₦airaland Forum

GidiMovies: What's the name of your church?

What kind of hope does he/she preach?

Financial satisfaction? Heavenly grace? 'A new car each year, for paying your tithes', or hell for your enemies, unless dem free you

Holla!

whatever it is, it is al false hope. Christianity is built around false hopes and assumptions

hahahahah. . . Come on guys, make una free Jonathan na. By the way, I have seen the unaltered version of that picture, the boy's stomach did not protrude like that, some ACN hater prolly did that to make a Joke outta Nigeria's first family.. Make una take una time o...lol

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Yawn. Another lengthy copy and paste job and yet you haven't even started meeting the challenge you were issued. Come back when you actually have something to say.[/quote]hahahahahahahahhaha. . . Am laughing, typical of you to divert and talk bullshit.
Zeitgist is Archaya's work, some shallow minded Christian threw a challenge asking for facts and evidence to the claims made by the movie, she took her time to address the so-called Challenge in a rejoinder. She did not stop there but went further to give the challenger her own challenge; Prove to everyone that Jesus Christ is not a Mythical Character just like Horus, Zeus, Buddha, Krishna and these other godmen whose characteristics were obviously stolen and merged to form this Jesus Christ Character.
Instead of petty diversion and childish antics, just throw in the towel and admit that Defending a historical Jesus outside the fairytales of the bible is hard.
I challenge you to come up with answers outside of the over revised bible that is full of lies and irreconcilable bullshit that onlt make sense to christian dummies like you and your sidekick bernimoor.

An average Nigerian is a simple-minded sucker that will fall for anything. Imagine after warning some slowpokes here that this whole charade is an organuzed fraud, some nincompoops still went ahead to make payments.
Whoever paid that money should not come here and complain to us, we careless if they emptied your life savings, you got what you deserve, you simple-minded Pricks.
Soon them go buy Jet on top una gullibilty, afterall Oyedepo, Ajibole and co are already flexing with una life savings. . Lol

nairaland.com/1020513/exposed-jesus-christ-greatest-lie/1
here is the thread where your mentor was busy going round and round, diverting attention from the main topic. He got served to the point he had to take some time off nairaland to re-examnie his beliefs. Jesus Christ is Fraud, the greatest lie ever sold.

BERNIMOORE: @rhymz



VIRUS! this write ups,(copied from another ones site) is just a manifestation of incompetence on your part, 'you lost your reasonings to harfull knowledge' Virus, and you are just abandoned to wallow in this stupidity, 'what a bunch of garbage up there'!

You are a Stray eeediioot trying so hard to come across as intelligent. You need to first understand an argument before butting in like a clueless nincompoop. The Zeitgist was a short documentary exposition on the history of religion, christian in particular and its author borrowed a lot from Archaya's book and ecen worked with her.
Christian Appologists watched the documentaries and some of its position on certain christian doctrines and decided to throw a pretentious challenge that made it look like most of the positions of the documentary were not based on fact. Archaya responded to the challenge like any other scholar that knows what they are talking about will do.
Or did you think nobody will take up the so-called challenge? You prolly thought I couldn't find her rebuttals to christian appologists bluff?
Will you scumbags stop shifting the goal post and and just address the damn issues?
I did not even come up with the Zeitgist argument, your dishonest mentor, Anonym did, only for him to go silent and let you, his subordinate numbskull do his dirty laundry for him. You have got no clue, I will rather debate your oga himself, you be boy-boy.

fluffybaby: By the way, when a child of 13 or 18 or younger pays tithe the mnumu pastor should know that he should be in school studying not working. These pastors don't even serve God like missionaries of old who built many schools for the poor and dedicated time to teach the interedted people in the area to read and write. Nowadays they enjoy seeing porverty cos those expectant poor people will keep giving miracle expectation oferrings.

back in school, I know of eediots that gave their school fees as tithe to student pastors who were living lavishly and enjoying all the benefits of good life including pretty women. There was this gal from Christ Embassy who was a galfrend to my pal, she will dish out all her pocket and upkeep money to the church only to move in with my pal as a live-in gal friend. Trust my homeboy, he 4cked her brains out. . Lol

esere826: If its an accepted church tradition, then its great that the kids learn at a tender age

hahahah. . .what next are they going to learn, prolly steal and give it to Daddy GO to hold for "god". Sick religious people

naturalwaves: ^^^ Please, give me the link to Archarya's work(s). Thank you!

http://ebookbrowse.com/acharya-the-christ-conspiracy-the-greatest-story-ever-sold-pdf-d180172742
Also here is a very interesting topic on NL that discussed some parts of the woman's book cHrist conspiracy. It enraged a lot of NL christians that they just could not answer most of her questions regarding Jesus's historicity or the lack of evidence to support their beliefs.
nairaland.com/1020513/exposed-jesus-christ-greatest-lie

