The Left's War On Christians
See other The Left's War On Christians Articles
Title: 'Jesus is a MYTH': Christ stories appeared decades after his 'death' - and he was probably many people rather than just one, atheist writer claims
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet ... le-just-one-writer-claims.html
Published: Apr 3, 2015
Author: Richard Gray
Post Date: 2015-04-03 08:49:14 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 26785
Comments: 116
Jesus Christ was not a real person and is probably the result of a combination of stories about several different individuals, according to a writer and leading atheist activist. David Fitzgerald, a San Francisco based author, believes he has compiled compelling evidence that proves Jesus did not exist. He claims there are no contemporary mentions of Jesus in historical accounts from the time when he was supposed to have lived, yet other Jewish sect leaders from the time do appear. Mystery: This painting depicts Jesus Christ as single person but writer David Fitzgerald believes he was a literary invention that combined the stories from several cults and figures in Judea during the first century He also points to discrepancies in the early gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, claiming these were written decades after the supposed time of Jesus. Instead he insists the disciples of Jesus were also probably not real and their names only later attached to the gospels to lend them credence. In a new book due to be published later this year, he will argue that the figure of Jesus was actually a combination of pagan rituals and stories about other people. Speaking to MailOnline, he said: 'There is a paradox that Jesus did all these amazing things and taught all these amazing things yet no one heard of him outside his immediate cult for nearly 100 years. 'Or it means he didn't do all these things at all. 'The first gospel of Christianity appears to have been a literary allegory that were written decades after the time they portray. 'I believe that Christianity started as one of the many mystery faiths that appeared at the time where old Gods and old traditions were rebooted. 'Christianity appears to have been a Jewish mystery faith. 'By the time of Paul there appears to have been plenty of different "Lord's suppers" as he complains about the existence of other gospels and messiahs. 'It appears that early Christianity managed to take the stories from these other faiths and incorporate them into the story of Jesus.' Mr Fitzgerald, whose first book 'Nailed: Ten Christian Myths that Show Jesus Never Existed at All' was published in 2010, believes it is no longer reasonable to assume there has to be a single historic figure who began Christianity. Instead he says early Christians drew upon the beliefs and rituals of other cults and faiths around in the first century. He argues that John the Baptist's cult is one such example and had initially been a competitor to the cult of Jesus before being incorporated into the Christian story. Mr Fitzgerald says there are inconsistencies in the Gospels of the Christian bible (pictured above) that suggest Jesus Christ was a literary allegory and these accounts were written decades after his supposed life The statue of Christ the Redeemer (above) in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, is one of many depictions of Jesus but Mr Fitzgerald says that many of the early depictions were unable to agree on his appearance Mr Fitzgerald said: 'There is nothing implausible to think that Jesus was a real person, but I just don't think that he can have been a single person if he existed at all. 'We also have no mention of Jesus in other historical texts from the time. There were certainly people writing about Judea at the time like Philo of Alexandria. 'During this period there were many other messiahs and wannabe messiahs who did far less exciting things than Jesus, but all of them managed something Jesus did not - to make a dent on the historical record. 'Two billion people believe all these miracles happened yet there is no evidence they did.' The earliest mention of Jesus yet to be discovered is a limestone ossuary on which the words 'James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus' is inscribed. The box, which has been dated to 64AD - several decades after the crucifixion - was seized by the Israeli Antiquities Authority and its owner arrested for forgery in 2003. Although he was later cleared in 2012, doubts about the authenticity of the inscription remain. Others have said there could have been several people named James, whose father was called Joseph and had a brother called Jesus living in Jerusalem at the time. The James Ossuary (above) is thought by some to be the first mention of Jesus in an inscription on its side There are three mentions of Jesus in non-Christian sources which have been used to research the existence of a 'real' Jesus. A Jesus is mentioned in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews, which was written around 94 AD. Roman historian Tacitus later mentions Christ and his execution with Pontius Pilate in his Annals, thought to be written around 116AD. Both mentions were a considerable time after his alleged execution. Mr Fritzgerald also takes issue with many of the stories about the Crucifixion that stem from the first Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke. He said: 'There are many examples of inconsistencies in the gospels that suggest they were written by people who did not live in Judea at the time they are set. 'Mark makes many mistakes about life and geography during the first century in Judea. 'If Jesus really had been arrested on the eve of Passover, they would probably have just put him in jail and tried him after the weekend. 'The trial itself violates the rules of Jewish law - why was he not stoned? 'What we know about Pontius Pilate also suggests he was someone who would not do what the Jews asked him and would often do what they asked him not to. 'Instead Mark portrays him as being persuaded by the Jewish leaders to execute him.' Mr Fitzgerald argues that many of these stories were in fact incorporated into the story of Christ as literary devices rather than as a historical account. He said: 'There is also no evidence for the tradition that sees Barabbas - an anti-Roman rebel and murderer - being released while Jesus, an innocent, is condemned to death. 'What this actually seems to be is Mark using the story as an allegory for the Yom Kippur scapegoat ritual where one goat is released into the wilderness and the other is sacrificed for God.' Mr Fitzgerald hopes to have his new book 'Jesus: Mything in Action' out later this year. He added: 'It still puzzles me that as soon as anyone tries to pin down who Jesus is we get 50 different Jesus's emerging. There is no consensus.'
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: All (#0)
Must be a major Christian holiday coming up. Can you imagine a similar story about Mohamed during Ramadan?
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
What if Jesus really is the Christ? What if Jesus really is God? Just a thought by Rev. Bob Celeste Pastor, ChristianPatriot.com The Church for the American Christian who is a Patriot on the web. The Apostle John had this to say about Jesus: "In the beginning was the Christ, and the Christ was with God, and Christ is God. Jesus was in the beginning with God. All things were made by Jesus; and without Him nothing thing was made." (John 1:1-3 ACP/KJV Paraphrase) Now think about that for a moment, what if John spoke the truth? What if Jesus really did make the world? and what if He did it just the way the Bible says He did it? In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. (Genesis 1:1ACP/KJV) What if it is true that on the first day Jesus said: Let there be light! and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the dark-ness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. And on the second day Jesus said: Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters! And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. And on the third day Jesus said: Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear! and it was so. And Jesus called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth. and it was so. And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the third day. And on the fourth day Jesus said: Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years. And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. And on day five Jesus said: Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. And on the sixth day Jesus said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them. And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat. and it was so. And God saw every thing that He had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day. (Genesis 1 ACP/KJV) And on day seven God rested. Well, if Jesus is God, as I believe Him to be, and if Jesus did create the universe and everything in it and on it, then He not only owns it, but, He gets to make the rules and be the ultimate Judge of all His creation as to their obedience to His rules. And Jesus has a few rules, here are the ones you need to concentrate on: Jesus said: Unless a man is born again he will not enter into the kingdom of God! (John 3;3) Jesus said: whosoever shall deny Me before men, him will I also deny before My Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 10:33) What must one do to be saved? Funny you ask, for the very same question was asked by a prison warden of the Apostle Paul some 1,970 years ago. The warden asked: "What must I do to be saved?" And Paul said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." All humankind will spend eternity in one of two places, they will either spend it in Glory and ultimate happiness with the Lord or in the absolute darkness, pain and suffering of the eternal lake of fire that some call hell, for there is no purgatory. Your salvation is your responsibility, it is strictly between you and the Lord God of Creation, Christ Jesus, for there is no other way to God but through believe on Christ.
