Lately, after a long break from anything spiritual...I feel a yearning again to explore my faith and try reconcile my emotions and instincts with what may or may not be the "Truth." If I am to be a follower of Christ, I would definitely be a CU. But first, I really need to know if Jesus even existed. Maybe it doesn't matter...I don't know if I would believe in his supposed death and ressurection if there was proof of a real Jesus. Because I would probably want proof of that too.
I will say this, however, I believe in Grace. On some Cosmic level, I know that all men, women, and children are "saved" by Grace. We all have moments of brokeness in our lives that need restoring, and we all need Grace to have the strength to self examine and practice right living so that we may be agents of this Cosmic Christ to help to bring restoration to the rest of Creation. I just hope to one day be able to put into words what I believe in my heart.
I just really need to know right now though if Jesus was real, or he was made up, or he is really a combination of different men 2000 years ago that started a movement and decided that their message would be more powerful if the world thought that a real Son of God came to Earth.
I will take any resources, opinions, anything. But before I can move on, I really need to do some more research and exploring on this.
Peace and Blessings,
Bart
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html
http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn044/proof.html
There's a lot of pages on the web which can tell you why Jesus not having existed is a plain impossiblity. But think of this: Something that has had such in impact on history as christianity has, can hardly be a myth. Had he not even existed, he'd be hard pressed to get any followers, specifically because the early christians lived in the same period he did. If it was a myth, it would've been extremely easy to debunk. Be it by the roman authorities, or by the jews themselves. Reports of his existance and early christianity are found in secular history as well.
Thank you for the reply and the links...however, in regards to the ossuary box, it seems to have been proven a fake.
http://www.sbcbaptistpress.org/bpnews.asp?ID=16370
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/06/18/jesus.box/
I see. It's just the first webpage I found when I googled for it, probably should've checked it's authenticity first! :winkgrin:
In any case, it'd be extremely hard to prove Jesus did not excist. :grin:
:cloud9: Name one other person in the world's history, whose death was the impetus for changing the calculation of time. It is 2008 AD, is it not? My mother was a great person and she died in 1994. Can we all get together right here and now and agree that it is really 14 AD? Aw, come on.....you guys are no fun..... :laughing7: just joshing with you :winkgrin:.....Blessings to you.....
Good point, Cardinal! :laughing7:
please excuse me for not really feeling humorous at this point. :sigh:
however, i do appreciate you trying :thumbsup:
I'm serious...what texts, sources etc. do a good job in backing up the claim that Jesus was an historical figure and not just a synthesis of previous mythic,spiritual men(or women) or not a real person at all.
at the moment i'm reading this: http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
does anyone care to read it and give me their thoughts?
I just want people to know that I am sincere in my quest. I have not come here to debate or argue, mainly because I do not know enough to do either. I merely want to be able to explain in words what I know in my heart. And that is the Grace of Jesus Christ redeems ALL. I believe this on a cosmic/intuitive level, but I really would like to wrap my head around the historical/linear aspects of it as well.
Peace and Blessings,
Bart
I'm sorry if it seems we're not taking you serious; I assure you that was not my intention. :boyheart:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annals_(Tacitus) (the book I'm quoting from, clearly not a religious work, but in fact written by a roman historian)
Book 15, chapter 44 of the Annals:
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired."
As for their claim about Paul never speaking about Jesus life on earth in detail, that really isn't too weird. He offered spiritual help to the christian communities, by the very fact he was addressing people who were christians already, he didn't need to tell them of Jesus. Because by being christians, it's to be expected they already knew all about christianity and Jesus in the first place.
Also, Peter (which you can not deny was a very close person to Jesus) acknowledges Paul's epistles.
2Peter 3:15
and the long-suffering of our Lord count ye salvation, according as also our beloved brother Paul -- according to the wisdom given to him -- did write to you
Perhaps that is why Paul doesn't give any more insight, however, it is interesting that Paul was probably written before the Gospels...so, in reality, his epistle would be closer in time to a truer understanding of an historical Jesus that the actual Gospels....
:cloud9: Sorry, wasn't trying to make light of you at all........so seriously......if you accept the writings of Paul, then Who do you think it was he met on the Damascus road? And who do you think he was referring to as, Lord, in other places? Blessings to you......
Quote from: Cardinal on January 04, 2008, 11:55:43 PM
:cloud9: Sorry, wasn't trying to make light of you at all........so seriously......if accept the writings of Paul, then Who do you think it was he met on the Damascus road? And who do you think he was referring to as, Lord, in other places? Blessings to you......
Yeah, I was gonna say that too. But the point the critics on the page were trying to make was that it doesn't occur in the epistles themselves. The only mention of it is made in Acts, which they don't consider valid proof because it was not written by Paul himself.
Unless he mentions it in his epistles, too. In which case I have forgotten it. :mblush:
Quote from: Cardinal on January 04, 2008, 11:55:43 PM
:cloud9: Sorry, wasn't trying to make light of you at all........so seriously......if you accept the writings of Paul, then Who do you think it was he met on the Damascus road? And who do you think he was referring to as, Lord, in other places? Blessings to you......
well, in order to be intellectually honest, i think, i don't think you can use the bible as a reference to prove the bible or prove Jesus....I'm looking for non-religous historical evidence that was more than just hearsay.
I'm turning my brain off on this one until monday...
Peace and Blessings,
Bart
:cloud9: Ok, well, I just had lined up Romans 1 for you, but I am not the one to help with the non-biblical proof on this forum, although I'm sure there are some on here that could fix you up in short order. I do think I remember reading that the works of a Jewish historian named Josephus made reference to him. Guys? Blessings to you......
I found this, Cardinal:
______________________________
Josephus - Biblical Accounts Outside the Bible
Josephus mentions New Testament events and people in some of his works. For many skeptics, this is viewed as significant evidence against the myth and legend theories that plague early Christianity. Here are some excerpts:
Josephus mentions Jesus in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 (this paragraph is so phenomenal, that scholars now debate the authenticity of some of the more "favorable" portions of this text):
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."
Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2:
"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."
Josephus mentions James, the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities, Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1:
"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."
Josephus mentions Ananias, the High Priest, who was mentioned in Acts 23:2:
"Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money."
______________________________
I think the best thing you can do is just read the bible. Read the gospel of John to start, and see what you think. I think almost anyone here can testify the spirit of truth is more convincing than whatever any human's reasoning can tell you. :cloud9:
:cloud9: Thanks SLN.....I'm not good at finding things on here, LOL.....Blessings to you.....
Quote from: Mississippi HereticPerhaps that is why Paul doesn't give any more insight, however, it is interesting that Paul was probably written before the Gospels...so, in reality, his epistle would be closer in time to a truer understanding of an historical Jesus that the actual Gospels....
Why stop at Paul? What about Mark? His Gospel starts at the baptism of Jesus. Maybe the historical Jesus did not exist until he started walking down the road to His Baptist? NOT! Hey, maybe it takes a guy from Tennessee to teach a Mississippi Heretic. :laughing7: Sorry could not resist! I was born in Memphis!
Quote from: Mississippi Hereticit is interesting that Paul was probably written before the Gospels
I don't know what you guys have in Mississippi, but I do not have the book of Paul? :pointlaugh: BTW, I am Paul :Egyptdance2: :pointlaugh:
Quote from: Pierac on January 05, 2008, 01:24:13 AM
Quote from: Mississippi HereticPerhaps that is why Paul doesn't give any more insight, however, it is interesting that Paul was probably written before the Gospels...so, in reality, his epistle would be closer in time to a truer understanding of an historical Jesus that the actual Gospels....
