Cruise to build $10M Bunker because Xenu is coming...

[leemajors]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/showbiz/showbiznews.html?in_article_id=484455&in_page_id=1773

Hollywood star Tom Cruise is planning to build a bunker at his Colorado home to protect his family in the event of an intergalactic alien attack, according to new reports.

The Mission Impossible actor, who is a dedicated follower of Scientology, is reportedly fearful that deposed galactic ruler 'Xenu' is plotting an evil revenge attack on Earth.

According to American magazine Star, a source said: "Tom is planning to build a US$10 million bunker under his Telluride estate."

"It's a self-contained underground shelter with a high tech air purifying shelter."

The facility is said to have enough room for ten people - including wife Katie Holmes, 17-month-old daughter Suri and his adopted children Isabella, 14, and Connor, 12.

A spokesperson for the actor has denied the reports, saying: "This is completely untrue. He is not building on his property at all."

The 45-year-old is currently filming World War II movie Rubicon (formerly known as Valkyrie) in Germany, where he is regularly joined on set by Katie and Suri.

Tom plays German hero Colonel Claus Graf Schenk von Stauffenberg in the wartime thriller surrounding a failed plot by high-ranking military officers to blow up Hitler and has come under attack for his decision to do so as well as his religious beliefs.

The controversial film depicts the ill-fated plan to blow up the dictator on July 20, 1944, which he survived, with the plotters subsequently paying with their lives.

[nkdlunch]

thanks, I needed a good laugh

[BacktoBasics]

Fucking Tom Cruise. Jesus Christ

[BigZak]

that damn maverick

[MoSpur]

He gets weirder and weirder

[clambake]

makes sense to me. i built a bunker to protect my family from Xanadu

[CuckingFunt]

Tom Cruise is fucking insane, which amuses me to no end.

[BigZak]

if he doesn't show that he believes? that's alot of cash that the cult of scientology loses!

[T Park]

Whats scary, is people will look to him for advice on who to vote for in the next presidential election...

[johnsmith]

Whats scary, is people will look to him for advice on who to vote for in the next presidential election...


I know I should make fun of you for this post but there are just too many damn jokes I could make about it.......I mean, which route to go?

Irrelevant?

Typical?

Political?

What to do, what to do.

[SRJ]

Wouldn't it be funny if he turned out to be right?

[johnsmith]

Wouldn't it be funny if he turned out to be right?


Holy shit, I never thought of that.


Anyone have the San Antonio branch of Scientology phone number?

[PakiDan]

[QUOTE=clambake]makes sense to me. i built a bunker to protect my family from Xanadu[/Q

:lol :lol :lol :lol

[T Park]

I know I should make fun of you for this post but there are just too many damn jokes I could make about it.......I mean, which route to go?

Irrelevant?

Typical?

Political?

What to do, what to do.


Come on big talker, lets see what you got.


Seeing as you never show up to a GTG and ever talk shit DIRECTLY to my face, coward, lets see it.

[Shelly]

I think Suri is adorable!

[Condemned 2 HelLA]

I'm not sure which display of irrational behavior from Tom is funnier;
that one or this one:

http://www.hollywoodrag.com/index.php?/forums/viewthread/6652/

:lmao

[Hemotivo]

:lmao

[midgetonadonkey]

Whats scary, is people will look to him for advice on who to vote for in the next presidential election...

No shit. Look what happened the last time people elected a President based on his belief in a big fictional man in the sky.

[T Park]

Look what happened the last time people elected a President based on his belief in a big fictional man in the sky

just cause you prayed for something and gold told you hes got better things to do, doesn't mean he doesn't exist senor.

[midgetonadonkey]

just cause you prayed for something and gold told you hes got better things to do, doesn't mean he doesn't exist senor.

What makes you think Xenu doesn't exist?

[midgetonadonkey]

just cause you prayed for something and gold told you hes got better things to do, doesn't mean he doesn't exist senor.

And don't ever think you have any idea about why I believe what I do.

[BacktoBasics]

Interesting tidbit

PHOENIX - A man who agreed to plead guilty in a plot to extort more than $1 million from Tom Cruise for the actor's stolen wedding photos was found dead in his home, authorities said.

Investigators said it appeared David Hans Schmidt, 47, who was under house arrest and faced up to two years in federal prison, had committed suicide.

He was found dead in his townhouse around 3 p.m. Friday after police noticed a tracker placed on him had not moved and he had not checked in, said Lt. Anthony Lopez.

It wasn't known when Schmidt, who was free on $100,000 bond, was to enter his plea in court. He also faced a $250,000 fine under a plea agreement filed Aug. 24 in Los Angeles.

Schmidt, known for brokering deals involving compromising celebrity photos and videos, was arrested in July after federal authorities said a co-defendant obtained photos of Cruise's wedding to Katie Holmes in Italy last year from the event's official photographer, court documents show.

Starting in May, Schmidt had repeated contact with Cruise representatives and threatened to release the photos if he didn't receive between $1.2 and $1.3 million, authorities said.

Schmidt also tried to auction off Paris Hilton's diaries, along with photos of her in various stages of undress and other personal items that had been locked away in a Los Angeles-area storage locker until a few months ago.

He also claimed to have brokered deals to sell a sex video of Dustin Diamond, who played Screech on "Saved by the Bell," and a video of skater Tonya Harding's wedding night, according to published reports. He also claimed to have obtained topless shots of rescued U.S. Army POW Pfc. Jessica Lynch.

[Fillmoe]

is this dude on crack?

[maxpower]

I think that is one hell of an idea ....unless Xenu reads Star magazine.

[Jesus]

Fucking Tom Cruise. Jesus Christ

Have I not asked you to stop using my name in your posts?

