Who do you think Jesus was?

Lori_7 said:
when people EXPERIENCE the holy spirit communicating with them, or EXPERIENCE aliens communicating with them, i would think that's all the evidence they needed wouldn't you? i see no need to convince others when they could experience it too just like many, many people have. some people really want to know god and they do, and some people really don't want to know god, and they don't. and that's it.
Click to expand...

So WHY ARE YOU HERE?
 
Kapyong said:
Gday,



In fact there is plenty of evidence to show that the Gospel stories were crafted from the Tanakh.

And it is clear that much of G.Luke and G.Matthew were copied, often word-for-word, from G.Mark - showing they are religious literature, not history.


And "sound mind" ?
In other words - you are claiming that anyone who disagrees is simply insane - great tactic there Lori !


K.
Click to expand...

crafted (so seemingly poorly) for what insane motive? and by what collaboration?
 
Medicine*Woman said:
*************
M*W: Isn't it because of Jesus the believers will have everlasting life (immortality)?

There were stories (myths) of dying demigod saviors before the time of Jesus. Those who cling to this myth haven't done much relevant and intriguing independent study.

The gospels weren't even written during the time of Jesus, so they weren't relevant in those days either. However, if you find comfort and solace reading the gospels, I wouldn't want to deprive you of your fantasy.
Click to expand...

Yeah but Jesus is calling our something is wrong. What he asks, our purpose, our calling is now and it isn't the easy path.

The story of Jesus is pertinent today 2000 years later and speaks to the life we are living.

So the fact that Romans were killing people because of their beliefs you find it strange the gospels didn't surface for 30 years? Are books written about mid 20th century people now not valid?
 
You would have some guts writing about a man glorifying him as king while these same people were fed to lions.
 
Kapyong said:
Gday,

YOU made the claims, Joe -

YOU claimed that Constantine and his mum made statements in the NT.
Wrong.
Click to expand...

OH, Then perhaps you can demonstrate where I made that claim?
Cazzo said:
"
There is NO evidence for YOUR claim.
Click to expand...

There is plenty of evidence. But you cannot even get what I said correct. And you ignore everything you find inconvenient.
Cazzo said:
"
YOU claimed that Constantine set the birthdate of Jesus to December 25th.
Wrong.
There is NO evidence for YOUR claim.
Click to expand...

I said many other things too. As for Constantine and Christmas, Christians did not celebrate the birth of Christ before Constantine. But did did so after Constantine...kind of coincidental. And you cannot prove that Constantine was not behind the celebration of Christmas on December 25th. The Sol Invictus holiday.

Cazzo said:
"
Sadly, your another person who simply CANNOT admit error.
The web is full of 'em.

K.
Click to expand...

LOL, yes indeed the web is full of them. You don't have to look past your nose. When you can start getting your facts straight then maybe there will be some basis for discussion. But you cannot even get you allegations straight.

You make wild accusations claiming people have read books certian books. You don't have esp and you fail to support your claims.
 
rjr6 said:
You would have some guts writing about a man glorifying him as king while these same people were fed to lions.
Click to expand...

Considering the age, who was pulling strings back then, the amazing story, it is phenomenal it was recoreded at all. It in itself is a testimony.

Did John the Bsbtist even know how to write? Recently I saw a show that portrayed him as a homeless man living off the land. Yet his story is a topic for conversation 2000 years later, his message, what was accomplished.
 
Gday,

Lori_7 said:
crafted (so seemingly poorly) for what insane motive?
Click to expand...

Insane ?
So like I said - you have already decided that the opposition is INSANE !
A really great argument Lori.


Do you really not know what motives people have for writing religious books?

Did the the writer of the Gita have an insane motive?

Did the the writer of the Upanishads have an insane motive?

Did the the writer of the Hercules myths have an insane motive?

Did the the writer of the Old Testament have an insane motive?

Do you really believe that any religious book was written for an insane motive?



Lori_7 said:
and by what collaboration?
Click to expand...

Um, what?
I don't think you understand a word I say :-(


Kapyong
 
Gday,

joepistole said:
OH, Then perhaps you can demonstrate where I made that claim?
Click to expand...

My apologies, that was indeed someone else.


joepistole said:
I said many other things too. As for Constantine and Christmas, Christians did not celebrate the birth of Christ before Constantine. But did did so after Constantine...kind of coincidental.
Click to expand...

AFTER?
How LONG after?
What is your EVIDENCE?

The evidence does NOT support your claim.
There is NO evidence that Constantine set the date to 25th December.
History records this belief as starting in 354 AD.
Your claim is wrong. But you can't admit it.

joepistole said:
And you cannot prove that Constantine was not behind the celebration of Christmas on December 25th. The Sol Invictus holiday.
Click to expand...

Haha!
What a joke ! Now you are reduced to bleating that there is no evidence AGAINST your claim !

Can you prove Constantine was NOT a space alien, joe?

History does NOT work that way - you are essentially admitting you have NO evidence, but pretending you are still right!
What hogwash.
The evidence we DO have shows you are wrong.

