Exsistence Of Jesus

S

stacy

Registered Senior Member
you guys talk about miracles, you ppl talks about that Jesus has done miracles that no other prophet has done...
but have you even considrer how much prove we have for Jesus existance?

His life story could be all made up, every single of it, with out the world noticing, since we don't have anything that supports his existence really, further more we have so much that really says against his existence.

Jesus was a litterary person, that never existed in the form that is described in the bible.

Of course it is so that no person have had greater influence in the western history than him, but that's not a prove for his existence. In no where else but the life of jesus in history there hasn't existed so much falsefications from the churches side, it's a very rotten story about all falsefications if you look deeper into it.



Anyone that is intressted in a debate, let's open a topic and really put on some strength behind our words.
 
I don't see too much evidence of early corruption within the Church. The early members of the Church gave up everything, gave to the poor, and were killed by Romans. Not until around 300AD, when the Christianity became the religion of the state, could a case be made that some of the power and influence corruption, but there's no evidence whatsoever that the Bible or doctrines were corrupted.
 
stacy said:
you guys talk about miracles, you ppl talks about that Jesus has done miracles that no other prophet has done...
but have you even considrer how much prove we have for Jesus existance?

His life story could be all made up, every single of it, with out the world noticing, since we don't have anything that supports his existence really, further more we have so much that really says against his existence.

Jesus was a litterary person, that never existed in the form that is described in the bible.
.
Click to expand...
I think youre right
www.geocities.com/inquisitive79/
 
okinrus said:
I don't see too much evidence of early corruption within the Church. The early members of the Church gave up everything, gave to the poor, and were killed by Romans. Not until around 300AD, when the Christianity became the religion of the state, could a case be made that some of the power and influence corruption, but there's no evidence whatsoever that the Bible or doctrines were corrupted.
*************
M*W: okinrus, as smart as you are, and as learned as you are about Christianity, I fail to see how you refuse to acknowledge the corruption of the early church! In your mind, it is probably denial, but in the rest of the world, it's a reality. I'm truly sorry that your church has failed you like it has failed me. My concern is that you believe in lies. You're only fooling yourself!
Click to expand...
 
The stories of Jesus are just stories. There is no independent (non Christian) and no verifiable evidence of any type that he actually existed. That doesn't mean that he didn't exist but for possibly (if he existed) the most important person in the history of mankind, it does seem extraordinarily suspicious that there is no evidence that he ever lived.

In that light there is no credibility to any of the stories of his life being true.

Kat
 
Katazia said:
The stories of Jesus are just stories. There is no independent (non Christian) and no verifiable evidence of any type that he actually existed. That doesn't mean that he didn't exist but for possibly (if he existed) the most important person in the history of mankind, it does seem extraordinarily suspicious that there is no evidence that he ever lived.

In that light there is no credibility to any of the stories of his life being true.
*************
M*W: Yes, they are just like the stories of Harry Potter. They're fiction. Had Jesus ever existed, there would be more proof. Had Jesus lived, he would have NEVER been crucified. His "crimes" didn't warrant it. Why is it so hard for Christians to see this? I'll tell you why! Christianity is a cult that has brainwashed billions of innocent people.
Click to expand...
 
Medicine Woman said:
Katazia said:
The stories of Jesus are just stories. There is no independent (non Christian) and no verifiable evidence of any type that he actually existed. That doesn't mean that he didn't exist but for possibly (if he existed) the most important person in the history of mankind, it does seem extraordinarily suspicious that there is no evidence that he ever lived.

In that light there is no credibility to any of the stories of his life being true.
*************
M*W: Yes, they are just like the stories of Harry Potter. They're fiction. Had Jesus ever existed, there would be more proof. Had Jesus lived, he would have NEVER been crucified. His "crimes" didn't warrant it. Why is it so hard for Christians to see this? I'll tell you why! Christianity is a cult that has brainwashed billions of innocent people.
Click to expand...

Come on M*W - you have just told me that - ""Jesus was monogous with Mary Magdalene. They were married and had children who were the forefathers of the Kings of France. ""

Now you hint that Jesus never existed.

What is it to be?
Click to expand...
 