[Mister Sinister]

You're all idiots. Cthulhu's where it's at.

[slayermin]

Well there have been some interesting UFO documentaries lately on the Science and History channels. Maybe he's been watching too much television.

[peewee's lovechild]

This is almost as funny as christians bitching about the coming of the Rapture.

Almost.

[midgetonadonkey]

This is almost as funny as christians bitching about the coming of the Rapture.

Almost.

But the Rapture is foretold in a book. A book Pee Wee! A book.

[peewee's lovechild]

But the Rapture is foretold in a book. A book Pee Wee! A book.

Written by some fucked up old foggie who was living in solitary confinement on an island.

Fuck, Tom Hanks started talking to a volley ball after a couple of weeks being stranded on an island. Imagine what that fucker could have done with that volleyball if he had twenty years time?

He could have written a book to rival Revelations (Apocolypse to some of you).

[ashbeeigh]

This is almost as funny as christians bitching about the coming of the Rapture.

Almost.

Jerk.


But on topic. :lmao We should stock up on some peanut butter and 1/2 liter aquafina.

[Summers]

I think it's funny as hell, but it's from a British tabloid...

If it's true, however, someone who likes Tom Cruise needs to get him medicated.

[midgetonadonkey]

Written by some fucked up old foggie who was living in solitary confinement on an island.

Fuck, Tom Hanks started talking to a volley ball after a couple of weeks being stranded on an island. Imagine what that fucker could have done with that volleyball if he had twenty years time?

He could have written a book to rival Revelations (Apocolypse to some of you).

But if it's in a book it has to be true.

[exstatic]

makes sense to me. i built a bunker to protect my family from Xanadu
:lmao


http://www.blogwaybaby.com/uploaded_images/Xanadu-777801.jpg

[exstatic]

Jerk.


But on topic. :lmao We should stock up on some peanut butter and 1/2 liter aquafina.
So, he's a "jerk" for making fun of your religion, but you go ahead and unload on Tom's?

[ashbeeigh]

So, he's a "jerk" for making fun of your religion, but you go ahead and unload on Tom's?

Tom can call me a jerk if he wants to.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Now I'm not going to argue that Tom Cruise isn't insane because he believes in Scientology and that makes him mad as a cut snake, but you people all fell for a sucker report from:
1. the Daily Mail in the UK (a tabloid rag),
2. which quotes from "Star" magazine in the US (what a reputable journal!),
3. which quotes "a source",
4. which is directly contradicted by Tom's representative.

In other words, some hack writer made it all up, and you believe it?

Sheesh people, show a bit of media savvy, please... :rolleyes

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

So, he's a "jerk" for making fun of your religion, but you go ahead and unload on Tom's?

Scientology isn't a religion, even scientologists say that. It's "more of an alternative to psychology", so they say repeatedly.

Where do we draw the line on what constitutes a religion and what doesn't? I mean, Scientology is clearly a complete and utter load of shite, yet people believe in it so it becomes a religion and thus a sacred cow!? So if I believe that we're all dominions of the Omniscient Flying Spaghetti Monster, and declare that my faith, does that make it a religion? Where is the line?

Oh, and what delineates a "religion" from a "cult"? Scientology strikes me more as a cult than anything else.

[midgetonadonkey]

Scientology isn't a religion, even scientologists say that. It's "more of an alternative to psychology", so they say repeatedly.

Where do we draw the line on what constitutes a religion and what doesn't? I mean, Scientology is clearly a complete and utter load of shite, yet people believe in it so it becomes a religion and thus a sacred cow!? So if I believe that we're all dominions of the Omniscient Flying Spaghetti Monster, and declare that my faith, does that make it a religion? Where is the line?

Oh, and what delineates a "religion" from a "cult"? Scientology strikes me more as a cult than anything else.

Scientology is as ridiculous as Christianity. If you recognize one as a religion you must recognize all bullshit as religion.

[peewee's lovechild]

mad as a cut snake

You lost me there, buddy.

You Ozzies are funny creatures.

[peewee's lovechild]

But if it's in a book it has to be true.

I'd much rather take Stephen King's The Stand as truth.

Actually, that would be a pretty cool way to end humanity.

I'm going to start looking for a little old black woman who lives in a corn field and plays her gui-tar all day long.

Why is Kings so obsessed with corn fields??

I think that means that the scarecrow is the devil.

Which probably makes dorthy the Anti-christ.

And the munchkins are evil.

I don't know where I'm going with all this, but I can still probably make a religion out of it.

I'll just have to crucify the cowardly lion or some shit like that.

[Mister Sinister]

If you were a snake, and someone cut you, wouldn't you be pretty pissed off?

[peewee's lovechild]

If you were a snake, and someone cut you, wouldn't you be pretty pissed off?

I'd probably be dead.

Plus, snakes are always pissy.

But, I believe our silly Ozzie/Aussie (I like Ozzie because it's so much more amusing) friend used the word "mad" as in crazy.

I've never met a crazy snake.

Except for the one that used to visit me in the middle of my dreams asking for ice cream.

I've always questioned his motives. What the fuck would a snake need with ice cream. I mean, come on, they don't even have arms for fucks sake!!!

Maybe that's why they're so pissed all the time. They're awwwwwngreee because they have no arms to eat their ice cream with.

[Mister Sinister]

They wouldn't need arms, you dumb twat. They could just swallow it whole.

[peewee's lovechild]

They wouldn't need arms, you dumb twat. They could just swallow it whole.

But, ice cream melts my funny little 1/2 gay friend!!!

Ice cream melts!!!!!!