Why stop at Paul? What about Mark? His Gospel starts at the baptism of Jesus. Maybe the historical Jesus did not exist until he started walking down the road to His Baptist? NOT! Hey, maybe it takes a guy from Tennessee to teach a Mississippi Heretic. :laughing7: Sorry could not resist! I was born in Memphis!
Quote from: Mississippi Hereticit is interesting that Paul was probably written before the Gospels
I don't know what you guys have in Mississippi, but I do not have the book of Paul? :pointlaugh:
BTW, I am Paul :Egyptdance2: :pointlaugh:
When I speak of Paul's epistles being written before Mark, I'm suggesting that scholars put Paul's writing BEFORE Mark's....I'm not talking about the chronology of the events in the books themselves.
Sorry, I couldn't wait til Monday.
Peace and Blessings,
Bart
Any encounter with Jesus does not occur with you defining the terms of that experience. "To the contrary he will show Himself perverse..." You say, "Not like this" to Him and very possibly that is the only way for Him to come. You say, "Not like this" to Him and He'll say, "Not like this" to you. He is The ultimate Authority. You are not.
"For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. (1 Corinthians 5:14-19)
If you want to encounter God , if you desire to experience the Holy Spirit, You can wait upon Him to manifest. It is by undeserved condescension to you that He would make Himself known. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them." (Ephesians 2:8-10)
"But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. " (Hebrews 11:6) If you don't seek His face, earnestly waiting in prayer (and maybe fasting,) if you dump the Bible...really if you don't seek Him where He hangs out, why would you expect anything? Of course you can risk being casual. He likes to show up and show off to those that weren't seeking Him. Sometimes His presence distills as the dew. Sometimes it is giant hailstones with fire. Certainly you don't have to fast and pray; but, Jesus promised to reward you if you do it in secret, pursuing Him. There is a sort of trick to it. He says, "In the day that you seek me with your whole heart you will find me." You have to go for broke. It has to be complete abandonment, no ulterior motives, nothing held back. Is it just a certain kind of information you expect to be able to think about? Or do you want to walk with God? Other peoples knowledge of God does not have every "t" crossed or every "i" dotted; but, I guarantee that is part of finding Him because He is in those He's chosen. You need to learn to follow Him, to be under His discipline, not in subjection to other religious men. Come to Him with a great big emptiness, just an aching need in your heart that you cannot fill. That's where He puts something of Himself to unfold before your wondering eyes.
Quote from: reFORMer on January 05, 2008, 08:00:52 AM
Sometimes His presence distills as the dew. Sometimes it is giant hailstones with fire.
That blessed me, reFORMer. :Pray:
Two excerpts of secular history mentioning Jesus have been posted now. I'd say take it or leave it.
Unless you can prove Tacitus (a famous historian, not someone prone to lie) was lying (he would have no reason; romans and christians weren't exactly best friends. If anything, denying Jesus' existance would be favorable for them) it's a fact he existed. Period.
There's obvious evidence for his existance. We shouldn't have to prove a historical figure did exist, they should prove he didn't! I could make a webpage right now claiming hitler didn't exist, despite the evidence arguing to the contrary. Wouldn't people just say I'm a fool? And wouldn't they say I have to supply evidence that he didn't exist, rather than the other way around?
:cloud9: That was excellent Reformer :thumbsup:
Quote from: SLN on January 05, 2008, 02:42:54 PM
Two excerpts of secular history mentioning Jesus have been posted now. I'd say take it or leave it.
Unless you can prove Tacitus (a famous historian, not someone prone to lie) was lying (he would have no reason; romans and christians weren't exactly best friends. If anything, denying Jesus' existance would be favorable for them) it's a fact he existed. Period.
There's obvious evidence for his existance. We shouldn't have to prove a historical figure did exist, they should prove he didn't! I could make a webpage right now claiming hitler didn't exist, despite the evidence arguing to the contrary. Wouldn't people just say I'm a fool? And wouldn't they say I have to supply evidence that he didn't exist, rather than the other way around?
I agree with much of your post...much of what Josephus has to say is amazing and I do consider it...Tacitus as well...but yet there is scholarship to suggest the writings of Josephus have been added to, and if they were not, it is still heresay. So, I think it is safe to say...there is no way to know.
Dave...obviously you do not know enough about me to make a call like you did. If you had read and understood my original post, it is evident I have "met" Jesus the WAY...I have never met Jesus the HUMAN. Dave, I have read several of your posts as a lurker on this boad and you are quite adept at producing nice little "soundbytes." I look for something more. If you have nothing to offer, then I ask you please refrain from joining the discussion. If you choose not to, then I will simply ignore you and you can rest assured that you will be writing for yourself only.
Quotewhat texts, sources etc. do a good job in backing up the claim that Jesus was an historical figure and not just a synthesis of previous mythic,spiritual men(or women) or not a real person at all.
I wonder why people don't consider the New Testament to be historical. Simply because the Christian church has declared the writings to be "the word of God" and "Scripture", it is in fact history. It was written by more than a few people who testified that Jesus existed and suffered persecution for that belief.
Imagine there was no New Testament, and archaeologists found the original letters, or even copies, of Peter, James and John. Archaeologists would be asking themselves...."Who is this Jesus?" There would be no doubt of His existence. Once you add it to the "Bible", it is immediately thrown into question for no other reason than the fact it is in the book.
Just one man's relatively uninformed opinion.
Giz
Brother Mississippi:
I "feel" you, Bro! But, I don't think you will ever logically or rationally prove God or Jesus. The best that Deist and Theist can come up with is the mystery of the "Uncaused Cause". Science can't explain Origins either and (many) plug the scientific hole with more ("Future") Science, that is, they have faith that they will, some day, discover the answers to these puzzles. Believers fill this void with "God-Did-It" and trust that God will explain these mysteries to the curious by and by. This is also an act of faith.
But the question is, "Did Jesus Exist". I don't think a proof or disproof is going to be possible here either. First, it is generally difficult, if not impossible, to prove a negative. So proving that someone didn't exist, especially an ancient someone (Jesus), would cause me to place this pursuit in the "next-to-impossible" category. However, proving that Jesus absolutely did exist is very difficult too. There are very few external sources besides the Bible. Now, the Bible, allegedly, verifies itself (2 Tim 3:16), but for me, 2 Tim 3:16 proves nothing other than the fact that some early Christian writers revered the OT writings - the only "Bible" they had at the time.
However, if it is important for we humans to "know" God, then I think it reasonable to expect this same God to provide us (in due time) with whatever, intellect, senses or resources that we need to "make contact". Consider Thomas in John 20:29.
From your post, it seems that God may have already done this. If so, the next question is what are YOU really willing to accept on faith? This is a very personal question that only you and "God" can answer. No matter what you decide, I can't believe God would condemn us for using our minds in a sincere search for Him.
Wishing you Grace and Peace in your quest, John :HeartThrob:
When you say you would want proof of Jesus's resurrection you should realize no other human beings saw it, unless the ones in white at the tomb after the event. Everybody is at a similar level of proof in this matter.
The only higher position relates to what you refer when you say you know Jesus the Way but have never met Jesus the human. It could be said Paul's blindness was the result of seeing Him. You should have a larger concept of what it is to be human. God says, "I called you all Elohim, all of you sons of El Elyon." Jesus reiterated it: "...He called them Gods to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken..."
Hi MH
Well if one is to take the bible away as a source of proof then all we have is the calendar change. One must assume that the Roman empire making Christianity a state religion would therefore place some significance on the "myth" of Jesus the man. Ancient texts are just that ancient.
On my blog and here, I say the bible is just a book. It can point you in the right direction but for it, the words, to become life in you, it takes the Holy Spirit.