[qoute]
M*W: okinrus, as smart as you are, and as learned as you are about Christianity, I fail to see how you refuse to acknowledge the corruption of the early church!
[/quote]
Simply because there is more historical evidence Jesus existed than there was any type of corruption within the early church. There was heresies but these were outside of the Church.

In your mind, it is probably denial, but in the rest of the world, it's a reality.
Click to expand...
My view is religion should allow oneself to escape from the world. You are caring too much what the world thinks, allowing the kingdom to pass by.

I'm truly sorry that your church has failed you like it has failed me. My concern is that you believe in lies. You're only fooling yourself!
Click to expand...
As Vienna mentioned, you've changed your point of view some number of times. You are as unsure Jesus existed as you are my belief in lies.
 
Ok maybe he did exist woop de do da diddly dorp. I exist. Theres a healer in another country today that heals people all the time blind people too. But he could be called jesus couldnt he? I think jesus could have existed and i also think that he could have also been made up. We can't know for sure, but lets just blindly worship him anyways :p
 
he may have existed
if he did,
he may have been a healer
if he was,
he may have been the "son of G_d"
or maybe the superstitious people of the time decided to make up stories about him
instead of "he's a witch!" they said "he's a saviour!"

and then, if he did exist,
he may have been crucified

if he was,
he may have gone to heaven

so many "may"s... all we got is a bunch of believers, an ancient translated book that resembles the Greek, Roman, Babelonyan (and other) mythologies, and Mel Gibson

who cares if he really existed...
if it makes people happy, let them worship him all they want as long as they don't hurt non-believers
 
A stone crypt was found in Isreal a few years ago inscribed with the words "James brother of Jesus". While this doesn't prove anything researchers are fascinated by the fact that of the thousands of such items they have studied this is the only one that mentions a sibling. I Kind of agree with otheadp otherwise
 
about that crypt, there was a story in the press that the inscription was actually a fake
then there was another story confirming that it was authentic...
so much hype and buzz over a guy who [may] have been dead for 2000+ years
 
I guess that is why it hasn't been more widely publicized. He wasn't just any guy to the faithful though.
 
Excuse me, we've had the greatest scientists and historians in the world track him down and check every detail and city mentioned in the Bible... (what you think ppl wouldn't devote their lives to finding out?!) look it up in google.com! Anyway, they have proven that he DEFINITELY existed. The actual question is WAS he the King of the Jews, Son of God, Prophet or just a fake?
 
I have heard that there was no mention of jesus in the roman historical literature during his time. You'd think that there would be considering the impact he had on that area.
 
Why would the romans want to emphasize the existance of Jesus? Wouldn't that only increase increase his importance before and after his crucifixtion? I would think they would not want to under the circumstances..........So maybe that would explain why there is no mention of him in the roman texts of that time..........

Atta Boy
 
path, what the hell is that?

mario, I seem to recall hearing the opposite. My memory isn't what it should be though.

Personally, I believe a rather influential man we now call Jesus existed. No proof.
 
Vienna said:
Come on M*W - you have just told me that - ""Jesus was monogous with Mary Magdalene. They were married and had children who were the forefathers of the Kings of France. ""

Now you hint that Jesus never existed.

What is it to be?
*************
M*W: Yes, I may have 'hinted' that there's no proof that Jesus existed. The more I study Christianity, the farther I get from it. Jesus may have existed. I really don't know since there's no proof. I slightly tend to believe he was a real person, a Rabbi, but all that hoopla about his working miracles and dying on a cross just seems so fakey. However, when I study more about Mary Magdalene, John the Baptist and Joseph of Arimathea, I'm more convinced that Jesus did actually exist. Previous to my intense research into Christianity, I was an avid student of the ancient Frankish empire. That's where I found the connection between the first French kings and Jesus and MM. Finding this information within the religion of Christianity was not to be. It was surpressed by the RCC from the begininng. What would you trust? A religion who surpressed the truth about Jesus while protecting and enabling pedophiles-or-books on ancient Frankish history? Now my focus is on Mary Magdalene. There is a connection between her and John the Baptist, and I'm digging into that just now. I also have a theory that maybe it was MM who was the "savior" (i.e. progenitor) and not Jesus because there is proof that she existed. Knowing that, I tend to think that Jesus existed, too. It's not that he was the "savior" of the world, I see both MM and Jesus as being "co-creators" of the world.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top