Follow Christ but not Christian

RJM said:
The Sioux used to torture their prisoners to death
Click to expand...
"Every country has done something rotten" ~~ Mrs Gilman, my second grade teacher, when one of my classmates (a white boy) said hearing how Native Americans (and others) had been treated made him feel ashamed. Mrs. Gilman said "Don't ever be ashamed of your country. When you look at history, you will see that every country has done something ROTTEN." This framing has been so meaningful and useful to me, and I remember it still some 45 years since.
 
wil said:
Is is equals? =? It is to me.
Click to expand...
1691723351443.png
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Okay, now that I am home and off the road, I followed up with some of my notes from various books and such in regard to this.

The Roman Empire kept extensive records, so why is Jesus’ trial and crucifixion not recorded?
Why did Pontus Pilate not write about Jesus? Why didn’t Herod’s court make a record of Jesus?
Often a string of ancient names (contemporaries of Jesus) will be listed and then it will be pointed out that none of them mentioned Jesus.

The bottom line is, very few records from that time have survived. Even Pontus Pilate himself only has a few surviving references that verify his historical existence. We only have one reference to Pontus Pilate by a Roman Historian, and that reference was only there to give a frame of reference to who the sect of Christians were.

There are a couple of things to remember. Jesus was only famous with a very small amount of people within his lifetime. Why would anyone write about him outside those who were his followers? Secondly, we don’t know whether Pilate, Herod, or any other Roman official ever wrote about Jesus, because so many of the Roman records did not survive. There may have been records about him, but we don’t have any of the notes or records that Pilate’s administration kept from the time frame. They are gone, burned, eradicated, non-existent.
________________________________________
So with that said, I stand corrected in that even though the Romans did keep extensive records, none exist during the time of Jesus that mention Jesus/Yeshua. You are right.
Click to expand...
In over 20 years you are the only non-believer to actually admit this to me. Doesn't make believers correct. But I have heard these claims of crucifixion and census records of Jesus's time and place for so long. I have looked tirelessly. Never had a single non-believer provide them (because they don't exist.... that we know of). So thank-you for being the first one to admit this. I wasn't trying to prove the existence of anyone. I just really really want these records.
 
juantoo3 said:
Yep...therein lies the irony.

But her critique of socialism is scathing, and in my case experientially true.
Click to expand...
I used to think Ayn Rand was off her rocker. As I have aged she has made a lot of sense and become somewhat of a political prophet. If she were still alive and we were to meet, I don't think we'd get along. But we would both agree that the direction our country is heading is definitely the wrong one.
 
TheLightWithin said:
"Every country has done something rotten" ~~ Mrs Gilman, my second grade teacher, when one of my classmates (a white boy) said hearing how Native Americans (and others) had been treated made him feel ashamed. Mrs. Gilman said "Don't ever be ashamed of your country. When you look at history, you will see that every country has done something ROTTEN." This framing has been so meaningful and useful to me, and I remember it still some 45 years since.
Click to expand...
Of course. But who is trying to put-up these other societies as the noble example for humanity?

Tribes had their own tribal laws and mores, which were for the good of the tribe: but members of other tribes were not regarded as people. So it was completely fair to raid and kill and rape another tribe.
 
RJM said:
Of course. But who is trying to put-up these other societies as the noble example for humanity?

Tribes had their own tribal laws and mores, which were for the good of the tribe: but members of other tribes were not regarded as people. So it was completely fair to raid and kill and rape another tribe.
Click to expand...
That is horribly simplistic (bordering on bigotry) and terribly misleading. You are suggesting that every tribe was at war with every other tribe. Not so.

As with Europe today, there were alliances and there were traditional / historical enemies. Tribes might get along then somebody does something stupid and tribe A exacts revenge on tribe B. No different than watching the news of the world at large today. Politics is politics.

Case in point is the Iroquois Confederacy...confederacy by definition is alliance. Can't have an alliance with just one tribe.

Plains Indians were little different, apart from their legendary battles - the dividing line being largely between those who helped the whites conquer, and those who resisted. It ended badly for ALL of the Indians, and demonstrated clearly that the white, civilized European conquerors were liars of the nth degree who dealt treacherously and underhandedly.

At least Custer got Siouxed.

1691754614865.png
 
juantoo3 said:
That is horribly simplistic (bordering on bigotry) and terribly misleading. You are suggesting that every tribe was at war with every other tribe. Not so.

