UDreamOfJanie

Dream a Little Dream of Me.

Wow. Talk About Drawing A Picture

The video below the fold is quite a piece.  A stunning history of the Christian mythology, with clear and concise pointers and explanations of the massive plagiarism and astrology inherent in the religion.

I highly recommend taking the 26 minutes to watch it.

A peek above our garters to Phonon at AtBC.

Filed under: Education, Fundies, Literature, Religion, The After The Bar Closes Fun, Video

20 Responses

  1. Musicguy says:

    Amazing! I’ve heard most of this before. It’s great to have it all in one place. I think this should be required viewing for all!

  2. JanieBelle says:

    Same here, Musicguy.

    It really drives the point home when it’s presented this way, and it’s the first time I’d seen it all together like this.

  3. mesogen says:

    Hey! This is phonon (in wordpress, I’m mesogen, apparently). I just wanted to commend you on your Tatu/McCarthy avatar up there. I guess that’ll be my new band, Tatu McCarthy (or maybe my firstborn).

  4. JanieBelle says:

    Identity crisis? hehe

    I’m flattered that I could inspire your band name, but I might not be able to take credit for that.

    The image on the right side bar is my work, but the image on the left side bar belongs to a guy who started a blog to protest our treatment by WordPress staff.

    That blog is pretty much abandoned at this point, but you can click the image to see it still, last I checked.

    Don’t sweat the URL, that’s just part of the protest. There’s not actually any porn there. The URL is childporn.wordpress.com, and the blog is called “Censor This”.

    Good to see you here, Phonon. Sure hope you make a habit of it.

  5. Amanda says:

    I like how he ends with “we don’t want to be unkind…” after he had already included the clips of people making fun of and laughing at Christians.

    As far as the historiciy of Jesus… Josephus wrote of a man named Jesus. Tacitus wrote of “the Christ” who was killed by Pilate. The Talmud mentioned Jesus. There aren’t many sources, but there are sources apart from the Bible that mention Jesus. That at least should tell you that a man named Jesus existed during this time period.

    Here’s a thought, too. If “The Bible” had never been canonized, and all we had were independent manuscripts that speak of Jesus (the writings of Paul, the Gospels, etc.), would you put more stock in the things they said?

  6. Musicguy says:

    I just made G watch the video. His jaw hit the floor so many times! I was laughing my ass off as I watched HIM!

  7. Musicguy says:

    Amanda- if we had only independent writings, we’d not so easily discount the other “gospels” and writings that were NOT included in the bible! You can’t just take some of the writings from that period and leave the rest.

  8. JanieBelle says:

    Hi Amanda! Geez, I’ve missed you ’round here.

    ‘course that’s really mostly because I’ve been blogging sporadically at best.

    Just a quick drive by comment, as I’ve got about 20 irons in the fire right now.

    re: Tacitus

    Putting aside the fact that he wasn’t born until about the year 56 and that makes his account second hand, here’s a tidbit about his single mention of “Christus” that I’ve seen mentioned on several reputable history sites before…

    From Wiki (and this is just the quick version at hand)

    The Roman historian Tacitus wrote concerning the Great Fire of Rome, in book 15, chapter 44 of his Annals (c. 116):

    Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

    Some scholars have suggested that this passage could be a later addition by Christian scribes[1]. This is supported by the fact that no early Christian writers refer to Tacitus even when discussing the subject of Nero and Christian persecution. Tertullian, Lactantius, Sulpicius Severus, Eusebius and Augustine of Hippo make no reference to Tacitus when discussing Christian persecution by Nero.[1] Additionally, widespread Christian persecution as described in the passage is not mentioned by Luke in Acts. Also, it is unlikely there were an “immense multitude” of Christians in Nero’s Rome.

    On the other hand, some argue that the passage is far too critical of Christians to be added by Christian scribes. The passage even implies that the Christians may have been guilty of setting fire to Rome. Additionally, any inaccuracies of the passage (i.e. “immense multitude”, “prefect” vs. “procurator” Pontius Pilatus) could be due to exaggeration or mistakes in reporting when written in 116.

