The Science of Disinformation

Any topic with a chance of polarization - Not for the easily offended.

Moderator: Team

Post Reply
Circlotron
Expert
Expert
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:56 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Circlotron » Fri Dec 15, 2017 7:40 am

David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
Jesus had broken the Roman law
Nope.
Circlotron wrote:
Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:01 pm
Remember Pontius Pilate said “I find no fault in him”
John 18:38

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Firedome8 » Fri Dec 15, 2017 10:38 am

David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
Firedome8 wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:39 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:30 am



The Jews pointed the gun, gave the command to fire.
The Romans pulled the trigger.

The Romans did not give a damn about another false prophet.

Then why did the Jews kill him?
He was disturbing the peace in the Roman viewpoint.
I don't think so. The Roman style of governing was to let the locals run the show as long as no Roman laws were broken and taxes were paid. Jesus' failed attempts to reform the Jews did not concern the Romans and Pilate said so. It did disturb the Jewish priests but the Romans didn't care.

The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews". Since the Jews had no king at that time, and only Rome could appoint a Jewish king, Jesus had broken the Roman law and was subject to the most brutal form of punishment as an example to others. He was nailed to the cross, died within six hours, and as was the custom, left to rot on the cross as an example to others. The road leading to the gates of Jerusalem were strewn with the corpses of Roman law breakers.

Jesus did not die for anyone's sins, then or now. He died because his followers became too aggressive and because he began to believe his own ability to convert the Jewish priests to his reform ideas. This same concept of challenge and punishment was followed many times over during the rise and growth of Christianity.

And, as we all know, Christianity only grew by the point of the Roman sword.
And the well laid plans of the Flavian dynasty using the god delusion for control.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by GARY C » Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:56 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
Firedome8 wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:39 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 11:30 am



The Jews pointed the gun, gave the command to fire.
The Romans pulled the trigger.

The Romans did not give a damn about another false prophet.

Then why did the Jews kill him?
He was disturbing the peace in the Roman viewpoint.
I don't think so. The Roman style of governing was to let the locals run the show as long as no Roman laws were broken and taxes were paid. Jesus' failed attempts to reform the Jews did not concern the Romans and Pilate said so. It did disturb the Jewish priests but the Romans didn't care.

The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews". Since the Jews had no king at that time, and only Rome could appoint a Jewish king, Jesus had broken the Roman law and was subject to the most brutal form of punishment as an example to others. He was nailed to the cross, died within six hours, and as was the custom, left to rot on the cross as an example to others. The road leading to the gates of Jerusalem were strewn with the corpses of Roman law breakers.

Jesus did not die for anyone's sins, then or now. He died because his followers became too aggressive and because he began to believe his own ability to convert the Jewish priests to his reform ideas. This same concept of challenge and punishment was followed many times over during the rise and growth of Christianity.

And, as we all know, Christianity only grew by the point of the Roman sword.
Your opinion is factually and historically incorrect, not to mention biblicy incorrect.

Circlotron
Expert
Expert
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:56 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Circlotron » Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:15 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews".
John 19:19-22 says that Pilate wrote and put a sign above Jesus calling him the king of the Jews, and the Jewish religious leaders complained about it. Pilate as representative of the Roman law didn’t seem to have a problem with Jesus being called that, only the Jewish religious leaders did.

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Firedome8 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:51 am

Circlotron wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 4:15 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews".
John 19:19-22 says that Pilate wrote and put a sign above Jesus calling him the king of the Jews, and the Jewish religious leaders complained about it. Pilate as representative of the Roman law didn’t seem to have a problem with Jesus being called that, only the Jewish religious leaders did.
On the assumption that any of it is based on objective reality.

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Firedome8 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:52 am

Jesus was a liberal .

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by GARY C » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:19 pm

Firedome8 wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 9:52 am
Jesus was a liberal .
I that why Jesus didn't accept this guys blame others answer but told him to get off his ass and do something?
You will notice Jesus didn't tell someone else to house and fund this guy.
John 5: 6When Jesus saw him lie, and knew that he had been now a long time in that case, he saith unto him, Wilt thou be made whole? 7The impotent man answered him, Sir, I have no man, when the water is troubled, to put me into the pool: but while I am coming, another steppeth down before me. 8Jesus saith unto him, Rise, take up thy bed, and walk. 9And immediately the man was made whole, and took up his bed, and walked: and on the same day was the sabbath. 10The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured, It is the sabbath day: it is not lawful for thee to carry thy bed. 11He answered them, He that made me whole, the same said unto me, Take up thy bed, and walk. 12Then asked they him, What man is that which said unto thee, Take up thy bed, and walk? 13And he that was healed wist not who it was: for Jesus had conveyed himself away, a multitude being in that place. 14Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee. 15The man departed, and told the Jews that it was Jesus, which had made him whole.

