It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'Jesus NEVER existed': Writer finds no mention of Christ in 126 historical texts and says he was a

page: 31
94
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 22 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

Way to deflect, give no sources and appeal to authority.



But I do notice anyone trying to buck against the accepted evidence of Christ's real existence want to drag any and all who don't agree into some "faith role".


Why do you call him "Christ"? We know that many, many Jews claimed they were "Christ", before, during and after the advent of Jesus of Nazareth, if he existed. "Christ" was a title that many people wore, including Saul, David, Solomon, Cyrus the Great and Hellenistic followers of the Eleusian mysteries.

I don't believe you, or anyone else going around saying most scholars believe. That's like saying 9 out of 10 doctors recommend Trdent sugarless gum. Perhaps you mean, "Most biblical scholars"? Biblical scholars get their degree from divinity school.



AND I FOR ONE think the dude was most likely awesome. In fact, how many of you would face the law knowing it would kill you horrifically for your beliefs?


Lot's of people die for their beliefs. Look at how many are willing to die for their country!



Go hate all you want...any "real school" will teach you that you are most likely wrong.


Name calling and insults isn't going to make a mythical man more real. Have you studied the historicity of Jesus like I have? No? But you blindly believe what you told, and call those with valid evidence "quacks". How are you any different that any other Christian operating on faith? I'll tell you who the real quacks are!

There is NO evidence, outside the Bible, for the existence of one Jesus Christ, the man of myth. It bites, but it't true! Most real[/] scholars of history, anthropology and mythology agree, Jesus Christ was NOT a real person.


edit on 22-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 09:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

Name calling and insults isn't going to make a mythical man more real. Have you studied the historicity of Jesus like I have? No? But you blindly believe what you told, and call those with valid evidence "quacks". How are you any different that any other Christian operating on faith? I'll tell you who the real quacks are!

There is NO evidence, outside the Bible, for the existence of one Jesus Christ, the man of myth. It bites, but it't true! Most real[/] scholars of history, anthropology and mythology agree, Jesus Christ was NOT a real person.



1) I am not name calling or insulting people...but both have happened to me here.

2) Studied Jesus like you? Lol...what does that even mean? I've looked into this issue for about 25+ years. And maybe even more than you since you seem to be thinking you are on to something that thousands of historians have not figured out yet.


What you don't seem to understand is this- Most historians believe evidence shows Jesus was a living man. You can argue all you want. You can fight the views of established/educated historians all you want.

It don't bother me.

Just make sure if you are ever taking a school test and the question is-

"Is Mr Mask correct when he says most historians think Jesus actually existed"

You enter your answer as "yes...Mr Mask is right".

Unless you want to fail.

Hugs bro.

MM


edit on 23-10-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

Which is it? Jesus or Christ? You keep changing the goal posts, man.

Yes. Certainly a man named Jesus existed. Tons of them. Certainly there were many who claimed to be "Christ" and had followers. The Bible even has Jesus warnings of such.

So, yeah. Someone named Jesus existed. However, Jesus Christ, the mystical. magical man of myth NEVER EXISTED! Find me one scientist who can prove he did!


edit on 23-10-2014 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: oletimer
a reply to: Spider879

Argumentum ad Ignorantiam: (appeal to ignorance) the fallacy that a proposition is true simply on the basis that it has not been proved false or that it is false simply because it has not been proved true. This error in reasoning is often expressed with influential rhetoric.


the problem with what you say above, is that anything that man has not personally experienced in his own lifetime, can be classified in that vane
edit on 23-10-2014 by jimmyx because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 11:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword

So, yeah. Someone named Jesus existed. However, Jesus Christ, the mystical. magical man of myth NEVER EXISTED! Find me one scientist who can prove he did!



The biblical individual "Jesus Christ" most likely existed in the educated views of most historians. I am being very clear here.

Did he perform magic? Come back from the dead? Heal people? Etc...

Most likely not.

Did he preach, gain a following, get executed by the authorities (by crucifixion) and then have witnesses find his tomb empty (or at least they said they did)? Most likly...according to most historians.

Not some random guy named Jesus...the biblical Jesus.

Did it go down as the bible explains it word for word? Oh surely not.

Lastly- why do you keep saying scientists can't prove it? Scientists can't prove any historical figure. Science doesn't prove history. It simply adds to evidence and probabilities of things.

Historians are the authority here...not scientists.

And MOST historians (even secular ones) will rush to tell you-

"Jesus most likely existed".

I don't see what you are having a problem with here. I am simply informing you of the truth. Why do so many of you Christ haters want to assume history buffs (like myself) trust in magical things when historical Jesus is debated?

Do you think the majority of historians are all theists? lol..that would surely be silly.

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 11:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Mr Mask

Which is it? Jesus or Christ? You keep changing the goal posts, man.