Many Atheists say this is the "voice in your head" but anyone that has had an encounter cannot use adequate words to describe it, the infilling of the HS. The biggest challenge is to articulate carnally what we experience Spiritually, we then defer to our source and that is the text in the bible. Following that we study NDE's and even that may be scientifically bogus. Near Death is not death.
We have testimonies which are generally personal, similar but not the same and again is hearsay.
Probably why we are told to each work out our own salvation with fear and trembling; it is a personal thing, not corporate, no one size fits all.
The closest we have is the inner witness and followed by 2nd external witnesses that may come from others who have had similar experiences and/or see things the way you do, that I am afraid is all we have. What gives me a level of assurance is that people from different cultures have similar experiences wrt God and salvation and miracles.
Blessings
There are numerous texts that cover this question available in bookstores. Unfortunately, it is after 2 am and I am not remembering titles, even having read some of them. There were more than 2 historians that mentioned Jesus, what was the name of the Jewish military officer that became endeared to the Romans? I wish it were not so late, some of those books were quite helpful. "Know why you believe" may have been one of them. I know one covered the issue in a legalistc sense, was it Greenleaf who converted after trying the case for Jesus in that fashion? Also of course, C.S. Lewis. Wish I could offer more help, been through it myself. Actually, at one time I believe a letter from Pilate to his wife even existed. Of course, documents from 2000 years ago are likely destroyed by age, and this is something used to advantage by those seeking to "dispel the myth". Calling for a writ of habeus corpus 2 millenia after the fact is pretty bad, especially when it is common knowledge the body left! Most honest historians of our time will tell you the existence of Jesus Christ, and His crucifixion, are as reliable as the life of Julius Ceasar. They may question the resurrection, but not the other parts.
Quote from: Mississippi Heretic on January 05, 2008, 06:50:54 PM
Quote from: SLN on January 05, 2008, 02:42:54 PM
Two excerpts of secular history mentioning Jesus have been posted now. I'd say take it or leave it.
Unless you can prove Tacitus (a famous historian, not someone prone to lie) was lying (he would have no reason; romans and christians weren't exactly best friends. If anything, denying Jesus' existance would be favorable for them) it's a fact he existed. Period.
There's obvious evidence for his existance. We shouldn't have to prove a historical figure did exist, they should prove he didn't! I could make a webpage right now claiming hitler didn't exist, despite the evidence arguing to the contrary. Wouldn't people just say I'm a fool? And wouldn't they say I have to supply evidence that he didn't exist, rather than the other way around?
I agree with much of your post...much of what Josephus has to say is amazing and I do consider it...Tacitus as well...but yet there is scholarship to suggest the writings of Josephus have been added to, and if they were not, it is still heresay. So, I think it is safe to say...there is no way to know.
Dave...obviously you do not know enough about me to make a call like you did. If you had read and understood my original post, it is evident I have "met" Jesus the WAY...I have never met Jesus the HUMAN. Dave, I have read several of your posts as a lurker on this boad and you are quite adept at producing nice little "soundbytes." I look for something more. If you have nothing to offer, then I ask you please refrain from joining the discussion. If you choose not to, then I will simply ignore you and you can rest assured that you will be writing for yourself only.
Mississippi Heretic,
You are quite right in your assessment that there is NO proof of the historical Jesus Christ either archealogically or written by people living in the same era as him (ie eye witness accounts) except for the Biblical narratives (gospels)....and they were written 70 to 90 years AFTER his birth
This in itself is quite an anomaly as the Bible states that "multitudes followed him"...the Jews, Romans, Samaritans even Egyptians and Persians should have heard about him if he caused such a commotion in Judea, Samaria and Galilee that someone MUST have written about him...his doctrines...his teachings...someone contemporary with him who lived at the same time...BUT...the first we find written about the historical Jesus is supposedly Mark in 70AD...40 years AFTER his death?
In the cultures/nations I mentioned above there were many historians and/or religious scholars that could have written about this "god-man" walking the earth...but there is NOTHING written about the historical Jesus from someone during or even shortly after the supposed life of Jesus Christ....NO eye witness accounts that can be verified
for anyone reading this, we must remember that we are talking about the historical Jesus (ie life and times) NOT about his supposed followers ie Christians...
Christians were first called that name in Antioch where Paul preached...Jesus NEVER went to Antioch...this is a very important fact we have to take in
hence many history scholars state that Christianity should be called Paulianity...and that the "sect of Christianity" was not started by Jesus Christ, but by Saul of Tarsus
and to give the example of Paul seeing the light on the way to Damascus...where is the second witness to that as demanded for a prophet according to the Bible?
We only have one man's account, his own (or of his scribe Luke)
now further...
many Christians believe that the story of Jesus Christ as son of God...Saviour of the world...begat by God's spirit with an earthly woman who was a virgin...being born poor with animals in a manger/cave...growing up and being a sage at a young age with incredible spiritual insight...healing the sick and the lame...and dying for his beliefs...and being resurrected...many think this story is unique to Jesus Christ...
this is NOT so...
Jesus Christ shares striking similarities with other god-men of almost ALL other religions/sects/cults, some predating him by 3000 years!...examples are the lives/myths of Osiris, Horus and Isis of Egypt...Mithras of Persia and Rome...Krishna of India...Dionysus/Bacchus of the Greeks/Romans...as well as to some extent Hercules/Apollo...also Attis of Phrygia...Zoroaster/Zarathustra of the Persians...Buddha of the Easterners
similarities include:
- born of a virgin
- birth celebration on 25th December,
- only begotten son of God,
- healer,
- saviour,
- redeemer,
- annointed one (ie Christ/Messiah),
- resurrection,
- his teachings (especially the Sermon on the Mount)
...and there is more...
from studying the above lives/myths it is clear that there has been a need in man's heart since the beginning of mankind (of what we have evidence) for a saviour god to come to earth and save man from iniquity/himself...
it is also important to note that more is written about these other god-men in ancient literature than about Jesus Christ (outside of the Bible that is)...this in itself seems a bit odd don't you think?
Actually, I though the latest for evidence for the gospels places at least some of them in existence as far back as 40 A.D. (bce). That would put them within 5 years of the crucifixion.
Brother Noname: So, do you believe Jesus did not exist? Is this what you are saying?
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
With regard to previous mythic figures similar to Jesus, if we see a common ancestor, and common Father, to all men, it makes perfect sense. So the Jews were set apart (made holy), as an example of His desires. This does not mean other peoples would not have shreds of memory of God's plan, corrupted as it may have gotten through time and separation. That they could remember a prophesied man/god, and various things about him, would be a given. Their mythological fulfillments of this prophetic figure, in their own tales, would be natural. The thing that sets the myths and Jesus apart is that only He was a real historical person. Makes perfect sense.
Quote from: noname on January 16, 2008, 09:55:15 AM
Quote from: Mississippi Heretic on January 05, 2008, 06:50:54 PM
Quote from: SLN on January 05, 2008, 02:42:54 PM
and to give the example of Paul seeing the light on the way to Damascus...where is the second witness to that as demanded for a prophet according to the Bible?
We only have one man's account, his own (or of his scribe Luke)
:cloud9: Paul did say the person traveling with him saw the light, but did not hear the voice, so wouldn't that be a second witness in the natural? Not to mention Cornelius whom the Lord had ready and used to heal Paul's temporary blindness. And besides that, the Spirit is our witness that all these things be true. That's what I love about God.......He witnesses Himself, so that none have to doubt.