Spiritual Terrorism & the Lunatic Fringe
In my books I expose a pattern of censorship within the fields of religion and mythology created through intimidation and terrorism that culminated in the Inquisition but by no means ended there, as it is continued by fanatics of a variety of religions, including and especially Christianity and Islam. Where facts and logic fail, out come the personal attacks, ad homs, calumny, vitriol, libel, slander and threats. And we wonder why this material is not more widely known? As my research shows, time and again scholars have stepped forth with this information, only to be slapped down by religious authorities and the general public. Where the persuasion of "authorities" fails, these scholars have been thrown to the mobs—and that is precisely what we see flourishing all over the internet. The mainstream ignores this fracas, while the frenzied mob gleefully drags the bodies around.
For those with an open mind and a more serious interest in the reality behind the scenes, however, such mob rule will not suffice. These truth-seekers will look to the real research behind the so patently logical and rational claims that our "revealed" religions represent little more than the dressed-up rehashes of ancient ideologies dating back millennia. Scholars and other writers have not only lost their occupations for revealing such truths but they have also been killed. Again, is it any wonder why this info is not more widely known? Those of us who have brought to light this information have been subjected to the most uncivil and depraved treatment at the hands of rabid and utterly unqualified individuals who have slandered and libeled us with all manner ofcalumny and false witness deriving from religious delusion, delirium and dementia. This calumny includes allegations of the most bizarre and fanciful nature imaginable, devoid of facts but reflecting an unglued worldview that is best described as "lunatic fringe." This lunacy would include ridiculous and malicious rumors, lies and vitriol invoking the "Illuminati," "Theosophy,""Masons" and assorted other nonsensical notions.
In this regard, one ZG "challenger" remarks: "I hope you will find that this 'Christ-myther' scenario is the exact dogma of the ancient mystery schools and many secret societies." Now we get to the heart of this matter, which is to convince you of the validity of Christianity and that the powers that be are trying to destroy it. Despite the proselytizing effort, the facts, however, reveal otherwise: To wit, such powerful secret societies who could pull off all the other shenanigans attributed to them, including creating a massive amount of human culture such as various religions and cults, would certainly be able to destroy Christianity in an instant, if they wanted to do so.
The actuality is that these selfsame agencies—remember, these are the powers that be, according to this mentality, the "Illuminati" and so on, who control the media—do whatever theycan to shore up the flagging faith, by producing endless "documentaries" concerning the "real" Jesus that never discuss possible mythical originsof Christianity based on Pagan precedents. In fact, the mainstream media—which undoubtedlywould be under the control of these all-powerfulsecret societies and brotherhoods—bend over backwards to ignore this Christ-myth research, burying it wherever it can be found, censoring those who bring it up, and, in earlier times, driving them into poverty or worse.
Who was behind the Inquisition, if not the powers that be? Where was the all-powerful god Jesus when millions were being abused, raped, tortured and murdered in his name? Where is he now, if the Illuminati are really in charge? Why is Jesus relying on the likes of those we see all over the internet spreading disinformation regarding human history? Why dothe mainstream media favor received Christian tradition and history, if there is some grandiose conspiracy to bring to light the information foundin ZG1.1 and elsewhere?
In the end, "ZEITGEIST" is a grassroots movementcreated by "some guy with a computer," not the omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent Illuminati and New World Order. In this same sense, I myself am "just some gal with a computer," and I know many of the other people in the field of Jesus mythicism, most of whom arejust barely making ends meet. The idea of an overarching conspiracy of omnipotent scalawagsbehind Jesus mythicism is completely absurd.
Confronted with these facts, debunkers retreat into supernatural claims that the purported puppetmasters are working through diabolic agencies including channeling the sentiments of long dead people with whom this material does not originate in the first place. In other words, when faced with science, we hear the same old"Devil got there first" platitudes. That's right—when all else fails, it's obviously the all-powerfulSatan getting the better of God once again and yanking our chains.
The same "challenger" contends that these"ancient mystery schools" and "many secret societies" are "the groups more or less behind the problems in parts 2 and 3 of Zeitgeist" and then remarks:
They seem to encourage the belief system Zeitgeist is pushing, even though it is primarily based on initiated writers like Plutarch Gerald Massey, and Manley P. Hall. NOT on the actual writings or records of historical Egypt or any other.
This entire paragraph reveals a number of problems with this detractor's viewpoint, including the utter fallaciousness of ZG.1. being"primarily based on initiated writers…" Firstly, merely a small portion of the mythicist position has anything to do with Plutarch or Gerald Massey, and that much concerns Egypt only. Secondly, the Egyptian evidence of Jesus mythicism relies not on either of these sources but on the numerous artifacts from Egypt itself and the voluminous commentaries thereupon by highly qualified authorities. Moreover, I personally have never read any book by Manley Hall and therefore make no reference to him in any of my works.
In addition, if Plutarch was "initiated," then he was in a better position to know what exactly was this "Christ-myther scenario" that is supposedly the "exact dogma of the ancient mystery schools and many secret societies." Is the debunker claiming here that the belief that Christ is a myth is really an ancient doctrine, sincehe asserts it was "the exact dogma of the ancient mystery schools?" According to the same debunkers, the idea of Christ as a myth is simply a "new fad" fabricated in the 19 th century!
Moreover, this individual is not qualified to state what is or is not in the "actual writings or recordsof historical Egypt or any other." Does he read hieroglyphs, and has he personally done a surveyof thousands of papyri and inscriptions? In Christ in Egypt , I have quoted numerous well-respected authorities on Egypt and sifted through several translations of thousands of pages of Egyptian writings, as well as translated some myself, to demonstrate that these parallelsare real and are indeed in the "writings and records of the historical Egypt." This individual's remarks simply show that he is neither qualified nor capable of doing such intense research, not that the material isn't there.
In reality, this statement would more accurately read that the Christ myth scenario is the exact dogma of the ancient mystery schools and many secret societies. In other words, the various motifs of the gospel story are essentially what was being taught in the mystery schools for hundreds to thousands of years before Christ purportedly lived.
As concerns the besmirchment of Plutarch, why should we not trust his assessment, particularly when the ancient Egyptian writings and other artifacts do in reality back up his contentions? Dowe have any refutation of his commentary from antiquity, anyone calling him a liar and denying his accounts? No, but we do have Egyptologists remarking upon his accuracy, such as: "When we examine this story by the light of the results of hieroglyphic decipherment, we find that a large portion of it is substantiated by Egyptian texts…" (See Christ in Egypt , 91)
Plutarch's writings appeared in a pre-Christian context, despite him having written during the first and early second centuries. There is absolutely no evidence that Plutarch was aware of Christ, Christians or Christianity and was influenced by them, nor has anyone reputable made such a contention. He was obviously free to make these statements without the censorial Inquisition and its harpies on his back calling hima liar, as there was no reason to do so. Not only isit likely he was telling the truth but also that no one had an interest in refuting him because there was at that time no Christian tradition to defend.
What does Plutarch say? He relates that Osiris is the sun and Isis the moon, and that Isis was impregnated by the sun and gave birth to Horus on the winter solstice (which has come down to us as December 25 th ). Plutarch also relates the myth about Osiris's annually celebrated death and resurrection. We have no reason to doubt any of these claims—in fact, in Christ in Egypt , I have demonstrated through numerous pre-Christian primary sources that Plutarch is correct. Thus, Plutarch remains a very valuable resource who shows that no one in the modern era is making up any of these contentions. When faced with Plutarch, in fact, rather than honestly admitting they knew nothing of the existence of these remarks in his writings—if they had even heard of him in the first place—debunkers smugly raised the bar and pretend that he has norelevance.
Not content with revealing such flawed thinking,this same "challenger" also libels me personally by saying that my books are "notoriously absent of many references to her claims," an utter falsehood that is again reflective of this individual's total ignorance of the subject matter in general and my work in particular. Every majorand many minor contentions in my work are carefully cited, with abundant ancient and modern sources, including biblical verses in their original languages, as well as citations from other languages. The lack of honest admissions on the part of apologists is what is notorious, not the absence of references by so-called "Christ-mythers."
In the same paragraph, after falsely characterizing my work, the "challenger" includes my email address and incites his readersto harass me with requests for information that is already demonstrated repeatedly and copiously in my writings over the past two decades.
Where does it all come from?
When one reads various remarks from would-be debunkers, whether theists or atheists, one can see that they have not studied this subject in depth by their repeated admissions that they do not know where the information has come from. When one hears someone say, "I have no idea where they got that from" or "I can find no historical record of these claims myself," they arein effect revealing their own ignorance of the subject and their own personal inability to do adequate research, and should therefore not be presenting themselves as experts.
This fact is handily demonstrated by the massive amount of research concerning the Horus-Jesus parallels that I have put together in my book Christ in Egypt . Again, in that book, I have shownthrough numerous ancient, pre-Christian primary sources that the contentions in ZG1.1 concerning Horus and/or his father Osiris or other Egyptian divine figure are true and factual. There is, of course, no acknowledgement of these facts from the ZG debunking crowd, just more of the same dismissive calumny, libel and vitriol designed to cover up the criminal destruction that has allowed for these facts to be buried. As I describein my book, however, in Egypt there was simply too much evidence of the ancient astrotheological religion at the basis of the Christmyth to destroy or cover up. Christians did in fact rampage all over that country, defacing and destroying monuments, texts and other artifacts wherever they could. Nevertheless, again, the evidence was too overwhelming—literally, in this case, as there were so many massive buildings, some of which were buried and forgotten. Where the Christians could not destroythe monuments, they stuccoed over the hieroglyphs, having the effect of preserving them for future generations, and it is to these and much else that we may turn for our evidence.
This information thus comes from many differentsources, including primary sources, as well as the works of ancient historians and moderns scholars.
It needs to be kept in mind throughout this study of comparative religion and mythology dating back into ancient times that much of it takes place in languages other than English. In addition to the writings in their original languages, including Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek and Latin, appears much commentary in more modern times also in languages such as Latin, as well as French and German. This material is not particularly easy to dig up and/or understand, and requires expertise to make it more readily available.