Their tongues are not nearly of substance enough eat all the ice cream before it melts. They need arms to hold the ice cream off the ground and enjoy it at a leisurly pace. Without the arms, they would be forced to eat it off the ground and it would all melt in a matter of seconds.

Use you mind, liberate yourself from ignorance!!

[Mister Sinister]

But, ice cream melts my funny little 1/2 gay friend!!!

Ice cream melts!!!!!!

Their tongues are not nearly of substance enough eat all the ice cream before it melts. They need arms to hold the ice cream off the ground and enjoy it at a leisurly pace. Without the arms, they would be forced to eat it off the ground and it would all melt in a matter of seconds.

Use you mind, liberate yourself from ignorance!!
That...that's just....you....God, DAMN IT, peewee!

[TDMVPDPOY]

10m for a bunker? rippoff

just take out the water of ur pool, and flip it upside down, you got ur self a cheap diy bunker

[Condemned 2 HelLA]

Scientology is as ridiculous as Christianity. If you recognize one as a religion you must recognize all bullshit as religion.

:clap

[exstatic]

Scientology isn't a religion, even scientologists say that. It's "more of an alternative to psychology", so they say repeatedly.

Where do we draw the line on what constitutes a religion and what doesn't? I mean, Scientology is clearly a complete and utter load of shite, yet people believe in it so it becomes a religion and thus a sacred cow!? So if I believe that we're all dominions of the Omniscient Flying Spaghetti Monster, and declare that my faith, does that make it a religion? Where is the line?

Oh, and what delineates a "religion" from a "cult"? Scientology strikes me more as a cult than anything else.
It's funny because they claim and receive tax exempt status as such.

I just see little prigs like Ashbeeeiieieigh as one monkey throwing dung at another monkey's religion. It's kind of funny that they think other people are deluded, when they believe in a virgin birth of a male child (couldn't even be parthenogenesis), raising of the dead (multiple offenses, including himself, allegedly), alchemy (changing water into wine), and the ability to walk on water and replicate food in mass quantities. That sounds no less ridiculous on the face of it than Xenu coming home to roost.

[fraga]

I remember watching that South Park episode where they "explain" what Scientology is and where it originated from and the whole story behind it. Now that can't be true can it...people don't actually believe that do they...South Park was just making fun right........right....

[leemajors]

I remember watching that South Park episode where they "explain" what Scientology is and where it originated from and the whole story behind it. Now that can't be true can it...people don't actually believe that do they...South Park was just making fun right........right....
http://www.xenu.net/

[ashbeeigh]

It's funny because they claim and receive tax exempt status as such.

I just see little prigs like Ashbeeeiieieigh as one monkey throwing dung at another monkey's religion.


Dude, whatever they want to believe. I was calling peewee a jerk, not the scientology movement or anything Tom Cruise is doing. My comments were all in line with what everyone else was saying.

[jman3000]

retards. everybody. k thx.

[jman3000]

i went through 12 years of sunday school and my philosophy is if youre a good person, youre a good person. any loving God should accept you for what you are whether it be atheist, christian, muslim, hindu, buddhist, taoist, etc. i shouldnt have to do a bunch of useless, retarded ceremonies and donate money to shit in order to get in heaven or motel 6... whatever.

[Mavschick]

Is Xenu's splooge going to be that voluminous and toxic that Cruise needs to build a bunker to hide in so as to not get covered in it? Xenu must be some sort of freak.

[peewee's lovechild]

Dude, whatever they want to believe. I was calling peewee a jerk, not the scientology movement or anything Tom Cruise is doing. My comments were all in line with what everyone else was saying.

Are you mocking my new found religion based on ice cream eating snakes and evil munchkins??

[Bigzax]

Jesus can kick Xenu's ass. That's all i got to say about that.

[ashbeeigh]

Are you mocking my new found religion based on ice cream eating snakes and evil munchkins??


I may be. whatcha gonna do about it? :spin

[peewee's lovechild]

Jesus can kick Xenu's ass. That's all i got to say about that.

He'll be armed with a Crucifix.

Xenu has an intergalactic army.

My money's on Xenu.

[peewee's lovechild]

I may be. whatcha gonna do about it? :spin

You will feel the Munchking wrath on Judgement day.

The Lollypop guild will kick your ass.

[DarkReign]

There is no God. Just another device to make you feel seperate from your fellow man.

Xenu is coming though. He called me first 'cuz Im down with the Interplanetary MENSA folks.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

It's funny because they claim and receive tax exempt status as such.

I just see little prigs like Ashbeeeiieieigh as one monkey throwing dung at another monkey's religion. It's kind of funny that they think other people are deluded, when they believe in a virgin birth of a male child (couldn't even be parthenogenesis), raising of the dead (multiple offenses, including himself, allegedly), alchemy (changing water into wine), and the ability to walk on water and replicate food in mass quantities. That sounds no less ridiculous on the face of it than Xenu coming home to roost.

I knew someone would pick up on this. :)

Yes, all religions contain highly irrational ideas, however I think you really have to draw the line here between Bible literalists (who are deluded IMHO), and those who understand that the Bible is a series of parables and life-lessons and not necessarily true to fact. OTOH, is there a similar dichotomy amongst Scientologists? The way I understand it, to be a Scientologist it's all or nothing, and if you can't commit 100% then you get excommunicated.

Also, believing that there was a cool and compassionate guy named Jesus is far less of a stretch than Xenu and his alien souls...

[peewee's lovechild]

I knew someone would pick up on this. :)

Yes, all religions contain highly irrational ideas, however I think you really have to draw the line here between Bible literalists (who are deluded IMHO), and those who understand that the Bible is a series of parables and life-lessons and not necessarily true to fact.

So, that means I CAN make a religion based on The Wizard of OZ because it's full of life lessons and parables??

