It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by TheBlueSoldier
So historical documents from all over the world that state a person clearly exists is not evidence? That's just plain ignorance. Here's a question, do you believe that Julius Caesar existed? We have no body nor any forensic evidence that he once existed (Roman tradition was burning the body to ashes). The only thing that proves Julius Caesar existed was the documents and written evidence, and there is just as much evidence that supports the existence of Julius Caesar as there is Jesus Christ (look at my first quote in my previous post). And by the way, have you ever heard of the "Shroud of Turin"? There's some physical evidence for ya.
Originally posted by Al Davison
Wooohooo! You've really opened a can of worms in which I am very well-versed. The question for you is: Do you know enough about this issue to discuss it? I'm ready whenever you are. My guess is that you aren't going to like the evidence very much. You won't be able to refute it (unless you are better versed than the Vatican's representatives) so, get ready for a very bumpy ride. [edit on 17-3-2006 by Al Davison]
Originally posted by Toelint
I've GOT to ask this. Has anyone else here bothered to check this out, in the Research Forum?
THIS is good stuff! What ever questions you have about Jesus (or if you just need ammo) check it out!
Originally posted by Toelint
And so...if it's found in the Bible (and that includes the Old Testament) it's automatically a lie?
I'll ask again...one more time...Where is the proof that Jesus DID NOT exist?
Mod Edit to remove quote of previous poster.
[edit on 11-4-2006 by Benevolent Heretic]
Originally posted by Nygdan
In order to look at this sort of thing objectively, its better to think of it in terms of a religion that you might be neutral on.
What is the evidence that Rama existed? There are documents, the Ramayana, that suggest that he existed. The information in the stories is apparently relatively accurate, with regards to the non-fantasy type stuff, for the time period it alleges to have occured in. The place names are accurate.
But does that show that he existed, and all the other characters in the story?
Originally posted by batel gemBel
LOVE IS THE WAY TO HEAVEN.
Originally posted by TheBlueSoldier
Here's a previous post that I posted on ATS a few weeks ago.
For those of you who question Jesus' existence:
-Here is a quote from a professor at Manchester University.
"Some writers may toy with the fancy of a 'Christ-myth', but they do not do so on the ground of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Ceaser. It is not historians who propogate the 'Christ-myth' theories."
- F.F. Bruce, Rylands Professor of biblical criticism and exegesis at Manchester University.
-This quote is from a famous Roman Philosipher, who is relied heavily on by historians who need information from the Roman era.
Cornelius Tacitus (born A.D. 52-54):
"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumour, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for thier enormities. Christus, the founder of the name was put to death by Pontious Pilate, procurator of Juedea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischeif originated, but through the city of Rome also. " Tacitus, Annals XV, 44.
-This is a letter from a famous Jewish war tactician to his friend.
Josephus, a Jew who commanded a force during a Jewish revolt against Rome and who after defeat wrote a history of Israel twice mentions Jesus. Josephus had no reason to be a friend of Jesus, writes this
"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising facts and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He was over many Jews and many of the Greeks . He was the Messiah.
When Pilate, upon hearing him accused by men of the highest standing amongst us, had condemned him to be crucified, those who had in the first place come to love him did not give up their affection for him.
On the third day he appeared to them restored to life, for the prophets of God had prophesied these and countless other marvelous things about him, and he has still to this day not disappeared"
-This is from an enemy of the Christians who himself acknowledged the existence of Jesus of Nazareth.
Lucian of Samosata
A second century satarist, who spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians. He connected them with the synagogues of Palestine and alluded to Christ as: "the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world ... Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that cruicified sophist himself and living under his laws." - The Passing Peregrinus
-In the bible, Jesus is accused of being "The King of the Jews":
A historical artifact in the British Museum has a letter written by Maraben Serapion who wrote about the Jews who executed "their wise king".
-The Encyclopedia Brittanica which has irrefutable information.
"No serious historian would doubt the historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. On occasions some have tried but only by ignoring the overwhelming evidence that supports the existence of Jesus. These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries" - Encyclopedia Britannica
I hope that clears a few things up.