Primary Source Destruction
In this regard, the loud shrieking of the debunkers for "primary sources" in fact serves to remind us of the historical treachery of religious fanatics in the willful and deliberate destruction of human culture-mankind's very past. The scale of this censorial sin is so vast and appalling that it takes the breath away. Who will answer for this heinous crime against humanity, about which we are reminded every time someone raises the issue of primary sources?
The reality is that there would be much more evidence of ancient religion and mythology had not so much been destroyed, largely by fanatics spawned by the monotheistic Abrahamic faiths of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. For example, in antiquity there existed multiple volumes about ancient religions specifically mentioned bythe early Church fathers; yet, these important treatises do not survive, while the Christian apologies and polemics against them do. These works on religion obviously were around when the fathers wrote their commentaries, criticisms and diatribes against them-the latter were preserved but the original bases of these apologies and polemics have been "lost" or deliberately destroyed. Why? These lost/destroyed works include the voluminous writings of the Roman statesman and soldier Marcus Terentius Varro (116-27 BCE )-called "the most learned of the Romans"-especially his workon religion ( Antiquitates rerum humanarum et divinarum ), which no doubt would have been eye-opening, had it survived. Although Varro's works were burned in his day after he was outlawed by Marc Anthony, based on commentaries upon him by St. Augustine (354-430), enough must have survived until that time at least.
In a number of instances, where so much primary-source material has been destroyed wantonly and willfully, we simply must rely on secondary sources such as the historians of the past, who took the time to chronicle painstakingly whatever they could find within their limited resources of the era. In many cases, these sources are more accurate than scholars of the modern era because they were closer to the events or material in question.
Even if a story, myth, tradition or motif is not recorded in a pristine primary source of the impossible kind required by the "debunkers," if itdoes appear in the works of a historian , regardless of whether he represents a source secondary, tertiary or otherwise, prior to the Christian era-such as is the case with Diodorus Siculus (c. 90-27 BCE), for example-the information presented therein could likewise have served as an inspiration for the creation of the Christ myth. No one is contending that only primary sources were used in the creation of Christianity, as such a proposition is ludicrous.
And where are the inerrant primary sources written by the very hands of the apostles themselves that prove Christianity's extraordinary claims? Millions give a pass to these supernatural claims, because they have been conditioned by them since an early age, while making unreasonable and impossible demands of proof for rational and logical contentions that Christianity is in significant part a rehash of earlier religions and myths.
If the works of ancient historians such as Diodorus, Plutarch and Macrobius do not represent reliable sources, then neither does the New Testament. In addition, if we cannot rely on the works of historians for corroboration of comparative religion, then we may also throw out the purported testimony of Josephus, Pliny, Suetonius, Tacitus, Thallus, Phlegon and all the rest as having no value in "proving" the historicity of Jesus. In this regard, a " Jesus Challenge " is issued and unlikely to be met any time soon.
If the Christian faith can rely largely upon the secondary-source testimony of non-eyewitnesses as "proof" of extraordinary, supernatural events-there being no textual autographs or concrete and relevant archaeological evidence for gospel claims concerning Jesus-then so too may we turn on occasion to secondary sources when it comes to chronicling one of the most important and fascinating subjects of human culture, i.e., religion and mythology. To ignore this wealth of information because it is considered secondary not only constitutes an egregious waste of a massive human effort but also is utterly unscientific and derived from a need to shore up the faith no matter what the cost. Indeed, the dishonesty in ignoring this body of work can onlybe deemed appalling and negligent.
The mockery concerning primary sources-many of which were obliterated long ago by Christian fanatics attempting to stamp out all signs of Paganism-reminds one of the taunting by a criminal who believes the law will never catch up with him because he is too clever and has destroyed all the evidence. It is obvious from the caution with which they proceed and the commentaries and polemics they eventually produce that this evidence was extant during thebulk of the period when the early Church fathers were creating Christianity, but began to disappear sometime after they finally procured the power to destroy it.
Happily, despite the desperate and endless widespread criminal acts of destruction, the evidence of our collective human past is so vast and obvious that enough of it remains regarding many aspects of human culture-including variousartifacts we take for granted today, such as the names of the days of the week and the months-that we can piece together a reasonably accurate picture of our ancient religious and mythological heritage, using both whatever primary sources remain, as well as secondary sources deemed to be accurate and factually sound. We are fortunate, for example, that so much of the massive and long-lived Egyptian culture also survived the numerous assaults by religious fanatics. Despite all of the frantic evidence-burying criminal activity, we possess an enormous amount of primary-source material from ancient Egypt, clearly pre-Christian, which iswhy my response to the various would-be ZG1.1 debunkers, including a nearly 600-page scholarlybook, Christ in Egypt, with almost 2,400 citations from over 900 sources, including abundant primary-source material in a variety of languages, both ancient and modern, as well as the works of highly credentialed individuals in relevant fields. What is "pre-Christian?"
In this debate, it is necessary to define what is meant by "pre-Christian." Requiring only"primary source" evidence "before the time of Christ," as debunkers are wont to do, is utterly unreasonable and shows a real lack of scholarship in the subject. When Christ was supposedly born-around 1 AD/CE, 4 BCE, 6 BCE or some other undocumented date that cannot be found in any pristine primary source-the whole world did not suddenly take notice and start following him and his new cult. Indeed, Christianity itself remained largely unheard of until the second century, with the bulk of the earliest Christian efforts taking place at the end of that century. In this same regard, the AD/BC dating, representing "Anno Domini" or the "Year of Our Lord" and "Before Christ" (or some other notation in another language meaning the same), was not even established until the 6th century, with the efforts of the Scythian monk Dionysius Exiguus, (c. 470-c. 540).
In Europe, the country of Lithuania did not become Christianized until the 14th century, meaning that until that time it too was pre-Christian. In some parts of the world to this day Jesus Christ and Christianity remain completely unknown, making those places pre-Christian. Just because something entered the historical record after the year 1 AD/CE does not mean that it is not pre-Christian and was therefore influenced by Christianity. In fact, it could be very well pre-Christian and completely uninfluenced by Christianity. Raising the Bar
The ZG "debunking" over the years has changed, with the bar being raised every time it is answered. First it was claimed that ZG1.1 and its sources simply fabricated the facts. When this assertion was shown to be false-and a reflection of the lack of expertise in the subject by the would-be debunkers-it was admitted that there were plenty of people making these contentions long prior to ZG but that they were evidently seized by some peculiar madness with no basis in fact. For example, in setting up his"requirements" one ZG "challenger" remarks:
Let me be very clear, Im [sic] not looking for what people SAY it says in the ancient literature. There is an abundance of that available. I want to know where these people are getting their information because I can find no historical record of these claims myself.
First of all, this person should be thanked for acknowledging that there is an "abundance" of people making these comparisons, because too many individuals on the internet repeat the falsehoods that I and others are "just making it all up." Secondly, when he admits he cannot find something, he is reflecting not that it isn't there but that he is not a qualified and capable researcher.
Thus, the first admission of ignorance of the subject matter-which did not stop "debunkers" initially from making one wrong claim after another, as if they were experts-was that the information was simply fabricated a few years ago by modern writers. The next claim was that it was fabricated by ne'er-do-wells years earlier, up to perhaps a couple of centuries.
When that widespread contention of reliance upon "19th century writers" was shown to be false, by bringing up far more ancient sources used by these earlier scholars, such as Philo, Plutarch, Justin, Macrobius and so on, the debunkers raised the bar again by claiming that these ancient sources are "worthless" and apparently likewise fabricated data. No matter how far back we go in time, therefore, the bar will be raised and the cry will be "fabrication."
Of course, no admission of the previous errors and oversights indicating the lack of real knowledge and expertise in the subject-or any apology for essentially calling the modern proponents of Jesus mythicism "liars" and"frauds"-has ever been forthcoming from this"debunking" crowd, as such honest admissions are not their strong points. And, naturally, in order to keep up the faith, regardless of how dishonest and lacking in integrity have been the previous efforts, the bar was raised again, this time by requiring pristine "primary sources" only approvable by the debunkers themselves. But what else can we expect from those who believethat a book-and that book alone-was written by the very hand of God? Any source we can dig up will not suffice, therefore, because all will be dismissed as "hearsay" written by men, not by God. To ignore ancient sources simply because their information was not recorded by the very finger of God constitutes poor scholarship, to say the least. Meanwhile, without any proof at all--not even any earthly corroboration--these same individuals willingly believe that the Bible was written by the very finger of God.
The bottom line is not whether or not Zeus himself left behind documentation of having impregnated the virgin Danae with a golden shower to produce Perseus, or a certificate proving Dionysus's mother Semele's virginity, butwhether or not these precedents existed in the pre-Christian world and could have been drawn upon by the creators of Christianity. Most assuredly, the major motifs in question that supposedly distinguish Jesus Christ and prove his divinity were in fact religious and mythological concepts long before his purported advent, regardless of whether or not they can be found in an authorized ancient encyclopedia guarded by Cerberus the three-headed dog for the past 2,500 years.
Encyclopedia Surfing
While clamoring for primary-source proof of the logical claim that supernatural events in the NewTestament and other parts of the Bible representnot "history" but myth, detractors rely on very little evidence for their own beliefs and convictions to the contrary.
For example, as part of the supposed"debunking" come remarks such as the following: "It only took me 15 minutes on the internet to debunk Zeitgeist." Well, if it only tookyou 15 minutes, and you used websites such as Wikipedia or those of Christian apologists, you have not studied the subject sufficiently by any stretch of the imagination. It takes years-decades-of serious study and research both in and out of a formal academic setting to master this subject, provided you even possess the appropriate skills to do such study and research in the first place. Just knowing how to study and research requires scholastic training.
Thus, scanning internet or other encyclopedias-"encyclopedia surfing"-or net forums and chat rooms will not suffice to make an expert of anyone, particularly when the petty efforts at "debunking" are plastered all over the net and are easily accessible to even the most illiterate and uneducated among us. The deeper research, however, is often buried under layers of fear and loathing, revealing a shameful recordof censorship based, once again, on religious fanaticism-the same fanaticism that today wantsto censor this information again with shrill cries, personal attacks and fallacious claims of"debunking." Such shallow dismissals do not constitute "credible research," and the truth about this matter is much more profound and interesting than a 15-minute perusal of the net will ever reveal.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]lol, sudden amnesia? let me remind you.




