You can believe any irrational bs you wish too. {note that I said "irrational" because without evidence that is all it can be.} Yes someone else did, but you claimed jesus existed. The Jewish don't give a rats arse, Whether the christians think jesus was the messiah, the jews messiah hasn't arrived yet, so the christian jesus is far from being a thorn in their side, it is merely a fictional tale to them.
Gday, Not real. At least in the sense of people who met Jesus. NONE of the NT books were written by anyone who met Jesus. We do not have even one authentic claim to have ever seen Jesus. Who's apostles were they ? All books were written by literate persons - including all the ancient myths. Do you believe the ancient Greek myths ? No? Why not? They were written by literate persons. The ancient world is full of ancient myths - the only reason many belueve in this one is because it became the state religion. For a millenium or more anyone who disgreed risked being burned at the stake. K.
Gday, Thanks Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! That was me under an earlier name. Yes, the evidence for Jesus is very poor indeed. But believers are convinced we have many sources, even eye-witnesses! But we don't. K.
:spank: And I was only beaten by seconds linking you to those threads. Glad I didn't now. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Gday, No, I am not a Jew. I just looked at the evidence. Will you ever address the points I bring up? YOU claimed that this much vaunted "Oral Tradition" preserved the details about Jesus. I pointed out that theye couldn't even get the Lord's Prayer right! They couldn't even remember the right names of the 12 apostles! Not to mention numerous other huge differences in the stories - like the Easter Sunday stories - completely different. The Oral Tradition failed to record these details. Because it wasn't history anyway - it was ancient myths, different authors, writing stories. Nothing to do with history. K.
Was it not in 135 Ben kochba ( misspelled ) was not accepted as messiah, but because he was a blood thirsty Akiba changed his mind
Gday, Old material? hahaha here you are preaching two THOUSAND year old myths, but a post from 5 years ago is "old"? What a laugh. Hush your questions? It ANSWERS your questions - but you don't seem interested in discussing the issues :-( No-one can hush anyone here - everyone, including you, is free to post whatever they want. Various posters have answered you, but all you respond with is snarky one-liners. Who? Satan? Is that the level of your debate? K.
Mom has 2 parents, that's true... One mother and one father. Dad - ditto... That gives me 4 grandparents, two grandfathers and two grandmothers.
Gday, Are you serious? We do NOT have testimony from "hundreds of witnesses". The entire New Testament has 27 books, SOME of which are claimed to be by eye-witnesses. Can you please post these HUNDREDS of eye-witness claims? We'd love to see them. Who did? None of the Gospels contain claims like that. They are anonymous books which tell religious stories - later some OTHER people came to believe them. Seriously, Mind Over Matter - WHERE is this "testimony of hundreds of witnesses who saw him, spoke with him, touched him, ate with him, learned from him" Please quote some for us to consider. Meanwhile, here is my list of who did and didn't claim to have met Jesus : Paul Paul never met a historical Jesus, and never claimed to. He did claim to have had revelations "thru Christ" etc. He did claim to have had a vision of Christ. And others (Acts) claim Paul had a vision of Christ. It is worth noting that Paul does not place Iesous Christos in history : * No places - Paul never mentions Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary, etc. * No dates - Paul never places Iesous Christos in time. * No names - Paul never mentions Mary, Joseph, Pilate, Judas, Nicodemus, Lazarus etc. * No miracles - Paul never mentions the miracles/healings of Jesus * No trial/tomb - Paul never mentions the trial or the empty tomb etc. Paul's Christos is a heavenly being, not a historical person. the 500 Paul claims 500 others had a vision of Christ. The Gospels do not mention that, no other writer mentions that, and we have no names or evidence for any of the 500. Even IF it happened - they had a VISION like Paul - nothing historical. G.Mark The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to traditon, Mark was a secretary of Peter and never met Jesus. This Gospel, like all of them, started out as an un-named book. G.Matthew The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to tradition it was written by an apostle - but it never says so, and it mentions Matthew without the slightest hint that HE was writing it. G.Luke The author of this book never identifies himself, and never claims to have met Jesus. According to tradition it was written by a follower of Paul. G.John According to tradition this Gospel was written by the apostle John, and the last chapter says : " This is the disciple who is testifying to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true." This is part of a chapter that was added to the Gospels, and it is clearly someone else making a claim for the book. It most certainly does not even come close to specific claim that anyone personally met Jesus. Jude This letter contains no claim to have met Jesus. Johanines 1 John contains this passage : That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. 