Another annual recycle of discredited 'claims.'
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
He said: 'There are many examples of inconsistencies in the gospels that suggest they were written by people who did not live in Judea at the time they are set. 'Mark makes many mistakes about life and geography during the first century in Judea. 'If Jesus really had been arrested on the eve of Passover, they would probably have just put him in jail and tried him after the weekend. More error and speculation. I know you are just posting the article cranky:) Archaeology from the early 20th century up to this day has only confirmed, not denied the Gospel accounts. A lot of these atheists (and liberal theologians) continue to parrot discredited 19th century Tubingen skeptics. Honestly, atheists probably 'believe' in God. They are just angry that the very thought of someone in charge other than themselves and He has rules.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Tell it to Flavious Josephus!
Either there are credible, contemporaneous accounts of Jesus of Nazereth or there are not. If there are then Jesus of Nazereth should be considered an historical figures as much as any other personage in the historical record. But if there are credible, contemporaneous accounts of other rabbis of the day extant and none of Jesus of Nazereth, that would be very telling, imho.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
My understanding is Flavious Josephus was born AD.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
I understand your logic train, however as I pointed out the geography and historical facts of the Gospel writers are confirmed by archaeology. The theories of the mid to late 19th century discredited as best hearsay accounts. But they recycle the same skither each year.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Yes and he lived during the same period as the apostles.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 6 He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
The Dead Sea scrolls place Jesus (at that time) as a Zealot. If so, he was not a 'myth' nor was he the son of an architect or a rabbi as your article suggests. Jesus was a Zealot. He was murdered by the Romans and Jews because he was against both regimes while they wanted to satisfy a directorate from Rome, "to quell the minions." No records of Jesus are known that were written in his lifetime about him. All records are only after his crucifixion. As a result, the Jesus known in the Bible is a "myth." But, Jesus was real; he just wasn't a Sadducee, Essene or a pharisee. For that matter, he was not a Roman, either. HE WAS A HOME GROWN REVOLUTIONARY TIRED OF THE ROMAN AND JEWISH BULLSHIT.
A single contemporaneous, credible account of the existence of a Jesus of Nazareth would put the whole issue to bed. As yet, I haven't heard of one. However, all the evidence is not in. Recently, a synagogue where Jesus preached was said to have been discovered. I don't know what, if any, records are typically kept in synagogues but if any names are recorded, I would expect Jessus of Nazereth to be among them.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
I'm not much of an Aslan devotee.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Whether you want to believe faerie tales or not is not an issue; the legendary "JESUS" is a myth, as written in the Holy Bible irrespective of version or origin. Jesus was a zealot; he was the revolutionary strength that later crumbled the Roman Empire. Unfortunately for the world, the rumours became "truth." Then again, that is the reason for no writings before or during Jesus' time on Earth. All writings occurred after his death; most of were 100 years afterwards.
Buckeroo. The things you said are only opinions. You made a decision not to believe in your past. Because of that decision you now base your beliefs on that. Even when contrary evidence is introduced. You will ignore it because you have told your brain to discount it. Every reaction you have to Gods word is now dismissed by you because of the decision you made way back whenever. I'll admit the opposite is basically true for Christians. We chose to believe and because we do we might not consider some things. Because it contradicts the decision we already made to believe.
People need myths to help them endure the trials of life and to make them believe there is ultimate compensation for injustice.
Yearly Easter attack. Very predicable.
Barabas was a zealot. Jesus was against revolt.
There are many people who want to think that Jesus is only a myth. They also want to think that Hell is only a myth. It would be most unfortunate for them if they are wrong.
As yet, I haven't heard of one. I think we have been down this road again. It was the 1st Century AD. Rome had no peers. The empire wrote the history according to Caesar. So actually having 27 books in the NT era (1st century AD) with multiple authors giving detailed accounts of the area, government and customs IS the contemporaneous evidence. The NT was written with Christians as a minority religion, hated and persecuted by the Empire. To dismiss these accounts as not evidence, we could deny Caesar never wrote anything.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
The atheist approach is to impeach the star witness. To suppress the evidence before a question is launched.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Very weird commentary. As a recommendation, s_l_o_w d_o_w_n so that your publick forum may capture your opinion. Too phunney; where has God's Word been revealed? Be objective about all things in life, Stone. Don't agree with anything.
They also wish to prove the Book of Genesis wrong. If they can prove the foundation of the Bible wrong, the rest is wrong.
There is no "proof" about the Biblical "Genesis." Sorry about your faith into an-unknown region.
If there was no fossil record. (That is what you would expect to see if there really was a flood as described in Genesis) You could point out that if the flood was true where are all the fossils? But you can't say that. You can only say the fact that there are fossils doesn't prove Genesis. But you can't say "See Genesis is incorrect there are no dead things buried in mud". You don't consider the truth of these words. Because of decisions you have made in the past to discount the Bible and not take it at its word.
A Frisco atheist, believes in the easter bunny, but Jesus is a "myth"....
Ah, Christian love. There's no love like Christian love.
Major views of Jesus: Christian view -- he was the son of God who died on the cross to either pay for our sins (western view) or free us from death (eastern view). Muslim view -- he was the son of God and a major profit. Jewish view #1 -- he was a real historical figure and a rotten heretic. Jewish view #2 -- he was a figment of Paul's imagination.