The Spirit of God is what witnesses to us that we are a new creation after we believe on Him who rose from the dead, even if only to question the reality of that statement. In my own case, the Spirit witnessed it to me, for 4 days before I even knew what had happened to me when I, alone and un-coached, said that seemingly innocuous prayer from my heart. Prior to the Spirit witnessing to me, I only knew or thought of Jesus as a historical personage of some note.
Imagine my shock, when I discovered He was the son of God who comes with power, signs and wonders. I was SO different, I thought I was getting ready to have a nervous breakdown, and couldn't figure out if that was so, then why did I have such joy, like I had never known? Not to mention the shock of my family members, who were presented with a totally different person from one day to the next. Different, as in someone who said they would never set foot in a church to one who woke up asking to go to church, and reading the Bible from the first waking moment that day, and continuing to do so for next 2 years without ceasing. So........that's MY story.......Blessings to you.......
quotes
Quote from: jfraysse on January 16, 2008, 04:06:47 PM
Brother Noname: So, do you believe Jesus did not exist? Is this what you are saying?
it is not a question of my belief...but a question of proof...this is what this thread's about as i understand it
as for proof of a historical Jesus...outside the gospels, there are NONE
if you have proof of an eye witness account of the life of the historical Jesus (other than the gospels)...please share it with everyone
Reverend G said:
QuoteActually, I though the latest for evidence for the gospels places at least some of them in existence as far back as 40 A.D. (bce). That would put them within 5 years of the crucifixion.
if you think this, then provide the proof
@ Cardinal
I clearly stated in this thread that we shouldn't confuse spiritual things with historical...spiritual things are subjective ie each person has their own spiritual experiences/awareness or not...and it differs from person to person, not even Christians' experiences of Jesus are the same...
Missipppi Heretic asked a simple question in the beginning of this thread...let's concentrate on the historical/archealogical facts to prove/disprove a historical Jesus?
:cloud9: Sorry about that.....it'd been so long since I viewed this post, I actually forgot this was the one where someone was asking for proof outside the Bible. Forgive the intrusion......carry on...... :thumbsup:
Hmm, wish I took notes when i read, then I could give specifics. I'll look into it. I think it is from either Qumran or an egyptian dig where fragments were found, that they have ascertained the earlier date for existence.
anyone been able to dig up some truth?
an archeological find...an eye withness account outside the Bible?
I'm still waiting...
With regards to the Gospels, fragments of all were present at Qumran (dead sea scrolls), and since the community was eradicated in 70 ce, we can be certain they existed pre 70. Also a number of scholars studying language usage have placed dates in the 40's and 50's ce on the various Gospels. It isn't fresh news.
Regarding secular sources, I can offer these: Josephus, Jewish Historian (37-100ce), related the crucifixion and resurrection as a historical event, Thallus and Phlegon, both lost books, referred to by Julius Africanus, both related the events but hoped to find natural explanations for them (including the eclipse and Jesus' miracles), Tacitus, Roman Senator and later governor of Asia, despised Christians but in 116ce wrote of Jesus crucified under Pilate, and the pernicious outbreak of the cult who followed Him, Mara Bar-Serapion in the 70's ce to his son from prison wondered what good the Jews did in persecuting their wise king, Jesus. Do you not find it strange that none of the Roman emperors who wished to eradicate Christianity tried to do so by declaiming His existence? They always tried to force Christians from their faith, or marginalize them, or blame them for evil deeds, but never did they try to tell people that He had not existed, been crucified, they did not even question His resurrection. Wouldn't that have been easier? At least stemmed the flow of converts?
At jesusmystery.com they state that there are 19 secular writings of His existence,after discounting Josephus as religiously motivated, and both Gemaras of the Jewish Talmud, since it was religiously motivated and attempted to discount His diety. Is this enough?
again Rev G...you have failed to give me any eyewitness account of the life of Jesus...only some references made by so-called historians after they have heard the story themselves
as for Josephus...it has been proven that certain texts were added to his original texts to favour the myth of Jesus...and I would not trust Josephus so much...if you learn more about his life you will realize that he was a Jewish traitor who walked over to the Romans to spare his own life...and in turn got his childhood friends killed which have stood by him unto the end
as for the Romans prosecuting Christians, it means nothing...they also prosecuted Jews, followers of Zoroaster, followers of any other religion than their own...their religion included the worship of the Caesar and most other religions did not bow down to Ceaser
if you use this straw man argument...then I can ask you why Constantine murdered all the pagans and outlawed their religion/s once he MADE Christianity the official state religion...
and I can also ask you why Christians slaughtered millions of Muslims AND Jews AND Pagans in the Middle Ages on their crusades...
does that make pagan gods real or is Allah the real god then if the prosecution of others is used for an argument that their god is real?
as far as the Dead Sea Scrolls are concerned...do you even know what has been discovered there or are you relying on hearsay again? nothing about Jesus my friend...only fragments of some of the Hebrew scriptures...checkit...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dead_Sea_Scrolls)
QuoteAlso a number of scholars studying language usage have placed dates in the 40's and 50's ce on the various Gospels.
I dissagree...the dates you refer to are references to paul's writings...not the Gospels...but again, if you have proof...let's see it
if you claim all these things as true...give us some web links and veritable facts to support your arguments
noname,
Have you read the book called "The Jesus Dynasty" written by James Tabor? This book is worth the read even though James Tabor doesn't believe Jesus was resurrected, he gives pretty strong evidence that Jesus existed.
CHB
It is obvious that you prefer to deny Jesus existence. That is sad. That nobody can prove through the showing of an eyewitness any historical character, I suppose you also do not believe in your own great great grandfather. They faked the whole thing. Especially since there is much less data available on him. And certainly nobody has built a belief system around him. Basically what I am hearing from you is that sources that are perfectly acceptable for proving the existence of any other historical person are not acceptable to the person of Jesus. Any historical document can be questioned, and never can true 100 percent proof be established. Even G. Washingtons personal signed letters can not be 100 percent authenticated, well I guess they could, if they dug him up, took a DNA sample, and found some dead cells on the letter. But even that would not prove he wrote it.
What you are trying to accomplish after the fact is indeed negated by prior existing facts. Why would authorities not just have denied His existence years ago, why not just call Him the mythical Jesus 1700 years ago? So much easier than trying to dispel what He was, as that supposes His existence. Perhaps Jesus was really Francis Bacon? Even competing monotheistic religions accept His existence, both Judaism and Islam. It would be so much easier to say He never happened, than try to say He isn't what He claimed to be. Of course, realistic scholars accept His existence too, so should I conclude you are unrealistic? I will not, though I will pray for you.
As to the dead sea scrolls, yes, I do know what I am saying, am aware of your "fragment" argument, and also know the counters to that argument. Actually, if you choose to look, there is more than just easily dismissed fragmentary evidence. Of course, once your mind has been set against believing something, no amount of credible evidence will be believed.
Of course, I am definitely a crackpot, I believe that all electronics work on smoke....you let the smoke out of the electronic item, it no longer works...lol. I witness that happening, though I guess most realistic people believe it is about electron flow or something. Sorry guys, I'm done here, it is to the point of silliness.
There will be many to whom God will give faith after this life, or as I saw posted elsewhere, cause an "earthquake" in their life in this lifetime to open their cell door. Some arguments are fruitless, as until God gives the ability to believe, some will just refuse to see it...many did so with Jesus standing face to face with them, and as with many others, will have to be correctively punished and cleansed in the lake of fire before every knee bows and every tongue confesses Jesus is Lord. God is good, and He knows what to do with ALL of us. God's blessing.
Noname, you seem dead set on proving Jesus did not exist. Where is your proof that He did not? :blah: :spank:
The last 3 posters, I suggest you read the entire thread again.
