Jim Lewandowski Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > In all these discussions it seems
> to be
> > you
> > > that
> > > > doesn't care about truth. If those
> who
> > have
> > > > dedicated their lives to truth are
> so
> > busy
> > > > covering it up, and you are not,
> why is
> > it
> > > that
> > > > you espouse ideas that are well
> known to
> > be
> > > modern
> > > > inventions.
> > >
> > > ***
> > > What ideas have I espoused that aren't
> true?
> > >
> >
> > That Jesus had a wife, for a start. Do you
> know
> > what real historians who know that period of
> > history think about that idea using primary,
> > secondary, and tertiary sources of evidence ?
>
>
> ***
> Jesus the divine vs. Jesus the POSSIBLE historical
> person are two different things. IOW, I'm not
> saying the Jesus character (real flesh and blood)
> had a wife or not or went to france or not.
>

In fact you are saying nothing because you know nothing. There is a "POSSIBLE historical" version of everyone. You clearly have not studied history in any academic sense. And yet you criticise historians for their opinion. Have you heard about a far more recent historical figure like Bizmark ? There are many different opinions on how much he planned what he did and how much he reacted to what events came his way. But historians have debated so many of the nuances of it for ages that your commentary would be considered nonsense unless you read the existing literature. And, nazi's aside, very few books are written about bizmark that are full of nonsense rubbish. Even the fictional ones take care to distinguish the facts from the fiction in an epilogue.

But with Jesus any old flim flam man can write a book and it becomes so popular with people like you, even if its all based on pure ignorance of the actual understanding of history, just because of the importance he once had in our past. The past that saw the renaisance, as well as some dark times. It was your sort that supported the dark times, and the real historian types that supported the renaisance. And I say that with a clear conscience.

Do you know the etymology of that last word ?


>
> > What they see is a man who defied conventions
> of
> > what a religious man should be.
>
> ***
> You'd have to separate the Jesus biblical
> character from the possible Jesus historical
> character for me to follow.
>

Okay you silly, silly man. I'm going to invent a Jim Lewandowski that is what I may possibly think you may be. I'm not going to rely on evidence at all. I'm going to tell you about a man I know, honest guvnor, nudge-nudge-wink-wink, who has told me that your idea of fun is cutting the feet off rabbits and having a good laugh at watching them limp around on stumps.

Of course you need to seperate the Jim Lewandowski people know about from the one I've been told about. Of course I don't trust anything you or your friends say because I trust this man I know because what he says makes a lot more sense to me. And I don't need any evidence from him because I rekon thats the kind of thing you would laugh at.

So basically you need to seperate an idea in my head I haven't really spent much effort investigating, from one you believe in.



>
> He had close
> > friends that were women - quite possibly his
> > closest had a history in prostitution. He
> > welcomed them to such an extent that his
> disciples
> > found it uncomfortable. "What will people
> say"
> > and all that. Now in our tabloid society we
> rekon
> > that these sometimes far distant accounts of
> the
> > disciples concerns to suggest, well the
> > appropriate way to express the root though,
> "he
> > must have been shagging her".
> >
> > Although I personally would not have a
> fundamental
> > problem if Jesus had had sex with Mary
> Magdalene -
> > the idea is simply not credible.
>
> ***
> It's a moot issue to me.

Then why go on about it ?


>
>
> You have to
> > spend some time trying to understand the
> society
> > of the time. His disciples would not have
> ended
> > up willingly going to cruel deaths just for
> their
> > refusal to reject someone as god, if he
> defiled
> > their very understanding of honesty, truth,
> and
> > belief.
>
> ***
> It SAYS they did so. That doesn't mean it's so.
> But, after viewing Dr. Bart Ehrmans (Chapel Hill,
> NC) series The Birth of Christianity to
> Constantine, he even plainly states that the
> gospels disagree with each other.


So do all acounts of pretty much everything. You clearly have no education in any way of evaluation of evidence.

>
>
> >
> > > ***
> > > It's obvious not all of Brown's novel
> is
> > > "factual". I don't understand the point
> to
> > the
> > > above post contents.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > What is your point then ? If you realise the
> book
> > is all complete fiction, then say so, stop
> > moaning, and admit that Dan Brown is
> disingenous
> > in what he claims, and in how has intended
> the
> > book to be taken.
>
> ***
> Intent occurs BETWEEN ONE'S EARS. I may have the
> intent to read a book and attribute to it things
> NOT INTENDED by the author. That's MY problem.

Indeed. But if you claim to want some idea of the reality as far as its understood by people better informed than you, then accept it graciously or contest it with reasoned arguments.


>
>
> If you think there are elements
> > of truth in it, then stop saying "but its
> fiction"
> > like a moron, and say what you consider to be
> true
> > in it.
>
> ***
> Only those things that can be independently
> verified by people who would have nothing to lose
> one way or the other can be considered "factual".
>


Which leaves nothing left in Dan Browns book that he espouses so much on his web site.


> > >
> > > ***
> > > So, you're saying Mithra and Christ have
> no
> > > similarities?
> >
> > No
>
> ***
> Wow. I can't say that.
>

Why not ? Of course there are some similarities. If you didn't think as much why did you suggest it ? You really are a strange person.