    The secular historian Suetonius also mentions Christians being harmed during this period by Nero, but there is no connection made with the fire and the reliability of the passage is also questioned.[2]

    re: the Talmud

    also seen elsewhere, but also from Wiki

    Despite the numerous mentions of Edom which may refer to Christendom, the Talmud makes little mention of Jesus directly or the early Christians. There are a number of quotes about individuals named Yeshu that once existed in editions of the Talmud; these quotes were long ago removed from the main text due to accusations that they referred to Jesus, and are no longer used in Talmud study. However, these removed quotes were preserved through rare printings of lists of errata, known as Hashmatot Hashas (“Omissions of the Talmud”). Some modern editions of the Talmud contain some or all of this material, either at the back of the book, in the margin, or in alternate print. These passages do not necessarily refer to a single individual and many of the stories are far removed from anything written in the New Testament. Many scholars are convinced that these people cannot be identified with the Christian messiah.

    and re: Josephus

    basically ditto the comment about Tacitus.

    From the Wiki:

    The following passage appears in the Greek version of Antiquities of the Jews xviii 3.3, in the translation of William Whiston:

    3.3 Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.

    As usual with ancient texts, the surviving sources for this passage are Greek manuscripts, all minuscules, the oldest of which dates from the 9th century. It is likely that these all derive from a single exemplar written in uncial, as is the case with most other ancient Greek texts transmitted to the present in medieval copies, and have come down through the hands of the church. The text of Antiquities appears to have been transmitted in two halves — books 1–10 and books 11–20. But other ad hoc copies of this passage also exist.

    The first to cite this passage of Antiquities was Eusebius, writing in about 324, who quotes the passage in essentially the same form.

    So it comes down to the fact that there are no first hand accounts of all the amazing things related in the New Testament from anyone without a vested interest in propagation of the church.

    Though it is not conclusive, I do indeed find that odd.

    Kisses

  9. Amanda says:

    You can’t just take some of the writings from that period and leave the rest.

    And I could say the same to you.

    I’ll admit…that video left me feeling…not entirely confidant. But I can say that Janie’s rebuttal up there is pretty full of “may be”s and “could”s. I would say that while I can’t definitely say those writings are about Christ, you also can’t definitely say they aren’t.

    Oh, and Janie…I’ve got you in my feed reader so I always know when you post something new. Problem is your website is blocked at work so I don’t always get to read what you write (don’t know why it’s blocked…some WP blogs are, some aren’t).

  10. JanieBelle says:

    Hey, just checking one last time before I head to bed and probably wake up Kate for some… uh.. conversation… yeah, that’s it… conversation…

    Conversation of this sort, I suspect.

    😉

    It’s an awful LOT of ifs for something so world shattering that it should be rather rock solid, I should think.

    Setting that aside though, I think the historicity (or lack thereof) of a specific man called Jesus is rather beside the point.

  11. JanieBelle says:

    don’t know why it’s blocked

    Oh come on. I think we can ALL figure out why my blog winds up on the OMFG! list…

    😉

    Kisses to you Amanda

  12. JanieBelle says:

    Oh, and before I slip into nighty night land, how’ve you been? I haven’t made it over to the new place much, but honestly I’ve been so busy doing other stuff that I haven’t spent nearly enough time on ANYONE’s blog lately.

    I actually feel rather guilty about that.

  13. Musicguy says:

    The problem with “other writings”, Amanda, is that they do not paint Jesus as God. Rather, they consider him a holy man, if that. These other writings also haven’t had the misfortune of being copied/edited/translated/copied/translated/copied so many times that the originals NO LONGER EXIST, making it impossible to check for errors or inconsistencies!

  14. Amanda says:

    Janie – I can assure you it isn’t the content! Our new webfilter categorizes websites and certain categories are blocked, including “personal website” which is what your website is categorized. Most WP blogs are categorized as such, but not all. My own website isn’t categorized that. And the majority of Vox blogs are also blocked because they are “personal websites.” But occasionlly I find one that has slipped through the cracks. There really seems to be no rhyme or reason.

  15. Amanda says:

    As far as the historicity of a man named Jesus…that is the point because the conclusion of your video up there was that there was no man named Jesus.

