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.

 

Why Are You Attacking Jesus?

page: 11
0
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
The other people and I on this thread have shown sufficient evidence that Jesus existed, now it's up to you to try to prove he didn't.


you've given articles that state that the bible is a legitimate historical document, and that 3rd hand sources that weren't even alive at the time of the supposed crucifixion are supposed to be seen as reliable

yeah, that isn't sufficient evidence
but that isn't the point of this thread
this is a WHY are you attacking jesus thread
i put forth my thread to shift the DID jesus exist question away

why am i supposedly attacking jesus?
because i believe that any religion that put dahlmer in heaven and gandhi in hell isn't good



We should not have to prove something we know is true.


that is an entirely different discussion on the nature of truth and proof, and we don't have a philosophy board....

[edit on 12/18/06 by madnessinmysoul]




posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:28 PM
link   
If I could prove that without a doubt Jesus really existed would you believe he was the son of God?



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
If I could prove that without a doubt Jesus really existed would you believe he was the son of God?


no, but i'd accept him as a historical figure
mainly because i do not accept the existence of god at all



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

Originally posted by kinglizard
If I could prove that without a doubt Jesus really existed would you believe he was the son of God?


no, but i'd accept him as a historical figure
mainly because i do not accept the existence of god at all


Then what's the point of trying to prove him to you?

You would still not accept his message.



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
no, but i'd accept him as a historical figure
mainly because i do not accept the existence of god at all


That's kinda my point, we can never really truly bridge the evidence --- faith gap.

I mean if yall won't accept the 27 individual separate books written on the guy from different perspectives in the NT then you probably won't accept lesser evidence. (it is 27 isn't it?)

But maybe you all aren't really diving into the Christian thing in this thread.

[edit on 12/18/2006 by kinglizard]



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
Then what's the point of trying to prove him to you?


Exactly! Exactly! Hallelujah!!

What IS the point in trying to prove ANYTHING about your faith??? Faith is not fact. Faith is belief without proof!

What is the point???



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Jesus is beaten, spit upon, hated because thats his role... Christ was the redeemer.... not Jesus..

Like Jedi Mind Tricks said... Frak Your Crucifix, Your religion and its uselessness...

Christ never wanted a religion... people who renounce Jesus are more christians than the christians.



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuRe EnErGy
Christ never wanted a religion... people who renounce Jesus are more christians than the christians.


That's an interesting interpretation.

Does Religion and Church mean the same thing to you?

Matthew 16:18

And I (Jesus) tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it

Isn't a Church a place to study and learn theological (religious) beliefs?

[edit on 12/18/2006 by kinglizard]



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
Isn't a Church a place to study and learn theological (religious) beliefs?


Just curious, KL. Is this forum a church? One can certainly study and learn theological beliefs here.

I'm really not trying to be a pita here (like I sometimes am), I'm curious as to what a church is to you.



posted on Dec, 18 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Well I see a Church as a place where like minded people gather and study the same religious belief set (in my case the bible) with a theological scholar. Is this forum a Church? I don't see it as one.

[edit on 12/18/2006 by kinglizard]



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 06:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by NowAmFound
shihulud:

Too many ways to respond to that. So glad others have already done it for me. I would be here all day.

www.geocities.com...


A nice site full of probablies and maybe's.

JUST SO YOU MIGHT LISTEN::

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EITHER FOR OR AGAINST THAT CAN PROVE THE EXISTANCE OF A JESUS OF NAZARETH.

Even if there was evidence for the existence of said jesus - This would still NOT prove the divinity of said jesus or that a god exists.


Also the burden of proof is on the claimant of existance not the other way round, as I can ask you to prove that Beer elves or vampires or ghosts or space turkey's dont exist - while you can state as much logic or evidence as you please, there is no evidence for or against such beings existing. For this you MUST rely on FAITH (a belief in something that cannot be proven).

So if I might ask: Why do you have FAITH in god and jesus if you 'know' that these beings exist?????