>
> >
> > > And, you're also saying there's no
> > > circumstantial evidence to these
> > similarities
> > > (additional)?
> >
> >
> > You are projecting things. I'm restricted
> in
> > being able to reply to you because of how
> the
> > board rules here make my opinions into
> "personal
> > beliefs". However, this person Jesus claimed
> to
> > be the word through which the universe was
> > created, not just the earth but the whole
> > universe. You can say all spiritual insights
> are
> > fantasy nonsense. Or you can say that some
> are,
> > but there are also a few that have various
> levels
> > of clarity in an indirect sight of something
> > larger than they can conceive. Which do you
> > subscibe to ?
>
> ***
> I prefer the Gnostic take (IIRC, they never
> whacked anyone who didn't believe as they did).
>

Do you believe in society having a legal system ? Do you think murder is okay ? Do you think stealing is okay ?

Your thoughts are so primitive and unaware of history I intend to to give up after this post. I hadn't quite realised how many fundamental issues of why society is as it is and why society was as it was would be completely missing from your understanding.


>
> >
> > > And, you're also saying there was
> > > never a such a thing as competition
> between
> > > religions?
> > >
> >
> > Yeah read those words into my mouth if you
> like.
>
> ***
> I'm not trying to. I'm saying religious
> competition seems to have been a big thing for our
> past ancestors and our CURRENT fellow humans.
>

Yes and thats a pity. You provide no answers and loads of nonsense. So you don't help any of these problems.


> > > >
> > > > Get to the point Jim. The fact is
> Dan
> > Brown
> > > > leaves many of his readers
> thinking
> > that's
> > > what
> > > > Opus Dei is all about.
> > >
> > > ***
> > > So, he alone has the POWER to make
> people
> > think
> > > what he wants them to? Certainly,
> freedom
> > of
> > > speech in the U.S. (excluding libel,
> slander,
> > and
> > > avenue) has gone TOO far.
> > >
> >
> >
> > They said similar things in Weimar germany...
>
>
> ***
> And since there WERE people who DISAGREED with
> Hitler, that implies that Hitler did not have
> ABSOLUTE power. Are you saying it is your job to
> step in to help people who believe X when you
> don't think they "should"?
>

Where do you buy your opinions and conclusions from ? You deserve a refund!

I'm all for freedom of speech. It was christianity that was confident enough to desire the ideal of all people being free to do such things.

What happened with Hitler is that he sold a desperate people all the types of lies that your sort are fond of spreading. He took intelligent people and made most of them into scared idiots. There were many in Germany who knew full well the ignorance of those wishy washy "this may possibly somehow - unlikely though it is - be true" -> turned into "this is true". Like Dietrich Bonhoeffer. But all of your sort saw 'the bright light of what may be true if the jews hadn't messed everything up'

Its plain wrong. And it was you that started with the holocaust reference. And you who should realise that the holocaust was supported by huge elements that are now considered 'alternative history' - Dan Brown etc....


>
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Every good historical
> > > > novel I have read has a section
> (usually
> > at
> > > the
> > > > end) which makes an honest attempt
> to
> > > seperate the
> > > > fact from the fiction. And they
> usually
> > even
> > > say
> > > > something about all errors being
> their
> > own
> > > fault
> > > > rather than the real historians
> that
> > advised
> > > them.
> > > > Dan Brown does none of that. Its
> > difficult
> > > to
> > > > see any honest, dilligent or
> sincere
> > > intention on
> > > > his part whatsoever.
> > >
> > > ***
> > > We differ in opinion on this. I believe
> his
> > > illustrated edition would clarify this.
> > >
> >
> >
> > You are indeed a joke.
>
> ***
> IIRC, the illustrated edition had a b/w photo of
> Isis/Horus to show it mimicked as close as is
> reasonably possible, the iconic image of Mary and
> baby Jesus. That's a fact, Jack.
>

Yes and its up to you if you want to consider that the whole Jesus/Mary thing is an espousal of the Isis/Horus story. You could of course read things like Isaiah 53 and start to understand that the origins of these things goes right to the root of the universe. The actual reality of the root made flesh is what belief in jesus is about. If its all nonsense regurgitate beliefs to you - then why on earth are you interested in Dan Browns regurgitated shite ? You may as well live your life.


> >
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > We might throw
> > > > > > in the *fact* that Opus
> > > > > > Dei is a lay
> organization
> > which has
> > > no
> > > > > monks.
> > > > >
> > > > > ***
> > > > > I thought it was a work of
> > fiction?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > It is - completely. And yet you
> are
> > > suggesting
> > > > that aspects of it are true. What
> is
> > all
> > > that
> > > > about ?
> > >
> > > ***
> > > DaVinci seems to have been a real
> person.
> >
> >
> > Ahh - well said Jim. No one here realised
> that.
> >
> > > The
> > > Louvre seems to be a real museum. The
> > character
> > > of Jesus was written about. Ditto Mary
> M.
> > OPus
> > > Dei exists. Things like that.
> > >
> >
> > Jokes are supposed to be humerous, aren't
> they ?
>
> ***
> The joke is in the eye of the beholder.
>
> I don't mean to upset you in any way, but you can
> be if you choose so.
>

I will be annoyed. I'm restricted in what I can say here - but the way Dan Brown wrote his book has lead to people I consider friends having a warped idea of reality. And you could say thats just my opinion - but the VAST majority of historians, let alone over a billion catholics across the globe, would tend to agree that Dan Brown does far more to confuse his readers that generally start out looking for a bit of entertainment, than he does to enlighten them. And then he continues to support the mistaken impressions people have gained from his book. Even though it was copied from a supposedly factual book that has long been discredited.

So sure - it annoys me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2005 07:52PM by Simon.