As with Europe today, there were alliances and there were traditional / historical enemies. Tribes might get along then somebody does something stupid and tribe A exacts revenge on tribe B. No different than watching the news of the world at large today. Politics is politics.

Case in point is the Iroquois Confederacy...confederacy by definition is alliance. Can't have an alliance with just one tribe.
Click to expand...
Ok
juantoo3 said:
ended badly for ALL of the Indians, and demonstrated clearly that the white, civilized European conquerors were liars of the nth degree who dealt treacherously and underhandedly.
Click to expand...
I agree
 
In a sacred manner I live.
To the heavens I gazed.
In a sacred manner I live.
My horses are many
(Old Sioux song, from 'Bury my Heart at Wounded Knee' by Dee Brown)
 
Last edited:
Matthew 20:16 So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen

I wonder how many people will be surprised at God's opinion of what we did for His kingdom while in this life. Thanks for that meme @juantoo3
 
moralorel said:
In over 20 years you are the only non-believer to actually admit this to me. Doesn't make believers correct. But I have heard these claims of crucifixion and census records of Jesus's time and place for so long. I have looked tirelessly. Never had a single non-believer provide them (because they don't exist.... that we know of). So thank-you for being the first one to admit this. I wasn't trying to prove the existence of anyone. I just really really want these records.
Click to expand...
I admit when I am wrong, and I'm sure you are aware that even though the Romans did indeed keep extensive records, the time when Yeshua was alive and executed has no records that we know of because (I forget who) invaded Rome, conquered it and destroyed a lot of stuff. Thank you for sticking to your guns and making me re-research my claim. I learned something.
 
TheLightWithin said:
I think that was the point
Click to expand...
What?

Here was what I replied to:

moralorel said:

So if you tell me that bigfoot doesn't exist and that you have evidence, it's not your job to prove it? I have to prove that he does exist even though I'm not even making that claim?

My reply:
Exactly . . . you can't prove a negative

So, what exactly are you getting at with your comment "I think that was the point"?
 
moralorel said:
I used to think Ayn Rand was off her rocker. As I have aged she has made a lot of sense and become somewhat of a political prophet. If she were still alive and we were to meet, I don't think we'd get along. But we would both agree that the direction our country is heading is definitely the wrong one.
Click to expand...
I've only read some things of hers. Her fiction writing was meh. Philosophically I think she claimed to be the direct heir to Aristotle and to dismiss everything else in philosophy. It seems she was obsessively pro capitalism and anti religion. I think for education in economics I'd rather read some economists. For education in anti religious atheism you can find contemporary examples pretty much anywhere "the new atheists" et al. Interestingly for all her anti communist raging, Rand shared their disdain for religion.
 
Rand's fiction was simply a vehicle to place her philosophy into a context. As long as the reader isn't hyper-critical of the "science fiction" aspect, the stories (Atlas Shrugged, the Fountainhead) are tolerable. I've heard complaint of the one sex scene, basically a rape fantasy, but I've read worse in a pulp romance novel in the back of a High School math class, so I can only guess the complainer was a prude, or else grasping for any reason to dismiss her work.

<shrug>
 
juantoo3 said:
Rand's fiction was simply a vehicle to place her philosophy into a context. As long as the reader isn't hyper-critical of the "science fiction" aspect, the stories (Atlas Shrugged, the Fountainhead) are tolerable. I've heard complaint of the one sex scene, basically a rape fantasy, but I've read worse in a pulp romance novel in the back of a High School math class, so I can only guess the complainer was a prude, or else grasping for any reason to dismiss her work.

<shrug>
Click to expand...
No, I remember that, from The Fountainhead. I just remember thinking it seemed masochistic and bizarre. I kind of thought the whole book was odd. The books were vehicles - "novels of ideas" or "theory fiction" is a thing - maybe not a genre of its own but a trend or a type. Maybe not always great storytelling. But then so called classical literary works often sacrifice storytelling for too much artistic language or something.

Rand would be mostly worth reading because she's been a influence and headed a movement, which I guess still exists. Not because the books are great reads as such.
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
That's just stupid . . . I'm talking to you aren't I? I have a birth certificate, hundreds of pictures of me, I've written books, attended schools, been arrested, all documented. The Romans, who kept immaculate records, don't even mention a Yeshua, or any crucifixion of said name.

Yeah . . . Ciao Mio Amico!
Click to expand...
Do you know any Roman document on a trial in Jerusalem between 30 and 40 CE?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top