David Redszus
Guru
Guru
Posts: 5793
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:27 am
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by David Redszus » Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm

GARY C wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:56 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am
Firedome8 wrote:
Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:39 pm


He was disturbing the peace in the Roman viewpoint.
I don't think so. The Roman style of governing was to let the locals run the show as long as no Roman laws were broken and taxes were paid. Jesus' failed attempts to reform the Jews did not concern the Romans and Pilate said so. It did disturb the Jewish priests but the Romans didn't care.

The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews". Since the Jews had no king at that time, and only Rome could appoint a Jewish king, Jesus had broken the Roman law and was subject to the most brutal form of punishment as an example to others. He was nailed to the cross, died within six hours, and as was the custom, left to rot on the cross as an example to others. The road leading to the gates of Jerusalem were strewn with the corpses of Roman law breakers.

Jesus did not die for anyone's sins, then or now. He died because his followers became too aggressive and because he began to believe his own ability to convert the Jewish priests to his reform ideas. This same concept of challenge and punishment was followed many times over during the rise and growth of Christianity.

And, as we all know, Christianity only grew by the point of the Roman sword.
Your opinion is factually and historically incorrect, not to mention biblicy incorrect.
I think not.
We know very little about factual and historical correctness regarding Jesus. There is no original record.

Biblical correctness exists only in the minds of the believers and cannot be proven in any way.

All that we know comes from the writings of the Gospels which were written many years after the death of Jesus by persons yet unknown. The first written was the book of Mark which is consider the most accurate since it was written based on the an earlier oral tradition than were the others.

Matthew and Luke took much greater liberties from the book of Mark. John, the last to be written, went way over board and wrote an extreme report magnifying Jesus alleged accomplishments. None were written by anyone who actually knew Jesus but based their stories on what they had heard from others.

The development of the Gospels represents a clear picture of revisionist history. Things got even worse as time went by. It still does today.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by GARY C » Sat Dec 16, 2017 6:24 pm

David Redszus wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm
GARY C wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:56 pm
David Redszus wrote:
Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:24 am

I don't think so. The Roman style of governing was to let the locals run the show as long as no Roman laws were broken and taxes were paid. Jesus' failed attempts to reform the Jews did not concern the Romans and Pilate said so. It did disturb the Jewish priests but the Romans didn't care.

The problem arose when his illiterate disciples began calling him "King of the Jews". Since the Jews had no king at that time, and only Rome could appoint a Jewish king, Jesus had broken the Roman law and was subject to the most brutal form of punishment as an example to others. He was nailed to the cross, died within six hours, and as was the custom, left to rot on the cross as an example to others. The road leading to the gates of Jerusalem were strewn with the corpses of Roman law breakers.

Jesus did not die for anyone's sins, then or now. He died because his followers became too aggressive and because he began to believe his own ability to convert the Jewish priests to his reform ideas. This same concept of challenge and punishment was followed many times over during the rise and growth of Christianity.

And, as we all know, Christianity only grew by the point of the Roman sword.
Your opinion is factually and historically incorrect, not to mention biblicy incorrect.
I think not.
We know very little about factual and historical correctness regarding Jesus. There is no original record.

Biblical correctness exists only in the minds of the believers and cannot be proven in any way.

All that we know comes from the writings of the Gospels which were written many years after the death of Jesus by persons yet unknown. The first written was the book of Mark which is consider the most accurate since it was written based on the an earlier oral tradition than were the others.

Matthew and Luke took much greater liberties from the book of Mark. John, the last to be written, went way over board and wrote an extreme report magnifying Jesus alleged accomplishments. None were written by anyone who actually knew Jesus but based their stories on what they had heard from others.

The development of the Gospels represents a clear picture of revisionist history. Things got even worse as time went by. It still does today.
Not correct!
Not correct again!
Provably incorrect!
Once again your opinion does not mach facts and history.

Circlotron
Expert
Expert
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:56 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Circlotron » Sat Dec 16, 2017 7:53 pm

Here you say:
David Redszus wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm
We know very little about factual and historical correctness regarding Jesus. There is no original record.

All that we know comes from the writings of the Gospels which were written many years after the death of Jesus by persons yet unknown.

Matthew and Luke took much greater liberties from the book of Mark. John, the last to be written, went way over board and wrote an extreme report magnifying Jesus alleged accomplishments. None were written by anyone who actually knew Jesus but based their stories on what they had heard from others.
And yet in earlier posts you authoritatively assert that Jesus did do this or didn't do that.
You state that there are no original records and claim that what records do exist are "hopelessly corrupt and fanciful".
It follows that what you *do* know about Jesus' life is from these very records that you condemn.
Could you please explain then why your statements of what Jesus did or didn't do that would have to be based on these records are not as a consequence also hopelessly corrupt and fanciful?