[peewee's lovechild]

The way I understand it, to be a Scientologist it's all or nothing, and if you can't commit 100% then you get excommunicated.

That's funny, because I got excommunicated (disfellowshipped, as that particular reason calls it) for not commiting 100% to the faith.

Christain religions are not immune to this.

[peewee's lovechild]

Also, believing that there was a cool and compassionate guy named Jesus is far less of a stretch than Xenu and his alien souls...

Jesus lived in "Heaven" with legions of angels (alien souls) before being magically transported into a virgins uterus.

No, that isn't a stretch at all.

And, he's supposed to come back with his legions of alien souls to destroy earth and all the evil that resides in it.

How's that different from Xenu exactly??

[peewee's lovechild]

Also, since the christian "god" doesn't have a shape or form, and he has a desire to destory Earth . . . I think he's a lot like Galactus, which would make Jesus his Silver Surfer.

[Extra Stout]

I knew someone would pick up on this. :)

Yes, all religions contain highly irrational ideas, however I think you really have to draw the line here between Bible literalists (who are deluded IMHO), and those who understand that the Bible is a series of parables and life-lessons and not necessarily true to fact. OTOH, is there a similar dichotomy amongst Scientologists? The way I understand it, to be a Scientologist it's all or nothing, and if you can't commit 100% then you get excommunicated.

Also, believing that there was a cool and compassionate guy named Jesus is far less of a stretch than Xenu and his alien souls...
Philosophy can provide life lessons and parables without ever having to address the issue of worshipping a deity.

I guess a person could pick and choose aspects of Jesus' teaching and apply them to their own personal philosophy as they please, cafeteria-style, without addressing Jesus' claims to be the means of salvation, or calling himself not only the Son of God, but also the "I AM," which is the name of God (and upon the occasion of his calling himself that, provoked the Jews to pick up stones with which to stone him). But that would not make such a person a Christian, just as I would not be a Muslim or a Taoist if I found a nugget of value in the teaching of a wise imam, or an ancient Chinese philosopher.

With regard to the irrationality of certain Christian teachings, they are no more irrational today than they were in the first century A.D., when the learned Greek philosophers scoffed at them. Even then, there were those who found the moral teachings of Jesus appealing, but didn't want to bother with all that supernatural stuff. Paul addressed those in the church at Corinth who thought a literal resurrection of the dead was silly by saying, to paraphrase, "If there is no resurrection, then Christianity is a waste of time, and we are the most pathetic people on Earth."

[Bigzax]

"Just love one another and stop being assholes."

-Jesus Christ

[Lebowski Brickowski]

That man's on to something. Where do I send my money?

[peewee's lovechild]

"Just love one another and stop being assholes."

-Jesus Christ

"My brother used to pick on me."

- Jimmy Christ

[JoeChalupa]

Mi Iv

[spurs_fan_in_exile]

I tend to think that if an alien race has the technology to traverse the galaxy they're going to pack weaponry that will torch any dinky bomb shelter. If I were him I'd take the 10 mil and sink it into the "Tom Cruise is Still a Sane Human Being" ad campaign. What do you think Nicole Kidman's asking price would be for a 30 second spot?

[leemajors]

I tend to think that if an alien race has the technology to traverse the galaxy they're going to pack weaponry that will torch any dinky bomb shelter. If I were him I'd take the 10 mil and sink it into the "Tom Cruise is Still a Sane Human Being" ad campaign. What do you think Nicole Kidman's asking price would be for a 30 second spot?
you're forgetting that Cruise has transcended the physical plane of existence.

[CavsSuperFan]

Like no one else here is concerned about the reality of an intergalactic alien attack!

[Whisky Dog]

If it's not this invisible God of Christians, Jews, and Muslims coming to judge and destroy us it's the intergalactic aliens. Why can't someone come up with a religion where we aren't constantly afraid of being judged or decimated by some unseen force?


Probably because you can't control people without the fear element.

[johnsmith]

Come on big talker, lets see what you got.


Seeing as you never show up to a GTG and ever talk shit DIRECTLY to my face, coward, lets see it.



:lmao :lmao :lmao

[CosmicCowboy]

Tom plays German hero Colonel Claus Graf Schenk von Stauffenberg in the wartime thriller surrounding a failed plot by high-ranking military officers to blow up Hitler and has come under attack for his decision to do so as well as his religious beliefs.

The controversial film depicts the ill-fated plan to blow up the dictator on July 20, 1944, which he survived, with the plotters subsequently paying with their lives.

So we get to see Tom Cruise executed in his next movie? Dang, I might pay to see that.

[Sportcamper]

I have seen Close Encounters, E.T. and Days of Thunder... These guys like Tom Cruise, Richard Dryfus and Steven Spielberg know stuff about Aliens...

[peewee's lovechild]

I have seen Close Encounters, E.T. and Days of Thunder... These guys like Tom Cruise, Richard Dryfus and Steven Spielberg know stuff about Aliens...

Dryfus and The Berg are Jews.

They could buy Scientology.

[RuffnReadyOzStyle]

Peewee - just to be clear, if you go back and read what I have written in this thread you'll see that I think 'conventional' religions are full of illogical ideas, but I'm actually asking where we draw the line on what constitutes a religion. I don't really know exactly where the line can be drawn - religion in general bears no attraction for me because I favour rationality over faith.

However, it seems to me that Scientology is a clear fabrication, whereas I can believe that Jesus existed and did some incredible things, even if they were exaggerated in the Bible, and even if I don't believe that he was an immaculate conception and the son of God.

A noted science-fiction writer comes up with a crazy story about Xenu and his alien souls from 75mil yrs ago, and somehow that is meant to be as plausible as a mythology that has shaped 2000 years of human cultural evolution? I think not. That doesn't mean I think Christianity is rational, just that it's more plausible than Scientology.