I am always amazed when I hear ignorance crowing from the rooftops that Jesus Christ was just a myth and that the historical evidence does not support his existence. What does the evidence show? Firstly, we have 5800 handwritten manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. These manuscripts predate the Gutenberg press. Most of these 5800 manuscripts are from the Middle Ages, however only a few hundred reach back into great antiquity. In fact, we have four dozen manuscripts that date to the year 300 A.D. or earlier. These are the most important manuscripts. We have one recently discovered manuscript which has been dated 80 A.D. from the Gospel of Mark. The New Testament manuscripts more than favorably compare to any other works from ancient history. Take as an example Julius Caesar and his Gallic War, which he composed in 50 BC. All we have are 10 fairly well preserved manuscripts, which date to 850 A.D. the oldest one is 900 years remove from when he wrote the original. How about Livy, the Roman historian? We think he was born around 59 BC and died around A.D. 17. He wrote Roman History which about one third survives. Of the one-third that survives, books 3, 4, 5, and 6-- the oldest manuscript was written about A.D. 350. In other words, it’s more than 300 years removed from the time when he originally wrote it and it is even complete. How about Tacitus, the Roman historian, author of Annals and Histories, written sometime around A.D. 110 or 115? The oldest manuscripts of these date to the 9th and 11th centuries A.D. In other words, it’s more 800 and 1,000 years after the original. Furthermore, the quality of the New Testament manuscripts is excellent. In looking at them, we see that they are neatly copied by professional hands. They are not sloppy. They’re not illegible. They’re not full of misspellings, medical errors, and other types of mistakes. On the whole they are very neatly done. If we’re going to question the existence of Jesus Christ, then we need the question the existence of other historical figures for which there is far less historical evidence. However, that would be insane.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I think we have been down this road again. Shroud and Oviedo Cloth.
Negative criticism either neglects or minimizes the role of apostles and eyewitnesses who recorded the events. Of the four Gospel writers, Matthew, Mark, and John were definitely eyewitnesses of the events they report. Luke was a contemporary and careful historian (Luke 1:1–4; see Acts). Indeed, every book of the New Testament was written by a contemporary or eyewitness of Christ. Even such critics as the “Death-of-God” theologian John A. T. Robinson admit that the Gospels were written between 40 and 65 (Robinson, 352), during the life of eyewitnesses. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Myths? It incorrectly assumes that the New Testament stories are like folklore and myth. There is a vast difference between the simple New Testament accounts of miracles and the embellished myths that did arise during the second and third centuries A.D., as can be seen by comparing the accounts. New Testament writers explicitly disavow myths. Peter declared: “For we did not follow cleverly devised tales (mythos) when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Peter 1:16). Paul also warned against belief in myths (1 Tim. 1:4; 4:7; 2 Tim. 4:4; Titus 1:14). One of the most telling arguments against the myth view was given by C. S. Lewis: First then, whatever these men may be as Biblical critics, I distrust them as critics. They seem to lack literary judgment, to be imperceptive about the very quality of the texts they are reading . . . If he tells me that something in a Gospel is legend or romance, I want to know how many legends and romances he had read, how well his palate is trained in detecting them by the flavour; not how many years he has spent on that Gospel . . . I have been reading poems, romances, vision-literature, legends, myths all my life. I know what they are like. I know that not one of them is like this. [Lewis, 154–55]
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Would you say it is love if Christians ignored the "Hell-Bound" and simply laughed at them? Would it make you feel better if Christians were silent?
You have entered into the area called Faith. However, you should do a little research into Biblical Archeology just for the heck of it.
If that satisfies you that's fine with me.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Ignorance shouting from the rooftops.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
That's actually a very good idea. It would be interesting to see how many could withstand the scrutiny.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Perhaps. But that doesn't explain the disciples that refused to renounce Jesus even when subjected to unbelievable tortures. At least, not to me.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Actually, for many times in its history, Rome had an official historian. At least, according to Ronald Mellor in The Historians of Ancient Rome: An Anthology of the Major Writings.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Jewish view #1 -- he was a real historical figure and a rotten heretic. Jewish view #2 -- he was a figment of Paul's imagination. Muslims don't consider Jesus to be Gods son. They just consider him a lying prophet. Jews have many different views. The apostles were Jews. I bet you didn't even know that.
No such luck! There's simply too much secular gain to be had by preaching the mythology of Hellfire to ever give it up.
Indeed. My take on Jesus is that he was from a royal - but poor - bloodline. That is not that hard to believe since many royal families have poorer relations that are removed from the throne by so many cousins, etc. What is made clear in the New Testament that is generally looked over is that Jesus is linked to royalty and it seems not one of his enemies disputed this claim. Indeed, the leadership of the era must have been worried Jesus was royal enough. They did not just go after him because he was a street preacher alone. That the NT is citing genealogy is clear evidence that a royal claim is being made. The common peasants don't get a genealogy. When the Magi came to see a new born Jesus that is significant - those were Persians from Rome's only rival of that era - the Persian empire. If they were sending a diplomatic delegation they were doing so because they knew from Jews living in Babylon who were probably in touch with the Joseph and Mary royal lineage. Joseph and Mary were a dynastic marriage. Again, that does not mean they were rich or poor and were probably poor or getting by even of they had royal blood from David. Remember David started out life as a common sheep herder so he had literally thousands of cousins when he became king so there were many in Judea who could claim royal lineage. The arrival of the magi made Herod kill Jesus's clan base - the slaughter of the innocent. Jesus left to Egypt not Persia where the Magi were because Herod probably was looking for Jesus' family to escape with the Magi towards Babylon. Another clue for me is that a young boy Jesus was at the temple conversing with rabbis - now we can say Jesus as a young boy was a genius and that is why the rabbis tolerated a young boy conversing with them but it is clear Jesus has a duel message when he says he was at his Father's house. God's temple was also built by his ancestor and the rabbis knew Jesus was from the line of David and that made him a curiosity. When Jesus entered Jerusalem it is clear people honored him as a royal dignitary from the house of David arriving into the city.
Muslims in no way consider Jesus as the Son of God. They also consider their own prophet to be a greater prophet than Jesus. How is it that you make such declarative statements without knowing these things?
You look at spiritual things with secular eyes. The Bible tells us that such things are spiritually discerned. In other words you cannot understand spiritual things with a worldly mind.
What do you think they found in the Dead Sea scrolls?
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
You should read the Gospel of Luke. His account of Christ, His miracles and historical milestones were confirmed by the excavations of Sir William Ramsay in the early 20th century. His work closed the books on 19th century liberal theological skepticism. Much of what you write are from discredited 19th century liberal theologians. Start here: "“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Just think Obola, the current emperor. What if he did not have Fox news? There was no "opposition party" to the Caesars. Just think if Obolo was emperor in 30AD, would he mention Jesus Christ? Would the emperor's MSM give any coverage of the Sermon on the Mount? No. Emperor Obolo would send drones to strike Gethsemane.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Yep. And a very poor attack at that.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Proof is subjective. As neither you nor me can say we have "proof" of origins as we did not witness creation. But God did leave plenty of evidence (objective).
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
What type of love would you seek? You are about to fall off a cliff and don't see it happening. But two men at a different angle see your peril. Both men just left the cliff and know the peril. The first man says nothing thinking you know better. He also doesn't want to be seen as a "know it all." He concludes "live and let live." Who is he to judge your actions. The second man yells, "HEY, YOU THERE! I CAN SEE A DROP YOU MAY NOT SEE. STOP NOW AND LOOK AROUND." Which is love to you? The first man or the second man?
