The Instigator
mosc
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TouchtheSky
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Jesus son of Zeus, pie in the sky mythology

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
TouchtheSky
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/5/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 600 times Debate No: 114979
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (41)
Votes (1)

 

mosc

Pro

The Apostle Paul never saw the books of the gospel codifications which the catholic church fathers sanctioned. Some 100 gospel books written, all of them no less than 60 to 80 years - the book of toilet/prostitute client ie john - some 200 years after the imaginary events which that dude claimed to have personally witnessed. How does the Hebrew Bible - its called T'NaCH for Torah Prophets and Writings - view false witness testimony? Clearly the new testament authors held a different view point!!

That the church fathers catholic and protestant foist the gospel fraudulent books as absolutely accurate, this proves that all stripes of Xtians love lies. Perhaps someone might take offense at this opening statement. To bad. Yo Oh Saved ... how does the prophet Moses define the word truth? LOL
TouchtheSky

Con

Hey, thanks for sending this to me! I'm excited to discuss this together. I'm a little confused by the topic itself, but I'm going to assume that this debate is centered on Jesus' existence, and not his divinity. If I'm wrong, please do correct me.

There is actually real historical evidence that Jesus did exist, even outside of the four gospels. He is referred to in Josephus' Testamonium Flavinium [1], Pliny the Younger's tenth letter to Emperor Trajan [2], and Tacitus' Annals [3]. Jesus can be found in archeology [4] and secular records [5] [6]. I'd like to hear your evidence for why you believe that these events are imaginary. I will take up the burden of trying to prove both historical evidence for Jesus outside of the gospels, and why I believe that the gospels are reliable sources.

[1] http://people.uncw.edu...
[2] https://reasonabletheology.org...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
[5] https://www.bethinking.org...
[6] http://coldcasechristianity.com...
Debate Round No. 1
mosc

Pro

Josephus history - very very popular to the Catholic church for many centuries. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation and/or alteration. [The Jesus Legend by G. A. Wells 1996 page 48: "... that Josephus made some reference to Jesus, which has been retouched by a Christian hand. This is the view argued by Meier as by most scholars today particularly since S. Pines..."]

Pliny the Younger was governor of Pontus/Bithynia from 111-113 AD. His opinion ranks as hear say evidence. To process to be a Xtian at that time qualified as a Capital Crime. So his opinion, in light of where he publicly declares his ignorance "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. "

The Annals by Roman historian and senator Tacitus: a history of the Roman Empire from the reign of Tiberius to that of Nero, the years AD 14"68. This source merits consideration. The Annals was Tacitus' final work. The Roman historian and senator Tacitus referred to Christ, his execution by Pontius Pilate, and the existence of early Christians in Rome in one page of his final work, Annals (written ca. AD 116).

The attempt to make jesus son of Zeus into a flesh and blood man, absolutely absurd. Spirituality and history two completely different fields of scholarship. Limiting a god to 3 physical dimensions defines the worship of idols! In terms of physical evidence supporting the existence of Jesus ... very thin. Based upon physical evidence a person could not write a decent Obituary for this imaginary man. Some 100 gospels written, virtually all of them came some 100 years after the events which they proclaim to have witnessed personally!

The 4 gospels of church cannon - one and all originally written in Greek. The target audiance of these books - none Jews. The problem with this ... the so called deciples of Jesus son of Zeus ... were from Judea. The language spoken by Jews in Judea - Hebrew or Aramaic.
TouchtheSky

Con

I acknowledge my mistake in that Josephus is a suspected forgery- this is actually something that has been brought up in a previous debate, and I forgot to take that link out before I posted my argument. Nevertheless, all of the other manuscripts and references that I gave still stand, including Tacitus, Lucian of Samosata, and especially the gospels. Pliny the Younger (a staunch atheist) also gives a reference to the explosion of Christianity soon after Christ is believed to have died, which certainly gives credence to the idea who rose from the dead. [1]

While Tacitus did not spend more than a page on the section about Jesus in the Annals, I don't see why this proves your point. [2] Tacitus may not have spent a large amount of space writing about Jesus, but Jesus is certainly present, and the mention of his existence is enough to give us a source from a long time ago.