Oh no sir..I've been very clear in each post and have not wavered or changed direction.

My "goal posts" remain the same. To learn history.

You seem to have an entirely different goal here...its clear you don't care about history at all..just bashing theists and their dogma...to each their own bro!

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

The running trend in most of these discussions is bias. Most of the people arguing against a historical Jesus seem to have a problem with Christianity itself, or with the idea of the Jesus of the New Testament. They seem to be unable (or unwilling) to separate their own personal beliefs about a religion from what history has to say about the individual said religion is based on. For whatever reason, they are incapable of thinking rationally about the subject, and realizing that one does not need to be a Christian or even believe in a miracle working Christ to understand the person the New Testament is based on did in fact exist.

It seems more like desperation to me. Almost as if they want to close off any possibility of the religion they hate so much having any credibility. They feel threatened. If Jesus was a real person, then they might have to face the possibility that what the New Testament says about him could be true. That prospect terrifies them because they are blinded by their own emotions. So blind, that they can't even reconcile rationally, that an admission of a historical Jesus does not necessarily mean admission of a Christian Jesus (as you seem perfectly capable of doing, despite being a non-Christian).

I've seen this very irrational behavior parrotted many times here, where people mock what the New Testament says (for instance talking about "zombie jews") instead of looking at what the real issue is: Was the new testament based on a real person or not?



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

Look, you have talked about "Jesus" as being real. Then you say "Christ" was real, then you claim Jesus Christ was real.

Hate to break it to ya, but Jesus' last name wasn't Christ. They're 3 different entities/titles dude!

FACT: There were lots of men named Jesus around during the time period in question.
FACT: Josephus names more than a few Zealots named Jesus, but never Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus the son of Joseph.
FACT: Christ is a title that many men (and women) wore.
FACT: There is no evidence whatsoever that the magical, mythical god/man called Jesus Christ, with all his magical trappings ever existed! No historian or scientist, worth their salt, will admit otherwise.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Mr Mask

Look, you have talked about "Jesus" as being real. Then you say "Christ" was real, then you claim Jesus Christ was real.

Hate to break it to ya, but Jesus' last name wasn't Christ. They're 3 different entities/titles dude!

FACT: There were lots of men named Jesus around during the time period in question.
FACT: Josephus names more than a few Zealots named Jesus, but never Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus the son of Joseph.
FACT: Christ is a title that many men (and women) wore.
FACT: There is no evidence whatsoever that the magical, mythical god/man called Jesus Christ, with all his magical trappings ever existed! No historian or scientist, worth their salt, will admit otherwise.



Again with the magical thing...

How many times you gunna bring that up to me when I am the first person in the world to show up and explain the improbability of such a thing?

Sigh...

back to trying to get you to get this.

1) The man called JESUS CHRIST in the Christian bible most likely existed by the research of most historians. (and was killed by crucifixion after gaining a following and preaching his views).

2) The bible story of Jesus is most likely not accurate. Mostly due to magical things happening and people being the son of a deity....

Do I HONESTLY have to explain it simpler?

You think you know more than most historians in the world because you have faith that a hack is selling a controversial book that is not gaining much respect in academic circles?

lol.

Ok.

Believe what ya want man...enjoy your faith based belief system. I'm gunna learn history and not go following magical ideas...like "Jesus from the bible was never a real man".

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
It is ODD that the current time rate is based on BC AD of the LORD JESUS CHRIST... For the have not to existed why then has man based time on an imaginative being?
edit on 10/24/14 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

Oh man...your post is a breath of fresh air here lol.

Ya...these New Atheists types are becoming very common. No idea about history, science or theology- but want to bash whats hip to bash and assume every single thing in every religious text is false...out of spite.

Its hard to communicate with many people (not all, mind you) who are programmed to strongly love or dislike religion. Both seem very unable to listen to reason.

I see many of them as fanatics.

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

One more thing I'd love to be quoted as saying-

Real or not- Jesus Christ is one of the coolest people to have ever (most likely) existed.

Anyone being his enemy (be him fiction or fact) is not cool at all.


Jesus rules! Thumbs up big guy!

MM
edit on 24-10-2014 by Mr Mask because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask




2) The bible story of Jesus is most likely not accurate. Mostly due to magical things happening and people being the son of a deity....


You can't have the Biblical Jesus Christ WITHOUT the magical trappings.

Further, biblical accounts of the life of Jesus Christ contradict each other. Many conflict with historic and scientific data.

If you want to believe in a magical Jesus Christ, be my guest, go right ahead. But religion, like Christianity and the belief in a magical Jesus Christ requires faith. If there were proof, then no faith would be required, and we'd all be Christians. But there isn't any proof.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: DeadSeraph

I'm going to split hairs here and say that while there really may have been a cult leader that Jesus is based on, the person described in the Bible definitely didn't exist. The person in the bible, in order to exist, has to have magical powers and be the son of god. This defies the laws of physics, and without any extra-biblical sources backing up this person's divinity, then it reasons that the person didn't exist.