Noname is a believer, so why would he want to disprove? Fallacy of assumption. Read.
Blessings
Quote from: nonameanyone been able to dig up some truth?
an archeological find...an eye withness account outside the Bible?
I'm still waiting...
Just because you don't have archaeological proof does not mean it doesn't exist. By using your example... In 1950 you could also have said that Pontius Pilate did not exist. Yet you would have been wrong! Because 11 years later in 1961 inscriptions found at Caesarea Martitima, confirmed that Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect headquartered there. You could have said all the way up to 1961 that there was no archaeological proof that Pontius Pilate was a real person and you would have been WRONG! The proof was there for thousands of years. We just did not know about it yet. Therefore, the absence of archeological data is not lack of proof/truth.
The same goes for Caiaphas the high priest during the time of Jesus. In 1990, the tomb and ossuary of Caiaphas, was found in Jerusalem. New discovery's are happening every year but slowly due to the restrictions placed by the goverments of the regions.
You got to have faith, that is proof of archaeological findings not yet seen :laughing7:
Paul
It's OK, I want peace, my apologies, I'm sorry. I don't need to argue with the body. I just personally don't see how the spirit of this thread is helpful, so I'll get off it. You may sense a spirit of reconciliation in this topic, or some encouragement to the body. If it's present, that's great. Maybe it will bless someone. God's blessing.
Quote from: SeekerSA on February 05, 2008, 05:48:45 AM
The last 3 posters, I suggest you read the entire thread again.
Noname is a believer, so why would he want to disprove? Fallacy of assumption. Read.
Blessings
uhmm...thanks SeekerSA...just now people will think I'm an atheist...
@Pierac
you mentioned proof of Jesus' existence can be obtained by proof of people supposedly living the same time as him...
well...history also proves that people/nations mentioned in Homer's Iliad did exist...are you also then going to believe in Zeus, Cronus, Apollo and all the other gods mentioned in his writings like they are for real?
didn't think so...
my quest in this thread as I'm sure Mississipi Heretic's was (when he still participated), was to find the historical Jesus
I have stated before that I haven't found any EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT evidence of him outside the Bible
I still find this hard to understand, don't you guys?
if the Truth is out there I want to know that the Truth I'm putting my beliefs in is REAL...does anyone get what I'm trying to say here?
Quote from: nonameif the Truth is out there I want to know that the Truth I'm putting my beliefs in is REAL...does anyone get what I'm trying to say here?
Hey I'm playing along too. :thumbsup:
Quote from: nonameyou mentioned proof of Jesus' existence can be obtained by proof of people supposedly living the same time as him...
well...history also proves that people/nations mentioned in Homer's Iliad did exist...are you also then going to believe in Zeus, Cronus, Apollo and all the other gods mentioned in his writings like they are for real?
didn't think so...
Apples and Oranges, as Zeus, Cronus and Apollo were not born or lived on the earth. Jesus was born and lived on this earth. No one who believed in Zeus would have said he was a man. Jesus was a man. And being a man who worked a trade it is still possible for Archeological findings to come to light showing Jesus was a historical figure. What if they found a work order for a carpenter named Jesus who lived in Nazareth? Would that prove anything? Many would still say no. :2c:
Paul
Hi noname
I have yet to find any eye witness accounts outside the bible. I dont think it exists at this time. Maybe some day they will find something.
kept
QuoteI have stated before that I haven't found any EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT evidence of him outside the Bible. I still find this hard to understand, don't you guys?
Nope. Not many writings survived that time, so I wouldn't expect to find much if anything. There were many people running around calling themselves the Messiah, so Jesus would have been just another.
It would be helpful for those who need extra-Biblical evidence, but I don't discount the NT simply because it tells the story of Jesus by his followers. There are almost certainly errors and embellishments in the NT, but there are enough different people testifying to Jesus' existence to satisfy me. But that's not enough for everyone and I certainly understand that.
Giz
Quote from: Pierac on February 05, 2008, 05:07:49 PM
Apples and Oranges, as Zeus, Cronus and Apollo were not born or lived on the earth. Jesus was born and lived on this earth. No one who believed in Zeus would have said he was a man. Jesus was a man. And being a man who worked a trade it is still possible for Archeological findings to come to light showing Jesus was a historical figure. What if they found a work order for a carpenter named Jesus who lived in Nazareth? Would that prove anything? Many would still say no. :2c:
Paul
hey Kept,
glad to see you came back...didn't you leave for a sabbatical recently? :bigGrin:
hey Paul,
I only mentioned some Greek gods...they did believe that some gods came to earth as men...and even that the gods had children with earthly women, arising in the Titans (which were giants of old)...does this story sound familiar?
sure it does...just compare it to the Bible stories of the Anakim, Nephilim, Zimzum etc
even the Egyptians...from where came forth the Israelites who lived there for 400 years...had these beliefs 2000 BEFORE Christ was born...
they believed that the Pharaohs were the direct decendants of the gods...ie the Pharaoh was seen as the "son/sun of God"...ie the Messiah
even the same word we use to end a prayer "Amen"...is a call to the god they called the "originator"..."first one"..."most high"...Amen or Amun...later known as Amen-Ra as more emphasis was placed on him being of "divine light"...
some of their god-men (who supposedly were the sons of the gods or God in heaven), even had real tombs...and temples dedicated to them
furthermore, to come back to Jesus and specifically him being the Messiah (in a Jewish sense ie saviour of Israel)...
does nobody think it odd that after Jesus' supposed birth, life, death and ressurection a Jewish guy called Simon Bar Kochba proclaimed himself as the Messiah...started the Jewish revolts against Rome...even had his own coins printed...and the Jews believed him...
he even applied the Messianic "Star Prophecy" to himself ie Numbers 24:17: "There shall come a star out of Jacob" ("Bar Kochba" means "son of a star" in the Aramaic language)
Eventually he dragged the whole Jewish nation behind him into battle with the Romans...and we know what the consequences were
checkit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba's_revolt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba's_revolt)
but surely...if even some Jews knew about Jesus who supposedly lived only a few years before Bar Kochba (100 or so) and about 50 years after the Gospels were written...surely we would have at least a Jewish and/or Roman record of refuting Bar Kochba as the Messiah...can you start to see my dilemma in what to believe or not? there are more evidence for Bar Kochba's existence than that of Jesus...
I'm just finding it ever more unnerving that there is so little information about "the greatest man that has ever walked the earth"...but tons about other "Messiahs", "saviours" and "god-men"....mmmm
Quote from: noname on February 06, 2008, 08:39:06 AM
Quote from: Pierac on February 05, 2008, 05:07:49 PM
Apples and Oranges, as Zeus, Cronus and Apollo were not born or lived on the earth. Jesus was born and lived on this earth. No one who believed in Zeus would have said he was a man. Jesus was a man. And being a man who worked a trade it is still possible for Archeological findings to come to light showing Jesus was a historical figure. What if they found a work order for a carpenter named Jesus who lived in Nazareth? Would that prove anything? Many would still say no. :2c:
Paul
hey Kept,
glad to see you came back...didn't you leave for a sabbatical recently? :bigGrin:
hey Paul,
I only mentioned some Greek gods...they did believe that some gods came to earth as men...and even that the gods had children with earthly women, arising in the Titans (which were giants of old)...does this story sound familiar?
sure it does...just compare it to the Bible stories of the Anakim, Nephilim, Zimzum etc
even the Egyptians...from where came forth the Israelites who lived there for 400 years...had these beliefs 2000 BEFORE Christ was born...