2The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4We write this to make our[a] joy complete. Some believers assert this is a claim to have met Jesus. What did he see and hear? He certainly never says it was Jesus. He just had a spiritual experience and wants to tell everyone about it - "God is light". Nothing here about any historical Jesus at all. James There is no claim to have met Jesus in this letter - supposedly from Jesus' BROTHER ! Yet it contains NOTHING anywhere about a historical Jesus, even where we would expect it. It is clear this writer had never even HEARD of a historical Jesus. Revelation No claim to have met Jesus. the Petrines 2 Peter has this passage : 1.16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount. Here we see Peter directly claim to have witnessed Jesus' transfiguration. The ONE and ONLY such direct personal claim in the entire NT. But - 2 Peter is the very latest and most suspect book in the whole NT - scholars agree it is a forgery, so do many Christians, ancient and modern. A late and deliberate forgery that claims NOT to be based on "cunningly devised fables" - probably in direct response to critics claims. THAT is the one single book that contains a claim to have met Jesus. Clement Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did. Papias Does not claim to have met Jesus or anyone who had. He did claim to have met Presbyters who told him what some disciples had said. Discusses two books of Matthew and Mark , not called Gospels, not quite like modern Gospels. Polycarp Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did. Irenaeus claimed Polycarp met discples who met Jesus Ignatius Never claimed to have met Jesus or anyone who did. Justin Never claimed to have met anyone who met Jesus. Discusses UN-NAMED Gospels not quite like ours. So, the entire NT contains only ONE specific claim to have met a historical Jesus - from the most suspect forgery in the whole book. There is NOT ONE reliable claim by anyone to have ever met Jesus. But - there is a vast body of CLAIMS by later Christians - claims that are NOT supported by the earlier books, or by history. Just later books and claims, and claims about books. Kapyong
Gday, Riiiggght... The facts don't matter at all to you. As if the only "facts" are things that have been observed by eye-witnesses - a completely nonsensical idea. What matters is that you can believe what you want to. Well, I fully agree - You can believe what you want to. Just like Hindus, Scientologists, Theosophists, Heaven's Gate cult... But if you ever want to discuss the facts, feel free to join in. K.
Gday, Um, no. That is the religious STORY you are trying to convince us about. But here you just leap in and assume it was true! Were YOU there? Did YOU see Jesus? Then you have no facts! Seriously - who CLAIMED that THEY had met Jesus personally? Please show me the quote. L.Ron Hubbard describes very well some activity of Xenu the space alien. So what? Luke describes very well some activity of some apostles. So what? Not a lie. Just a religious belief. That some people came to BELIEVE. No-one lied. They just made a mistake and believed a MYTH. K.
Pure crap. You're being given evidence that you're wrong. Please point out this "hand waving" - so far any instances of this seem to be yours.
Hi I like to discuss with you , and it is fun . Any way the point was . The individual kapyoung said that religion was always part of the state and I believe it started about 3 rd century, were you are verifying . So for about 3 century the group call it the way,Nazarene , Christians were in the dog house persecuted by the Jewish court ( Sinhandren ) and by Romans. That means that they had to be working underground ( in hiding )
Indeed. A monolith that doesn't weather and is not approachable would work. So would story-high flaming letters spelling out a message to creation. Why did the message get so muddled? Why was it left to second hand error prone humans to interpret a supposed divinely inspired lesson? Christianity is around because it seems to be very adaptable. Plus, populations have a short memory, so as things get altered, they continue to think that the current information is how things have always been. Look at plenty of examples of recent events...if something is repeated enough, people believe it's true. The bible is no different. Yes, you can go back to earlier writings and see the evolution, but the majority of believers don't do that. What's the statistics on how many christians have truly read the whole bible, pick your modern version, cover to cover?
