Post: #51

(07-02-2013 12:04 PM)Neil Skywalker Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 01:25 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-01-2013 04:18 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  @speakeasy: Interesting view.

Just out of curiosity, as I am developing a series of posts on Christianity, but what are your thoughts on Jesus & Christianity?

I am currently writing a piece about Tolstoy's Ivan Ilyich for the forum, but that is a prelude to thoughts on Christianity.

Any ideas/thoughts/etc?

From what I've read there have been many Jesus-like legends that predated Jesus. Stories of a son of God being born from a virgin. Jesus wasn't the first person this was attributed to. Here is a link to peruse if you are interested in the topic:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

After reading that site, I really had to question whether a Jesus of Nazareth existed.

Thanks for sharing that article. I just read the whole thing. I've been an atheist all my life. You just supplied me with more argument ammo

Hate to burst your bubble, but Jesus was real and it's pretty much indisputable. He is mentioned by both Christians, Jews, and Romans independently of each other.

Quote:Since the 18th century a number of quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, and historical critical methods for studying the historicity of Jesus have been developed. Various Christian and non-Christian sources are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus, e.g. Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus. These sources are compared and contrasted to Christian sources such as the Pauline Letters and the Synoptic Gospels to determine the historicity of Jesus. These sources are usually independent of each other (e.g. Jewish sources do not draw upon Roman sources), and similarities and differences between them are used in the authentication process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_Jesus

Post: #52

If I had to just be a "regular guy," I'd go to the Summer of Love and Woodstock era.

In the late 60s and early 70s, regular guys could get into orgies and girls were extremely promiscuous. My dad said he went to a concert once and girl came up and just threw her top off. He said stuff like that was common for a couple of years.

If I could pick any era to live in as anyone, I'd be a 20-something Saudi prince alive today.

Post: #53

Golden age of Rome.

Post: #54

Just off the top of my head...

Babylon at its peak,

Crete as it was well before the decline of the Minoans and the Peloponnese under the Mycenaeans,

Persepolis under the Achaimenids,

Egypt under Ramses the Great

Alexandria during the Hellenistic period,

Rome around the time of Augustus,

Constantinople under the Byzantines,

Tang Dynasty China

Baghdad under the Abbasids

Of course, I'd only want to visit these places, and then only if I could live with the same comfort as the elite.

Post: #55

Surprised no one is choosing America during 2009.

You could relive Ed Hardy and Affliction Shirts in all it's glory:

Post: #56

(07-02-2013 07:43 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  If I could pick any era to live in as anyone, I'd be a 20-something Saudi prince alive today.

Agreed. Saudi princes do not give a fuck.

Case in point:

Post: #57

(07-02-2013 07:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 12:04 PM)Neil Skywalker Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 01:25 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-01-2013 04:18 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  @speakeasy: Interesting view.

Just out of curiosity, as I am developing a series of posts on Christianity, but what are your thoughts on Jesus & Christianity?

I am currently writing a piece about Tolstoy's Ivan Ilyich for the forum, but that is a prelude to thoughts on Christianity.

Any ideas/thoughts/etc?

From what I've read there have been many Jesus-like legends that predated Jesus. Stories of a son of God being born from a virgin. Jesus wasn't the first person this was attributed to. Here is a link to peruse if you are interested in the topic:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

After reading that site, I really had to question whether a Jesus of Nazareth existed.

Thanks for sharing that article. I just read the whole thing. I've been an atheist all my life. You just supplied me with more argument ammo

Hate to burst your bubble, but Jesus was real and it's pretty much indisputable. He is mentioned by both Christians, Jews, and Romans independently of each other.

Quote:Since the 18th century a number of quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, and historical critical methods for studying the historicity of Jesus have been developed. Various Christian and non-Christian sources are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus, e.g. Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus. These sources are compared and contrasted to Christian sources such as the Pauline Letters and the Synoptic Gospels to determine the historicity of Jesus. These sources are usually independent of each other (e.g. Jewish sources do not draw upon Roman sources), and similarities and differences between them are used in the authentication process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_Jesus

Reading the mentioned article in the link might change your mind on that.
The existence of Jesus is first mentioned 70 years after his supposed death. There are no eye witness accounts. It's all hearsay of hearsay.

While there was an abundance of scribes, poets,philosophers, free writers and governmental writers during the supposed lifetime of Jesus, no one mentioned him anywhere during that time perod.

You would think that a miracle performing prophet who regularly gathered large crowds of followers and who was feared by the Romans, would be mentioned by some one, just anyone who could hold a pen or carve a stone.

There are no records or evidence of his existence, the infanticide by the Romans or his death on the cross. There are also no records of the existence of Nazareth.

Besides that, the story of Jesus was already told in dozens of different versions even before Jesus even supposed to have existed. I'm talking thousands of years before him. All the same characteristics.

Read the article. It's a long read but it might change your thoughts on this.

Post: #58

(07-03-2013 12:14 PM)Hencredible Casanova Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 07:43 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  If I could pick any era to live in as anyone, I'd be a 20-something Saudi prince alive today.