  16. JanieBelle says:

    Janie – I can assure you it isn’t the content! Our new webfilter categorizes websites and certain categories are blocked, including “personal website” which is what your website is categorized. Most WP blogs are categorized as such, but not all. My own website isn’t categorized that. And the majority of Vox blogs are also blocked because they are “personal websites.” But occasionlly I find one that has slipped through the cracks. There really seems to be no rhyme or reason.

    huh. That is rather odd…

  17. JanieBelle says:

    As far as the historicity of a man named Jesus…that is the point because the conclusion of your video up there was that there was no man named Jesus.

    But I think that was just part of the larger point that the Judaeo-Christian mythos is largely plagiarized from and by every other religion in the area, that none of them are unique, and all of them are based on ancient (lack of) understanding of the universe.

    All the symbolism comes back to Astrology, man’s early attempts at explaining how the universe works, and what role those big bright things in the heavens played in our lives.

    It’s both fascinating and ironic when (I’m going to pick on Judeao-Christianity for no other reason than because that was the main focus of the film) members of Christianity denounce Astrology (and other religions) when that is in fact the historical basis and focus of their own religion.

    It’s doubly fascinating in that Astrology was an early attempt to explain observed occurrences. It was sort of the predecessor of science, in a way.

    It didn’t work at all, and we all now (mostly) realize that the position of the stars in the sky have no bearing on our daily lives (unless one explodes nearby or something), but it was an attempt at understanding.

    Science today is a much more successful, more refined attempt at understanding, and perhaps that is the common thread that fundamentalist Christians find so offensive about them both.

    Ok, I seem to have gone off on a tangent here…

    Oh, yeah. The point of the film.

    The point to me seemed much more about the larger picture of borrowing, one culture from another, and that the bible is not an original document, or even an original set of stories.

  18. ANIMAL says:

    Good film,,,

  19. ANIMAL says:

    also,, would like to know WHO did it and when if aired.
    Would like to reshearch more

  20. JanieBelle says:

    It was. Again, I wouldn’t take every word as gospel, I think there may be a bit of a stretch in some areas.

    Overall, it was pretty good though. Definitely entertaining and thought provoking.

    As to who did it, I’m not sure and can’t seem to nail that completely down. It seems to be a strictly internet viral video to this point, however. As far as I can tell it’s never been aired in theatres or TV or anything.

    As an aside, it’s actually the first part of a three part movie (2 hours long). Parts two and three exhibit some interesting but more dubious connections in places.

    Of the three parts, the first seems to be the most well supported, though in all honesty I only have access to expertise on the subject of the first part.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Sex in the Public Square

  • Sex in the Public Square
  • Sex In The Public Square.org

always.

  • always.

A Word About Me

  • I am entirely fictional, and without sexual preference.
  • Don't like it? Don't come back.

EMail

  • janiebellemcknight AT gmail DOT com

The Erotic Dreams of JanieBelle and Lovers

Kate Once Said

  • "Did you know that you don't close your eyes all the way when you sleep?

    It's making me excited again."

Awards and Nominations


WhoreChurch Seal of Approval

Celluloid Blonde Award

  • Best You People Are Truly Geeks Post

Thinking Blogger Award

Excellent Blog Award

Rockin' Girl Blogger Award

Order of the Science Scouts

Mature Content is Contained on this Blog

Help us support Sex Work Awareness

Past Poetry Contest Winners

Kate Once Said:

  • "Did you know that you don't close your eyes all the way when you sleep?

    It's making me excited again."

Awards and Nominations


WhoreChurch Seal of Approval

Celluloid Blonde Award

  • Best You People Are Truly Geeks Post

Thinking Blogger Award

Excellent Blog Award

Rockin' Girl Blogger Award

Order of the Science Scouts

Creative Commons License

All original material on this blog excepting The Lilith Quotient is covered under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial- Share Alike 3.0 License.

Attribution should be made to JanieBelle McKnight, and contain a link to this blog.

The Lilith Quotient

Creative Commons License

The Lilith Quotient by JanieBelle McKnight is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial- No Derivative Works 3.0 License.

Attribution should be made to JanieBelle McKnight, and contain a link to this blog.

z

Site Meter

Peeking Dreamers

  • 397,813 Page Views Since Moving To WordPress
%d bloggers like this: