heard several persons relate these facts, Pilate has officially informed us of the miracles of Jesus. He has certified to us that after His resurrection from the dead He was acknowledged by many to be God. Therefore I myself also wished to do what you propose; but, as it is the custom of the Romans not to admit a god merely by the command of the sovereign, but only when the admission has been discussed and examined in full senate, I proposed the affair to the senate, and they rejected it with contempt, doubtless because it had not been considered by them first. But we have commanded all those whom Jesus suits, to receive him amongst the gods. We have threatened with death any one who shall speak evil of the Christians. As to the Jewish nation which has dared to crucify Jesus, who, as I hear, far from deserving the cross and death, was worthy of honour, worthy of the adoration of men—when I am free from the war with rebellious Spain, I will examine into the matter, and will treat the Jews as they deserve
From Flavius Josephus
documentacatholicaomnia.eu
>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 foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.
>We have records of Jesus outside the bible.
All written at least 150 years later
>We have records of him dying by sentence of Pilates outside the Bible.
See above
>We have geological evidence of an heavy earthquake happening around 33AD in the area.
Earthquakes happen nearly ever year in the middle east
>We have records of the Sun darkening itself 33AD.
Eclipses happen all the time. How does this prove Jesus existed?
>All written at least 150 years later
referencing earlier records from the archives they took the info from. Not to forgot King Abgars letter to Tiberius talking about Jesus and recognizing his divinity.
Also we rarely get records from such old times from the time it happens. They mostly are written decades or centuries after the fact.
>Earthquakes happen nearly ever year in the middle east
livescience.com
>Varves, which are annual layers of deposition in the sediments, reveal that at least two major earthquakes affected the core: a widespread earthquake in 31 B.C. and an early first century seismic event that happened sometime between 26 A.D. and 36 A.D.
yet in 100 years there was only one other of that strength.
>Eclipses happen all the time. How does this prove Jesus existed?
Jesus existing is another piece found in the other posts. This is merely confirming a single part of the narrative to be true. You purposely refuse to see the argument in how its all connected but create strawmans by singling out bits of info like it fits you
>If I isolate corroborating evidence and say on it's own it doesn't totally support the biblical narrative I can convince myself there's no preponderance of evidence
Wew, sorry about that cognitive dissonance bud
bump for effortposter-OP
>referencing earlier records from the archives they took the info from
Yes, and those "earlier records" are the Gospels we still have today. Which is why Tacitus and so on, EVEN IF they are not forgeries and EVEN IF they are talking about our Jesus, are not independent of the Gospels and therefore don't count as evidence for a historical Jesus.
Gott strafe England.
>Gott strafe England.
If the Jewish God wasn't willing to intervene to save us during WW2, what makes you think He is going to intervene to save us now?
Also, that book's main point is basically that the Gospels were just taking aspects from the Old Testament but adding Jesus in, that Paul wasn't referring to Jesus as a real person (though he did literally say Jesus was a fleshly person), that Josephus's reference of Jesus was a forgery, and that because of this, his life was invented by Paul and the scribes.
One of his main points is that he compares Christianity with the Hellenistic mysteries, and thus believes that it was basically the Hellenistic mystery religion of Judea. However, Christianity didn't even enter the Hellenistic tradition until at least the 2nd century AD. He also uses Romulus and Zalmoxis as examples of "resurrected deities" similar to Jesus, that's debunked here:
youtube.com
youtube.com
Overall, it's not a good refutation of the New Testament, and a good proponent of the Christ-myth theory.
If God would intervene from every evil happening than we never learn truely what this evil is and rebuke it. God could have cut off all the bad in the beginning, but then its only a matter of time till the next guy gets the same idea. So evil has its time right now so everyone will see where it leads to, and then, knowing fully well what evil and good is, choose good over evil so that God and we dont have to go through the same bullshit over and over again.
If the Nazis would have won it would just have resulted in the storyline to be dragged out further with in the end more evil and suffering existing since Nazis, regardless of how good they were, would not have been able to get rid of evil as a whole.
>that Paul wasn't referring to Jesus as a real person (though he did literally say Jesus was a fleshly person),
Small correction: it argues that the "fleshy" passage is a reference to a Jesus incarnated in some spiritual realm
>blah blah blah
Wow! Someone who has actually read it! This is a first.
SORRY FOR THE SPAM, BUT READ THIS REAL QUICK
What makes you think he didn't?
Ummm, nice refutation of something Carrier doesn't actually argue. Look, it says so right there in the video at 0.25!
>Not all these alleged parallels are claimed by Carrier. Some came from other Christ mythers
Romulus and Zalmoxis specifically however are brought up by Carrier, and this chiefly deals with Carrier's proposals.
If you died today do you know for sure you're going to Heaven?
Here's how you can know for certain: youtu.be
1 John 5:13
These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.
>that ye may know that ye have eternal life
How many of you are RH-?
>Romulus and Zalmoxis specifically however are brought up by Carrier, and this chiefly deals with Carrier's proposals.
At 1:27, your video claims that "Christ mythers" think the Jesus story was copied from Romulus. Carrier has never argued this and neither has any other mythicist I've ever read.
Well, possibly Atwill does, but then he's two sandwiches short of a picnic and no-one is really paying attention.
so nothing basically.
>At 1:27, your video claims that "Christ mythers" think the Jesus story was copied from Romulus. Carrier has never argued this and neither has any other mythicist I've ever read.
Sure, but Carrier's point is that Jesus's deity followed the themes of Romulus's deification, just not that Jesus was just straight out copied from Romulus. It chiefly deals with his point regardless.
This isn't Bible study class. This is Jow Forums.
Fuck off with this off-topic nonsense.
>Sure, but Carrier's point is that Jesus's deity followed the themes of Romulus's deification
Carrier argues that the Jesus and Romulus stories were all following a common theme, not that one particular religious tradition was copying from another. And the Romulus legend was certainly not the first one to match this theme.
Revelation 3:9
I will make those who are of the Synagogue of Satan, who claim to be Jews though they are not, but are liars—I will make them come and fall down at your feet and acknowledge that I have loved you.
And the video I linked deconstructs this supposed general theme of resurrection etc. that Carrier notes.
As a general rule I won't bother watching a video that contains two obvious mistakes in the first 90 seconds.
kikes are not israelites nor semites but the Edomites that lived in judeah
en.wikipedia.org
>The Edomites first established a kingdom ("Edom") in the southern area
of modern Jordan and later migrated into southern parts of the Kingdom of Judah ("Idumea", or modern southern Israel/Negev)
Eventually they were forced to convert
>They were again subdued by John Hyrcanus (c. 125 BC), who forcibly converted them, among others, to Judaism
And around that same time the Pharisee that follow the oral law
en.wikipedia.org
>The Pharisees preserved the Pharisaical oral law in the form of the Talmud
like we have today the kikes follow the Tal Mud and which was repeatedly rebuked by Jesus, telling them they are children of Satan.
Now Edomites are the descendents of Essau, the brother of Jacob/Israel who decided to wage war his brother and his people.
en.wikipedia.org
>The Hebrew word Edom means "red", and is derived from the name of its founder Esau
Now to do this Essau joined Amalek
en.wikipedia.org
>According to the Bible, Amalek was the son of Eliphaz (himself the son of Esau, ancestor of the Edomites)
Which thus, together with Essau became the Edomites (plus a couple other things mixed in likely).
The Amalek are known as Israels nemesis and who fits the whites nemesis better than the kikes? The Amalek are a canaanite tribe. Canaan is the son of Ham who was one of the three sons of Noah (Abraham coming from Shem, S(h)emites). Now the Hamites are traditionally black and indeed canaans curse hints to him becoming a slave like the blacks did. Furthermore i believe the biblical first black (can go into this) was Cain, who himself was the son of Eve and the serpent. This is the line of kikes, those that say they are jews, but are liars instead. The Synagogue of Satan and they came through the Hamitic line, thus are basically white skinned niggers
from Flavius Josephus
documentacatholicaomnia.eu
>2. For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of which are the Pharisees; of the second, the Sadducees; and the third sect, which pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essens. These last are Jews by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have.
so the closest relation the kikes have to the israelites is through Esau who mixed himself into the canaanites
Esau originally had the birthright to take over the tribe as a first born. However after a day of work on the field he went inside and asked his brother for something to drink or eat, for which Jacob demanded Esaus birthright. Esau agreed, and thus got what he wanted and Jacob got the birthright from Esau. However after this Esau wanted it back, Jacob didnt want to return it, and thus Esau parted from his family, joined a canaanite tribe that became known as Amalek (the Israelites nemesis) to wage war on Jacob/Israel. These eventually (likely with a couple others mixed into) became the Edomites which are todays Kikes. And to this day they still demand the birthright back from Israel (The white man). Their hate of whites is actually envy, they want what we have. Thats why they undergo plastic surgery to appear more european, take on germanic last names and yiddish is even just some fake german. They try to genocide whites so that they can take their position of chosen people they believe they inherited from Esau, without anyone else being left to rightfully claim that position.
Other than the kikes however Esau made up with Jacob/Israel again eventually, but (((they))) refuse to follow the lead to this day.
Something that might interest you:
Indeed, but he seems to got some things mixed up, thinking for some reason Amalek are the Israelites while Amalek by definition are not thos. Its just the Amalek project their issues, claiming we are the amalek and they the israelites when its the exact opposite around