Hardcore PROOF That Jesus Is Nothing But a Retold Tale: ~~~~

[astounding]

These video's are based nothing but on facts which you'll find yourself
if you do research.

START BY WATCHING THIS VIDEO: (You gotta download it)
=======================================




The God Who Wasn't There


The movie that has been astounding audiences in theaters around the world is now available on a high-quality, feature-packed DVD.

In this provocative, critically acclaimed documentary, you will discover:

* The early founders of Christianity seem wholly unaware of the idea of a human Jesus

* The Jesus of the Gospels bears a striking resemblance to other ancient heroes and the figureheads of pagan savior cults

* Contemporary Christians are largely ignorant of the origins of their religion

* Fundamentalism is as strong today as it ever has been, with an alarming 44% of Americans believing Jesus will return to earth in their lifetimes

Dazzling motion graphics and a sweeping soundtrack propel this uncompromising and taboo-shattering documentary that Newsweek says "irreverently lays out the case that Jesus Christ never existed."

The God Who Wasn't There includes provocative interviews with:

* Sam Harris, PEN Award-winning author of The End of Faith

* Robert M. Price, Jesus Seminar fellow and author of The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man

* Alan Dundes, Professor of Folklore at the University of California at Berkeley

* Richard Carrier, historian and author of Sense and Goodness Without God

Code: Select all

http://rapidshare.de/files/28138323/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part1.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28142834/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part2.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28147624/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part3.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28151701/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part4.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28155817/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part5.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28160146/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part6.rar.html
http://rapidshare.de/files/28134516/The_God_Who_Wasn_t_There.part7.rar.html

PASSWORD IS: www.docs4you.qfhs.org/forum



THEN GO ONTO WATHCING THIS PART WITH UNDISPUTABLE PROOF
THAT JESUS, THE BIBLE AND ALL OTHER RELIGIONS ARE NOTHNIG
BUT RETOLD TALES FROM THOUSANDS OF YEARS BEFORE THEM:
=============================================


Go to http://www.youtube.com

In the search box, type in: The Truth About The Jesus Myth


There are 6 parts in total.

Start from #1 obviously then progress onto other parts.


-A

[McCulloch]

So because we acknowledge that there are con men on both sides, we should bypass them entirely and go only with what the evidence supports. And guess which side the evidence comes down on?

Theists lose.

You see, not really. It all depends on if you insist on 'evidence' for a matter of faith.

No, we insist that matters of faith be acknowledged as matters of faith. When theists insist that these matters of faith are objective truth that is when we, appropriately, insist on evidence.

[Goat]

So because we acknowledge that there are con men on both sides, we should bypass them entirely and go only with what the evidence supports. And guess which side the evidence comes down on?

Theists lose.

You see, not really. It all depends on if you insist on 'evidence' for a matter of faith.

No, we insist that matters of faith be acknowledged as matters of faith. When theists insist that these matters of faith are objective truth that is when we, appropriately, insist on evidence.

I will accept that. There are far too many people that do that. Then again, on my part, my faith is my business, and your faith (or lack there of), is up to you.

[Cephus]

I will accept that. There are far too many people that do that. Then again, on my part, my faith is my business, and your faith (or lack
there of), is up to you.

Which is only true so long as you keep your faith to yourself. The minute you start telling me that your faith is true, it stops being your business and starts being mine, and I'm free to ask that you back up your statements with demonstrable, objective evidence.

[melikio]

The most significant/important thing (in my view), is the manner in which people wield that they have to offer others.

There are always extremists (or every flavor) who must be regarded overall as being problematic. My antennae are UP to detect NUTCASES on all sides of an argument, mainly because those kinds of people tend to create/be a larger problem or question than the issues they discuss.

There will likely ALWAYS BE QUESTIONS about what is fact, what is true or what is historical evidence (especially where it concerns NEW things). But the PEOPLE who wield such knowledge (regardless of their positions or viewpoints), in such a way as to continually separate or stir others toward what is negative (hatred, anger, violence), need to be scrutinized as much as anything else.

I understand people wanting to be "right" (and knowing they are), but there are real limits to the knowledge we all possess; even how we manage to interpret that which we do believe we know. I look at the Middle East, and realize so readily, that I don't care who's "right", but that they find the right way/s to stop the fighting and killing period.

People who believe in Jesus have Him in their person. Those who question His existence, do question; don't attempt to force them into "belief". Humans who argue, are capable of and typically do find "evidence" to support the view they possess, or the agenda they wish to propel. I tend to think/believe, that the ways and methods of the "messenger", are often more significant than the content of the "message" itself. And in that light, we can see the power of Jesus' actions (in this world) above many other things; whether myth or historical fact.

-Mel-

[Cephus]

I understand people wanting to be "right" (and knowing they are), but there are real limits to the knowledge we all possess; even how we manage to interpret that which we do believe we know. I look at the Middle East, and realize so readily, that I don't care who's "right", but that they find the right way/s to stop the fighting and killing period.

But the people in the Middle East care who is right and nothing, no amount of evidence, no amount of convincing, is ever going to convince either side that they're wrong or should give up. The other side is the enemy and neither side will rest until the enemy is dead. That's what religion brings to the table.

[Easyrider]

But the people in the Middle East care who is right and nothing, no amount of evidence, no amount of convincing, is ever going to convince either side that they're wrong or should give up. The other side is the enemy and neither side will rest until the enemy is dead. That's what religion brings to the table.