Oh, and I'm not "silly" dude. Not in any sense. Unless I'm drunk. ;)

[j-6]

Xenu's a big chick, but c'mon! Didn't Tom learn how to use a sword in The Last Samurai? $10M is a lot of money to spend hiding from a 6 foot lesbian.

[Mister Sinister]

I'm going to laugh when Cthulhu rises from the ocean and rapes a horde of Japanese schoolgirls, using only the noodly appendage that is his face.

[Phenomanul]

To each their own...

[Mister Sinister]

You know you love the tentacle rape.

[Phenomanul]

I'm referring to people's choice of 'religious' or 'philosophical' beliefs... That everyone is entitled to believe what they want. My belief system is compatible with the belief that everyone was given free will to believe in whatever fillls their heart's content.

[peewee's lovechild]

However, it seems to me that Scientology is a clear fabrication, whereas I can believe that Jesus existed and did some incredible things, even if they were exaggerated in the Bible, and even if I don't believe that he was an immaculate conception and the son of God.


You're really not making much sense here. There is absolutely NO PROOF that Jesus ever existed. So, if there is no proof of his existence, then it's all a complete fabrication too.



A noted science-fiction writer comes up with a crazy story about Xenu and his alien souls from 75mil yrs ago, and somehow that is meant to be as plausible as a mythology that has shaped 2000 years of human cultural evolution? I think not. That doesn't mean I think Christianity is rational, just that it's more plausible than Scientology.


Christianity is more plausible??? Have you even read Revelations (Apocolypse)?? That shit is better than most of the Sci-fi literature available today. I mean, John describes, with detail I might add, God's vehicle!! The fucker is supposed to have some sort of car to move about in the heaven's. How the hell is that more plausible???

And, exactly how different is the bible to some other ancient scripts that most people write off as fiction??

You don't make a very good case here, my silly friend.



Oh, and I'm not "silly" dude. Not in any sense. Unless I'm drunk. ;)


You're not silly, you're Australian.
:)

[Mister Sinister]

I'm referring to people's choice of 'religious' or 'philosophical' beliefs... That everyone is entitled to believe what they want. My belief system is compatible with the belief that everyone was given free will to believe in whatever fillls their heart's content.
Take all the fun out of my Cthulhu references...jerk. Nah, but seriously, I agree with you.

[Extra Stout]

I won't often respond to somebody who is bound and determined to be hostile to Christians, since such hostility indicates a disinclination to listen anyway, but peewee stated a couple of gross falsehoods which reflect either a lack of knowledge about the extant evidence, or a choice not to pursue said knowledge.


You're really not making much sense here. There is absolutely NO PROOF that Jesus ever existed. So, if there is no proof of his existence, then it's all a complete fabrication too.
No proof? Then why did Christianity emerge in the first place? Why did not the Roman and Greek commoners follow Mithraism instead?

What of the tomb inscriptions calling upon Jesus, dating from the 40's A.D.?

Why did Caesar pass a special decree in Judaea regarding the prohibition of opening tombs in A.D. 50?

Why did Thallus in the third book of his history written in A.D. 52, describe the strange event of a solar eclipse on the day of a full moon in the early 30's?

Why does Josephus mention James, the brother of "Jesus, the so-called Christ" ? If, as skeptics maintain, this is a Christian interpolation, how can writers from the third century refer to this citation, given that Christian influence over the Roman government was still a century away?

Given the evidence available to those who do not have a predetermined agenda to deny the existence of a historical Jesus, his historicity is difficult to discount. If this evidence is insufficient, then neither can we trust in the existence of most other historical figures of antiquity.


Christianity is more plausible??? Have you even read Revelations (Apocolypse)?? That shit is better than most of the Sci-fi literature available today. I mean, John describes, with detail I might add, God's vehicle!! The fucker is supposed to have some sort of car to move about in the heaven's. How the hell is that more plausible???
No honest exegete would interpret Revelation, or any other piece of apocalyptic literature, be it Christian or otherwise, literally. The point of apocalyptic literature is that it is mystical and allegorical.

[leemajors]

revelations reads more like a gnostic text than the rest of the New Testament.

[Fat Bones]

This may work, it's a fixer upper. But hey, he's got an extra 8.5 mil to throw at it.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Titan-Missile-Base-Central-%20Washington_W0QQitemZ190132455924QQihZ009QQcateg ory%3Cbr%20/%3EZ1607QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
http://i4.ebayimg.com/02/i/000/aa/98/552a_2.JPG

[peewee's lovechild]

No proof? Then why did Christianity emerge in the first place? Why did not the Roman and Greek commoners follow Mithraism instead?


First of all, just because a religion has sprung up out of nowhere, doesn't mean that it has any valid truth to it. If we all use your rationale, then Scientology would be an acutal and legit religion.

As to why Roman and Greek commoners did not follow Mithraism, no one is completely sure. But, this doesn't confirm the existence of Jesus. When it comes down to it, christianity appealed to the commoners because it promised and ever lasting life in the heavens. Chrisitanity also gave the commoners a hope for a better life after they died, something that most religions at the time didn't do.

So, if you're a common person in Ancient Rome, would you rather have a faith that assures you of a peaceful afterlife in relative equality, or would you rather stick to the "everyone goes to Hades in the afterlife" type of religion?




What of the tomb inscriptions calling upon Jesus, dating from the 40's A.D.?