Still waiting for you.[/quote]The Real ZEITGEIST Challenge
by D.M. Murdock/Acharya S
The following article is a response to the purported "debunking" of the first part of the original "ZEITGEIST" film. Because of its length, it is divided into several pages. I have also provided a free ebook containing the entire article , linked at the bottom of each page as well. Please also listen to my appearance on Peter Joseph's "Zeitgeist Undebunked" radio show.
Listen to internet radio with Peter Joseph on BlogTalk Radio
"And when we say also that the Word, who is thefirst-birth of God, was produced without sexual union, and that He, Jesus Christ, our Teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven, we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter."
Early Church Father and Saint Justin Martyr (c. 150 AD/CE)
The hit internet movie "ZEITGEIST," purportedly viewed over 100 million times worldwide in a variety of languages, has stirred up much controversy over the past three years since its release by filmmaker Peter Joseph. As a source for the religious segment—"Part 1"—of the original, official version of ZEITGEIST, I have been aware of the dramatic reactions from thosewho are religiously inclined, particularly towardsChristianity, which ZG contends is a manmade contrivance based on Pagan and Jewish precedents. This part of ZG in particular draws the most fire, apparently because it is the most challenging to the faith.
Instead of welcoming this short digest of religious history that has the potential of providing much needed release from erroneous and deleterious belief systems, a number of individuals have become so flummoxed, distraught and challenged by ZG's revelations that they have gone on the warpath and created a series of dubious "debunking" articles and videos, including a "Zeitgeist Challenge" of their own, full of flawed logic and false contentions that have been addressed long ago but that I have also rebutted continually over the past few years whenever claims of ZG "debunking" or"refutation" have cropped up. My measures to demonstrate the overall factual nature of Part 1 of the original ZEITGEIST (ZG1.1) include an ebook, "The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1," a video and an exhaustive study of the ancient Egyptian influence on Christianity called Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection .
I have also written several articles and appearedon a number of radio programs, although ZG1.1 appears to be so controversial that the mainstream media seem terrified to give air time to any serious expert in comparative religion and mythology who actually knows about the profound but often difficult-to-find research and factual evidence behind the film's major contentions regarding religious origins and precedents.
In any event, once more I step into the fray to demonstrate—as I have already done many times over the past decades—that a number of salient "modern" religious notions are in fact very ancient, that Christianity is largely a rehash of earlier religions and mythologies, and that acknowledging this past, without all the brainwashing and conditioning that causes intellectual dishonesty, blindness and hysteria, represents the real "ZEITGEIST Challenge."
Logical Fallacy No. 1: Straw Men
One of the most prominent "debunking" attempts raises the straw man that ZG1.1 is"unscholarly," accusing the "makers of Zeitgeist" of failing to list "original texts," besides the Bible, in defense of the film's claims. Firstly, m any of the "original texts" are found in a number of the sources Peter Joseph does cite, so this latter contention merely reflects the ignorance of the commenter in not knowing the subject matter in question.
Secondly, this 22-minute segment of ZEITGEIST was never meant to be a scholarly, exhaustive documentary on the subject. Although it does play the voices of certain individuals, there are no "talking head" experts in ZG1.1 with pristine credentials giving scholarly consensus at august universities, as we see in professional documentaries. ZG1.1 was not intended to serve as such; instead, it is a readily accessible and easily understandable digest of centuries of deep research and profound scholarship in the subjects of comparative religion and mythology. Such individuals in relevant fields with pertinent opinions do exist, however, and these scholarly assessments showing the true origins of religious thought are what I have spent the better part of the past two decades putting together in my works.
While ZG1.1 itself does not go through a list of its sources, Peter Joseph has created a "Sources" page on his ZeitgeistMovie.com website that carefully and thoroughly cites every contention in ZG1.1, a number of which were from my books,which include:
The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold
Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled
Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of The Christ
It is to these sources, then, that any serious student (and would-be "debunker" of ZG1.1 would need to turn.
As noted, I have also created several pertinent articles, ebooks and videos, along with an enormous, in-depth study specifically addressing the Egyptian/Horus claims in the film, which largely emanated from a list in my book The Christ Conspiracy (p. 115). These ZG1.1-inspired works include:
The Companion Guide to ZEITGEIST, Part 1
Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection
Was Horus Crucified? (Article)
Was Horus Crucified? (Radio)
The Nativity Scene of Amenhotep III at Luxor
The Star in the East and the Three Kings
Jesus as the Sun throughout History
Skeptic Mangles ZEITGEIST (and Religious History)
"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked? Acharya Responds(Video)
"ZEITGEIST, Part 1" Debunked? NOT!" (Blog)
ZEITGEIST Part 1 section at TBK Forum
Acharya's Frequently Asked Questions
Was Krishna's Mother a Virgin?
Metafysiko Interview of Acharya S
Here I will reiterate some of the same material, as well as steer the reader to my previous writings, where the "debunking" of ZG1.1 has already been addressed, thoroughly and repeatedly. I will also provide more fascinating information that has not been included in my other writings.
Logical Fallacy No. 2: Appeal to Authority
Some of the most notorious "debunking" of"ZEITGEIST," Part 1, has been largely by Christian apologists , although they infrequently identify themselves as such, as they apparently understand this admission will leave them open to charges of bias. In not a few instances, these would-be debunkers have also pretended not to be Christians, presenting themselves as"atheists," while appealing to other purported atheists, whose alleged expertise is flung aroundin order to drub ZG1.1 and its proponents. When apologists remark that "even so-and-so says so, and he's an atheist," they seem to be raising up the atheist as some sort of omniscient god whose word should be taken on face value because his unbelief must somehow make him an expert on the history of religion and mythology. If so, then we must also take as true and factual the atheist's declarations that there is no proof of a god. Apparently Christians and other theists, however, draw the line at the atheist's "expertise" on this point. The reality is that simply because someone lacks a belief in a god—the definition of "atheism"—he or she is not an expert on religion by any stretch of the imagination.
While these ZG1.1 "debunkers," whether theists or atheists, themselves frequently have no relevant credentials, they often harp on the supposed lack thereof by ZG1.1's sources. This"appeal to authority" fallacy could therefore be applied to them as well, as they are usually far less qualified to be writing about religious origins than a number of the film's sources, including lay Egyptologist Gerald Massey, an important analyst of the Egyptian claims as found in ZG1.1 and elsewhere about whom I write in my book Christ in Egypt , an excerpt of which can be found at the following link:
Who Was Gerald Massey?
In sum, the highly peer-reviewed Massey was farmore erudite, educated and qualified on this subject than the bulk of his detractors.
I too possess academic credentials from excellent institutions that are certainly relevant to the subject and sufficient enough to allow me to become an expert in the field of comparative religion and mythology. While this subject is extremely interesting and important, it isn't"rocket science" or brain surgery that requires a slew of advanced degrees to study, master and present the facts in a professional, scholarly manner without the bias and kneejerk reactions that lead the debunkers to make so many erroneous contentions. Expertise in this field nevertheless does require some skills that are not abundantly found in the general populace and are usually procured through education, suchas I possess, including the ability to research in a variety of languages.
I have been studying a number of languages in addition to English for nearly 40 years, starting inthe early 1970s. Not only did I study French, Spanish, Italian, German, ancient Greek and Latinformally in school/college, but I also taught myself modern Greek, as well as other languages, including Sanskrit, Hebrew and Egyptian, to varying degrees. I used Greek abundantly during my trips to Greece, where I did both undergraduate and postgraduate studies, including traveling extensively to archaeological sites throughout the country, serving as a teacher's assistant on Crete, and excavating at Corinth with the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.
Such language skills very much come with the territory of archaeology, history and religious origins, and without them no investigation of thesubject of ancient religion and mythology can be thorough, including any attempts at "debunking"ZG1.1. These skills are, of course, necessary for the study of ancient texts or primary sources .

