Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
The fraud that was Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism and the Latter Day Saint movement.
Full debate here.
@ChristianityExposed
Full debate here.
@ChristianityExposed
Hostile "Testimonies"
Christian apologists will often bring up this infographic in defense of Jesus' historicity. However, some of these sources are extremely problematic and none of the writers were even alive during Jesus' purported lifetime and could therefore not have been eyewitnesses.
The earliest source on the list is Josephus' Testimonium Flavianum, written in 93 CE. Not only was he born after Jesus' supposed death and was the book written decades after the alleged crucifixion, the passages referring to Jesus are well-known forgeries.
The works of Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, and Suetonius were written in c. 112 CE, 116 CE, 121 CE resp., and only confirm the presence of a small Christian community in the Roman Empire during that period, which has never been a subject of dispute.
Even later came Phlegon's and Celsus' works in c. 140 CE and c. 178 CE resp., and the Talmud—which does not even refer to Jesus Christ—was not completed until c. 500 CE.
The date of Bar-Serapion's letter is unknown, but is estimated to be written between 73 CE and 300 CE and does not mention Jesus by name—only some "wise king" of the Jews in a rather strange paragraph about Athens suffering from a famine after Socrates' death, which never happened.
And Thallus, a Pagan chronologer of unknown date who allegedly was a 1st century witness to the gospel tradition of a "darkness" at Jesus' death, was a completely unknown figure until Christian apologetic sources first mentioned him in the late 2nd century—and it only gets worse from there.
There are absolutely zero genuine contemporary extrabiblical sources. If we had to resort to "testimonies" this poor for any other historical figure, Christians too would acknowledge the extreme unlikelihood of that person ever having existed, let alone if such extraordinary claims were made about them.
@ChristianityExposed
Christian apologists will often bring up this infographic in defense of Jesus' historicity. However, some of these sources are extremely problematic and none of the writers were even alive during Jesus' purported lifetime and could therefore not have been eyewitnesses.
The earliest source on the list is Josephus' Testimonium Flavianum, written in 93 CE. Not only was he born after Jesus' supposed death and was the book written decades after the alleged crucifixion, the passages referring to Jesus are well-known forgeries.
The works of Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, and Suetonius were written in c. 112 CE, 116 CE, 121 CE resp., and only confirm the presence of a small Christian community in the Roman Empire during that period, which has never been a subject of dispute.
Even later came Phlegon's and Celsus' works in c. 140 CE and c. 178 CE resp., and the Talmud—which does not even refer to Jesus Christ—was not completed until c. 500 CE.
The date of Bar-Serapion's letter is unknown, but is estimated to be written between 73 CE and 300 CE and does not mention Jesus by name—only some "wise king" of the Jews in a rather strange paragraph about Athens suffering from a famine after Socrates' death, which never happened.
And Thallus, a Pagan chronologer of unknown date who allegedly was a 1st century witness to the gospel tradition of a "darkness" at Jesus' death, was a completely unknown figure until Christian apologetic sources first mentioned him in the late 2nd century—and it only gets worse from there.
There are absolutely zero genuine contemporary extrabiblical sources. If we had to resort to "testimonies" this poor for any other historical figure, Christians too would acknowledge the extreme unlikelihood of that person ever having existed, let alone if such extraordinary claims were made about them.
@ChristianityExposed
christiantoday.com.au
The Jesus of History
Time Magazine did a story about the ‘Most Significant Person in History’ and concluded after a very comprehensive and detailed research program that Jesus was that person. The results appeared in their December 10th, 2013 edition.
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
https://t.me/survivethejive/5600
There is indeed an occult element to this. One of the Mitzvahs (commandments) of Disney's CEO's religion is "to remember and destroy Amalek," as stated in Deuteronomy 25:17 and commanded in Exodus 17:14.
And who is Amalek, you ask? That would be the European race, as both these rabbis and the prime minister of Israel have no issue admitting.
Not only have they "pulled down [our] idols, cast aside [our] racial inheritance, and substituted for them [their] God and [their] traditions" through Christianity, their end goal is to "utterly wipe out the memory of Amalek from under heaven."
Needless to say, that includes distorting our ancestral beliefs and history to such an extent that, eventually, no one will remember it. Fortunately, however, people are getting quite sick of it—even in Asia.
