Spectator N0 2682 - Exchanges By Doc
Crosswords0 min ago
Homeless Refugees
97 Answers
We mustn't forget that what we are "celebrating" tomorrow is the homeless refugee couple having to spend the cold and frosty night in a barn for their baby's birth.
Today the Little Englanders would rather see them drowned in the Mediterranean.
Today the Little Englanders would rather see them drowned in the Mediterranean.
Answers
We should be grateful the the fable of peace and love hasn't been twisted out of all recognition by greedy, powerful forces bent on profiting from the gullibility of the downtrodden and dispossesed. It could all have led to misery for millions down the centuries.
23:34 Mon 24th Dec 2018
A few bits. Firstly there was no census at the time of the birth of Jesus. Historically the nearest census was about ten years adrift of the alleged date of the birth, long after the wicked King Herod had died - and that didn’t require everyone to return to the place of their birth to register. There’s no record of Herod’s slaughter of the innocents either.
Secondly, there was no stable. The wise men visited the baby at a house. The manger was possibly handy because it wasn’t unknown for people in that area of the world to share their homes/caves with their animals. Some still do. Thirdly, low winter (and night) temperatures in Israel are not unusual. Snow is not unknown.
All of that said, whilst I’m pretty much convinced that Jesus existed, the legend surrounding him has been shamelessly fabricated, much of it designed to tug at the heartstrings, as the story of Christmas (and that of the crucifixion) does – and it works. Personally I have a sneaking suspicion that Jesus was a man who would have been deemed pretty special – the rightful king of the Jews - hence Herod's pursuit of him. There was a fellow who wanted to hang on to his throne.
As fascinating as it is (to me at least) to try to make some sense of it all, the story, written long after the event, renders it one giant, complex, jigsaw puzzle - probably impossible to ever solve completely.
Secondly, there was no stable. The wise men visited the baby at a house. The manger was possibly handy because it wasn’t unknown for people in that area of the world to share their homes/caves with their animals. Some still do. Thirdly, low winter (and night) temperatures in Israel are not unusual. Snow is not unknown.
All of that said, whilst I’m pretty much convinced that Jesus existed, the legend surrounding him has been shamelessly fabricated, much of it designed to tug at the heartstrings, as the story of Christmas (and that of the crucifixion) does – and it works. Personally I have a sneaking suspicion that Jesus was a man who would have been deemed pretty special – the rightful king of the Jews - hence Herod's pursuit of him. There was a fellow who wanted to hang on to his throne.
As fascinating as it is (to me at least) to try to make some sense of it all, the story, written long after the event, renders it one giant, complex, jigsaw puzzle - probably impossible to ever solve completely.
we have missed a bit in the it-didnt-happen-like-that scenario.
bear in mind - no evidence is not the same evidence-that-it-didnt - but hell this is AB so rules like that go darn the tube at line 1
three wise men er-er and their names - caspar, nalthasar and melchizidek er-er and one black er-er-er
the rewriting of Jesus story needed recognition that he was divine at the beginning - whilst others didnt, hence three wise men saying "ware izzee den, the ickle baby Jesus" ( wise and from essex,s ee) and the manger
and a recognition that he was divine at the end
offering myrrh at the crucifixion (B)
(B) has two versions - offering gall which was usually done then and then the change to myrrh ( showing kingship ) BUT there was also a failure to rewrite all versions. So the gall story persists in the Gospels showing what the scribes were up to
but you all knew that innit
I mean you were taught dat at skool - no?
[that post for slow readers was to show the actual process and reasons to re-write gospel stories]
bear in mind - no evidence is not the same evidence-that-it-didnt - but hell this is AB so rules like that go darn the tube at line 1
three wise men er-er and their names - caspar, nalthasar and melchizidek er-er and one black er-er-er
the rewriting of Jesus story needed recognition that he was divine at the beginning - whilst others didnt, hence three wise men saying "ware izzee den, the ickle baby Jesus" ( wise and from essex,s ee) and the manger
and a recognition that he was divine at the end
offering myrrh at the crucifixion (B)
(B) has two versions - offering gall which was usually done then and then the change to myrrh ( showing kingship ) BUT there was also a failure to rewrite all versions. So the gall story persists in the Gospels showing what the scribes were up to
but you all knew that innit
I mean you were taught dat at skool - no?
[that post for slow readers was to show the actual process and reasons to re-write gospel stories]
Eddie, whatever gave you the idea that it doesn't get cold in Israel?
https:/
https:/
Naomi - I have listened to many atheist lectures and remain unconvinced.
But as qualified as these atheists are in the fields of science, history, and scripture, I have never heard any of them use the arguments that you employ.
You are simply not right.
Check out the atheist professors yourself.
That would dismiss your arguments as unworthy.
But as qualified as these atheists are in the fields of science, history, and scripture, I have never heard any of them use the arguments that you employ.
You are simply not right.
Check out the atheist professors yourself.
That would dismiss your arguments as unworthy.