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
OK Red... There is no more "proof" about the faerie tale called "Genesis" just as there is no "objective evidence" other than some silly book that you believe in and about.
Where to start with this one????
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Absolutely nothing about "Jesus." Which immediately infers that Jesus was not an Essene.
That is somewhat akin to researching the reality of Bugs Bunny and Yosemite Sam; it has no interest to me.
There is no proof of Big Bang nor evolution. None of us were there to observe (subjective). Scientists do put forth hypotheses and theories based on what they consider evidence. Yet again, evidence is based on someone's original witness testimony (subjective). If you don't believe in an unmoved Mover, then you will have to pick two routes: The first is to accept an illogical approach. The second is you will have to accept a premise based on blind faith. A premise devoid of both objective evidence and subjective eyewitness testimony.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Then how did you conclude Jesus was a Zealot?
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Absolutely correct ... and yet no one (of any merit) seems to worship "theories" or "hypothesis."
“The bitterest truth is better than the sweetest lie.”
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
He certainly wasn't associated with the clans: Sadducee or a Pharisee, either.
That is because of two reasons. They lack truth and lack eyewitness testimony...observation. Thousands witnessed the Risen Christ. Zero people witnessed or wrote about "Lucy."
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Well definitely not a Sadducee. They did not believe in the resurrection of the dead. Some debate Phasisee. By whom Christ condemned in His ministry, I conclude He was in fact, literally, His own "man." Meaning He preached the Holiness and purity of the Law where the other sects were laden with man-made traditions. Christ condemned them for that.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Your post #59 lacks substance. You should fix it.
You, perhaps by accident, have said in so many words, you don't know what you are talking about regarding proving the OT.
Proving the Old Testament? It is just a series of unrelated faebles about the Jewish belief system. The book of Genesis and all others were simply yarns handed down from generation to generation until the Babylon exile, about 600 BCE. After the Jews learned to write, while in Babylon, the Hebrew Bible was created: instant & presto! The data presented has little meaning outside of the bloodline of Jews as the books relate to the many issues that were confronted by this small wandering group of sheepherders.
In truth, the Muslims think that Jesus was the Purest Prophet, and that Jeusu revealed the truths of God, about life after death and all things. They believe that Jesus was born of a virgin, Mary. Mary is the only woman named in the Quran. Muslims think that Mohammed is the Final prophet. It's not that Mohammed is "higher" than Jesus. In fact,the opposite was true: Jeusu was born of a virgin and had all of the miracles. The problem, according to Islam., is that Christians distorted Jesus' message, and made it about the divinity of Jesus, and not about the pure message from God that Jesus brought. The Koran says that it will be Jesus who judges at the end. But the Christians, by turning Jesus into a God, twisted Jesus message and distorted things in their writings. So God sent Mohammed, who was neither miraculous like Jesus, nor as pure as Jesus, nor as high as Jesus, to be the Final prophet, to straighten out the story and restore Jesus' original message from God to men, which was not I am God, but rather, do this to worship God and pass judgment. Muslims believe that only Muhammad. Can be fully trusted, in the Koran, because the Christians and Jews twisted what God saiD and what the prorphets said. So in the end, Jesus will Judge Mohammed too, but the terms of the judgment will be what's in the Koran, not what the Christians said, because the Christians distorted the message, but Mohammed was sent by God to unbend what was bent. That is what the Koran really says. it''s not what Chrisitans think.
Ah, but there was my friend. Mark 15:7 And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder in the insurrection. One of Jesus apostles belonged to the Militia of the day.
So the Jews didn't know how to write until 600 BC? NONSENSE ! Scientists have discovered the earliest known Hebrew writing — an inscription dating from the 10th century B.C., during the period of King David's reign.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Interesting conjecture. I've never heard such claims before.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations. Even then, they were thrown back as worthless but, they learned some skills by that time. Four hundred years earlier writings must have been borrowed from another culture. Any society, describing themselves as "the chosen people" when all they have were a few goats and living in tents must really be an asocial people wouldn't you say?
Mystery: This painting depicts Jesus Christ as single person but writer David Fitzgerald believes he was a literary invention that combined the stories from several cults and figures in Judea during the first s This same shallow unbelief and ignorance pops up this time every year. He also points to discrepancies in the early gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, claiming these were written decades after the supposed time of Jesus. Mark was written as early as 40 AD. We have a copy dated 80 AD, which was found in Egypt, which proves it had been in circulation for some time. Those so-called discrepancies are apparent, but not real. Instead he insists the disciples of Jesus were also probably not real and their names only later attached to the gospels to lend them credence. Not according to eyewitness accounts. Maybe I only imagined standing at John's tomb in Ephesus.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Wrong! The Paleo-Hebrew alphabet (Hebrew: הכתב העברי הקדום), also Palaeo-Hebrew alphabet, is an abjad variant of the Phoenician alphabet. It dates to around the 10th century BCE. It was used as the main vehicle for writing the Hebrew language by the Israelites, who would later split into Jews and Samaritans. The term was coined by Solomon Birnbaum in 1954, writing "To apply the term Phoenician to the script of the Hebrews is hardly suitable".[1] It began to fall out of use by the Jews in the 5th century BCE when they adopted the Aramaic alphabet as their writing system for Hebrew, from which the present Jewish "square-script" Hebrew alphabet descends. The Samaritans, who now number less than one thousand people, continue to use a derivative of the Old Hebrew alphabet, known as the Samaritan alphabet.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
No, Muslims consider Jesus a great prophet. What Do Muslims Believe about Jesus? Muslims respect and revere Jesus (peace be upon him). They consider him one of the greatest of God’s messengers to mankind. The Quran confirms his virgin birth, and a chapter of the Quran is entitled ‘Maryam’ (Mary). Jesus was born miraculously by the command of God, the same command that had brought Adam into being with neither a father nor a mother. During his prophetic mission, Jesus performed many miracles. Muslims believe that Jesus was not crucified. It was the plan of Jesus’ enemies to crucify him, but God saved him and raised him up to Him. And the likeness of Jesus was put over another man. Jesus’ enemies took this man and crucified him, thinking that he was Jesus. Neither Muhammad nor Jesus came to change the basic doctrine of the belief in one God, brought by earlier prophets, but rather to confirm and renew it.
Yep...