@ChristianityExposed
There is indeed an occult element to this. One of the Mitzvahs (commandments) of Disney's CEO's religion is "to remember and destroy Amalek," as stated in Deuteronomy 25:17 and commanded in Exodus 17:14.
And who is Amalek, you ask? That would be the European race, as both these rabbis and the prime minister of Israel have no issue admitting.
Not only have they "pulled down [our] idols, cast aside [our] racial inheritance, and substituted for them [their] God and [their] traditions" through Christianity, their end goal is to "utterly wipe out the memory of Amalek from under heaven."
Needless to say, that includes distorting our ancestral beliefs and history to such an extent that, eventually, no one will remember it. Fortunately, however, people are getting quite sick of it—even in Asia.
@ChristianityExposed
https://t.me/realblaircottrell/4584
It's false to claim that Christianity is not "Judeo" simply because Jews at times express dislike towards it. Nor does it oppose Judaism, as many seem to suggest.
The foundation of Christianity is very much Judeo, not European, and therefore Judeo-Christianity most definitely is appropriate terminology.
The main reason why (mostly Orthodox) Jews take issue with Christianity is due to them not believing that Jesus is their Moshiach (Messiah)—a concept completely foreign to Europeans at the time Christianity was founded—and therefore consider it to be an heretical sect.
We find the same sort of unrequited love between Mormons and Christians. However, that does not negate the fact that Mormonism was indeed founded upon Christianity.
Also, they dislike Pagans—those of the ethnic faith—way more than they dislike Christians.
@ChristianityExposed
It's false to claim that Christianity is not "Judeo" simply because Jews at times express dislike towards it. Nor does it oppose Judaism, as many seem to suggest.
The foundation of Christianity is very much Judeo, not European, and therefore Judeo-Christianity most definitely is appropriate terminology.
The main reason why (mostly Orthodox) Jews take issue with Christianity is due to them not believing that Jesus is their Moshiach (Messiah)—a concept completely foreign to Europeans at the time Christianity was founded—and therefore consider it to be an heretical sect.
We find the same sort of unrequited love between Mormons and Christians. However, that does not negate the fact that Mormonism was indeed founded upon Christianity.
Also, they dislike Pagans—those of the ethnic faith—way more than they dislike Christians.
@ChristianityExposed
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Jewish theologian Dr. Dmitry Radyshevsky praising Christianity for bringing the non-Jewish nations to the God of Israel, while condemning and strawmanning Paganism by correlating it with "whatever Hitler believed in."
@ChristianityExposed
@ChristianityExposed
The Very Last Word In The Bible
Amen, the very last word in the Bible, could well have begun as a Pagan word. Yet Christians, Jews and Muslims end their prayers, Scripture readings, and hymns by saying Amen as an expression of concurrence.
From old Egyptian texts we can see that people regarded the sun as the emblem of the Creator. They called the sun Ra, and all other gods and goddesses were forms of the Creator. One of these gods was Amen; a secret, hidden and mysterious god named variously Amen, Amon, Amun, Ammon and Amounra.
So Amen was originally the name of a Pagan god, who was considered a form of god the Creator. But he was certainly not considered the same One and Only God who Abrahamic religions worship now.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
Amen, the very last word in the Bible, could well have begun as a Pagan word. Yet Christians, Jews and Muslims end their prayers, Scripture readings, and hymns by saying Amen as an expression of concurrence.
From old Egyptian texts we can see that people regarded the sun as the emblem of the Creator. They called the sun Ra, and all other gods and goddesses were forms of the Creator. One of these gods was Amen; a secret, hidden and mysterious god named variously Amen, Amon, Amun, Ammon and Amounra.
So Amen was originally the name of a Pagan god, who was considered a form of god the Creator. But he was certainly not considered the same One and Only God who Abrahamic religions worship now.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
The Importance Of Pre-Christian Customs
Halloween is rooted in an annual Celtic pagan festival called Samhain that was then appropriated by the early Catholic Church some 1,200 years ago.
The importance of pre-Christian customs to people’s lives apparently wasn’t lost upon the early Catholic Church. Pope Gregory I, also known as St. Gregory the Great, who headed the Church from A.D. 590 to 604, advised a missionary going to England that instead of trying to do away with the religious customs of non-Christian peoples, they simply should convert them to a Christian religious purpose.