Jesus, or "Yeshua" as was his real Hebrew name, was not a name the he owned. Other Hebrews had that name as well. You're basing this on the name "Yeshua" being inscribed in a tomb?? No one is even sure where the actual tomb is. There are, to date, four possiblities for Jesus' tomb. And, only one of them is on the outside the walls of Judea, where he most probably would have been entombed. That particular tomb, however, has no inscriptions.

What's to have stopped someone from inscribing said name on any random tomb just to embelish the legend of this Jesus man?

Plus, his death wouldn't have been around 40 A.D., it would have been 32-33 A.D. at the latest.




Why did Caesar pass a special decree in Judaea regarding the prohibition of opening tombs in A.D. 50?


Judea was a hotbed of rebellion at the time and Ceasar (Nero or Caligula, can't remember which at the moment, though both were insane) was afraid that they would use Jesus (The Messahia) to unite the Hebrews (Israel and Judea) against the Romans. This actually did happen. Read up on the Maccabee Rebellion.

Judea was extremely important to Rome because it was the crossroads of the Empire, and to lose it would mean to lose control of half of the Empire.




Why did Thallus in the third book of his history written in A.D. 52, describe the strange event of a solar eclipse on the day of a full moon in the early 30's?


Thallus wrote about an event that happened 22 years before, and that's supposed to make something true?? Do you even remember events that transpired 20 some years ago, and with great clarity??

The Mayans, Egyptians, Aztecs, Ancient Chinese, and countless others also have similar stories with eclipses and what not. Shouldn't we give creadence to any one of theses as well? Why does that only work in regards with christianity?




Why does Josephus mention James, the brother of "Jesus, the so-called Christ" ? If, as skeptics maintain, this is a Christian interpolation, how can writers from the third century refer to this citation, given that Christian influence over the Roman government was still a century away?


How is this proof? Only because somebody wrote that James was the brother of Jesus? There are some writings, written before Josephus, that claim that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, but that seems to have been discarded as false. Why do you pick and choose what is true?





Given the evidence available to those who do not have a predetermined agenda to deny the existence of a historical Jesus, his historicity is difficult to discount. If this evidence is insufficient, then neither can we trust in the existence of most other historical figures of antiquity.


His existence is also incredibly difficult to prove. Other historical figures have loads and loads of evidence proving their existence. However, religious figures such as Jesus, Buddha, Zoroastra, Shiva and others don't have much in evidence that they ever existed.





No honest exegete would interpret Revelation, or any other piece of apocalyptic literature, be it Christian or otherwise, literally. The point of apocalyptic literature is that it is mystical and allegorical.


Aaaaaaand, so is anything that the Scientologists read.

It's just as arbitrary as christianity.

[Extra Stout]

First of all, just because a religion has sprung up out of nowhere, doesn't mean that it has any valid truth to it. If we all use your rationale, then Scientology would be an acutal and legit religion.
Here you are moving the goalposts. You said there is no proof Jesus existed. That is a historically dubious claim. Whether Scientology is true or not, is not the same question as whether L. Ron Hubbard was an actual person.


As to why Roman and Greek commoners did not follow Mithraism, no one is completely sure. But, this doesn't confirm the existence of Jesus. When it comes down to it, christianity appealed to the commoners because it promised and ever lasting life in the heavens. Chrisitanity also gave the commoners a hope for a better life after they died, something that most religions at the time didn't do.

So, if you're a common person in Ancient Rome, would you rather have a faith that assures you of a peaceful afterlife in relative equality, or would you rather stick to the "everyone goes to Hades in the afterlife" type of religion?
The question here is not whether Christianity is true and all the other religions are false. Nobody is going to argue into that belief if you are bound and determined not to believe it. But you are arguing that somehow this religion sprung up out of nowhere all of a sudden, for no particular reason, based upon a myth which was spontaneously created out of whole cloth. Don't you think that where there is smoke, there is fire? Is the idea of an itinerant preacher who becomes popular, and draws the ire of the authorities, somehow infeasible, or unusual in Jewish history?


Jesus, or "Yeshua" as was his real Hebrew name, was not a name the he owned. Other Hebrews had that name as well. You're basing this on the name "Yeshua" being inscribed in a tomb?? No one is even sure where the actual tomb is. There are, to date, four possiblities for Jesus' tomb. And, only one of them is on the outside the walls of Judea, where he most probably would have been entombed. That particular tomb, however, has no inscriptions.
I'm not talking about Jesus' tomb. I'm talking about catacombs which have inscriptions exhorting somebody named Jesus to save loved ones, inscriptions which date from approximately ten years following the purported crucifixion of Christ.

That is an awfully short time for a myth to develop.


Judea was a hotbed of rebellion at the time and Ceasar (Nero or Caligula, can't remember which at the moment, though both were insane) was afraid that they would use Jesus (The Messahia) to unite the Hebrews (Israel and Judea) against the Romans. This actually did happen. Read up on the Maccabee Rebellion.

Judea was extremely important to Rome because it was the crossroads of the Empire, and to lose it would mean to lose control of half of the Empire.
So, the myth of Jesus, created out of whole cloth in the 30's, was so fully developed and had spread so far, not even 20 years following his purported ministry, that Caesar felt compelled to act?

By the way, Caesar was concerned about the conflict between the mainstream Jews and the Nazarene sect, because the latter claimed their leader had risen from the dead, while the Jews claimed they merely had snatched away his body and claimed he rose. Caesar wanted to make sure nobody else was going to start snatching away bodies, claiming resurrections, and causing more problems in Judaea. That is why he issued the decree.

And if by "crossroads," you actually mean "backwater outskirts which were on important trade routes with other nations," I will agree, but Judaea was no more the middle of the Empire than Britain was.


Thallus wrote about an event that happened 22 years before, and that's supposed to make something true?? Do you even remember events that transpired 20 some years ago, and with great clarity??
This is a terrible argument on your part. Are you simply going to discount any corroborating accounts of events depicted in the Bible? By that standard, no ancient history is knowable.