they believed that the Pharaohs were the direct decendants of the gods...ie the Pharaoh was seen as the "son/sun of God"...ie the Messiah
even the same word we use to end a prayer "Amen"...is a call to the god they called the "originator"..."first one"..."most high"...Amen or Amun...later known as Amen-Ra as more emphasis was placed on him being of "divine light"...
some of their god-men (who supposedly were the sons of the gods or God in heaven), even had real tombs...and temples dedicated to them
furthermore, to come back to Jesus and specifically him being the Messiah (in a Jewish sense ie saviour of Israel)...
does nobody think it odd that after Jesus' supposed birth, life, death and ressurection a Jewish guy called Simon Bar Kochba proclaimed himself as the Messiah...started the Jewish revolts against Rome...even had his own coins printed...and the Jews believed him...
he even applied the Messianic "Star Prophecy" to himself ie Numbers 24:17: "There shall come a star out of Jacob" ("Bar Kochba" means "son of a star" in the Aramaic language)
Eventually he dragged the whole Jewish nation behind him into battle with the Romans...and we know what the consequences were
checkit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba's_revolt (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_Kokhba's_revolt)
but surely...if even some Jews knew about Jesus who supposedly lived only a few years before Bar Kochba (100 or so) and about 50 years after the Gospels were written...surely we would have at least a Jewish and/or Roman record of refuting Bar Kochba as the Messiah...can you start to see my dilemma in what to believe or not? there are more evidence for Bar Kochba's existence than that of Jesus...
I'm just finding it ever more unnerving that there is so little information about "the greatest man that has ever walked the earth"...but tons about other "Messiahs", "saviours" and "god-men"....mmmm
At least we can agree on this, if nothing else. But then again, what else would Satan want? Does he want the truth about the real Jesus spread around, or all other gods, since he was their originator? Who does he
really want people to know about? :mshock:
Quote from: jenna on February 06, 2008, 08:46:42 AM
At least we can agree on this, if nothing else. But then again, what else would Satan want? Does he want the truth about the real Jesus spread around, or all other gods, since he was their originator? Who does he really want people to know about? :mshock:
hey!! we have agreement! :bigGrin:
you know Jenna...I have come to the realisation that my relationship with the most High (ie Creator, Originator and Sutainer of All), has got NOTHING to do with any "other" entity (you mentioned Satan)...I have discovered for myself that everything and anything or anyone who is placed between God and me is only an obstacle to overcome...only creates distance between us, not unity
the BIG LIE is that somehow by our actions or by some other entity's interfearance, we can lose the Love of our Creator and that we need an intercessor...an inbetweener
QuoteI'm just finding it ever more unnerving that there is so little information about "the greatest man that has ever walked the earth"...but tons about other "Messiahs", "saviours" and "god-men"....mmmm
There is no disputing the lack of information, but the lack of information must be put in context. The "other Messiahs" were probably all militaristic types that history would record. Please remember that most historians weren't like the scholars today who hold objectivity as a virtue. They worked for dictators who liked stories about how they crushed rebellions...to keep others in line and for their own glory. Jesus didn't preach violence and let no military movement and went so far as to claim His kingdom wasn't of this world. Consequently He would be of little interest historically...except for those who followed Him, of course.
Giz
Brother Giz: Excellent points! My thoughts (at least some of them) exactly! History, many times, depends on the "history" and POV of the historian, especially when the guy you work for can have Your Head on a platter if he doesn't like what you wrote!
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Quotehey Kept,
glad to see you came back...didn't you leave for a sabbatical recently?
Hi noname, yep but as soon as I was leaving mainly because I was dealing thru the ot vs nt God thing, the lack of evidence as you are pointing out, the tribalism and many more things I felt I should take time off instead of bringing them up on other forums. As soon as I did that they began taking a front seat anyways. So my 'sabbatical' has been interrupted but
I am up for a full time job as well so I will be fading off into the distance soon.
i must appear very wishy washy huh? oh well, thats me I suppose, shes here, no wait shes not, no shes back, no wait shes not :mshock:
ps wanted to add, been giving attention to a lot of the things you bring up here.
you said you dont accept any go between I believe you phrased it, sorry if I state it different. Does that mean you see Jesus different than you previously did?
kept
Wanted to add, I do find those things very interesting indeed noname.
Speaking for me, I read acharra's book a few years ago when it came out and it brings forth much of the things you are sharing here. What it did to me though was further show me that as far back as we have evidence mankind has had the religion of a dying god/man, resurrection to immortality. Even if there is very little evidence for Jesus outside the gospels to me all the evidence of this same belief going back to our very early times shows me that its very important. It is at the center and remains at the center. That tends to really speak volumes to me.
Jesus Christ has been made real to me as the center of that revelation. He is where I entered into that knowing instead of thru other myths and legends. He is still therefore my shining example of this truth that mankind seems to hold to all thry history. And so even if tomorrow they unearthed real proof that he was just another in a long line of god/men myths, it really wouldnt change the power of the gospel for me. I find its become a part of my inner spiritual life. It speaks on a level much deeper than just historical anyways.
kept
hey Kept,
I totally get what you're saying when referring to Jesus Christ as your shining example
for me, whether true or myth, he is that too...I have never seen a man with love like him
on the other hand...I want to ask...if there was no "middle-man" between us and God (the Almighty, First One, Most High)...would we all have these wars and strife between religions and nations and clashes of civilisations?
if we all just worshipped the God above all, would we then need Jesus, Mohammed, Moses?
and if God is our Father...can't we just talk to Him directly? must we always work through a medium?
even Jesus himself said that the Father wants us to worship Him in Truth and in Spirit...he didn't say "in Truth and in Spirit through me"...see what I'm getting at?
I'm looking to worship a God that heals and not kill, that bring people together not drive them apart...not to "devide and conquer"...but draw all people together in love, peace, unity
if any proposed god do not have those "fruits", I'm simply not interested anymore
@ gizmo:
QuoteThere is no disputing the lack of information, but the lack of information must be put in context. The "other Messiahs" were probably all militaristic types that history would record. Please remember that most historians weren't like the scholars today who hold objectivity as a virtue.
uhmm...people today have got relics of modern day idols or gods like Elvis in their homes...even towels with his sweat and spit on...if the historical Jesus was the man that drew masses of people...some of those people would have said something or kept something of him...
there are numerous things written about and physical evidence of other non-violent men that have walked this earth...a typical example would be Buddha (who lived 400 BC) - temples, statues, written word etc etc and even "eye witness accounts" from his followers...or Zoroaster who also lived prior to Jesus...that "argument" of yours do not hold any water with me
Quoteif we all just worshipped the God above all, would we then need Jesus, Mohammed, Moses?
and if God is our Father...can't we just talk to Him directly? must we always work through a medium?
even Jesus himself said that the Father wants us to worship Him in Truth and in Spirit...he didn't say "in Truth and in Spirit through me"...see what I'm getting at?
I'm looking to worship a God that heals and not kill, that bring people together not drive them apart...not to "devide and conquer"...but draw all people together in love, peace, unity
if any proposed god do not have those "fruits", I'm simply not interested anymore
i hear ya noname, I am very sick of all the tribalism and that is what seems to cause the fighting. I read that in 2007 we now have over 40,000 denominations in christianity alone.
Im all for unity too, but I dont think its going to come thru a religion
the times we seem to cross all barriers are when our common humanity rises up as one
I always am struck by pictures of prayers on battlefields, both teams claiming victory in the name of God, but you can put all those same people in an earthquake and all the barriers fall off and they come together in unity
thanks
kept
Quote from: Kept on February 11, 2008, 03:58:38 PM
the times we seem to cross all barriers are when our common humanity rises up as one
Amen!
joining together in common humanity we become "god-like"...the way God wants us to be
after all these centuries of war and strife it is time for us to discover what we have in common and not how we differ, we tend to look at the differences and drift further apart
if God is One...we should also become One...else we cannot say that we know Him or His ways
Brother Noname and Sister Kept:
I know this is a bit off topic here but there are three basic tenets of Orthodox Christianity that I find repugnant and extremely complicated Biblical concepts.