Two prominent Bible scholars are hitting back at a writer’s claim that Jesus Christ was a mythical figure who never walked the Earth. As TheBlaze previously reported, writer Michael Paulkovich claims he analyzed the works of 126 ancient writers who lived during the first to third centuries and found no mention of Jesus, claiming that Christians invented Christ in order to have a central figure to worship. But not everyone is buying into Paulkovich’s theory. Dr. Candida Moss, a professor of New Testament and early Christianity at the University of Notre Dame and Dr. Joel Baden, a professor of Hebrew Bible at Yale University, argue in a new Daily Beast article that “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.” “Let’s get one thing straight: There is nigh universal consensus among biblical scholars — the authentic ones, anyway — that Jesus was, in fact, a real guy,” Moss and Baden wrote. “They argue over the details, of course, as scholars are wont to do, but they’re pretty much all on the same page that Jesus walked the earth (if not the Sea of Galilee) in the 1st century CE.” The scholars go on to note that some of the people on Paulkovich’s list of ancient sources actually preceded Jesus and, thus, wouldn’t have commented on the Christian savior. Additionally, they noted that some of these people were philosophers — individuals not known to comment on current events. Many of the others were mathematicians, satirists, doctors or poets. While some historians are among the bunch, Moss and Baden noted that few of their writings remain in tact and that most of what historians have to go on are mere fragments. “Long story short: of the 126 people listed by Paulkovich, there are only 10 or so whom we might expect to have written about Jesus,” they wrote. “And it’s probably worth mentioning that there are, of course, writers from the first centuries CE who refer to Jesus, and even write quite extensively about him. But since those authors all got bundled into a collection called the New Testament, we should probably just dismiss them from the discussion.”l Moss and Baden also tackle the overarching question behind the claims of Paulkovich and others like him: If Jesus was so important and pivotal, why did many of his contemporaries — outside of those who appear in the Bible — ignore him? The Bible scholars noted that Jesus simply wasn’t seen as very important in his time. “He was just another wannabe messiah who ended up on the wrong side of the authorities,” Moss and Baden wrote. “The prime candidate for ‘Son of God’ in the Roman world was the emperor himself, who had coins, statues, and temples to back those claims up. Jesus had a small band of followers and a lot of stories about sheep.” The authors concluded on a comical note, claiming that, by Paulkovich’s own logic, some might assume that he, too, doesn’t exist based on a lack of biographical information and virtually no web presence. “It is safe to say that there are no historians that have, to this point, included Paulkovich in their writings (and let’s be honest, the chances going forward aren’t great),” Moss and Baden wrote. “What’s more, not a single mathematician, poet, philosopher, or gynecologist … refers to him even a single time.”
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
That seem to sum it up. Apart from the Gospels, there is little independent evidence and apparently, no indisputable evidence of an 'historical Jesus'. But the search isn't over.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
Tacitus and “Christus” I begin with Tacitus. I’m referring to Annals book 15, chapter [44], written sometime between ad 110 and 120. “This name”—and here Tacitus is referring to the name Christian—“originates from ‘Christus’ ”—which is the Latin form of Christ—“who was sentenced to death by the procurator, Pontius Pilate, during the reign of (Emperor) Tiberius. This detestable superstition which had been suppressed for a while spread anew, not only in Judaea where the evil had started, but also in Rome where everything that is horrid and wicked in the world gathers and finds numerous followers.” Well, most scholars agree this is an authentic passage. No Christian would have invented it and inserted it into Annals. Unfortunately, some of Tacitus’ History and Annals does not survive, and so we don’t have a fuller exposé of what he’s talking about here or this particular period of time. But a couple of things ought to be noted. First of all, his very negative description of the Christian movement is not simply because he thinks poorly of Christians as such, but because Christians at this time are still very closely associated with the Jewish people or with the land of Judaea or Israel. Tacitus himself was an anti-Semite, and he wasn’t afraid to express himself very critically and negatively of the Jewish people. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
I've read it dates to 107BCE. And some doubt its authenticity, pointing out (among other things) that Pontius Pilate was not a procurator but a prefect and no authentic imperial document would make such an error.
There are three kinds of people in the world: those that can add and those that can't
So, you agree with me. They borrowed what little they could understand from the Phoenicians and bastardized what little they could understand. As for the Old Testament or the Hebrew Bible (in part, "the Torah") it began in ~600 BCE, after the Exile. So, what happened to all that time from the beginning that God created? Did the Jews think that time stood still for them? I am confident of the fact, as they are the self proclaimed "chosen people" and can make up rules for just about anything because they possess few principles.
Not true. When the Jews came back from Babylon, they had to make a choice: use the new form of letters they learned in Babylon, the "Aramaic" script, or to return to their old style letters, the "Ivrit" script. The majority went with Aramaic script, so what we today call "Hebrew" letters are not, in fact, Hebrew. They are Babylonian letters. The original Hebrew Ivrit script stopped being used, except by a few. There are some Ivrit texts at Qumran, and they are the oldest ones. Also, the Samaritan Pentateuch is written in Ivrit letters. This, too, was a reason that the returning Jews ended up keeping the Babylonian script and not readopting their old form of the letters (the alphabet itself is the same): the old form was used by the Samaritans, and the Jews wanted to clearly distinguish themselves from them. The existence of the Ivrit, however, is well attested. And that means that the Jews knew how to write long before they went away to Babylon. They didn't learn to write in Babylon. They learned a new script.
No they don't. They say he is a liar and was not born of a virgin. Show me where it says that Muslims believe that Jesus is the son of God and was born of a virgin.
Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD.
The substance is from reading the Gospels for over 40 years.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Local rabble rousers:) Not a Roman opposition party.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
Simon called Zelotes, one of the twelve Apostles. In the Greek, Zelotes, pronounced dzay-lo-tace' Search for 2208 in Strong's KJV, the same as 2208; a Zealot, i.e. (specially)a partisan for Jewish political independence,:--Zelotes. That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
Show me where it says that Muslims believe that Jesus is the son of God and was born of a virgin. I already showed you. You just don't want to understand. Here it is again: What Do Muslims Believe about Jesus? (Remember) when the angels said, “O Mary, God gives you good news of a word from Him (God), whose name is the Messiah Jesus, son of Mary, revered in this world and the Hereafter, and one of those brought near (to God). He will speak to the people from his cradle and as a man, and he is of the righteous.” She said, “My Lord, how can I have a child when no mortal has touched me?” He said, “So (it will be). God creates what He wills. If He decrees a thing, He says to it only, ‘Be!’ and it is.” (Quran, 3:45-47) Lying about these people is not going to help your cause.
Have you studied Biblical Archeology? Yes or no.
The Muslims do not believe Jesus is the son of God and has the power to forgive sins. Muslims consider him a liar.
After 40 years of reading "begat, begat, begat" which is the basis of the gospels, what have you learned from all your reading?
Yes. John Hagee sez: It is not possible to say, "I am a Christian" and not love the Jewish people. The Bible teaches that love is not what you say, but what you do. (1 John 3:18) "A bell is not a bell until you ring it, a song is not a song until you sing it, love is not love until you share it." Yet, the man is a 100% PRO-Israeli fascist to steal Palestinian lands while murdering innocent women and children. It is the way it always was, just a different mask, this time.