BTW, no disrespect meant, David.
I appreciate your technical insights and knowledge on other pages. :)

P.S. I now can't see where referenced that "hopelessly corrupt and fanciful" quote. It was there because I copied and pasted it because I'm lazy. Now I can't find it at all.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by GARY C » Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:34 pm

Not to mention that in a few pages Jesus has gone from a non existent mythical being to a prophet that was killed by the Romans.

No one doubts the existence of Tiberius Caesar who was a was Roman emperor from 14 AD to 37 AD but there is far more non biblical history for Jesus than there is for Tiberius.

Is it possible that the world resist the reality of Jesus because He is who He said He is?

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Firedome8 » Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:08 pm

GARY C wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:34 pm
Not to mention that in a few pages Jesus has gone from a non existent mythical being to a prophet that was killed by the Romans.

No one doubts the existence of Tiberius Caesar who was a was Roman emperor from 14 AD to 37 AD but there is far more non biblical history for Jesus than there is for Tiberius.

Is it possible that the world resist the reality of Jesus because He is who He said He is?
No one thinks or calmed caeser was god ...non biblical history for jesus??? Do you mean josephus flavius...a Flavian hack in on the con.

GARY C
Guru
Guru
Posts: 3803
Joined: Tue May 14, 2013 10:58 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by GARY C » Sun Dec 17, 2017 3:57 am

Firedome8 wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 11:08 pm
GARY C wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 8:34 pm
Not to mention that in a few pages Jesus has gone from a non existent mythical being to a prophet that was killed by the Romans.

No one doubts the existence of Tiberius Caesar who was a was Roman emperor from 14 AD to 37 AD but there is far more non biblical history for Jesus than there is for Tiberius.

Is it possible that the world resist the reality of Jesus because He is who He said He is?
No one thinks or calmed caeser was god ...non biblical history for jesus??? Do you mean josephus flavius...a Flavian hack in on the con.
At least 4 major historians!
Around 40 historical references with in 150 years or less of His life, no other major historical person has the evidence He has, just 4 historical references is more than any other!

Circlotron
Expert
Expert
Posts: 631
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 6:56 am
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Circlotron » Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:07 am

David Redszus wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm
Biblical correctness exists only in the minds of the believers and cannot be proven in any way.
Matthew and Luke took much greater liberties from the book of Mark.
The development of the Gospels represents a clear picture of revisionist history.
Fairy tales often start in the manner of "Once upon a time in a far off land there lived a king that had a beautiful daughter..."
No date.
No place name.
No person's name.

Contrast Luke 3:1-2 concerning when John the Baptiser arrived on the scene:

3 In the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod was district ruler of Galilee, Philip his brother was district ruler of the country of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was district ruler of Abilene, 2 in the days of chief priest Annas and of Caiaphas, God’s declaration came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

Tiberius Caesar began in August 17, 14 C.E. (Gregorian calendar) so we have a date.
No less than seven people who held public office are named.
Five different places are named.

Way different to "once upon a time"
If those writings were just made up then it would have been plain and obvious to people of those days.

Firedome8
Guru
Guru
Posts: 1567
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 6:16 pm

Re: The Science of Disinformation

Post by Firedome8 » Sun Dec 17, 2017 9:44 am

Circlotron wrote:
Sun Dec 17, 2017 7:07 am
David Redszus wrote:
Sat Dec 16, 2017 3:57 pm
Biblical correctness exists only in the minds of the believers and cannot be proven in any way.
Matthew and Luke took much greater liberties from the book of Mark.
The development of the Gospels represents a clear picture of revisionist history.
Fairy tales often start in the manner of "Once upon a time in a far off land there lived a king that had a beautiful daughter..."
No date.
No place name.
No person's name.

Contrast Luke 3:1-2 concerning when John the Baptiser arrived on the scene:

3 In the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea, Herod was district ruler of Galilee, Philip his brother was district ruler of the country of Ituraea and Trachonitis, and Lysanias was district ruler of Abilene, 2 in the days of chief priest Annas and of Caiaphas, God’s declaration came to John the son of Zechariah in the wilderness.

Tiberius Caesar began in August 17, 14 C.E. (Gregorian calendar) so we have a date.
No less than seven people who held public office are named.
Five different places are named.

Way different to "once upon a time"
If those writings were just made up then it would have been plain and obvious to people of those days.
Have you ever read the Thomas Jefferson bible ? Much clearer picture. Not all of the book is fictional but it is by no means a history book or a message from the gods.

Post Reply