So joe - when is the FIRST evidence for a Sol Invictus holiday on December 25th?

Do you know the answer?
I doubt it.
The answer is : 354 AD !

So,
YOU claim Constantine set the birthdate of Jesus to December 25th to match the Sol Invictus holiday.

But -
There is NO evidence for a 25th December Sol Invictus holday until decades AFTER Constantine.
And -
there is NO evidence for Christians celebrating on December 25th until 354AD either !

But you never knew those facts, did you joe?
And now you can't admit it.

joepistole said:
You make wild accusations claiming people have read books certian books. You don't have esp and you fail to support your claims.
Click to expand...

You have a serious emotional blockage about admitting error - common for internet believers.

I admitted my error above in attributing a post - it happens sometimes.

But when I pointed out YOUR errors - and your response is falsehoods and abuse.

I did NOT say you specifically HAD read The Da Vinci Code - I said books LIKE that because there are many such books and web sites - but you will never admit that will you? Because you are pathologically unable to admit ANY error.

You will continue to go on and on and on about that The Da Vince Code issue, you'll never ever admit I said books LIKE that. Because that would mean admitting you were wrong.

Nor will you ever admit you were wrong about Constantine.


K.
 
Last edited:
Of course the Lone Ranger existed cause he was in moving picture shows.

Although he did wear a mask. So really we'll never know for sure.
 
Kapyong said:
You made claims about Constantine that were simply WRONG - I know this because I check the facts.
Click to expand...
a claim by itself, as to him being wrong is wrong..back up your accusation with links..
(you also joe..)
Sadly, you don't check the facts - you just repeat crap you read in nonsense books like The Da Vinci Code.
Click to expand...
speculation in an attempt to discredit..bad form dude..

But you can't admit your errors when pointed out.
How sad.
Click to expand...

its usually the first to say such a thing that is guilty of it..


Kennyc said:
Not at all. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If jesus is as claimed we simply require the evidence (not opinion or belief) to prove it.
Click to expand...
i'm not so sure that (bolded) statement is true anymore..
there have been non-believers here on this forum that have put forth evidence that jesus did NOT exist..
other non-believers have pulled the evidence card also, both knowing that there would be no evidence to put forth..so to say that you require evidence in incorrect, what would be more accurate would be to say ' i just want you to see that there is no evidence'...




Kapyong said:
I compare Scientology with Christianity - both have people who BELIEVE in supernatural beings and events that they NEVER experienced themselves.
Click to expand...

ok now i am confused..i read L,Ron Hubbards Dianetics (thought it was very helpfull to me) that was the first time i had heard of scientology, did a little research into it..and dismissed it..i am/was unaware that scientology had supernatural beings or events in it..

My point is that BELIEF proves nothing.
Repeating claims about Christian BELIEFS proves nothing other than what Christians BELIEVE.
Click to expand...
correct belief does not Prove anything..
i am sure there are many times in your life that you have to make a decision without any proof ..what is it that determines your choice then?
the choices we make in our daily lives do not come with guarantees, yet these are the ones that hurt the most..
but when it comes to belief about jesus and god why is it such a harder decision? there is actually LOTS more information on god and jesus than there is when one has to make those daily decisions..


To convince others - you need evidence and argument - not just more beliefs.
Click to expand...
are you speaking for yourself?
not everyone needs evidence or proof..the fact that you are arguing 'to convince others' says that you have not made a decision, you say you need more evidence and proof to be convinced, why it it such a thing to get hung-up about..whether you believe or not, you are still gonna be the same person you are right now..believeing is NOT a commitment to others rules..
there are as many churches as there are attitudes about who/what god is, both none and all is correct..(i have tried to explain this, apparently i barely understand it..)

anyway..ill stop now..
 
Kapyong said:
Gday,

Who claimed to have met a historical Jesus ?

It is frequently claimed that we have multiple eye-witnesses who claimed to have met Jesus.

This is probably why believers respond with cries of
"why would they die for a lie?"
"how could it all be a hoax?"
"that's just a conspiracy theory"
when a sceptic claims the Gospels are not true history.

Because -
believers are convinced we have numerous reliable claims from identifiable people that they met Jesus - thus if Jesus did not exist, then all those eye-witness claims must have been a "hoax". If Jesus was not historical, the claims to have met him must have been a "lie", If Jesus never lived then all those multiple claimed eye-witnesses must have been involved in a "conspiracy".

So, let's examine the evidence -

How many :
* identifiable people
* claimed to have met Jesus
* in authentic writing.
?

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 Chrsitains - claims that are NOT supported by the earlier books, or by history.

So,
If Jesus wasn't historical, there is NO LIE, NO HOAX and NO CONSPIRACY required at all - because there are NO actual claims to have met Jesus to be a hoax or a lie or a conspiracy in the first place.

Just later books and claims, and claims about books.


Kapyong
Click to expand...

ahhh...but none of them existed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top