Also, I'm going to come back to Jospephus, because, while the Testamonium Flavinium has been proved to be a forgery, Josephus has referred to Jesus in other places, and this time, in a negative light, making it less likely to be another forgery. Josephus says, in book twenty of Jewish Antiquities, 'Being, therefore, this kind of person [i.e., a heartless Sadducee], Ananus, thinking that he had a favorable opportunity because Festus had died and Albinus was still on his way, called a meeting [literally, "Sanhedrin"] of judges and brought into it the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah " James by name, and some others. He made the accusation that they had transgressed the law, and he handed them over to be stoned.' [3] While the other reference most likely was a forgery, this mention is much more reliable, as it is more compatible with Josephus' supposed views [4].

[1] https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://www.magister.msk.ru...
[4] https://bible.org...
Debate Round No. 2
mosc

Pro

"All of the other manuscripts and references that I gave still stand, including Tacitus, Lucian of Samosata, and especially the gospels."

These sources prove nothing. They compare to the Talmudic ridicule of Jesus son of Zeus. The Talmudic ridicule mocked the believers in this myth. Unless you believe that placing the Divine Name - no where found in the Xtian bible none sense - permits a person to fly - like the Talmud writes that this imaginary man did which caused him to do all his miracles. Satire does not make the people of Lilipoot real.

""While Tacitus did not spend more than a page on the section about Jesus in the Annals, I don't see why this proves your point."

Tacitus killed Xtians. He despised and abhorred their religious abomination. Attempting to employ an enemy of that vile religion as proof that validates that Jesus son of Zeus physically lived, utterly absurd. Prove that Zeus physically lived and then you have a solid proof.

"" but Jesus is certainly present, and the mention of his existence is enough to give us a source from a long time ago.""

No. All that his writings prove, that their existed Xtians in his day that believed in this mythical none sense.

""Josephus has referred to Jesus in other places, and this time,""

Jews do not buy this false messiah none sense. The gospels - written in Greek - appealed to Goyim who worship mytholgy.

"" a heartless Sadducee""

At that time, the P'rushim [translated as pharasees] had expelled all Tzeddukim [translated as sadducees] from all Jewish communities. Meaning if a Sadducee wanted to marry a Jewish women - then he would have to convert to the Jewish faith!

"" "Sanhedrin"] of judges and brought into it the brother of Jesus-who-is-called-Messiah " James by name, and some others. He made the accusation that they had transgressed the law, and he handed them over to be stoned.' ""

The Catholic Church argues that Jesus was an only child. 1, https://www.catholic.com...
"The scene is Jesus' own district, a synagogue, probably in Nazareth itself, where Jesus and
Mary undoubtedly had many relatives. The speakers in Mark 6:3 are the fellow-villagers of
these relatives. There is no need in this text to restrict the meaning of adelphoi/adelphai to
uterine brothers and sisters. Mark 6:3 is in perfect accord with Catholic doctrine."

"If Jesus were the uterine brother of the other four (James and Joses and Judas and Simon),
then Mark would write ho adelphos. But no manuscripts give that reading. Adelphos without
the article is non-specific and non-exclusive: Jesus is a relative, one of many, of the other four.

Notice also the repetition (called polysyndeton) of the word "and" (kai) between the names of
the other four. This suggests that Mark is presenting them, not as a cohesive group, but as
four disparate individuals."
TouchtheSky

Con

Alright, it's my last argument! Thank you for your points and your information- I'm enjoying your perspective and the chance to evaluate your questions about Jesus' existence and what that means to Christians.

Your points themselves don't make a whole lot of sense. You said that my sources prove nothing because the idea that they are trying to prove is ridiculous. You said, 'These sources prove nothing.
They compare to the Talmudic ridicule of Jesus son of Zeus'. However, this argument itself makes no sense at all- the documents themselves prove that the idea of Jesus ISN'T ridiculous. They offer real, historical references that back up the idea of the existence of Jesus. Most of them are written by Jews, Atheists, and Pagans, who would not have asserted Jesus' existence unless it was the undeniable truth.