Unless the person name na Uncle Ruckus, why wont he or sha have a family? Even Uncle Ruckus eventually turned out to have a family.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]So many words and yet not a single word in response to the challenge he came seeking....SMH[/quote]which challenge? Guy abeg go crash with your bible for your corner. You have attempted with no success in different threads to deflect from the issues only to recreate and put it in your own terms, a tiring antics that continues to fail you and make you look stupid.
Na you go run now when it becomes too hot for you.

Denise216: No actually that won't work. Black women have a hierarchy of priorities that no one else takes seriously, they're just mocked or made trivial. So Black women need to get back to separate platforms and identity, at least in the states. Black men aren't going to advocate for breast cancer research in African American women, studies to show the link between work place discrimination and prejudice and premature births, access to stabilizing hormones found in oral contraception because 1 in 4 African American women hemorrhage with their monthly mens. cycle (this is also going on the Jamaica and Haiti). Right now Black women have been able to control the natural hair niche and take 20% of the industry back, they need R & D. Then there are the non-profits that black women created that need to be revamped so that they function in the interests of black women they way they used to. That's a lot and that's just off the top of my head. Its not alienation its giving issues the priority they need to get things done and not waiting for your concerns to be put through a gender filter despite contributing equal resources.

Well, I cant agree more with you. You have said it all. However, I was actually talking in relation to issues that affect women in general instead of making it seem more like a black woman problem, they can give it a wider purpose while solving the problem if it affects their demography the most. You know like achieving a goal using different means, it makes the burden lighter, less stress, gives the issue more attention and clout plus the needed sympathy to force action. Making every problem all about the black woman thing can be alienating if not handled with caution, it makes other women outside the race but with thesame problem feel like their problems are not being given any consideration as well just because they are not black. Of course black women should have causes set up to help other black women but when it comes to discussing it and how it affects them as women, it should be given a wider appeal that makes it the problem of every woman not just black. I bet there are more non-black women with many issues that black women will thank God they don't have.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lololololololololol..............don't flatter yourself my dear. The time I spend on NL these days are few and far between, so I have even less time for copy and paste responses as is your nature. I know the next thing you'll start doing is quoting Archarya so I have linked you to a site as I did the last time.

