Is there evidence that Jesus Christ existed? Yes, there is.

a reply to: windword

Everything that is sourced outside of your sources are dismissed by you as censored Christians documents and Christian apologist arguments its like having a debate with a child. The Romans wouldn't keep records about a poor carpenter preaching about anti Roman occupation. They didn't even share the same religion at the time why would they write about a man turned in by his own people, it defies logic.

But since we can't use Christians of Jewish sources because they are for sure liars and fabricate the truth we have to use Roman sources which I don't find reliable since they wouldn't logically write about Jesus during the time he was alive and preaching.

Why would the Romans write about an anti Roman Jew? To spread Jewish propaganda?The only time they write about Christians is when the population of Christians were growing in the empire.... do you get my logic?

They crucified soooo many people that were against the empire why would they keep records about him?

and as I argued before the majority of the followers of Christ were poor simple people that probably couldn't write. The apostles were even simple people with simple backgrounds.

a reply to: JDmOKI

The Romans wouldn't keep records about a poor carpenter preaching about anti Roman occupation. They didn't even share the same religion at the time why would they write about a man turned in by his own people, it defies logic.

Josephus did! He wrote about several unremarkable Jewish folk who were able to excite the multitudes into religious and/or political fervor, all of which claiming to be some sort of Messiah! None of them were Jesus of Nazareth though.

To me, its not whether Jesus Christ existed, but did his death remove a curse that mankind was placed under...ie he died for our sins.

The only way for mankind to get close to God again was for God to sacrifice the human version of his son? That makes God (our father/creator) look so weak and inept against his created entity named Satan. I hope this isn't the case!

a reply to: windword

Josephus was born in 37 AD Jesus died around 30 AD

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Besides that, only a true believer would even suggest that what exists as Christianity today was "founded" by Yeshua the Desert Mystic.

Christianity was an invention of the Roman government. The Roman Church even mimics the structures of the Roman Government.

Pontifex Maximus ring a bell?

Pfft.

For centuries before that what were being fed to the lions in front of the Roman citizens for entertainment?
What was being worshipped in underground crypts in Rome hiding away from authority?

Rome adopted Christianity, a pre existing religion.

That earliest scrap of scripture someone posted was not a Roman invention.

originally posted by: carewemust
To me, its not whether Jesus Christ existed, but did his death remove a curse that mankind was placed under...ie he died for our sins.

The only way for mankind to get close to God again was for God to sacrifice the human version of his son? That makes God (our father/creator) look so weak and inept against his created entity named Satan. I hope this isn't the case!

God loved mankind so that he gave his only begotten son. This would make Satan tremble, not the other way around.
Redemption.

Way to twist the story.

a reply to: JDmOKI

Josephus was born in 37 AD Jesus died around 30 AD

Did he? How do you know that? Who died first, John the Baptist, or Jesus Christ?

Having said that, it does appear that Josephus is giving John's death as occurring in 36 CE,
www.josephus.org...

Star & Flag for topic that was bound to get trashed by the typical naysayers.
So much evidence and yet the denial is profound, anything that even begins to challenge their personal world view is jumped on.
That Jesus Christ existed is beyond doubt, and a fact, what he did, and even more important what he will do in the future are the real questions.

a reply to: windword

soooo he was born in 37 AD.... Pontius Pilate was in Judea from AD 26–36

a reply to: JDmOKI

Are you trying to give cause to reject Josephus' works?

Answer the question. When did Jesus Christ die, and how do you know the date! Who died first? John the Baptist or Jesus?

By the Way, Josephus mentions John the Baptist and his followers, but not Jesus of Nazareth!

a reply to: windword

well we have to assume that Jesus died around the time Pontius Pilate was actually in Judea. No, I'm not rejecting Josephus' work and it is debated in some of his works if he made mention of a Jesus type figure during that time. Also, he was born after the events he is chronicling. John the Baptist was executed by a king that had scribes not some Roman appointed prefect

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Besides that, only a true believer would even suggest that what exists as Christianity today was "founded" by Yeshua the Desert Mystic.

Christianity was an invention of the Roman government. The Roman Church even mimics the structures of the Roman Government.

Pontifex Maximus ring a bell?

Pfft.

For centuries before that what were being fed to the lions in front of the Roman citizens for entertainment?
What was being worshipped in underground crypts in Rome hiding away from authority?

Rome adopted Christianity, a pre existing religion.

That earliest scrap of scripture someone posted was not a Roman invention.

What is your source for that historical assessment? The movie Quo Vadis?

If you'd like to know how many different sorts of "Christianity" there were before the Romans created what we would recognize as Christianity (established by Constantine) try reading some of the works of the Gnostic Christians found at Nag Hammadi (Link).

Christians:

First of all, I know this goes against everything you've been taught, but not everyone outside your religion "hates" you.

Disagreeing with you isn't hating you.

Evaluating your beliefs as somewhat deluded ... isn't disagreeing with you.

THE Jesus of your Bible did not exist. A "Jesus" (or rather several figures) probably did exist.

That's what the very evidence that you have presented here says.

Your belief is filling in gaps in the evidence for you that are miles wide to someone who is not a believer.

But, here's the bottom line. SO WHAT?

So I don't believe in your Jesus as a historical fact. SO WHAT?

You aren't going to win us over and we aren't going to win you over. I fail to see why we continually start these threads.

Or why I post in them.