Maybe you should invite some Hezbollah and Al Queda fanatics to your house and try some long-winded, secular U.N. debates with them and see if that stops the killing. Better yet, let's disarm the U.S. like some of the radical San Francisco progressives want and see how long people stay alive.

[melikio]

That's what religion brings to the table.

I understand your point, and your point of view; but there are many who CAN differentiate between "religion", and the promotion of hate and strife.

Not ALL religious views are created equal, and not ALL people of religion are are closed-minded or intransigent. There are also many secular or non-religious attitudes which are also problematic for mankind as a whole. And many who wield their secularism as dogmatically as any right-wing religious person, have contributed to some of the problems we've all had to deal with in this society and others.

It IS very comfortable to think/believe that we could label "religion" as THE problem, but that just isn't a fully-realistic view; that isn't the way things are.

-Mel-

[astounding]

One major advantage I do see in following a religion is that is substantionally reduced the crime and/or murder rate.

Suppose you have 100 people that all believe in god. They all know that if one of them kills another person they'll go to hell.

Now what happens when they stop believing in god through evidence that he doesn't exist (however they want to define evidence)?

CRIME/MURDER RATE WOULD PROBABLY INCREASE UP TO 90%.

-A

[melikio]

They all know that if one of them kills another person they'll go to hell... CRIME/MURDER RATE WOULD PROBABLY INCREASE UP TO 90%.

No, not necessarily. Radical Muslims CERTAINLY believe in "God"; but it is clear enough that they don't value the lives of individuals human beings as many other religious people surely DO.

I don't "believe" that "murder" necessarily what gets a person into "hell" (if it exists). On the contrary, it is the amazing CONCEPT of LOVING OTHERS which I have taken from Jesus' living/dying example, that causes me to literally VALUE the lives of others.

-Mel-

[Lotan]

One major advantage I do see in following a religion is that is substantionally reduced the crime and/or murder rate...

CRIME/MURDER RATE WOULD PROBABLY INCREASE UP TO 90%.

There you go, making things up again. Why rely on assumptions when you can easily find real answers?

For example, atheists make up less than 1/10 of 1% of the American prison population.

Japan, which has almost 0% Christians, also has one of the lowest crime rates in the world.

How about this...

THE MORAL HYPOCRISY OF THE BIBLE BELT

"THE BIBLE BELT IS THE HOMOCIDE BELT:
Salon article, "Praise the Lord, Pass the Ammo" by Steve Champman
Murder Rates 1995 - 2003
Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends in the US: Regional trends
Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide Trends in the United States: Trends in homicide rates by region"

Besides this, there is also the well known relationship between religion and the form of mass-murder we call 'WAR'...

"Religious canons and morality of war

According to Bainton (1960), until the Emperor Constantine reign, no known Christian writer approved of war. Afterwards, the church codified the principle of the just war (justum bellum). The Islam's counterpart of the just war is the notion of jihad, proposed by Ibn Rushd (Averroes). Throughout the ages, Christian and Islamic leaders instigated or sponsored unprovoked wars of aggression, typified by wars expanding the Dar al-Islam (lands of Islam) into the Dar al-harb (lands of the infidel) and by the Crusades.

The cruelty and savagery of the Crusades was later replicated in the Protestant vs. Catholic wars of religion, of which the most devastating was the Thirty Years' War, depopulating many areas of Europe to about a half of the pre-war inhabitants. Throughout Christian history, only Anabaptists and Quakers rejected the notion of the just war while the mainstream religious community, with individual exceptions, either overtly supported or tacitly accepted militarism and wars of conquest.

Religious and militarist attitude studies
Among the reviews of the studies scrutinizing relationship between religious and militarist attitudes, Russell's (1971) monograph excels in many respects other meta-studies of this topic. Russell concentrates on studies of the close relationship between militarism and nationalism and studies pertaining to the paradox, that while universally accepting peace to be a major value, the more devout Christians tend to have stronger militarist attitudes than do the less devout Christians.
Russell comments that "religious belief is probably the most important aspect of a world view" and that "the Christian belief has dominated Western culture for 2000 years, and is clearly related to the authoritarian-punitive world view." He observes that in the Old Testament, the wars were religious crusades; that God was said to demand these wars and required the utter and complete destruction of the enemy. He concludes that

"...by modern standards, such as used at the Nuremberg trials, Yahweh was directing his people to commit genocide on all who opposed him."
Russell's observations support the notion that with respect to prohibitions against the collective violence the New Testament is deficient and the Old Testament (and Qur'an) are not only deficient, but instrumental during the decisive phases of the decision-making processes to initiate a war.

Russell's concerns are echoed by the progressive Jewish and Christian theologians, such as Richard Rubenstein, Johann Baptist Metz and Gustavo Gutierrez. In this context Marc H. Ellis, called "the most important contemporary Jewish theologian," in his Unholy alliance: religion and atrocity in out time (1997, p.17) asks:

"To find a path beyond atrocity and beyond a religiosity that sponsors and is silent before violence, after thousands of years of Judaism and Christianity, is it part of our fidelity to abandon these religions, at least as we have known them? In doing this, we explore the truths found in opposition to ancient and modern religious understandings that lead to atrocity, and the hope that might energize us to build a world without barbarism, (...) a life that bends toward community rather than empire." (Ellis, 1997, pp. xvii, 185)." (more here)