The Mayans, Egyptians, Aztecs, Ancient Chinese, and countless others also have similar stories with eclipses and what not. Shouldn't we give creadence to any one of theses as well? Why does that only work in regards with christianity?
To what extent do these have external corroborating evidence? Mind you, we are speaking of historical accounts, not of religious faith.


How is this proof? Only because somebody wrote that James was the brother of Jesus? There are some writings, written before Josephus, that claim that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus, but that seems to have been discarded as false. Why do you pick and choose what is true?
Because according to the argument that accounts with a religious agenda are not reliable compared to detached historical accounts, a mention by one of history's most famous historians carries a great deal of weight.

This especially comes with the discovery that other accounts by Josephus, such as the siege at Masada, which once were speculated to be mythical, in fact are corroborated by archaeology.

This is why skeptics denying the historicity of Jesus want to claim that this mention is an interpolation: it is devastating to their position.


His existence is also incredibly difficult to prove. Other historical figures have loads and loads of evidence proving their existence. However, religious figures such as Jesus, Buddha, Zoroastra, Shiva and others don't have much in evidence that they ever existed.
This is true only if you assume that the religious accounts have no historical value whatsoever, because of their religious agenda. Modern historical methods would regard such an assumption as completely unsound, since no secular historical account can be regarded as completely objective or agenda-free either. That is why the hypothesis of the "Jesus myth" among scholars has fallen on such hard times since its heyday 100 years ago.

Even among the humanist skeptic scholars who think Christianity is just another religious superstition, today you will find extremely few who deny the historicity of Jesus. People such as yourselves like to claim Robert Price's writings as proof-texts, but his biblical exegesis can be sliced through like butter. (I especially liked his claim that Paul, in the middle of teaching the doctrine of bodily resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, somehow denies it. Price then uses that to claim pieces of the Gospels are interpolations. Great stuff!)

Yet even so, both Josephus and Tacitus mention Christ.

Look and see who has the stronger evidence for his existence: Jesus of Nazareth or Alexander the Great.


Aaaaaaand, so is anything that the Scientologists read.
Scientology's writings are apocalyptic literature?

Do you even know what you just said?

[peewee's lovechild]

Here you are moving the goalposts. You said there is no proof Jesus existed. That is a historically dubious claim. Whether Scientology is true or not, is not the same question as whether L. Ron Hubbard was an actual person.


I get where you're going. And, I'm sorry I jumped on it. Yes, I'll give in that an actual human going by the name "Yeshua" probably existed. But, I was arguing that the great and all powerful Jesus, as described in the bible, probably never existed. I doesn't bother me that people would believe that there was a priest or rabbi that went by the name of Jesus and that he spread a message of hope and unconditional love. What bother's me is that people think that Jesus the "Superman" existed. There's just no proof of that.



The question here is not whether Christianity is true and all the other religions are false. Nobody is going to argue into that belief if you are bound and determined not to believe it. But you are arguing that somehow this religion sprung up out of nowhere all of a sudden, for no particular reason, based upon a myth which was spontaneously created out of whole cloth. Don't you think that where there is smoke, there is fire? Is the idea of an itinerant preacher who becomes popular, and draws the ire of the authorities, somehow infeasible, or unusual in Jewish history?


I'm not saying that it sprung out of nowhere, but it did happen "all of a sudden" as you put it. That, however, does not prove that there was a Jesus "Superman".

I do agree with your last statement about him being an itinerant preacher who pisses off the government, though.



I'm not talking about Jesus' tomb. I'm talking about catacombs which have inscriptions exhorting somebody named Jesus to save loved ones, inscriptions which date from approximately ten years following the purported crucifixion of Christ.

That is an awfully short time for a myth to develop.


Ten years is plenty of time. If I'm not mistaken, Catholics have granted sainthood to Pope John Paul II and there's already talk of making Mother Theresa a saint. I'm pretty sure there are catholics all the world over lighting candles to those saints and asking them to help them in their time of need.

I'm no longer arguing the human existence of a man named Jesus, I understand now what you were trying to say. But the fact that people inscribed tombs, walls, etc., with somebody's name doesn't necessarily prove anything one way or another.




So, the myth of Jesus, created out of whole cloth in the 30's, was so fully developed and had spread so far, not even 20 years following his purported ministry, that Caesar felt compelled to act?


I already explained why Caesar felt compelled to act. Nero, or Caligula (I can't remember which it was), was extremely paranoid.



By the way, Caesar was concerned about the conflict between the mainstream Jews and the Nazarene sect, because the latter claimed their leader had risen from the dead, while the Jews claimed they merely had snatched away his body and claimed he rose. Caesar wanted to make sure nobody else was going to start snatching away bodies, claiming resurrections, and causing more problems in Judaea. That is why he issued the decree.


You fail to see the importance of Judea. Having a rebellion start in Judea would have been disatrous for the empire of Rome. And, even if it was a conflict withing the Jewish community, a civil war breaking out in Judea would have been just as bad as a rebellion.



And if by "crossroads," you actually mean "backwater outskirts which were on important trade routes with other nations," I will agree, but Judaea was no more the middle of the Empire than Britain was.


Judea had several important ports that serviced Rome. It was a crossroads of trade. Goods from Africa and Persia first arrived there and where distributed to the western part of the Roman Empire. Britain was nowhere near that important.

As a matter of fact, that area continues to be important to this very day for that same reason.




This is a terrible argument on your part. Are you simply going to discount any corroborating accounts of events depicted in the Bible? By that standard, no ancient history is knowable.