1. The revealed Evil Nature of the Biblical God, which to me, is rooted in required appeasement or sacrifice, that is, the "angry god" concept.
2. God's supposedly "Exclusive Revelation" to a "Chosen People". Knowledge of God should be simple (if it is important) and undeniable to All Humans! NO Tribalism!
3. The "Mission" to Evangelize the World with the Biblical God's "Turn or Burn - Good News" (ET). This mission, as stated, is ultimately important, overly difficult to achieve and failure to reach this goal has catastrophic consequences to the unreached and/or unsure. UR mostly gets around this problem and the problems associated with #2.
In regards to Problem #1, as I have shared before, God's Spirit tells me that I should not honor anyone, especially "a god", that thinks, speaks or acts in an evil fashion and (allegedly) violates its own rules. Since the actions of the Biblical "meanie god" span the gamut of human emotions and evil deeds, the origins of "this god" are best explained as man-made.
Evil men are capable of a wide range of atrocities, with or without "religion", but for those who need the "sanction of god" to commit horrid acts, the Bible is full of explicit examples to justify the "Lord's Work". Every "god inspired" evil action, dogma or command flows down stream from this explanation. Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate said it best when he wrote "... But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion."
At every turn, Jesus seemed to do and say things that would offend and turn back ingrained tribalism and the "religious" folk of His day. Why? He even said that He came to bring "a sword" and divide (families included). Why? Was it because He was "having a bad day"? I think not! It was because He was "correcting" the most religious and "word based" people on the planet! To me, this is a sobering message. What would the world be like today if the "words" hadn't spawned the Dogmas of Orthodox Christianity and the Roman Catholic Church NEVER HAD an EMPIRE to go with them?
Maybe we would have had a lot less of those battlefield prayer scenes!?
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Quote from: noname on February 05, 2008, 04:20:06 PM
Quote from: SeekerSA on February 05, 2008, 05:48:45 AM
The last 3 posters, I suggest you read the entire thread again.
Noname is a believer, so why would he want to disprove? Fallacy of assumption. Read.
Blessings
uhmm...thanks SeekerSA...just now people will think I'm an atheist...
@Pierac
you mentioned proof of Jesus' existence can be obtained by proof of people supposedly living the same time as him...
well...history also proves that people/nations mentioned in Homer's Iliad did exist...are you also then going to believe in Zeus, Cronus, Apollo and all the other gods mentioned in his writings like they are for real?
didn't think so...
my quest in this thread as I'm sure Mississipi Heretic's was (when he still participated), was to find the historical Jesus
I have stated before that I haven't found any EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT evidence of him outside the Bible
I still find this hard to understand, don't you guys?
if the Truth is out there I want to know that the Truth I'm putting my beliefs in is REAL...does anyone get what I'm trying to say here?
i'm sorry noname for not participating...i just felt that what would happen with this thread is what is happeining now...just folks running round and round an argument, a dog chasing his tail. Shortly after we corresponded, I came to a peace that I don't have to know, don't care to look anymore and that it doesn't really change the way I believe. In a way it is bittersweet to detach oneself from the search...yet, it is so liberating. I am not bound by preconceived notions and therefore I am more open God's greatness and more willing to be in awe of God's creation....I'm sorry if I have opened up a can of worms here. However, I think the question is still worth the asking. As for the answer, it's pretty clear though...there is NO clear historical evidence for the existence of Jesus the Man. What is left, however, is the personal revelations by God to His children in regards to His Being...and that Spirit filled journey is what seems to be the most important thing to me.
Peace and Blessings to All,
bart
QuoteI am not bound by preconceived notions and therefore I am more open God's greatness and more willing to be in awe of God's creation....I'm sorry if I have opened up a can of worms here.
Good for YOU, MH! No worms, at least for me. Sorry for the digression!
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Nice post John
and
Im happy for you Bart
I have found for me personally to give myself fully to what ever season Im in. Sometimes I go a long time without picking up a book and other times I am reading everything in site lol
kept
Quote from: jfraysse on February 12, 2008, 04:14:25 PM
Brother Noname and Sister Kept:
I know this is a bit off topic here but there are three basic tenets of Orthodox Christianity that I find repugnant and extremely complicated Biblical concepts.
1. The revealed Evil Nature of the Biblical God, which to me, is rooted in required appeasement or sacrifice, that is, the "angry god" concept.
2. God's supposedly "Exclusive Revelation" to a "Chosen People". Knowledge of God should be simple (if it is important) and undeniable to All Humans! NO Tribalism!
3. The "Mission" to Evangelize the World with the Biblical God's "Turn or Burn - Good News" (ET). This mission, as stated, is ultimately important, overly difficult to achieve and failure to reach this goal has catastrophic consequences to the unreached and/or unsure. UR mostly gets around this problem and the problems associated with #2.
I'm thinking along the same lines John...
what is really curious to me is that the god of the Jews (Yahweh, Jehovah) first revealed himself with this name to Moses...(to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob God was El - Shaddai)
of this god of the Jews even his prophets tell us that he creates "good AND evil"
and if one takes the examples you have given one can clearly see "by the fruits" of this god that he does indeed "create evil"...by the fruits of modern Israel one can also see that they follow this evil god...who wants to steal other peoples land, lock them up in a prison without basic water, food and necessary services (in the case of Gaza)
the teachings of Jesus goes directly against this type of god
@bart:
QuoteAs for the answer, it's pretty clear though...there is NO clear historical evidence for the existence of Jesus the Man. What is left, however, is the personal revelations by God to His children in regards to His Being...and that Spirit filled journey is what seems to be the most important thing to me.
Amen! the goodness and real personality of God will shine into every heart who accepts it...and remove all the cobwebs of evil gods and their "chosen" :thumbsup:
Brother Noname: Ref your #65. The names... yes, that is interesting, isn't it! Thanks! Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Brother NoName:
Just to be clear, none of my remarks should be construed to be Anti-Semitic. I am vehemently opposed to both Zionist and Anti-Semitic groups as they represent Tribalism.
As stated before, I believe that God is not a respecter of persons, groups, Races and Nations and that this concept should be Humanity's Model.
As you point out, Jesus, although a Jew, did not appear to be "political" in anyway. He was not the National Deliver the Jews wanted nor was He an advocate of the Roman (other any other) State. As I have told others many times, "I am a Zionists only to the extent that you are an Anti-Semite"! :bigGrin:
I hope I have cleared up any confusion on this matter, if there was any.
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Brother John,
I'm not seeing anything you say as Anti-Semitic...
this anti-semitic thing is quite a nice tool for Zionists to use against their enemies...and then they are killing their fellow Semites (the Palestinians, Lebanese) by the thousands...they use this as a nice political tool to get what they want...and they aren't even Jews themselves by birth as most of them are of Khazar descent (ie "normalized" Jews)
Orthodox Jews (ie the real Jews born of Judah), fiercely oppose the Zionists...in their way of thinking and action...they also oppose Jews going back to Israel to take the land by force, as they acknowledge that God made them a promise that the Messiah will set Judah (and the whole of Israel) free when the time is right.
for links to Jews against Zionism, check these links out:
http://www.nkusa.org/ (http://www.nkusa.org/)
http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/ (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/)
Brother NoName: Cool, man! I'm glad I didn't give that impression!