Agreed. Saudi princes do not give a fuck.

Case in point:

He thought he could get away with the same entitled behavior in NYC as he would in Saudi Arabia.

Post: #59

I think the roaring 20s and early 30s before the Great Depression was a fascinating time in American history.

The Wild West, I'd love to see what the early pioneer towns were really like.

The Romans and Renaissance Italy to see characters like Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Machiavelli, the Medicis and the Borgias.

Post: #60

I would choose a time where women think they are equal to men and are unfamiliar with being dominated.. being the only man to do so would cause a ridiculous amount of ripples and attention and pussyyyyyy

Post: #61

This post below by Soup put into words one of the time periods I was thinking about:

/thread-25378-...#pid484459

It'd be interesting to go back in time when you had overlapping Hominids (i.e. seeing Neanderthals interact with early Homo Sapiens)

Seeing the actual evolutionary links, earlier forms of tribal association, and maybe even getting a sense of when consciousness developed (still one of the biggest mysteries of science and humanity)

Also to be a fly on the wall for some major or famous ancient battles:

Battle of the Badger Mouth
Battle of the Teutoburg Forest
Battle of Salsu

Most of the other stuff has been mentioned already or obvious like construction of the Egyptian pyramids

It also be dope to observe safely somehow the major disasters or environmental records for the planet (i.e. biggest asteroid impacts, largest rogue wave, etc.)



For my RVF brohers, bring back photo/video of the biggest harems and most luxurious palaces for some inspiration.



And for recording the history of our movement, I'm sure we're all curious about the first instances of styles like "Aqueduct Game" "Living God according to this tribe Game" or what it'd be like to have Casanova as a wing.

Post: #62

I'd like to go the Golden Age of Rome perhaps to give them some scientific and engineering hints but in reality, if it was just for the sex, Renaissance Venice. Imagine actually having Casanova as a wingman.

Post: #63

I like clean vaginas that aren't hairy. Can you imagine how stinky and hairy the pussies were in ancient times?

The Brazilian waxing stuff started around the mid-90s I think.

Post: #64

(07-03-2013 12:21 PM)Neil Skywalker Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 07:08 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 12:04 PM)Neil Skywalker Wrote:  

(07-02-2013 01:25 AM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-01-2013 04:18 AM)2Wycked Wrote:  @speakeasy: Interesting view.

Just out of curiosity, as I am developing a series of posts on Christianity, but what are your thoughts on Jesus & Christianity?

I am currently writing a piece about Tolstoy's Ivan Ilyich for the forum, but that is a prelude to thoughts on Christianity.

Any ideas/thoughts/etc?

From what I've read there have been many Jesus-like legends that predated Jesus. Stories of a son of God being born from a virgin. Jesus wasn't the first person this was attributed to. Here is a link to peruse if you are interested in the topic:

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

After reading that site, I really had to question whether a Jesus of Nazareth existed.

Thanks for sharing that article. I just read the whole thing. I've been an atheist all my life. You just supplied me with more argument ammo

Hate to burst your bubble, but Jesus was real and it's pretty much indisputable. He is mentioned by both Christians, Jews, and Romans independently of each other.

Quote:Since the 18th century a number of quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, and historical critical methods for studying the historicity of Jesus have been developed. Various Christian and non-Christian sources are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus, e.g. Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus. These sources are compared and contrasted to Christian sources such as the Pauline Letters and the Synoptic Gospels to determine the historicity of Jesus. These sources are usually independent of each other (e.g. Jewish sources do not draw upon Roman sources), and similarities and differences between them are used in the authentication process

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existence_of_Jesus

Reading the mentioned article in the link might change your mind on that.
The existence of Jesus is first mentioned 70 years after his supposed death. There are no eye witness accounts. It's all hearsay of hearsay.

While there was an abundance of scribes, poets,philosophers, free writers and governmental writers during the supposed lifetime of Jesus, no one mentioned him anywhere during that time perod.

You would think that a miracle performing prophet who regularly gathered large crowds of followers and who was feared by the Romans, would be mentioned by some one, just anyone who could hold a pen or carve a stone.

There are no records or evidence of his existence, the infanticide by the Romans or his death on the cross. There are also no records of the existence of Nazareth.

Besides that, the story of Jesus was already told in dozens of different versions even before Jesus even supposed to have existed. I'm talking thousands of years before him. All the same characteristics.

Read the article. It's a long read but it might change your thoughts on this.

Didn't figure this would become a religious thread... but eh you never know with the "Wheel of RVF topics". I studied roman history and early Christianity in college, and Neil is right. There are no "secular" references to anyone named Jesus (or having to do with Christianity at all) until nearly a century after he supposedly lived. If I recall correctly there was a letter written after 100 AD by the emperor or someone in government that mentioned "Christians".

The ironic thing is that what the Christians did (create Jesus and other stories out of thin air, or adaptations of half-truths) is exactly what Mormons are criticized for today with the whole "John Smith revelations" BS.