Then, why not give the same creedance and reverance to: The Epic of Gilgamesh, The Iliad, The Odyssey, etc.? They all have some historical relevance.



To what extent do these have external corroborating evidence? Mind you, we are speaking of historical accounts, not of religious faith.


They don't. But, neither does what Thallus wrote.



Because according to the argument that accounts with a religious agenda are not reliable compared to detached historical accounts, a mention by one of history's most famous historians carries a great deal of weight.


But, why is that? History is written with a bias. If you don't believe me, read some Civil War history written by a Southerner. For years the Civil War was known as "The War of Northern Agression" by Southerners.

Just because a historian has written something doesn't necessarily make it true, or reliable.




This especially comes with the discovery that other accounts by Josephus, such as the siege at Masada, which once were speculated to be mythical, in fact are corroborated by archaeology.



I'll give you that. It's true that some of what Josephus wrote has been corroborated by archaeology. But, so have some of Homer's writings. But, I don't see anyone believing that Zeus was an actual god and that Hercules was an actual living person.




This is true only if you assume that the religious accounts have no historical value whatsoever, because of their religious agenda. Modern historical methods would regard such an assumption as completely unsound, since no secular historical account can be regarded as completely objective or agenda-free either. That is why the hypothesis of the "Jesus myth" among scholars has fallen on such hard times since its heyday 100 years ago.

Even among the humanist skeptic scholars who think Christianity is just another religious superstition, today you will find extremely few who deny the historicity of Jesus. People such as yourselves like to claim Robert Price's writings as proof-texts, but his biblical exegesis can be sliced through like butter. (I especially liked his claim that Paul, in the middle of teaching the doctrine of bodily resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15, somehow denies it. Price then uses that to claim pieces of the Gospels are interpolations. Great stuff!)

Yet even so, both Josephus and Tacitus mention Christ.

Look and see who has the stronger evidence for his existence: Jesus of Nazareth or Alexander the Great.


Okay, I'll agree with that.





Scientology's writings are apocalyptic literature?

Do you even know what you just said?


They're not apocalyptic, but they are just as sci-fi as Apocolypse.

And, like I said, it's just as arbitrary.

[johnsmith]

Countdown to T park explaining what this all has to do with him in 3.......2........1........

[peewee's lovechild]

Does TPark stand for "Trailer Park"?

Just asking.

[Extra Stout]

I get where you're going. And, I'm sorry I jumped on it. Yes, I'll give in that an actual human going by the name "Yeshua" probably existed. But, I was arguing that the great and all powerful Jesus, as described in the bible, probably never existed. I doesn't bother me that people would believe that there was a priest or rabbi that went by the name of Jesus and that he spread a message of hope and unconditional love. What bother's me is that people think that Jesus the "Superman" existed. There's just no proof of that.
There is no proof of his miracles external to the New Testament. And, obviously, there is no external proof that he contained both fully divine and fully human essences within a single hypostasis, nor that he lived sinlessly, nor that God the Father regarded his death by crucifixion as an acceptable substitionary atonement for the sins of all men who might have faith in him, nor that he was resurrected from the dead and thereby defeated death so that those who have faith in him might have eternal life through him. Those are all articles of faith.


They're not apocalyptic, but they are just as sci-fi as Apocolypse.

And, like I said, it's just as arbitrary.
Apocalyptic literature is very different from science fiction, but that really is just a rabbit trail from the main point of this discussion, which has been resolved.

[peewee's lovechild]

There is no proof of his miracles external to the New Testament. And, obviously, there is no external proof that he contained both fully divine and fully human essences within a single hypostasis, nor that he lived sinlessly, nor that God the Father regarded his death by crucifixion as an acceptable substitionary atonement for the sins of all men who might have faith in him, nor that he was resurrected from the dead and thereby defeated death so that those who have faith in him might have eternal life through him. Those are all articles of faith.


Agreed.



Apocalyptic literature is very different from science fiction, but that really is just a rabbit trail from the main point of this discussion, which has been resolved.


I don't necessarily agree, seeing how Apocolypse is VERY sci-fi, but you're right as to how this isn't part of the main discussion.

[DarkReign]

revelations reads more like a gnostic text than the rest of the New Testament.

Its "Revelation" not revelations.

Im no zealot, but at least refer to it correctly.

[leemajors]

Its "Revelation" not revelations.

Im no zealot, but at least refer to it correctly.
it's actually the Book of Revelation if you wanna be like that.

[2centsworth]

i went through 12 years of sunday school and my philosophy is if youre a good person, youre a good person. any loving God should accept you for what you are whether it be atheist, christian, muslim, hindu, buddhist, taoist, etc. i shouldnt have to do a bunch of useless, retarded ceremonies and donate money to shit in order to get in heaven or motel 6... whatever.
There's not one person in the world who is good, not one. Romans 3:10 & Romans 3:23

To be a Christain is to acknowledge your sin, repent of it, and then accept God's forgiveness.

[2centsworth]

There is no proof of his miracles external to the New Testament. And, obviously, there is no external proof that he contained both fully divine and fully human essences within a single hypostasis, nor that he lived sinlessly, nor that God the Father regarded his death by crucifixion as an acceptable substitionary atonement for the sins of all men who might have faith in him, nor that he was resurrected from the dead and thereby defeated death so that those who have faith in him might have eternal life through him. Those are all articles of faith.


Apocalyptic literature is very different from science fiction, but that really is just a rabbit trail from the main point of this discussion, which has been resolved.
you need a good dose of Lee Strobel.

[Extra Stout]

you need a good dose of Lee Strobel.
I don't think even Lee Strobel could argue for those doctrines apart from the New Testament. The best he could do would be to argue for the reliability of the New Testament itself.