You are right that Tacitus killed Christians and despised them [1], but, contrary to what you suggested, this actually proved my point. If we have a non-christian source written by someone who despised Christianity, that makes their assertion that Jesus was real all the more credible. After all, if Jesus was made up, Tacitus would have done everything in his power to prove this fact, but instead, Tacitus asserts Jesus' existence. If we were trying to prove Jesus' divinity, this would be different, but we are simply trying to prove his existence.

You ask me to 'prove that Zeus physically lived, and then you have solid proof'. The idea of this is ridiculous, and I'm not sure exactly what you're getting at. Christianity and Hellenism are two completely different religions from completely different time frames and people groups [2] [3]. Proving Zeus' existence will no more prove Jesus' then proving Jesus' will prove Zeus'. Both are entirely unrelated to one another.

I am fully aware of the Catholic church's arguments about Jesus being an only child, but I disagree with them. I think that there is both historical and biblical evidence that Jesus really did have siblings. Josephus asserts this, as I have already discussed. And in the Bible, verses like Jude 1:1, Acts 12:17, John 2:12, and many more also discuss Jesus' siblings. [4] However, I do not believe that this is relevant to the subject. The question that you are trying to argue is that Jesus never existed (or so I assume, because this is what I asserted at the beginning, and you never corrected me). By saying that Jesus didn't have siblings, you are basing that on the assumption that Jesus existed in the first place, so you may as well have already given in.

[1] https://www.britannica.com...
[2] https://www.greekmythology.com...
[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk...
[4] http://www.bibleinfo.com...
Debate Round No. 3
41 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mosc 2 months ago
mosc
The shemone esri has 13 middle bra'kot which affix to both the Parshat Shevuoth and the 13 middot. The remaining 6 bra'kot affix to the 6 yom tovim.
Posted by mosc 2 months ago
mosc
The sages sealed the Sha's, NaCH, and Siddur so that all generations of Israel share the exact same masoret. Learning the logic system of the 13 middot a person does not learn from a Rav. Learning the 13 middot logic system requires actual learning from the Primary Sources.
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
As I said, it comes from memory, perhaps I forgot something? Likely not.
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
What I wrote about the 13 Middot is how I was taught. Do you expect an apology?
Posted by mosc 2 months ago
mosc
The Chumash has 54 Parshaot. The Gemara of Shabbot teaches of 2 crowns to the Torah. The 2 Parshaot of blessings and Curses - the crowns of responsibility of Life and Death; Blessings and Curses; ruling the land with righteous justice and G'lut. The Gemara of Bra'kot teaches: Make your davvening in a M'kom k'vua/in a fixed place. The Reshonim clearly did not understand this Gemara; Rav Rotenburg of Germany, the teacher of the Ramban held that "fixed place" means - have a fixed place in the beit knesset where one davvens. Rabano Yona rejects this opinion by saying that all places in the beit knesset share equal holiness. The Tur poskins like Rav Rotenburg whereas the Shul'chan A'ruch poskins according to the opinion of Rabano Yona: the M'kom K'vua, according to him: a fixed place within ones' home. The difficulty of both opinions 2 that are 4 ( language of the Mishna of Shabbot), tefilla its a duty of the heart NOT of the location. Therefore the correct learning of the Gemara of Bra'kot, M'Kom its a remez to the Name of HaShem. Where does HaShem live? Brit. HaShem lives within the hearts and souls of the bnai brit people. Consequently, when a person studies the Parsha of the week, learning from M'kom K'vua, one affixes a midda to a Parsha. Four times in the yearly reading the Torah learns a definition for a fixed midda. This represents the sh'itta of how to learn a midda L'shma. Anyone can talk about a matter, Torah learning learns "through" a matter. The matter being the Parshaot of the Chumash. That's kabbala.
Posted by mosc 2 months ago
mosc
When I toured both the US and Israel on my bicycle, 2000 miles in the US approximately and from Haifa to Eilat returning by way of dead sea climbing to Jerusalem and then proceeding back to Haifa, I learned that touring its the journey that's important NOT the destination.