He didn't agree with you. If you have any integrity quit pettifogging.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Vicomte13: Not true. The existence of the Ivrit, however, is well attested. And that means that the Jews knew how to write long before they went away to Babylon. They didn't learn to write in Babylon. They learned a new script. buckeroo: Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD. GarySpFC: He didn't agree with you. If you have any integrity quit pettifogging. Yes, he did. He unknowingly supported 100% of my posts.
Not in Rome. Not a serious threat to bring down the Roman regime. The Zealots today would be considered a regional faction. One which Rome obliterated ca. AD 70.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
That you haven't.
"“Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. He is not here; for He is risen, as He said." (Matthew 28:5,6)
The Scriptures were written by men, of course. They were inspired to write them by God.
Jesus' virgin birth is a miracle in which Muslims believe, but they don't believe this makes him a son of God. A miracle , yes, but not one that involved the fathering of a child by God. Rather, he was formed miraculously, like the first animals and men. His birth was miraculous, but there was no transmission of divine essence. In other words, Mary was given a cild in her womb by God, but God did not impregnate her, according to Muslims. Jesus is a miraculous prophet, made by God, but not BEGOTTEN by God. Thus, he is not God's biological son, and is holy, but not divine, for nothing shares in divinity, according to Islam.
Not in Rome. Not a serious threat to bring down the Roman regime. The Zealots today would be considered a regional faction. One which Rome obliterated ca. AD 70. A serious enough threat to send the better part of half the Roman Army to extinguish.
John Hagee? What does he have to do with this discussion? Red Herring. How have you studied Biblical Archeology? Or, should I ask what you know about it?
yeah, this guy professes to steadfastly follow the Bible based on all archaeological evidence he has studied which has demonstrated the truth of and about Israel. what's so wrong with bringing this charlatan up on this thread?
What makes you so sure that GOD inspired any man? Because they told you so through one form of communication or another? Why doesn't GOD inspire you and me and everyone else while simplifying the interpretation of GOD's word? I question all things on this planet. So any retort, "you can't argue with GOD's word," just won't go very far beyond your own post.
Do you really believe that everyone wearing a Christian nameplate is perfect or even really a Christian? Even Mohammed was a pedophilic, psychopathic murderer whose devout followers even now follow him by doing the same things he did. And, the best you can do is mention Hagee's name? Get real. And, you studied Biblical Archeology how?
If they say they are Christians, they must be. They could be "GOD" inspired as Vicomte13, suggests. What do the Mulahs have to do with this thread? John Hagee and all Christians that embrace Israel. Don't you watch with any interest the bullshit that our tax payer dollars pay for within the middle east?
The Muslims trust only the Koran and the Hadith written in Arabic. Translations in another language means nothing to them. Also, to the Muslims lying to non-Muslims is widely accepted as being morally acceptable as given in the Koran. In Muslim countries, believers of other religions are second class citizens with no rights. People should be cautious about supporting the Muslims. They love useful, naive people just as the Communists do.
Buck, you should think about your posts before typing them. You should have some substance in them.
The Middle East issue is complete lie by all Christians as their testament about "Jesus" or any "GOD." This ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIER stuff is not worth another dime.
Buck, are you a Muslim?
Nope. The world around me and you and everyone has nothing to do with GOD in any direct way. It is all a mystery. Why do you ask?
Very cute, Stone. here, let us reflect on violence in Israel, endorsed by nice Jews and Christians: Honour Hagee, before it's too late!
Wonderful. Good little Lutherans I think.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live." (John 11:25)
Nice bit of Jihadi propaganda.
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live." (John 11:25)
It gets real phunney when "Christians" suggest GOD is based on Biblical divine inspiration while murdering in the real world. It also goes for Muslims. It is very strange with one small caveat ... I don't want to pay for this government war.
He has and he does.
The Arabic is authoritative, yes, but the Yusuf Ali translation into English is considered by Muslims to be the testimonial standard in English. Of course it's but an echo, as are all translations into any language. But if one is going to discuss the Koran in English with Muslims, they accept the Yusuf Ali translation as very good. It's an exaggeration to say that translations "mean nothing to them". To Wahabbis, probably, but to Pakistanis or Indonesians, or Muslims in the West, they are meaningful. Lying is a legitimate tactic in war (and American law enforcement). in the Bible the Israelites lie and deceive their enemies in war all the time. The Muslims believe the same thing. Now, radical jihadis say that there is permanent war against all Muslims, so one can lie to them at any time. This is not the traditional position of the four schools of Islam, however, and is not the majority opinion among Muslim clerics. It is true that in some Muslim countries, believers of other religions have no rights. But it is not true either as a matter of law or as a matter of fact in most Muslim countries. The closer to Saudi Arabia and Wahabbism, the more hardcore and oppressive Islam becomes. People should not support Muslims, or Jews, at all. These are false religions that each reject Christ in their own special way. People should care about Arabs and ethnic Jews, while hoping that they can someday shed their false religions and see the truth.
What?
Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in Me, though he may die, he shall live." (John 11:25)
Ah, Christian love. There's no love like Christian love. Why confuse the warnings by Christians of a destination called Hell with "hatred"? Did you run into traffic as a child, or did someone tell you it was dangerous? I reckon you trusted that advice, source, and adverse outcome. Ken, if Christians truly "hated" you, they'd say nothing and allow you to swan-dive into the bowels of Hades forever, and readily accept the "myth" (or rather lie) that there is no Judgment, and that *everyone* lands in Paradise.
Firstly, we have 5800 handwritten manuscripts of the Greek New Testament. These manuscripts predate the Gutenberg press. Most of these 5800 manuscripts are from the Middle Ages, however only a few hundred reach back into great antiquity. In fact, we have four dozen manuscripts that date to the year 300 A.D. or earlier....We have one recently discovered manuscript which has been dated 80 A.D. from the Gospel of Mark. Yup, that kind of ignorance from intelligent people just boggles the mind. Vanity is literally the enemy of Eternal Life. The skeptics are readily willing to accept the secular world's flimsiest evidence and accounts of "history" and so-called "science" dogma, yet deny fastidiously maintained ancient records, manuscripts and testimony from several sources. The New Testament manuscripts more than favorably compare to any other works from ancient history. Take as an example Julius Caesar and his Gallic War, which he composed in 50 BC. All we have are 10 fairly well preserved manuscripts, which date to 850 A.D. the oldest one is 900 years remove from when he wrote the original. Great overview and statistical reminder, Gary. Thanks... To review, there are 5800 handwritten manuscripts of the Greek New Testament + 48 manuscripts from 300 A.D. and earlier. THEY are to be regarded with utmost skepticism and dismissed as a "myth." On the other hand, the weight of 10 manuscripts with respect to Julius Caesar's escapades which date to 850 A.D. are to be believed as totally authentic -- historically and factually. Based on the documentation and "evidence," why the heavy skepticism for the life and history of Jesus Christ and the Gospel? And "myth" status? "Myths" are based on lies, NOT testimony and proven documentation, which is overwhelming. My theory is that the skeptics know well the truth of the matter, but are foolishly hoping against hope that somehow after this mortal life has passed that they will be a Mulligan on Judgment Day by the Almighty as having *already* "served their time in Hell." Or that "everyone goes to Heaven" because they were "good people." Two of Satan's best lies.