........by the way, you didn't still respond to the challenge even after sweetening the deal for you with $1000. Please be so kind as to take the challenge now ok.

I am not interested in anything less than a full well researched response to the zietgeist challenge. (....and yeah, copying and pasting parts of Acharya's text does not count as research).

You now have your work cut out for you. Please impress me.[/quote]Whatever your excuses and antics are, they are overused and too familiar to be taken seriously by anyone that understands your round about antics when corned. . Lol
hahahah. . . You know I find it funny how you are so quick to talk down Acharya's work and use all manner of diversionary antics to downplay the woman's academic work. You know she is one of those very few classic intellectuals with the guts and intellect to unearth some real truths about religion, especially that of Christianity the most imperialistic and arrogant religion on earth that arrogates to itself the power and fore-knowledge of who will be damned and who will not. The religion that took it upon herself to purge out other older religions in the pretense of being the true religion that knows God's thought even before he thinks them. Acharya may not be your averaqe christian Joe that is mentally docile hence your love but you can't flaw the very damning evidence, facts and case she made against Christianity and the Characters in it.
Whether I copy and paste Acharya's work is immaterial, the facts are these:
1. Do I agree with her well researched academic work of history and theology? Hell Yes!
2. Does she have the intellectual capacity and qualification to write on this issue? Hell yeah! I am yet to see any more knowledgeable theological books from those half-baked bibled wielding conmen you lots call Daddy GOs, exploiting their sucker population.
Infact, here are some comments by seansoned authorities in theology,language, religius and classical comparative studies about Acharya's scholarly work:

Testimonials
"Murdock's scholarship is relentless! ...the research conducted by D.M. Murdock concerningthe myth of Jesus Christ is certainly both valuable and worthy of consideration." —Dr. Kenneth L. Feder, Professor of Archaeology, Central Connecticut State University, Frauds, Myths, and Mysteries: Science and Pseudoscience In Archaeology
"I find myself in full agreement with Acharya S/D.M. Murdock... I find it undeniable that...many, many of the epic heroes and ancientpatriarchs and matriarchs of the Old Testament were personified stars, planets and constellations..." —Dr. Robert M. Price, The Pre-Nicene New Testament
"I can recommend your work whole-heartedly!" —Dr. Robert Eisenman, James the Brother of Jesus and The New Testament Code , RobertEisenman.com
"...I have found Murdock's scholarship, research,knowledge of the original languages, and creative linkages to be breathtaking and highly stimulating." —Rev. Dr. Jon Burnham, Pastor, Presbyterian Church, Houston, TX
"Acharya S deserves to be recognized as a leading researcher and an expert in the field of comparative mythology, on a par with James Frazer or Robert Graves—indeed, superior to those forerunners in the frankness of her conclusions and the volume of her evidence." —Barbara Walker, The Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets and Man Made God
"I've known people with triple Ph.D's who haven't come close to the scholarship in Who Was Jesus? " —Pastor David Bruce, M.Div, NorthPark Seminary, Chicago, HollywoodJesus.com
"Thirty years ago, when in divinity school, I mighthave had second thoughts about becoming an Episcopal priest if a book like D. M. Murdock's Who Was Jesus? had been available to me." —Bob Semes, Retired university professor of History and Religion, Founder and Executive Director of The Jefferson Center
"Ms. Murdock is one of only a tiny number of scholars with the richly diverse academic background (and the necessary courage) to adequately address the question of whether Jesus Christ truly existed as a walking-talking figure in first-century Palestine." —David Mills, Atheist Universe

BERNIMOORE: @mollie12,

your first reply to rhymz is 'just very straight to the point' in which you said something about one reasoning oneself 'into christ' or 'out of christ', unfortunately people like rhymz have got theirself into a 'curse of self destruction' declared by apostle peter(he will be shouting threat now,olodo), how do i mean, rhymz is not even worth discussing at all,because he is seeking attention,for example he just seach copy from another persons work and paste some things that he never verified by himself about apostle paul, by creating a tread 'how paul distort christianity 1 and 2, he alledged that paul was a Gay, just because paul mention that 'he had an infirmity in him' rhymz took that opportunity to 'fill in the gap' thereby falling into what peter said in 2 peter 3:15-17;

15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, [size=14pt]which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.[/size]
17 You therefore, beloved, since you know thisbeforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked;

so, manage your time wisely,bacause a determined person who choose to 'reason out of christ' should be left alone to wander in his own error!ask Mr Anony on the forum, i have been following his write ups, i will post some links that you will confirm that rhymz is looking for attention, (no apology pls) he can insult but thats the truth GBAMMMMM!

Between you and I who is the attention seeking MOFO here? You or Me that cares less if you dropped dead fuming in your rage?

Check my history and see on what sections I post the most.
I don't have time for religious riff-raffs like you, trying so hard to make a satan out of anyone that dares to question your irrational religious beliefs.

I care less if my positions on religion give you sleepless night to the point that you stalk and obsess yourself with my threads and posts, sorry I can't help your mood swings. . Lol. . Am not here to appeal to your sensibilities or say something you would like.

Go get a job and quit stalking me in your rage. If it was up to religious nitwits like you, you prolly would have gone bokoharam on me for having the guts to ask for real facts backing the basis of your lifelong religious beliefs. .

Well, it is not in your place to decide who is telling the truth or not, let the facts speak for themselves, unfortunately, in this regard, they stack up against the basis of your belief system to the point they make it seem like nonsense.
Instead of whining and stalkiing me on NL like some perv that needs help, you should accept the fact that your religion is full of inexplicable BS that defiles common sense under heavy scrutiny of evidence and facts of history.
Too bad with folks like you, common sense is not afterall common.

[quote author=Mr_Anony]Lol, still in the business of derailing threads while parroting your "new discovery" are you? Have you won that money yet? http://zeitgeistchallenge.com/[/quote]hahaha. . Mr Anony, u still dey alive, I though you went missing after that Jesus Exposed thread. You got so confused to the point you gave yourself a break to re-examine your beliefs. .lol. .anyway, welcome back, feel free to join the dicussion and possibly take up the challenge.

mollie12: Something else you missed is the fact that several works of literature from that time of history have been lost. Interestingly enough, the scrolls of the bible found are the most numerous, outnumbering other historical texts from that time. So the issue is not the lack of historical texts that make mention of Jesus, it's the lack of these texts.