The old beliefs associated with Samhain never died out entirely. The powerful symbolism of the traveling dead was too strong to be satisfied with the new, more abstract Catholic feast honoring saints.
Instead, the first night of Samhain, October 31, became All Hallows Day Evening, the night before the saints were venerated. That name eventually morphed into Halloween.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
Halloween is rooted in an annual Celtic pagan festival called Samhain that was then appropriated by the early Catholic Church some 1,200 years ago.
The importance of pre-Christian customs to people’s lives apparently wasn’t lost upon the early Catholic Church. Pope Gregory I, also known as St. Gregory the Great, who headed the Church from A.D. 590 to 604, advised a missionary going to England that instead of trying to do away with the religious customs of non-Christian peoples, they simply should convert them to a Christian religious purpose.
The old beliefs associated with Samhain never died out entirely. The powerful symbolism of the traveling dead was too strong to be satisfied with the new, more abstract Catholic feast honoring saints.
Instead, the first night of Samhain, October 31, became All Hallows Day Evening, the night before the saints were venerated. That name eventually morphed into Halloween.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
I am often asked how Christianity spread so quickly in the Roman Empire if Jesus never existed. This is what's called a loaded question, since it presupposes the false premise that Christianity indeed spread quickly, which it did not.
It is estimated that by 100 CE there were about 7,000 Christians in the Roman Empire, which was a mere 0.01 percent of its entire population at the time. And by the middle of the 3rd century, it was only about five percent, according to Edward Gibbon.
It wasn't until Emperor Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380 CE that the spread of Christianity was hastened, which proclaimed (Nicene) Christianity as the official state religion.
In 392 CE, however, Rome was still predominantly Pagan, so he decided to launch a war on paganism, which slowly forced pagans out of towns. Hence, the term pāgānus, meaning rural. In some remote regions, paganism persisted well into the 6th and 7th centuries.
@ChristianityExposed
It is estimated that by 100 CE there were about 7,000 Christians in the Roman Empire, which was a mere 0.01 percent of its entire population at the time. And by the middle of the 3rd century, it was only about five percent, according to Edward Gibbon.
It wasn't until Emperor Theodosius I issued the Edict of Thessalonica in 380 CE that the spread of Christianity was hastened, which proclaimed (Nicene) Christianity as the official state religion.
In 392 CE, however, Rome was still predominantly Pagan, so he decided to launch a war on paganism, which slowly forced pagans out of towns. Hence, the term pāgānus, meaning rural. In some remote regions, paganism persisted well into the 6th and 7th centuries.
@ChristianityExposed
The "Christian" Trinity
The Trinity doctrine, which didn't gain acceptance until the fourth century during the First Council of Nicaea, was much more influenced by Greek philosophy than by biblical teachings.
Plato wrote about a divine triad consisting of "God, the ideas, [and] the World-Spirit" centuries before the Gospels were even written.
This concept was later refined by other Greek philosophers into what they referred to as three "substances": the supreme God or "the One," from which came "mind" or "thought," and a "spirit" or "soul."
These were considered different divine aspects of the same God, or as "good," representing the personification of that good, and the agent through which that good is carried out—distinct yet unified as one.
The early Church Fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria, openly acknowledged their Greek philosophical influences. In his book "Stromata," for example, he references Plato well over a hundred times.
@ChristianityExposed
The Trinity doctrine, which didn't gain acceptance until the fourth century during the First Council of Nicaea, was much more influenced by Greek philosophy than by biblical teachings.
Plato wrote about a divine triad consisting of "God, the ideas, [and] the World-Spirit" centuries before the Gospels were even written.
This concept was later refined by other Greek philosophers into what they referred to as three "substances": the supreme God or "the One," from which came "mind" or "thought," and a "spirit" or "soul."
These were considered different divine aspects of the same God, or as "good," representing the personification of that good, and the agent through which that good is carried out—distinct yet unified as one.
The early Church Fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria, openly acknowledged their Greek philosophical influences. In his book "Stromata," for example, he references Plato well over a hundred times.
@ChristianityExposed
Evidence Of Jesus?
The tweet is entirely correct. The annotations, however, clearly are not.
The works of Tacitus and Josephus are not evidence, nor is Lucian of Samosata's, which was merely a satirical commentary on the late 2nd century Christian community written about 140 years after the alleged crucifixion.