I went back to 2/2012 on this site and you were at that time denying the existence of Jesus similiar to G A Wells. Here is what a secular humanist had to say about that nonsense, and it will give you an idea how far out your ideas float. G.A.Wells - retired German teacher, amateur theologian and the hyper-skeptics' demigod. Wells is not very well known outside of the skeptical community. It is the curious nature of his ideas which draws attention. There have been Bible scholars who have denied Jesus said the things attributed to him. Few, however, have joined Wells in denying Jesus very existence. Randel Helms, speaking to an audience of secular humanists at a CODESH "Institute for Inquiry" on "A Secular Humanist Approach to the Gospels," said sarcastically, "I think that you can deal with Well's notion that Christianity could have started without a historical Jesus [as follows]: Sure Christianity could have started without a historical Jesus. And monkeys could fly out of my butt."
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
'Jesus is a MYTH'
#2. To: cranky (#0)
'Jesus is a MYTH': Christ stories appeared decades after his 'death' - and he was probably many people rather than just one, atheist writer claims
#3. To: cranky (#0)
#4. To: cranky, GarySpFc, liberator, BobCeleste, Don (#0)
Mr Fritzgerald also takes issue with many of the stories about the Crucifixion that stem from the first Gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke.
#5. To: cranky (#0)
#6. To: redleghunter (#3)
Another annual recycle of discredited 'claims.'
#7. To: patriot wes (#5)
Tell it to Flavious Josephus!
#8. To: cranky (#6)
Either there are credible, contemporaneous accounts of Jesus of Nazereth or there are not.
#9. To: cranky (#7)
My understanding is Flavious Josephus was born AD
#10. To: cranky (#0)
#11. To: redleghunter (#8)
the geography and historical facts of the Gospel writers are confirmed by archaeology
#12. To: buckeroo (#10)
Jesus was a Zealot.
#13. To: cranky (#12)
#14. To: buckeroo (#13)
#15. To: cranky (#0)
'Jesus is a MYTH'
#16. To: cranky (#0)
#17. To: buckeroo (#13)
Jesus was a zealot; he was the revolutionary strength that later crumbled the Roman Empire.
#18. To: cranky (#0)
#19. To: cranky, Vicomte13 (#11)
A single contemporaneous, credible account of the existence of a Jesus of Nazareth would put the whole issue to bed.
#20. To: Don (#18)
There are many people who want to think that Jesus is only a myth. They also want to think that Hell is only a myth. It would be most unfortunate for them if they are wrong.
#21. To: A K A Stone (#14)
Buckeroo. The things you said are only opinions. You made a decision not to believe in your past. Because of that decision you now base your beliefs on that. Even when contrary evidence is introduced. You will ignore it because you have told your brain to discount it.
Every reaction you have to Gods word is now dismissed by you because of the decision you made way back whenever.
I'll admit the opposite is basically true for Christians. We chose to believe and because we do we might not consider some things. Because it contradicts the decision we already made to believe.
#22. To: redleghunter (#20)
#23. To: Don (#22)
#24. To: buckeroo (#23)
There is no "proof" about the Biblical "Genesis." Sorry about your faith into an-unknown region.
#25. To: cranky, Easter Bunny athiests (#0)
San Francisco based author
The D&R terrorists hate us because we're free, to vote second party
"We (government) need to do a lot less, a lot sooner" ~Ron Paul
#26. To: Don (#18)
There are many people who want to think that Jesus is only a myth. They also want to think that Hell is only a myth. It would be most unfortunate for them if they are wrong.
#27. To: cranky (#0)
#28. To: cranky, ALL (#0)
(Edited)
#29. To: redleghunter (#19)
A single contemporaneous, credible account of the existence of a Jesus of Nazareth would put the whole issue to bed. As yet, I haven't heard of one.
#30. To: rlk, ALL (#15)
But if the basic New Testament documents were composed by eyewitnesses, then much of destructive criticism fails. It assumes the passage of much time while “myths” developed. Studies have revealed that it takes two generations for a myth to develop (Sherwin-White, 190).
#31. To: cranky (#0)
#32. To: kenh (#26)
#33. To: buckeroo (#23)
#34. To: buckeroo (#13)
Whether you want to believe faerie tales or not is not an issue; the legendary "JESUS" is a myth, as written in the Holy Bible irrespective of version or origin.
#35. To: cranky (#34)
Whether you want to believe faerie tales or not is not an issue; the legendary "JESUS" is a myth, as written in the Holy Bible irrespective of version or origin.
#36. To: GarySpFC (#28)
If we’re going to question the existence of Jesus Christ, then we need the question the existence of other historical figures for which there is far less historical evidence.
#37. To: rlk (#15)
People need myths to help them endure the trials of life and to make them believe there is ultimate compensation for injustice.
#38. To: redleghunter (#19)
It was the 1st Century AD. Rome had no peers. The empire wrote the history according to Caesar.
#39. To: cranko (#27)
Muslim view -- he was the son of God and a major profit.
#40. To: Don (#32)
Would you say it is love if Christians ignored the "Hell-Bound" and simply laughed at them?
#41. To: A Pole, Vicomte13 (#16)
Yearly Easter attack. Very predicable.
#42. To: cranko (#27)
#43. To: kenh (#40)
#44. To: buckeroo (#10)
#45. To: buckeroo, GarySpFc (#13)
Whether you want to believe faerie tales or not is not an issue; the legendary "JESUS" is a myth, as written in the Holy Bible irrespective of version or origin.
#46. To: cranky, GarySpFc, liberator, BobCeleste, Vicomte13 (#38)
Actually, for many times in its history, Rome had an official historian.
#47. To: A Pole (#16)
#48. To: buckeroo (#23)
There is no "proof" about the Biblical "Genesis." Sorry about your faith into an-unknown region.
#49. To: kenh (#26)
Ah, Christian love. There's no love like Christian love.
#50. To: redleghunter (#48)
Proof is subjective. As neither you nor me can say we have "proof" of origins as we did not witness creation. But God did leave plenty of evidence (objective).
#51. To: Pericles (#41)
#52. To: redleghunter (#44)
What do you think they found in the Dead Sea scrolls?
#53. To: Don (#33)
You have entered into the area called Faith. However, you should do a little research into Biblical Archeology just for the heck of it.