I beg to differ with you on this vague claims of lost history. Unless you mean to tell us that the only history curiously lost to time is that of Jesus Christ and Christians alone, it is a well known fact that the centuries surrounding the beginning of the Christian era, the periods of Tiberias and Augustus, were, in fact, some of the best-documented in history, this fact is admitted even by Christian apologists.
For example, the Roman historian under Augustus, Livy (59 BCE-17 CE), alone composed 142 volumes.
Even the well known Jewish historian and philosopher Philo (20 BCE-50 CE), who was alive at the purported time of Jesus, was silent on the subject of Jesus Christ, the christian godman who brought down the wrath of Rome and Judea. Neither were Jesus and his followers mentioned by any of the over 40 other historians who wrote during the first and second centuries of the Common Era, including Plutarch, the Roman biographer, who lived at the same time (46-120 CE) and in the same place where the Christians were purportedly swarming yet made no mention of them, their founder or their religion.
The works of these common era historians and author are enough to fill up a library, yet in this mass of Jewish and Pagan literature, aside from two forged passages in the works of a Jewish author, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there is to be found no mention of Jesus Christ. Instead your best excuse is that most of it may have been lost, realy?

mollie12: The answer to your first point - Josephus Flavius. Heard of him?

Finally, a christian Amazon has been able to take up the challenge and defend her faith, to be sincere Miss, I respect your maturity and intelligence. Now to the issue.
1. In the entire works of Josephus, which constitute many volumes of great detail encompassing centuries of history, there is no mention of Paul or the Christians, yet Josephus was contemporary with Paul.
There are only two brief paragraphs that purport to refer to Jesus. Although much has been made of these “references,” they have been dismissed by scholars most of whom were honest Christian historians and Christian apologists alike as forgeries, as have been those referring to John the Baptist and James, “brother of Jesus.”
Bishop Warburton of Gloucester (1698-1779) labeled the Josephus interpolation regarding Jesus “a rank forgery, and a very silly one, too.”
The fact is, with the exception of this one incongruous forged passage, section 3, Josephus makes not the slightest mention of Jesus the Christ—though some score of other Joshuas, or Jesuses, are recorded by him, neither does he mention any of his widespread wonders and miracles.
The first mention ever made of the purpoted passage that made reference to Jesus the Christ are in the Church History of that “very dishonest writer,” Bishop Eusebius, in the fourth century.
Prior to Eusebius, this passage was not known to Origen and the earlier patristic writers. The passage has been demonstrated be an interpolation by the church Bishop writer, Eusebius. If you want full detailed analysis of the refutall I could paste it here in full.

kushe: @rhyme
The fool says in his heart,there is no god.I hope in your case however that you would repent from your folly cos in the sight of God you are too minute and insignificant,yet you daily occupy his mind and kind heart of forgiveness,wishing he would have a relationship with you through his son Jesus whose very existence you deny.You can either have him as a father in this life or as judge in the hereafter.Please choose wisely.

Dont quote the bible to Me friend, its claims till this day remains unproven, you will have to be high on some religious form of irrationality to believe the biblical fairytales. Don't worry about Me, just address the damn issues I raised, it is so obvious you christian lot can't seem to have answers besides diversionary antics that has become the hallmark of religious fanaticism.

uwa234: U̶̲̥̅̊ be mumu, go †☺ sunday school child.

you can easily Identify a low-I.Q bigot from the way he contradicts himself with his foullogic. Getting angry and over questions he can't attempt or seem to compregend..lol

Ijebulogic: Wow! Your response speaks volumes...and you see why people like @UNURMIND have issues with so called Christians of today. A man opens his heart that he was once a Christian and got frustrated with the hate around him. Your response should not be to judge him and spread rumours of perverts etc as you have done above , your response (if you are practicing the same Christianity as i am) is to find a way to encourage him back on the right path....am i missing something?

lol. . .he is using the age long method christians used against non-christians and later on Muslims too, to become mainstream religion. They used force, cajoling, threat and when all these did not work they started a sadistic purging of the people they called pagans, heathens, heretics,gnostics and so on, once they gained state power giving to them by Empiror Constatine, it was no going back, the earth must succumb to the christian God or face the most wicked punishments and destruction of older civilizations, religions, temple, tribes and so. .lol. . You think people willingly gave up their ancestral religion that was even more advanced and detailed than christianity then as they were older and christians copied from them. They were forced to give up their beliefs, the groups we call illuminati today were the forebearers of splinters religions groups that were silenced by the much powerful Roman catholic church who had been rewarded with state power by constantine. History my brother is lost on us, funny thing about is that it is the dominant side that gets to write it-whether true or not-the minority side of the story is destroyed by the drowning chants of majority. illuminati means being exposed to these truths that christian warriors destroyed-the truth about the christian lies, how they started, how they lifted heavily from their own pagan religion only to destroy theirs to erase any trace, how Jesus was nothing short of the myth of astro-theological myth that was prevalent then. . Too much truth to handle my brother

optimist D: I respect any man that calls himself a man of God. Pastor Bakare, wgat happend to on the job trainning? What if the person knows what it entails to be a pastors and keeps all the rules and commandments? What if she wins soul, which is the important thing as a christain, for God and helps humanity? What if she is more riteous than you and pleases God in all her ways? You mean she should not be called a pastor? What you are saying is that a criminal should be called a pastor for mere going to the school? That is part of our problems. We pay attention on qualications than people's skill and gift and what can offer.

imagine, on the Job training. No wonder religious hackers like Oyedepo, Adeboye and co are misleading zealots like you. There is a reason for theological books and knowledge, you want to learn while you teach, so typical of a christian looney who talks about shiat they know nothing about.

optimist D: because you do not believe in Jesus, the Christ, does not mean others shouldn't. Save yourself the headache and use your time for other things that will be of profit to you and humanity. I believe.

mentally lazy christian nut that believe because he was born into it and taught to be a christian. There are so many things I learnt when I was small that I have unlearnt and even learnt a better way now that I am an adult. The truth is not a function of old belief systems, it is a function of the facts and evidences supporting the belief systems. Why is it accepted as fact, is it because you were born into it and met it like that to be the truth even though in all honest there is no evidence to support sch belief system. Like I said, I want to see intellectual christians tackle the question, not robotic christians and zombies like you whose minds have been programmed to believe without questioning.

Blyss: Wrong. I'm 100% Black-American or African-American as you call us. By the way, I work with a shiat load of white guys, and a few white females, all the time. All of the guys, with the exception of one are married to white women, and the the one whom isn't is married to a Black-American woman. Now often times, during downtime in the work day groups of us would sit around and randomly talk about home life and the likes, and I swear to god that I am happy as shiat that the lord gave me the fortitude to stay away from white girls. The stories they tell about their wives makes the shiat brothas complain about with their black wives, look mediocre. The dudes go through HELL with these white women. 40% of them, don't even sleep in the same room as their wives anymore, not to mention have an intimate relationship with them.

Their wives are total control freaks, some of these dudes even give up their weakly checks to their wives every week. Most of their wives don't work, don't want to work and don't feel as they they should have to work and so they don't even bother looking for a job, despite the fact of that their family could really use some extra income. When these dudes get up the nerve to address them about the issue, they get cussed out and call Lazy, no good, stupid and all kinds of shiat; they even get the "My mother told me I shouldn't of married your no good azz" and the "I cant believe I was stupid enough to have kids with you" comment from them constantly.