The Bible books are not historical documents. We can't even prove the existence of Moses, let alone confirm everything else, such as the historicity of King Solomon or the earthquakes in Jerusalem that were strong enough to split stones.
And there are plenty of scholars who doubt that Jesus existed. Here is a list of 43 examples.
@ChristianityExposed
The tweet is entirely correct. The annotations, however, clearly are not.
The works of Tacitus and Josephus are not evidence, nor is Lucian of Samosata's, which was merely a satirical commentary on the late 2nd century Christian community written about 140 years after the alleged crucifixion.
The Bible books are not historical documents. We can't even prove the existence of Moses, let alone confirm everything else, such as the historicity of King Solomon or the earthquakes in Jerusalem that were strong enough to split stones.
And there are plenty of scholars who doubt that Jesus existed. Here is a list of 43 examples.
@ChristianityExposed
https://t.me/fyrgen/2980
Good question. Before the top-to-bottom imposition of Christianity's inherent Zionism upon the Romans—and later upon the rest of the European people, due to either force or their traitorous leaders converting to Christianity to make alliances with the Empire to solidify their own positions of power—they didn't speak too highly of the Jews. For example:
"This race detested by the gods . . . Things sacred with us, with them have no sanctity, while they allow what with us is forbidden . . . among themselves they are inflexibly honest and ever ready to shew compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies." — Tacitus (Histories, c. 100–110 CE)
"They are more unscrupulous, despicable cowards, treacherous, servile, and in general fickle, on account of the stars mentioned. [They] are in general bold, godless, and scheming." — Ptolemy (Tetrabiblos, c. 100–178 CE)
And they were very aware that Christianity is a Jewish sect. For instance, as Celsus states in On The True Doctrine (c. 178 CE):
"I wonder that Christians and Jews argue so foolishly with one another—their contest over whether Jesus was or was not the Messiah reminding me rather of the proverb about the shadow of an ass. In fact, there is really nothing of significance in their dispute: both maintain the quite nonsensical notion that a divine savior was prophesied long ago and would come to dwell among men. All they disagree on is whether he has come or not."
@ChristianityExposed
Good question. Before the top-to-bottom imposition of Christianity's inherent Zionism upon the Romans—and later upon the rest of the European people, due to either force or their traitorous leaders converting to Christianity to make alliances with the Empire to solidify their own positions of power—they didn't speak too highly of the Jews. For example:
"This race detested by the gods . . . Things sacred with us, with them have no sanctity, while they allow what with us is forbidden . . . among themselves they are inflexibly honest and ever ready to shew compassion, though they regard the rest of mankind with all the hatred of enemies." — Tacitus (Histories, c. 100–110 CE)
"They are more unscrupulous, despicable cowards, treacherous, servile, and in general fickle, on account of the stars mentioned. [They] are in general bold, godless, and scheming." — Ptolemy (Tetrabiblos, c. 100–178 CE)
And they were very aware that Christianity is a Jewish sect. For instance, as Celsus states in On The True Doctrine (c. 178 CE):
"I wonder that Christians and Jews argue so foolishly with one another—their contest over whether Jesus was or was not the Messiah reminding me rather of the proverb about the shadow of an ass. In fact, there is really nothing of significance in their dispute: both maintain the quite nonsensical notion that a divine savior was prophesied long ago and would come to dwell among men. All they disagree on is whether he has come or not."
@ChristianityExposed
Telegram
The Fyrgen • ᚫᛚᚢ:ᚢᛚᚫ
Here's a simple (but revealing) question: Would anyone in Europe or its colonies be in support of Israel if Europe had never been Christianised?
I posit that the answer to that reveals almost everything we need to know about Christianity's arrival and spread.
I posit that the answer to that reveals almost everything we need to know about Christianity's arrival and spread.
The Christianization of Poland took several centuries and started when the first ruler of the Polish state, Mieszko I, got baptized in order to marry the Christian princess of Bohemia, Doubravka, around the year 965. This established the Polish-Bohemian alliance, which strengthened his grip on power.
However, the Polish folk were not having it. Mieszko I and his 3 successors/descendants all faced revolts almost immediately after their coronations in 1025, 1026, and 1076. The most notable one being the "reakcja pogańska w Polsce" (pagan reaction in Poland) in the 1030s.
