Historicity of Jesus - 2

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Jan 21 2008, 06:22 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Jan 21 2008, 06:22 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->

... and that some mighty evil people purposely set out to perpetrate a cruel fraud on humanity for unknown reasons, since the promulgation of the views would get them persecuted by the most powerful empire in history, one that was particularly cruel.
[right][snapback]77363[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

Conspiracy is the only way we can explain the origins of the cultural terrorism known as Christianity. Something so extraordinary requires an extraordinary genesis.

[acharya]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Panin

Check such people in that era who lived when it was discovered that the Bible was a hoax

http://cs.anu.edu.au/~bdm/dilugim/panin.html

http://www.growthingod.org.uk/word7.htm

http://www.growthingod.org.uk/chrono.htm

http://www.growthingod.org.uk/english.htm

[dhu]

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture...1c65e3635a83133
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
That is typically beyond your Christian mindset! Hinduism is defined!
It is dharma based karma elevated by jnana! Called sanathana dharma.
Heard of it? It is not *belief* but conduct and realization.

Typical of Christian goondas, they judge Hindus by their yardstick.
You want Hindus to be like Christians. Nope. We think action and
knowledge are more important not belief. Belief is primary for you.
Not for us. It is secondary for us. I think you wont understand this. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Shambhu]

Yes, 100%, the Abrahamic mindset is just like that: when it comes to God, they cannot imagine anything beyond a superman in the sky. Nothing else. They will debate endlessly about the rules supposedly laid down by this superman.

Some of them will try to disprove these Abrahamic superman theories, and will call themselves rationalists. But these "rationalists" do not have the guts to undertake any inquiry into their own existence (eg "who is that I refer to as me? Is it my body? My soul? But those are possessions of the "me" ..."). All that is mumbo-jumbo, you see? Not rational.

They will continue to very "rationally" kiss their pet dog at home, stop for ducks on the roads, and turn a blind eye toward the millions of "food" animals that are slaughtered every day (after a pitiable life spent in horrible conditions). The animals, presumably, do not get stressed out or feel pain. Michael Vick? Ooh, bad! But McDonald's? Get real , there is no connection between the two, the rationalist ex-Abrahamic will say. The Abrahamic, of course, goes one step further: God put those animals on earth for us onlee. As long as you avoid eating (pick a species) your ticket to heaven is booked (though you need to re-confirm your reservations either weekly of 5 times a day..)

I have found that these guys need to be approached as if they were toddlers. They cannot grasp any concept other than "superman in the sky and his rules".

Another thing they cannot understand when we try to disprove the existence of Jeebus is that we are not doing all that just because we feel like it. All discussions have to be started off with:

How Indians have been tortured, killed by inquisitions, how their culture was destroyed etc. *based* on this "One True God who gave us His Son" story. *That* is why we want to put this Jeebus story to rest forever. If you had left us alone we would left you alone. Forget "had", let us speak of the *present*: if you leave us alone, we will leave you alone. But no, you have to try to wipe us off culturally. So please understand when we try to wipe Jeebus off, yes? <!--emo&--><img src='style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif' /><!--endemo-->

[acharya]

They are actually in panic since they usually get defensive in argument. There is only believe or no believe in the logic of Christianity. It is literally a leap of faith.

They do not have logic in their argument for their position

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Guidebook for
Con Artists and Manipulators
.

0  u    The Standard Reaction
1  u    Beliefs are Stronger than Steel and Stone
2  u    Confusing Reality with a Story About Reality
3  u    Declare Reality

.

4  u    Distort the Truth
5  u    Peddle Misinformation and Disinformation
6  u    Use a Third Party Deceiver
7  u    Prove Me Wrong

.

8  u    I'm the Authority -- Trust Me
9  u    Use the Uncontested Obvious or the Irrelevant as Proof
10  u    Use the Opponents Argument as Proof of your Position
11  u    Divert Attention

.

12  u    Be Excessively Technical
13  u    Use Personal Beliefs as Proof
14  u    Ignore Any Evidence that Does not Fit the Pre-determined Conclusion
15  u    Ask Loaded Questions

.

16  u    Create a  Problem
17  u    Get People to Demand What You Want to Impose Upon Them
18 8  u    Let's You and Him Fight
18 8au    Create Divisiveness

.