#54. To: buckeroo (#50)
#55. To: buckeroo (#52)
#56. To: redleghunter (#54)
Scientists do put forth hypotheses and theories based on what they consider evidence.
#57. To: kenh (#26)
Ah, Christian love. There's no love like Christian love.
#58. To: redleghunter (#55)
#59. To: buckeroo (#56)
Absolutely correct ... and yet no one (of any merit) seems to worship "theories" or "hypothesis."
#60. To: buckeroo (#58)
He certainly wasn't associated with the clans: Sadducee or a Pharisee, either.
#61. To: redleghunter (#59)
#62. To: buckeroo (#53)
#63. To: Don (#62)
#64. To: Don, cranko (#42)
#65. To: redleghunter (#46)
(Edited)
There was no "opposition party" to the Caesars.
#66. To: buckeroo, all (#63)
#67. To: redleghunter (#46)
There was no "opposition party" to the Caesars. Just think if Obolo was emperor in 30AD, would he mention Jesus Christ? Would the emperor's MSM give any coverage of the Sermon on the Mount? No. Emperor Obolo would send drones to strike Gethsemane.
#68. To: GarySpFC (#66)
#69. To: cranky (#0)
#70. To: buckeroo (#68)
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations. Even then, they were thrown back as worthless but, they learned some skills by that time.
#71. To: A K A Stone (#39)
They just consider him a lying prophet.
#72. To: Vicomte13 (#64)
#73. To: cranky (#1)
#74. To: GarySpFC (#73)
“Long story short: of the 126 people listed by Paulkovich, there are only 10 or so whom we might expect to have written about Jesus,” they wrote. “And it’s probably worth mentioning that there are, of course, writers from the first centuries CE who refer to Jesus, and even write quite extensively about him. But since those authors all got bundled into a collection called the New Testament, we should probably just dismiss them from the discussion.”l
#75. To: cranky (#74)
But he is aware at the beginning of the second century that Christians have been named after Christ —Christ, of course, or “Christus,” the Latin equivalent of the Greek Christos, which in turn translates Mashiach, the Hebrew word that means “one who is anointed.” So, he actually knows that and talks about it. The other thing that’s important is he recognizes that it’s Pontius Pilate. Jesus wasn’t executed by the Jewish people; he was executed by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, the governor of Judaea in the time of Emperor Tiberius. All of that, historically, is correct.
However, Tacitus does make one little mistake. He anachronistically reads the rank of governor as procurator back into the time of Pilate. Prior to the year 44 the governors in Judaea were prefects. And we actually have proof of that now, thanks to the Pilate Stone that was unearthed at Caesarea Maritima in 1961. There, the Pilate Stone refers to Pontius Pilatus, Praefectus Iudaea.
#76. To: GarySpFC (#75)
written sometime between ad 110 and 120
#77. To: GarySpFC (#70)
#78. To: buckeroo (#68)
That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations.
#79. To: cranko (#71)
No, Muslims consider Jesus a great prophet.
#80. To: Vicomte13 (#78)
#81. To: buckeroo (#61)
#82. To: BobCeleste (#65)
#83. To: redleghunter (#82)
Local rabble rousers:) Not a Roman opposition party.
#84. To: A K A Stone (#79)
(Edited)
No they don't. They say he is a liar and was not born of a virgin.
#85. To: buckeroo (#63)
#86. To: cranko aka jwpegler (#84)
#87. To: redleghunter (#81)
The substance is from reading the Gospels for over 40 years. [note: not learning]
#88. To: Don (#85)
Have you studied Biblical Archeology?
#89. To: buckeroo, Vicomte13 (#80)
Your agreement is further substantiation about a false Biblical record. The Old Testament or any written document is not handed down by GOD.
#90. To: GarySpFC, Vicomte13 (#89)
buckeroo: That is correct ... the Jews did not know how to write or read until the Babylonians took them for a couple of generations.
When the Jews came back from Babylon, they had to make a choice: use the new form of letters they learned in Babylon, the "Aramaic" script, or to return to their old style letters, the "Ivrit" script. The majority went with Aramaic script, so what we today call "Hebrew" letters are not, in fact, Hebrew. They are Babylonian letters. The original Hebrew Ivrit script stopped being used, except by a few. There are some Ivrit texts at Qumran, and they are the oldest ones. Also, the Samaritan Pentateuch is written in Ivrit letters. This, too, was a reason that the returning Jews ended up keeping the Babylonian script and not readopting their old form of the letters (the alphabet itself is the same): the old form was used by the Samaritans, and the Jews wanted to clearly distinguish themselves from them.
#91. To: BobCeleste (#83)
That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
#92. To: buckeroo (#87)
After 40 years of reading "begat, begat, begat" which is the basis of the gospels, what have you learned from all your reading?
#93. To: buckeroo (#80)
#94. To: cranko (#84)
#95. To: redleghunter (#91)
That would qualify as a party opposed to Roman rule.
#96. To: buckeroo (#88)
#97. To: Don (#96)
John Hagee? What does he have to do with this discussion?
#98. To: Vicomte13 (#93)
The Scriptures were written by men, of course. They were inspired to write them by God.
#99. To: buckeroo (#97)
(Edited)
#100. To: Don, Vicomte13 (#99)
Do you really believe that everyone wearing a Christian nameplate is perfect or even really a Christian?
Even Mohammed was a pedophilic, psychopathic murderer whose devout followers even now follow him by doing the same things he did. And, the best you can do is mention Hagee's name?
And, you studied Biblical Archeology how?
#101. To: Vicomte13 (#64)
#102. To: buckeroo (#100)
#103. To: Don (#102)
#104. To: buckeroo (#103)
#105. To: buckeroo (#103)
#106. To: Don (#104)
Buck, are you a Muslim?
#107. To: A K A Stone (#105)
#108. To: A K A Stone (#105)
#109. To: buckeroo (#107)
#110. To: redleghunter (#109)
Jihadi
#111. To: buckeroo (#98)
Why doesn't GOD inspire you
#112. To: Don (#101)
The Muslims trust only the Koran and the Hadith written in Arabic. Translations in another language means nothing to them. Also, to the Muslims lying to non-Muslims is widely accepted as being morally acceptable as given in the Koran. In Muslim countries, believers of other religions are second class citizens with no rights. People should be cautious about supporting the Muslims. They love useful, naive people just as the Communists do.
#113. To: buckeroo (#110)
#114. To: kenh, Don, redleghunter (#26)
There are many people who want to think that Jesus is only a myth. They also want to think that Hell is only a myth. It would be most unfortunate for them if they are wrong.
#115. To: GarySpFC, cranky, Buckeroo, ALL (#28)
I am always amazed when I hear ignorance crowing from the rooftops that Jesus Christ was just a myth and that the historical evidence does not support his existence. What does the evidence show?
#116. To: buckeroo, ALL (#90)
(Edited)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]