Unfortunately, Mieszko I's baptism formed close ties with the Catholic Church—which up until the 12th and 13th centuries remained a foreign and unpopular establishment in Poland, imposed upon its populace by a governing elite driven by their own political and expansionist objectives—which gradually gained enough political influence to consolidate its rule over the Polish people, despite their many uprisings.
@ChristianityExposed
However, the Polish folk were not having it. Mieszko I and his 3 successors/descendants all faced revolts almost immediately after their coronations in 1025, 1026, and 1076. The most notable one being the "reakcja pogańska w Polsce" (pagan reaction in Poland) in the 1030s.
Unfortunately, Mieszko I's baptism formed close ties with the Catholic Church—which up until the 12th and 13th centuries remained a foreign and unpopular establishment in Poland, imposed upon its populace by a governing elite driven by their own political and expansionist objectives—which gradually gained enough political influence to consolidate its rule over the Polish people, despite their many uprisings.
@ChristianityExposed
A few decades after Mieszko I's conversion, the Polish monarchs waged war on the Prussians over the following two centuries with the goal of converting them to Christianity in 997. However, they weren't very successful.
The Prussians defeated their armies in guerilla warfare, engaged in reciprocal raids, killed their missionaries, and the Prussians who had been baptized under compulsion returned to their native beliefs after hostilities ended.
After the Prussians heard what the Crusaders did to the Baltic tribes, they invaded parts of Poland, pillaging 300 cathedrals and churches as retribution, and enabled Christian converts to revert back to their pre-Christian beliefs.
This eventually led to the Teutonic Knights getting involved, who militarily defeated the Prussians in the second half of the 13th century. As a result, they were subjected to a gradual process of Christianization within the Teutonic Knights' monastic state after centuries of trying to preserve their heritage.
@ChristianityExposed
The Prussians defeated their armies in guerilla warfare, engaged in reciprocal raids, killed their missionaries, and the Prussians who had been baptized under compulsion returned to their native beliefs after hostilities ended.
After the Prussians heard what the Crusaders did to the Baltic tribes, they invaded parts of Poland, pillaging 300 cathedrals and churches as retribution, and enabled Christian converts to revert back to their pre-Christian beliefs.
This eventually led to the Teutonic Knights getting involved, who militarily defeated the Prussians in the second half of the 13th century. As a result, they were subjected to a gradual process of Christianization within the Teutonic Knights' monastic state after centuries of trying to preserve their heritage.
@ChristianityExposed
"When war broke out in Israel, organizations and ministries working in the country put crisis plans into action. And they looked to Christians in the US and around the globe to help fund their efforts."
"The International Christian Embassy Jerusalem (ICEJ) has received millions in donations since the war broke out, more than any other two-week period in its history."
"Around half of US evangelicals consider support for Israel and the Jewish people to be an important priority in their charitable behavior. For years, giving to nonprofits that work in the Holy Land has been on the rise. Some rank among the biggest Christian charities in the US."
"Evangelicals’ approach to Israel tends to be theological rather than political; those who believe Jews are God’s chosen people—51 percent of US evangelicals—are the most likely to make charitable support of Israel a priority."
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
"The International Christian Embassy Jerusalem (ICEJ) has received millions in donations since the war broke out, more than any other two-week period in its history."
"Around half of US evangelicals consider support for Israel and the Jewish people to be an important priority in their charitable behavior. For years, giving to nonprofits that work in the Holy Land has been on the rise. Some rank among the biggest Christian charities in the US."
"Evangelicals’ approach to Israel tends to be theological rather than political; those who believe Jews are God’s chosen people—51 percent of US evangelicals—are the most likely to make charitable support of Israel a priority."
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
"The most successful settlements in Africa are where blacks adopted Christianity."
To imply that (Sub-Saharan) Africa would be successful if they were Christian while already being the most Christian continent on earth is self-refuting.
The most successful settlements in Africa were "just as successful as Europeans," because they were colonized by Europeans, and even then they weren't—and still aren't—nearly as successful as Europe.
"Europeans were living in caves and huts and killing each other till they got Christianity . . . We acted just like Africans."
So Christians don't kill each other and before Christianity started to take hold in the Roman empire, they were living in caves and huts?
Alex Jones—just like all Christian conservatives/nationalists—wants you to believe that "we were [savages] until we got Jesus," the king of the Jews, to save us from our incompetence, even though our competence clearly derives from our European ancestry, not from adopting Jewish scriptures.