19  u    Chaos For Conversions
20  u    Get The Child and You've Got the Adult
21  u    The Exclude Me Clause
22  u    Secret Language

.

23  u    Becoming Offended
24  u    Politics By Murder
25  u    Divide and Conquer
26  u    Two Sides Are Actually only One

.

27  u    How to Steal a Million Dollars
28  u    What's the Pattern Here<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Disunion: true hallmark of the history of Europe ?</b>

EXCERPT:

The second road was that of education: a complete educational change was a necessary precondition for the teaching of the Church’s new interpretation of Christian religion,<b> insisting upon the need for each individual to achieve his redemption and to repay the infinite debt due to Christ who suffered for redeeming humanity. </b>To convince the laity, to capture people’s mind at a point where Christian principles would become the essential components of their individual moral views, it was necessary to teach, to preach and to reach each man’s conscience, whatever his status in society.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>What is it to be European?</b>

Jean Monnet liked to quote Bismarck’s remark that Europe was a mere geographical notion. "Europe has never existed" he claimed "one has genuinely to create Europe" My claim, in this paper, is that Europe does not need to be created, but only recreated.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

http://www.messiahtruth.com/response.html

[dhu]

<b>Orientalism, Hellas, and the Fall of Rome</b>

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Zero that was India
by Kamesh Ramakrishna Aiyer

Excerpt:

<b>As opposed to this, the references to India in the West are concrete: </b>Dionysios brings the secret of wine-making from India; Pythagoras visited India and learned number mysticism; Herodotus tabulates the tax revenues of the Persian Empire and reckons that the “Indian provinces” (on the west bank of the Indus – modern Afghanistan and Baluchistan) contributed half the revenues while the remaining eighteen provinces (from Egypt to Persia) contributed the remaining half. During Augustus Caesar’s time, Rome tries to limit imports from India because it was draining the country of gold. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->RM:

The grand plan is a re-enactment of what was done by missionaries to
obliterate pagans, native faiths around the globe. <b>The flaws of the
target faith must be shown to be INCURABLE ESSENCES. </b>Otherwise the
natives would 'develop/evolve' just like Christianity has and
continues to do. This is why "frozen in time" type of stereotypes are
dangerous especially when sold to Hindus as something romantic.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Representation and Reality of the Self in Art

Chapter 1. Aristotle's Concept Of Essence

In this chapter I will discuss <b>Aristotle’s concept of essence, which supports the claim that the representation of likeness in self-portraits is at the same time the representation of the essential self of the artist. </b>Aristotle discusses essence in Metaphysics, as a part of his answer to the ontological question of being. The concept of essence appears in a rather tangled discussion of substance in Book Zeta, first as a criterion for the substantiality; later essence is identified with the substance.

The ontological question of ...


<b>Aristotle goes on to say that essence is what is definable in a thing. </b>So, for Aristotle, essences are just the species of genus, and nothing else. [6] The essence of the thing is that which is intelligible about it, because it is the essence of something that is described in the definition of it. <b>Only essence can be defined. The essence of a thing is those per se features that are mentioned in the definition.</b> Aristotle’s claim is that the essence of something is its substance. Therefore, substance is essence. The claim that essence is substance means that what is ontologically fundamental is also conceptually prior, i.e., ontologically prior in a sense that the being of everything depends on the essence, conceptually prior in that it is in terms of essence that everything has to be understood.
... ..
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

New:
<b>
Rodeph Emet Video Interview with Joseph Atwill (55:42)</b>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2...earch&plindex=2

Previous Videos:

<b>Radio Interview by Atwill (15:38) </b>
http://rapidshare.com/files/87171142/Joe_A...essiah.mp3.html

<b>Harold Channer Video Interview with Atwill (57:50)</b>
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=83...earch&plindex=0
(see min 41:58 for the "Unkil Titus" ref.)