It's gotten so bad that I'll say another 5% of the dudes just moved on out the house to go live with their parents, a friend, or in a hotel, because even sleeping in a separate room wasn't enough. The only reason they stay with these women is because they don't want to lose all their money and property to these women when they leave them. They don't really care about the kids too much, because the mother has most them hatting his guts anyway.

I mean I can go on all day with this, but the moral of what I'm getting at, is that it's not just a black-American thing, it's an AMERICAN WOMAN thing. AMERICAN women period, no matter what Color they are, all act the same. They all carry the same attitudes, demand the same things, and threaten you with the same threats if shiat don't go their way. Many are nice but many are also mean as hell, but BA are just a much more vocal group than others in regard to their issues and unfortunately, find nothing wrong in airing out their issues randomly around public forms.

some body is being honest here, at least, there is no hint of sychophancy or denial in your post. I agree with you on the American women being largly thesame if compared without bias. I believe it has to do with the pro-feminist family laws in the west, rather than seek to protect both parties in a relationship like marriage, it confers so much rights and power to the femalefolks to the dentriment of the malefolks and these ripples is seen in the way both male and females in the west view marriage today. It is no more a sacred union between two a man and a woman, it has assumed too many definitions depending on the sexes involved and the prevalent same-sex cohabitation laws of each states. One of the ills of unlimited freedom, i guess.

I want to see christians challenge Me.

Christians need to start asking some real questions that their leaders has used "faith" to prevent them from asking.
Did Jesus realy exist?
Why is there so much inconsistencies in the accounts of Jesus's death.
Why is there no evidence of his crucifixion in the in the works of historians like Josephus, Tacitus and the likes who wrote extensively on the Jewish, Roman, Greek and egyptian histories of the time the bible alleged Jesus existed. Is the concept of atonement through death and ressurection original to Jesus or was it a borrowed concept of pagan worship and beliefs. Who came up with the idea of Jesus's death being a form of atonement for sins of adherent; Paul the novice convert or James and Peter the brother and disciples of Jesus? Christians please do a little research and read books by real expert from whom your Daddy G.o and co hurriedly copy from but stop at the shallow level.

I want to seriously throw this challenge to anyone who is realy convinced of the accuracy of the history of the christian religion as claimed by the canonical gospels and what is preached about Jesus.
I have come to discover with very serious damning evidence against the existence of Jesus Christ; it is all too galring under the scrutiny of facts of recorded history that Jesus Christ realy did not exist and that outside the christian holy bible, there is no record of Jesus christ in any of the detailed history about the places and the people he was alleged to have been contemprory with. These following question remain damning to the historicity of Christ till date:
1. How come with the kind of impact, wide spread miracles, political and ideological disagreement Jesus Christ was reacorded to have had with the Pharisees and the Roman authorities that eventually crucified him according to the gospels, however, there are basically no non-biblical references to a historical Jesus by any known historian of the time during and after Jesus’s purported advent.

2. How come the the story of Jesus Christ can be found only in the forged books of the New Testament, an assortment of gospels and epistles that required many centuries and hands to create.

3. The various Pauline epistles contained in the New Testament form an important part of Christianity, yet these “earliest” of Christian texts never discuss a historical background of Jesus, even though Paul purportedly lived during and after Jesus’s advent and surely would have known about his master’s miraculous life. Instead, these letters deal with a spiritual construct found in various religions, sects, cults and mystery schools for hundreds to thousands of years prior to the Christian era. Is it possible that Paul did not know about the Jesus christ described in Canonical gospels but instead invented his own Jesus mysticism
i still have more but will like to see an attempt first from intellectual christians that understand the historicity of the gospel, christ and how they all came about. No need for fanatical christians to attempt it, they will end up posting petty threats.

birdman: rhymz did you just derail your own thread?

not realy jare! I just wanted to give that looney his own medicine, he seems to think he has got a monopoly to trash-talk all the time. The kid is always angry and combative all the time, bringing up unrelated $h!t from his imaginary beef with everyone on every thrad.
Anyway, I am done taking him to the cleaners.

[quote author=~Royal~]rhymz go spell your name right and leave the young lady alone, I notice you steer clear of my Font and Aim for the "Female"...

What was that again about AA men vs Nigerian Men?.....

Sharia Law...

Islam...

Cowards...

Bullying Women...

Oh excuse me...lol

My truth slipped out.

...Somebody pass me an Ashtray.[/quote]hahahahahaha. . . Me live in the slums of brooklyn? Hahahah. . Just don't smoke your heart outs. I see how some AA losers validate their existence, you live in manhattan and so what? Make I begin clap for you ni? Lol. . Who is this tramp trying to impress, Me? Brouhahahah. . .guy you need more than an ashtray, you need to get high on that dope you smoke that make you talk $h!t you little gangstar with a keyboard and no brains. Do yourself a favour, do yourself nigga. . Lol

[quote author=~Royal~]Ghetto Retorts?...

Pardon?.

Are you Upset that i made a fool of your post?

I suspect an Individual is Hurt. LOL

Point out the "Ghetto-Ness" in the Post you quoted of mines.

Dark Skin Girls are Bitter, they have a right to be.

The only people i see crying are the Two Nigerians getting completely owned inside of this thread who seem to fail at structuring a proper line of text without errors, Ironically enough keep resorting to incorrect usage of the word Ghetto....

"Ghetto", Coming from Boarderline 3rd world country Children...lol

I currently live in Manhatten, from what i can recall from your little war with shymmexx i believe you are from the Slums of Brooklyn? If i recall accurately.

Not sure, because i don't really keep up with your post History, Unlike you admittedly do with me lol

So a 3rd world country born immigrant who moves to the slums of brooklyn is calling me Ghetto?

Based on what assumption...that i don't compile a wall of sloppy text as soon above by your Quote? lol

The Word around the Nairaland Neighborhood is StillWater is a Igbo Hoodrat Pretending to Live in Brooklyn, but actually living in Nigeria..

You ain't gotta lie to kick it mamii....

Rep Your 3rd World.

lol@you Mad at the Young Lady for saying "Dang"...

You got slayed...deal with it...

Umm i am not Shymexx, Ask me Me.

Time registered: November 19, 2007

Only a Lifeless Individual Dedicates 5 years of their Life to One forum.

Either Counter the Points of your slaughter layed upon you or keep it moving Mamii....

..5 years in the game and still an Unknown LoL[/quote]what a petty minded African-American ghetto urchin. Can't debate the substance of the issue the next thing is to attack personalities. Now I see why many AA women are on their last nerves. With many irresponsible weed-smoking fiends like you, impregnating little black girls and forcing them into situations they are not ready for how will they not be mad. Kids like you are a product of that system that is why you find it so unnatural to debate without any hint of combativeness and hostilities, you are so paranoid that everyone is against to the point you alienate yourselves from everyone else and expect not to be treated differently. You have got issues that your oversize ego will not let deal with, you will rather blame it on your women whose lives you make more difficult than man up.