Though all of that doesn't mean that the person in the bible can't be based off of a real person. Though to try to say that they are the same person is dishonest. There are MANY fictional characters in fictional stories that are based on real people, that doesn't mean that the people in those stories exist as well, even if they share the same name.
edit on 24-10-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: DeadSeraph

I'm going to split hairs here and say that while there really may have been a cult leader that Jesus is based on, the person described in the Bible definitely didn't exist. The person in the bible, in order to exist, has to have magical powers and be the son of god. This defies the laws of physics, and without any extra-biblical sources backing up this person's divinity, then it reasons that the person didn't exist. Though all of that doesn't mean that the person in the bible can't be based off of a real person. Though to try to say that they are the same person is dishonest. There are MANY fictional characters in fictional stories that are based on real people, that doesn't mean that the people in those stories exist as well, even if they share the same name.


I agree with a lot of what you say here...I feel it. I know what you mean. But here's my issue with people saying such things.

Ya, there is all this mention of Jesus doing magic...but its all from witnesses, followers, secondhand or many years after the fact.

The bible has people saying things about the man from mouths and minds outside Jesus himself.

I know a LOT of people will tell you stories about me that just are not true. Many good and many bad. The fact that I have had many crazy adventures shouldn't be considered fictional because a couple people exaggerated or outright lied about them.

What you have in biblical texts are all secondhand accounts.

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword


You can't have the Biblical Jesus Christ WITHOUT the magical trappings.

Further, biblical accounts of the life of Jesus Christ contradict each other. Many conflict with historic and scientific data.

If you want to believe in a magical Jesus Christ, be my guest, go right ahead. But religion, like Christianity and the belief in a magical Jesus Christ requires faith. If there were proof, then no faith would be required, and we'd all be Christians. But there isn't any proof.



Wow...you really can't get off this magical Jesus stuff huh? Showing your colors here.

I assure you- all historical data and research involved with popular consensus- has zero to do with saying magic happened.

Are you stomping your foot while telling me I can't have one Jesus unless I have another? lol. That's silly.

Look...MOST historians think Jesus (the one mentioned in the bible) existed.

And if you think this is soooooooo easy to debunk and call shenanigans on...why is it most historians are so lost in seeing your truth? Are you more educated? More certified? Done more research than all of them combined? Time traveled?

What makes you think quackery trumps decades of research and peer reviewed findings?

Honestly...I can have any Jesus I want. And I can sense it upsets you greatly that most educated people think Jesus was "most likely real".

I personally find it cool as heck. Jesus rules. Mad bro?

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum




He had a hallucinatory experience and became delusional. So what?


Slanderous and I could say the same thing about your novelist.

Cog, I only wish I could describe by comparison, or example, the
love and the hope Christ has given me. So you could see clearly
the object of your contempt. But I can't, there simply is no
comparison, or example, that comes close. I know it would do
no good, but I would still try. Because it should be shared,
not pushed door to door.


edit on Rpm102414v20201400000049 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword


You can't have the Biblical Jesus Christ WITHOUT the magical trappings.



One more thing...Yes I can.

I can simply think every witness was either lying, hallucinating, wrong or confused on what really happened. When dealing with a very charismatic cult leader, you would be shocked what his followers and enemies will say after the death of said cult leader.

I want history...you want to debate sea monsters and unicorns. I'm not interested.

MM



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Mr Mask

Fair enough. But at what point do, after the collection of enough fictional stories, we stop calling the person a real person and instead a fake? What if everything written about Jesus is a lie, but he was still based on a real live cult leader? He just didn't do anything that was attributed to him in the bible, even the mundane things.
edit on 24-10-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Mr Mask

Fair enough. But at what point do, after the collection of enough fictional stories, we stop calling the person a real person and instead a fake? What if everything written about Jesus is a lie, but he was still based on a real live cult leader? He just didn't do anything that was attributed to him in the bible, even the mundane things.


Well...that's what you can say about any historical person people hold up as a hero or bash as a villain really. Right?

I mean Abraham Lincoln was a money hungry, slave owner who thought black people were not equal to white people (as he said in his own writings). And he was blood thirsty.

Nobody points that out and treats the guy as a saint.

Like I said- what people want to take from historical people is up to them. I don't have the time or energy to make up people's minds on such a thing. I have limited time on Earth to mentally acquire as much knowledge as I can. Other folks can think what they please.

One thing is for sure...the guy's actions reverberated thousands of years forward after his death (with the help of others).

MM



new topics

top topics



 
94
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join