@ChristianityExposed
To imply that (Sub-Saharan) Africa would be successful if they were Christian while already being the most Christian continent on earth is self-refuting.
The most successful settlements in Africa were "just as successful as Europeans," because they were colonized by Europeans, and even then they weren't—and still aren't—nearly as successful as Europe.
"Europeans were living in caves and huts and killing each other till they got Christianity . . . We acted just like Africans."
So Christians don't kill each other and before Christianity started to take hold in the Roman empire, they were living in caves and huts?
Alex Jones—just like all Christian conservatives/nationalists—wants you to believe that "we were [savages] until we got Jesus," the king of the Jews, to save us from our incompetence, even though our competence clearly derives from our European ancestry, not from adopting Jewish scriptures.
@ChristianityExposed
The United States Was Not Founded On Christianity
The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, "We the people," and contains no mention of "God" or "Christianity." Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust" (Art. VI), and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (First Amendment). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn't our Constitution say so?
In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that "the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington's presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
The U.S. Constitution is a secular document. It begins, "We the people," and contains no mention of "God" or "Christianity." Its only references to religion are exclusionary, such as, "no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust" (Art. VI), and "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" (First Amendment). If we are a Christian nation, why doesn't our Constitution say so?
In 1797 America made a treaty with Tripoli, declaring that "the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion." This reassurance to Islam was written under Washington's presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.
-----
Full article here.
@ChristianityExposed
A common claim is that "we have more evidence for Jesus than for Alexander the Great." However, this is not even remotely the case.
For Alexander the Great (356–323 BCE), we have a good amount of contemporary evidence:
• We have coins that were minted from around 333 BCE up until the 2nd century CE, which depicts images of him wearing a lion's skin, symbolizing his connection to Heracles.
• We have the Alexander Sarcophagus (commissioned c. 332 BCE), which is decorated with bas-relief carvings of Alexander, along with scrolling historical—and mythological—narratives.
• We have the Alexander Chronicle (331–323 BCE), which is a Babylonian clay tablet inscription describing key battles and military campaigns led by Alexander.
• We have the Priene Inscription (c. 330 BCE), which contains a letter attributed to him where he granted privileges to the city of Priene (modern Turkey).
And the list goes on.
For Jesus, however, we have zero contemporary evidence.
@ChristianityExposed
For Alexander the Great (356–323 BCE), we have a good amount of contemporary evidence:
• We have coins that were minted from around 333 BCE up until the 2nd century CE, which depicts images of him wearing a lion's skin, symbolizing his connection to Heracles.
• We have the Alexander Sarcophagus (commissioned c. 332 BCE), which is decorated with bas-relief carvings of Alexander, along with scrolling historical—and mythological—narratives.
• We have the Alexander Chronicle (331–323 BCE), which is a Babylonian clay tablet inscription describing key battles and military campaigns led by Alexander.
• We have the Priene Inscription (c. 330 BCE), which contains a letter attributed to him where he granted privileges to the city of Priene (modern Turkey).
And the list goes on.
For Jesus, however, we have zero contemporary evidence.
@ChristianityExposed
"Aryan" Jesus
The three "first-hand eyewitnesses" mentioned here are the only supposed contemporary sources claiming that Jesus had light-colored hair and eyes. But, unfortunately for Christian Identitarians, these are all well-known forgeries.
Publius Lentulus is said to have been governor of Judea before Pontius and to have written his letter—which was "found" in 1421—to the Roman Senate. However, not only does the letter contain anachronisms, no procurator of Judea is known to have been called Lentulus and a Roman governor would have addressed the emperor, not the Senate.
Both of the other "historical accounts" were published in The Archko Volume (1884), of which the author was found guilty of falsehood and plagiarism by church authorities—of all things—after falsely claiming his source to be a guardian of the Vatican who never existed.
The "thousands of ancient artistic depictions" are based on these fraudulent accounts, and the supernatural visions are indeed "alleged".
@ChristianityExposed
The three "first-hand eyewitnesses" mentioned here are the only supposed contemporary sources claiming that Jesus had light-colored hair and eyes. But, unfortunately for Christian Identitarians, these are all well-known forgeries.