/sigh

a reply to: Gryphon66

/sign

Its not that anyone wants to convert you (maybe some do) its how you respond with complete disrespect and can't debate like an adult. You think your side is complete 100% truth and that counter arguments lack intelligence. your last post clearly presents your arrogance towards the subject and your complete lack of respect towards the people you're referring to in your post but ya know what that's the religious forum is on ATS I'm just an agnostic that wants people to debate like adults.

You really think 100% that Jesus did not exist? really? should we hire you and have you lecture at universities? Because if you can debate this and win and disprove an entire religion you could make some serious $$$$ just saying.

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: carewemust
To me, its not whether Jesus Christ existed, but did his death remove a curse that mankind was placed under...ie he died for our sins.

The only way for mankind to get close to God again was for God to sacrifice the human version of his son? That makes God (our father/creator) look so weak and inept against his created entity named Satan. I hope this isn't the case!

God loved mankind so that he gave his only begotten son. This would make Satan tremble, not the other way around.
Redemption.

Way to twist the story.

Well, now, let's be honest if we're going to claim to be good Christians and make Ol' Scratch get shakin in his shoes.

God created a human pair and put them in a walled garden with one tree at the center of everything.

He told them not to eat the fruit of that tree, even though he had done everything but put a spotlight on it.

His created human children ate this fruit, and were cursed by god to die (among other horrors). Not only that, all of their children through out all history and humanity would also be cursed because of a single action of two people.

He later gives out extensive and complicated lists of what actions actually constitute "sin" and establishes a priesthood to provide for blood sacrifices to appease his ... anger? Lust for blood? Etc.

A few thousand years later, this same god rapes and impregnates a young girl with Himself, somehow, and demands an ultimate blood sacrifice from his holy offspring, who is also, somehow, himself.

So, he allows the "Jesus" part of himself to die in a bloody sham of an "ultimate sacrifice" only to almost immediately bring him back from death.

Now, anyone who "accepts" this horrific insanity as redemption for the sins that god created himself, continues to abase themselves and live in fear, will somehow be saved from ETERNAL TORTURE in a lake of fire.


No, nothing crazy about any of that.

a reply to: JDmOKI

What kind of respect are you offering? None.

How do you think adults debate? They offer facts. You may not like how some adults debate. That's your issue.

Arrogance? What do you expect? The Christian religion is absolutely insane to me! Besides that, let he (or she) who is without arrogance throw the first rock.

I can and do respect Christians as individuals (usually equivalent to the respect I'm given which, as I noted, is rare).

Your second paragraph is the most telling. You invert and reverse everything you claim you're asking for in the first paragraph. That's called hypocrisy, and your version of it is of the first water.

Thanks for answering my question though.

originally posted by: DeadSeraph

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Grimpachi

Even at the time that he was born if Jesus was fictitious Tacitus would have described him so. Yet Tacitus doesn't do that, even though he was not Christian his references of "history" includes that Jesus did exist, was crucified under the orders of Pontius Pilate, and his followers were called Christians after his name.

Tacitus also wrote about Hercules like he was a real person.

So you must also believe Hercules was a son of god.

I bet I know who was stronger.

I would just like to state that I am very disappointed in ATS as a whole. Grimpachi I expect this sort of nonsense from, since he refused to acknowledge anything I said to him, but the fact this post received so many stars is quite frankly disgusting. Here is what Tacitus said about Jesus:

Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind

Here is what he said about "Hercules":

They say that Hercules, too, once visited them; and when going into battle, they sing of him first of all heroes. They have also those songs of theirs, by the recital of which ("baritus," they call it), they rouse their courage, while from the note they augur the result of the approaching conflict. For, as their line shouts, they inspire or feel alarm. It is not so much an articulate sound, as a general cry of valour. They aim chiefly at a harsh note and a confused roar, putting their shields to their mouth, so that, by reverberation, it may swell into a fuller and deeper sound. Ulysses, too, is believed by some, in his long legendary wanderings, to have found his way into this ocean, and, having visited German soil, to have founded and named the town of Asciburgium, which stands on the bank of the Rhine, and is to this day inhabited. They even say that an altar dedicated to Ulysses, with the addition of the name of his father, Laertes, was formerly discovered on this same spot, and that certain monuments and tombs, with Greek inscriptions, still exist on the borders of Germany and Rhaetia. These statements I have no intention of sustaining by proofs, or of refuting; every one may believe or disbelieve them as he feels inclines.

I expect no intellectual honesty here, but one of you should at least be bold enough to admit tacitus is describing a historical event in one case, and the beliefs of a people in another.

What a sad day for ATS.

Deny is the only part of the ATS slogan that happens on ATS. You will be denied intelligent debate or discussion here.

The faith of christians is only rivaled by the faith of atheists.

a reply to: Dfairlite

There have been over 8 pages of more than two sides of an issue presenting very reasonable arguments that have been backed up with sources.

The motto here is not Deny Ignorance ... Unless You Believe in It.

There's enough Doom and Gloom. Does it have to extend to ATS as well?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Are you implying Rome was responsible for the Christian religion in the first place?

a reply to: windword

You still with the same... Wikipedia isn't always right, it's a modern invention that is known of it's bias in certain topics, including religion, politics, and climate change.

You claim that no Christian text can be trusted, no Jewish text can be trusted and EVEN PAGAN TEXTS from the Romans can't be trusted... It is obvious that you don't know what else to invent to dismiss these facts.