<b>Rodeph Emet Video Interview with Dr. John Hudson (27:59)</b>
http://video.google.com/url?docid=41776674..._i0f_F-JcN_HG_Q

[acharya]

<!--QuoteBegin-dhu+Jan 25 2008, 02:51 PM-->QUOTE(dhu @ Jan 25 2008, 02:51 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Zero that was India
by Kamesh Ramakrishna Aiyer

Excerpt:

<b>As opposed to this, the references to India in the West are concrete: </b>Dionysios brings the secret of wine-making from India; Pythagoras visited India and learned number mysticism; Herodotus tabulates the tax revenues of the Persian Empire and reckons that the “Indian provinces” (on the west bank of the Indus – modern Afghanistan and Baluchistan) contributed half the revenues while the remaining eighteen provinces (from Egypt to Persia) contributed the remaining half. During Augustus Caesar’s time, Rome tries to limit imports from India because it was draining the country of gold. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[right][snapback]77632[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->
Its more fiction than history,
<b>
This review is from: The Nothing That Is: A Natural History of Zero (Hardcover)</b>
A disappointing book. Like many Eurocentric historians who simply have to credit the Greeks with every great invention, regardless if they really are responsible for it or not, this book appears to have been written with an agenda of stealing the discovery (or invention)of Zero away from Indians and somehow thrust it on the Greeks. It appears that the author has worked a great deal more on his conclusions than his arguments. He gives no reliable references from the experts in the field to support the argument and mostly overlooks those who oppose his view. The book does not even care to give a bibliography which is required in any serious research document. Not worth the price if you are looking for an authentic work on the history of zero.


<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[Shambhu]

The guy who writes on the CM forum under the handle RodephEmet has written books on origins of religions etc, but in a semitic setting only. I thought it was too pompous of him to generalize about all religion based on whatever he has proved about semitic religion. He used to think of indic religion in terms of AIT...I pointed out the newer findings to him. But the guy still thinks "rationality" is better than any religion. These guys cannot get it into their heads that there is a whole ancient religion based on rationality. Scientists never make fun of things they cannot explain, only pseudo-scientists do that..

Anyway, more power to him on his unravelling of the Jesus cult...

[dhu]

they ask the false and irrelevant questions. It's an aristotle-ian trait. Other than the specific discussions on CM , almost every other discussion there is remarkably obtuse.

[dhu]

<b>Zero: The Biography of a Dangerous Idea</b>
http://www.amazon.com/Zero-Biography-Dange...e/dp/0140296476

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->It may well be the most potent force in the universe. The Greeks were scared to death of it. Aristotle wouldn't permit it(and the Catholic Church's vice-grip on Aristotelianism held Western science and mathematics back for centuries)....<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->..
<b>It is among the Greek philosophers that Seife sees an outright distaste for the concept of zero as nothing, a void. </b>It conflicted with their particular notions of the universe and how it operated. Their aversion to it seems to have
carried over into the Mediaeval European period by way of the offended established principles of the church.
Seife follows the history of zero to modern times and discusses some of the ways that zero and infinity are
the same and some of the ways that they oppose one another. He brings both quantum mechanics and relativity theory into the discussion, revealing some of the ways that looking at zero and infinity have led to advances in physics in more recent times...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->On the Right are two ancient Vedic Swastika Mosaics from Jewish Synagogues discovered in Maoz-Haim, Israel and Ein Gedi, Israel

<img src='http://i97.photobucket.com/albums/l233/hinduunity/SwastikaIsrael1.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' /><!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-acharya+Jan 28 2008, 07:39 AM-->QUOTE(acharya @ Jan 28 2008, 07:39 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->Its more fiction than history,
<b>
This review is from: The Nothing That Is: A Natural History of Zero (Hardcover)</b>
A disappointing book. Like many Eurocentric historians who simply have to credit the Greeks with every great invention, regardless if they really are responsible for it or not, this book appears to have been written with an agenda of stealing the discovery (or invention)of Zero away from Indians and somehow thrust it on the Greeks. It appears that the author has worked a great deal more on his conclusions than his arguments. He gives no reliable references from the experts in the field to support the argument and mostly overlooks those who oppose his view. The book does not even care to give a bibliography which is required in any serious research document. Not worth the price if you are looking for an authentic work on the history of zero.

[right][snapback]77718[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
http://www.amazon.com/review/product/01951...erBy=addOneStar

It is not surprising they are sallying phorth as if nothing has intervened. Why they need to steal the zero? It is because they need to cover up the endemic normative ethics - the reality of which makes AIT an impossibilty. A normative ethics could never contemplate void and infinity inherent in one entity.

[dhu]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Geography of Thought : How Asians and Westerners Think Differently...and Why
by Richard Nisbett

...a gulf separates the children of Aristotle from the descendants of Confucius. ...<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->