You have brought these conclusions - I do not know your sh'itta - which you say serve as definitions for the 13 middot. Mr Rav taught me that middot affix to Parshaot. The 13 middot being the Oral Torah logic system revelation whih permits all generations to interpret the intent of the Written Torah. Your conclusions by this sh'itta compare to a mountain hanging by a hair. Let me brake it down:
""(1) G-d is merciful for all sins, even future ones."" No. You employ the 4th midda in the language of the 1st midda, so this renders that definition pu'sul. "(4) G-d is full of rahum" Rahum that's Hebrew, Mercy is the translation of rahum. Green is green does not define anything. " (2) He is merciful after the sinner has gone astray" Again you employ a term which remains undefined. This makes this definition pu'sul. "(3) G-d (El) rules over all nature, therefore, His mercy surpasses His own Name! " Same error ... same din. Pu'sul. " (5) G-d is full of v"hanun (grace), even to those who don't deserve it. " Translating Hebrew to English ... a translation never defines the original term translated. Same error... same din. "(6) He is ereh apayim (slow to anger), " Same error ... same din. "(7) even to those who lack good merit." None sense speculation. "(8) G-d never goes back on His word to reward us. " This does not define truth.

Enough you get the idea. Learning a matter L'Shma directly links with middot tohorot. 4 letters in HaShem, In the back of the 1st tractate of bra'kot - the 39 middot of Rabbi Yossi HaGaleli. A gematria, one of the ways to learn a "hint"/remez. Pardes (Jewish exegesis): p'shat, remez, drosh, sod. 4 X 13 = 52. The Chumash has 54 Parshaot.
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
Or actually, It. But that's Kabbalah, you said you don't believe in it, did ya?
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
There's your source. Happy now? G-d won't punish a person, whether they're Christian, Muslim, or even an atheist. He is the G-d of Israel, and as Abraham said, "Will the King of all the world not do justice?" G-d gives us the option of arguing with Him. Praise Him!
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
See #12
G-d taught Moshe the 13 middot after the golden calf incident. G-d then told him that whenever we pray and recite it, He'll forgive us. Remember v"nakeh lo y"nakeh? Repetition stresses action. When the rabbis cut off the verse AFTER v"nakeh, they were suggesting that G-d can forgive ALL sins. Here are is just a short list of the 13 middot:

(1) G-d is merciful for all sins, even future ones. (2) He is merciful after the sinner has gone astray; (3) G-d (El) rules over all nature, therefore, His mercy surpasses His own Name! (4) G-d is full of rahum, hence, He eases the punishment of sinners and never gives them more than they can bare. (5) G-d is full of v"hanun (grace), even to those who don't deserve it. (6) He is ereh apayim (slow to anger), delaying His wrath to sinners. (7) He is v"rav hesed, even to those who lack good merit, He gives them more gifts then they deserve, and if one's sins are balanced with mitzvot, He tips the scales a little towards mitzvot, in our favor! (8) G-d never goes back on His word to reward us. (9) He is notzeir hesed la-alafim. . . and remembers the good deeds of all, even into the future, for later generations who will be not so righteous. (10) He is nosei avon, forgiving intentional sins as long as one repents. (11) He is pesha, meaning, G-d allows us, even sinners, to argue with Him without punishment. (12) He is v"hata"ah, He won't punish us for sins we were unaware of, or sins we were careless to make, or those made out of apathy. Lastly, (13), He is merciful and forgiving, wiping away the sins of those who repent, but if one lacks teshuva, He doesn't cleanse them. All this was taught from Torah, and compiled by the Rabbenu Tam and Abudraham. It was the Kabbalists who added an addition: Say the 13 Middot when taking the Torah out of the Ark during Pesach, Shavuot and Succos. Then, we sing, "Master of the universe, fulfill my heartfelt requests for good!" By this, we mean to say that all our motives are done for good al
Posted by judaism 2 months ago
judaism
I gave you a list of all the middot, right? Thought I did, but it wasn't on here.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 2 months ago
Phenenas
moscTouchtheSkyTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Both Con's arguments and Pro's rebuttals are equally solid. The only point I can really reward is for grammar. Pro's was often hard to follow, and one need only look at the title to see what I'm talking about.