I, like you and many others, hate "religious wars" and religious fascism!
Those links are spot-on, btw. I'm glad somebody has some common sense when it comes to all this tribalism crap.
Thanks and have a great weekend!
Grace & Peace, John :HeartThrob:
Tribalism is rampant in this country too, unfortunately...the main example i'm thinking of are Democrats and Republicans....what is worse is when anti-tribalism groups(anarachists)become tribal in their thoughts and actions.
Quote from: Mississippi Heretic on February 12, 2008, 04:46:02 PMI am not bound by preconceived notions and therefore I am more open God's greatness and more willing to be in awe of God's creation....I'm sorry if I have opened up a can of worms here. However, I think the question is still worth the asking. As for the answer, it's pretty clear though...there is NO clear historical evidence for the existence of Jesus the Man. What is left, however, is the personal revelations by God to His children in regards to His Being...and that Spirit filled journey is what seems to be the most important thing to me.
Peace and Blessings to All,
bart
God had a special place and time where there was a cumulative result on some of the people there of His varied dealings leading up to His manifestation as human flesh. Things such as His sinlessness wouldn't have been very appreciated anywhere else, like India, for instance. As well, who else had the prophecies? Some things were with the Magi, but... Just like you wouldn't normally carry a jewel around loose in your pocket but put it in a finding, so Jesus appeared in Israel in the days of the Roman Empire.
The rules of doing history verify the existence of Jesus more than most any other ancient personage. One must only deal objectively and as a historian with the evidences. So was the understanding of the author of
The Robe, a historian travelling with Ingersoll, a famous atheist around the 1940's (he was responsible for the present popular idea of "the separation of church and state.") When on a train on a Sunday morning they heard church bells ringing, Robert Ingersoll suggested he put this Jesus thing to rest once and for all. After all, he was a scholar, a historian, so should be able to debunk it with ease. After 2 years research he says one night he realized there was more proof for Jesus in history as the New Testament documents present Him than that Julius Ceasar ever existed. He fell on his knees, crying out to God all night, and with the sunrise the light of God's love dawned in his heart. The outcome was he wrote
The Robe as a result of the research that he had done.
I tell this story from memory after maybe thirty or more years since I read it so I hope you'll forgive any lapse in detail. It should be in the preface to the novel which I don't have before me.
Of course, factoids about the historical Jesus do not do the same thing as the presence of His Spirit within us. Nevertheless, without some authoritative "preconceived notion" in the form of Scripture, there would be so much more Jesus's in our own image. The "real" Jesus is not in conflict with the Bible presentation of Him, but He also is not confined to the Bible.
---James
I find it unbelievable that someone would make a statement that there's more evidence for the historical Jesus than for Julius Caesar...ever seen a coin with Jesus' image on it like that of Caesars? to name one example that comes to mind...or...ever seen a statue erected in his true image?
and to just accept after you've read a novel (of which the meaning of is that it is...uhmm...fiction)...and then say now you have enough evidence?
please...present that to us...all this overwhelming evidence
and to say that the "Spirit of Jesus" in people is enough reason for them to believe in Him...what does that mean?
it is a very subjective remark...as "the spirit of Jesus" obviously manifests itself differently in the over 200 Christian denominations not true?...as they all believe differently
the same "spirit" leads people to believe in UR and ET...which are at total opposite ends of the belief spectrum...could it be "the same spirit"?
facts man...just give us the facts
Actually, I have never seen a coin with Julius Caesars image on it, though I am sure they exist. So do pictures of zeus. The fact is, more documentation has existed for Jesus existence than many other historical personages. That does not include biblical references. There are even Judaic references. To pick and choose historians of the past (well I don't find him trustworthy) when others accept their correspondence is just a way of shirking the evidence. While some historical tracts have been questioned, even Josephus works that have not been suspected of tampering do include Jesus. It is true that many of the documents which once existed are no longer extant, which is true of a number of historic persons besides Jesus. That a man named Jesus existed and was crucified are accepted historical facts by the multitude of historical scholars. Granted, this may change in the future, and the needed evidence does diminish as time goes by, barring further findings. Rewriting of history does seem in vogue today, so have at it.
Quote from: Reverend G on February 20, 2008, 02:34:03 PM
Actually, I have never seen a coin with Julius Caesars image on it, though I am sure they exist. So do pictures of zeus. The fact is, more documentation has existed for Jesus existence than many other historical personages. That does not include biblical references. There are even Judaic references. To pick and choose historians of the past (well I don't find him trustworthy) when others accept their correspondence is just a way of shirking the evidence. While some historical tracts have been questioned, even Josephus works that have not been suspected of tampering do include Jesus. It is true that many of the documents which once existed are no longer extant, which is true of a number of historic persons besides Jesus. That a man named Jesus existed and was crucified are accepted historical facts by the multitude of historical scholars. Granted, this may change in the future, and the needed evidence does diminish as time goes by, barring further findings. Rewriting of history does seem in vogue today, so have at it.
here are some of my facts:
Julius Caesar coins - issued in 44BC
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=523 (http://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=523)
Julius Caesar - Busts, statues, friends
http://www.beloit.edu/~classics/main/courses/history222/julius/ (http://www.beloit.edu/~classics/main/courses/history222/julius/)
show me some of your facts...other than hearsay
Already have presented evidence earlier, to which I was rebutted. Granted, the rebuttal was of the order of "I dispute your evidence", even though mainstream (even atheist) scholars accept it. Not like we can wake these people up and ask them what they really meant. That is the nature of history. One can dispute lots of things......I could choose to tell you that the busts, coins, stories are all of about a fictional character, but I won't. You couldn't prove me wrong, though it would be absurd. Your argument is equally absurd. Both are real historical persons, and widely accepted as such.
MH-
Do you believe Ceasar Augustus existed? If so can you prove it?
Bethany
Exactly my point Bethany....I cannot "prove" Caesar Augustus lived and breathed on this earth, yet I, and I'm sure most people, have no trouble believing it. It would be even harder to prove if you had to discount "political" works, since he is a politician of sorts.
Quote from: Reverend G on February 20, 2008, 05:40:02 PM
Already have presented evidence earlier, to which I was rebutted. Granted, the rebuttal was of the order of "I dispute your evidence", even though mainstream (even atheist) scholars accept it. Not like we can wake these people up and ask them what they really meant. That is the nature of history. One can dispute lots of things......I could choose to tell you that the busts, coins, stories are all of about a fictional character, but I won't. You couldn't prove me wrong, though it would be absurd. Your argument is equally absurd. Both are real historical persons, and widely accepted as such.
all "evidence" you presented was "hearsay"...NOTHING from the time Jesus was supposed to be living
the evidence of Caeser was when he was living and breathing 44 BC
and you call my arguments and evidence absurd?
What evidence?
Ok, lets look at Caesar then. You post a site showing coins and busts, which do not resemble each other. Also, I have seen coins with fictional people on them, oh, like Mercury, Lady Liberty, etc.... I see Plutarch is one of the historical documents available, of course Plutarch is 1st century CE, ceasar was dead in 44 BCE...so it must be hearsay as well. I also would not trust any Roman documents, seeing as how you can't trust the Bible for Christ. Romans would have been the ones making up the stories, no? Ah yes, many know about Caesar from a novel, if you like that term, written by someone over a millenia after Caesar, if he existed, was dead. Some guy named Shakespeare wrote it. So I see you are providing tons of credible proof? And Caesar supposedly ruled a nation, should be more proof than some Jewish carpenter's existence...right?
I cannot see this going anywhere fruitful. Points made both sides. Before it gets nasty, I am locking this thread.
Blessings