Publius Lentulus is said to have been governor of Judea before Pontius and to have written his letter—which was "found" in 1421—to the Roman Senate. However, not only does the letter contain anachronisms, no procurator of Judea is known to have been called Lentulus and a Roman governor would have addressed the emperor, not the Senate.
Both of the other "historical accounts" were published in The Archko Volume (1884), of which the author was found guilty of falsehood and plagiarism by church authorities—of all things—after falsely claiming his source to be a guardian of the Vatican who never existed.
The "thousands of ancient artistic depictions" are based on these fraudulent accounts, and the supernatural visions are indeed "alleged".
@ChristianityExposed
A lot of people claim that homosexuality was widespread throughout pre-Christian Europe, especially in Greece. However, their evidence for this is either misunderstood or greatly exaggerated.
For instance, they will bring up pottery from ancient Greece, even though only 30 out of 80,000 depicted what could be interpreted as homosexual scenes, which equals 0.0375%. The majority of them featuring Satyr, who were known hedonists, in which case it makes sense to depict them as such.
And then there is, of course, pederasty; a mentorship between an older and younger male. Was this sometimes abused? Most likely, yes—as elites still do today. Was this abuse tolerated? Not exactly. We have plenty of writings and laws condemning it (and homosexuality in general) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10].
Also, Achilles being upset about his best friend Patroclus dying does not make them gay, and the Greek concepts of love and beauty are often poorly translated.
@ChristianityExposed
For instance, they will bring up pottery from ancient Greece, even though only 30 out of 80,000 depicted what could be interpreted as homosexual scenes, which equals 0.0375%. The majority of them featuring Satyr, who were known hedonists, in which case it makes sense to depict them as such.
And then there is, of course, pederasty; a mentorship between an older and younger male. Was this sometimes abused? Most likely, yes—as elites still do today. Was this abuse tolerated? Not exactly. We have plenty of writings and laws condemning it (and homosexuality in general) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10].
Also, Achilles being upset about his best friend Patroclus dying does not make them gay, and the Greek concepts of love and beauty are often poorly translated.
@ChristianityExposed
The One True Faith
Some religious systems claim to be the "one true faith" for all mankind. Christianity is one such belief. Adherents of native religions know that this whole approach is wrong. There is no one religion for all the world—nor should there be.
The various branches of humanity arose under different conditions, underwent different experiences, and have their own unique way of being in the world. It is only right that we should approach the Divine in the manner native to our own branch of the human family... in the way of our own ancestors.
To claim that there is, or can be, or even should be a universal religion flies in the face of our genuine diversity. We recognize the uniqueness and the value of all the different pieces that make up the human mosaic [and support] the efforts of all cultural and biological groups to maintain their identity.
-----
From: Asatru: A Native European Spirituality by Stephen A. McNallen.
@ChristianityExposed
Some religious systems claim to be the "one true faith" for all mankind. Christianity is one such belief. Adherents of native religions know that this whole approach is wrong. There is no one religion for all the world—nor should there be.
The various branches of humanity arose under different conditions, underwent different experiences, and have their own unique way of being in the world. It is only right that we should approach the Divine in the manner native to our own branch of the human family... in the way of our own ancestors.
To claim that there is, or can be, or even should be a universal religion flies in the face of our genuine diversity. We recognize the uniqueness and the value of all the different pieces that make up the human mosaic [and support] the efforts of all cultural and biological groups to maintain their identity.
-----
From: Asatru: A Native European Spirituality by Stephen A. McNallen.
@ChristianityExposed
"Those men, whom Jewish and Christian idolaters have abusively called heathen, had much better and clearer ideas of justice and morality than are to be found in the Old Testament, or in the New. The answer of Solon [the Athenian] on the question, 'Which is the most perfect popular government?' has never been exceeded by any man since his time, as containing a maxim of political morality. 'That,' says he, 'where the least injury done to the meanest individual is considered as an insult on the whole constitution.' Solon lived above 500 years before Christ [1] . . . What Athens was in miniature, America will be in magnitude." [2]
Founding Father Thomas Paine on how the Constitution was inspired by Solon the "heathen"—whom John Adams spoke highly off as well—rather than the Bible.
@ChristianityExposed
Founding Father Thomas Paine on how the Constitution was inspired by Solon the "heathen"—whom John Adams spoke highly off as well—rather than the Bible.
@ChristianityExposed