G



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 07:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone
The other people and I on this thread have shown sufficient evidence that Jesus existed, now it's up to you to try to prove he didn't.

We should not have to prove something we know is true.

How do you explain the similarities between the life of jesus and the whole pantheon of pagan godmen that predate jesus, christianity, judaism and monotheism????
How do you explain the glaring differences in the reported life of jesus in the four gospels????
How do you explain the lack of other evidence for the existance the man????

I have yet to see any evidence that convincingly proves the existance of jesus without a shadow of doubt.

So until that time occurs I will not accept yours nor anyone elses assertion that jesus existed because you or anyone believes this to be the case.


G



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 12:42 PM
link   
shi:

www.tektonics.org...

On the differences within the gospels...they are actually discrepancies that help support the bible's authenticity. There are tons of books on this subject. If you are genuinely questioning, I can find some good ones for you.


On the "lack of other evidence"...this whole discussion has been a demonstration that there is not a lack. You can choose to ignore it. Most people you talk to will think you make sense. Anyone educated will probably laugh at you.

P.S. On the burden of proof...already been explained to you. Going in circles won't change anything.


[edit on 19-12-2006 by NowAmFound]



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by NowAmFound
P.S. On the burden of proof...already been explained to you.


Many believe in Aliens. About 80% of Americans. There is much written about them, there are pictures and it's pretty well accepted knowledge that other intelligent life exists in the Universe... Does the burden of proof lie with those who say aliens DON'T exist?

To say that X is true because there isn't proof that X is false, is a logical fallacy.

Burden of Proof



You cannot claim that "miracles exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "souls exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "angels exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."
You cannot claim that "deities exist unless someone proves that they do not exist."

The burden of proof is always on the claim that X exists rather than on the claim that X does not exist.
...
The person making a negative claim cannot logically prove nonexistence. And here's why: to know that a X does not exist would require a perfect knowledge of all things (omniscience). To attain this knowledge would require simultaneous access to all parts of the world and beyond (omnipresence). Therefore, to be certain of the claim that X does not exist one would have to possess abilities that are non-existent. Obviously, mankind's limited nature precludes these special abilities.


Regardless how much you assert that the burden of proof is on those who question Jesus' existence, it is elementary that it is on those who claim his existence. There is no way to prove something doesn't exist. Only to prove that it does.

I don't actually care whether or not Jesus existed, but I do care about the illogical argument that the skeptic must provide the proof for his skepticism... That's whacked.



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by NowAmFound
P.S. On the burden of proof...already been explained to you. Going in circles won't change anything.




i'll let shi respond to the rest of your post

but why do the people that aren't claiming anything have to disprove your claims?

it would like me telling you to disprove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and then saying that until you do, it's real

the burden of proof is on the claiment
that's how logical thought works



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 03:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by kinglizard
Well I see a Church as a place where like minded people gather and study the same religious belief set (in my case the bible) with a theological scholar. Is this forum a Church? I don't see it as one.

[edit on 12/18/2006 by kinglizard]


The body is the church, where the egos live....

Do you want your church to be a den of thieves or rapists? ..

Your egos gather under the one roof of your flesh and discuss their various view points to get you to act out the bodies desires...

Jesus knew Peters lusts ... and knew because Jesus gave him instructions that he could not fail ... Jesus instructed those disciples to be pricks.. but the best pricks a person could be.. he in a sense tricked them to be excellent pricks so we could learn from them... you cannot hide a city thats bright and fortified when its ontop of a mountain... in other words... they were openly 'evil' ... instead of hidden.. like the hidden societies that have existed forever.



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 03:22 PM
link   
shi and madness: It is evident that you guys aren't listening. You're like broken records. We've discussed this issue already. What about burden of proof in this circumstance do you not understand. Go back and read what I've written. You're wasting both my time and your own.



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 03:25 PM
link   
I was going to start a new thread for this, but realized that it fits into this discussion...it's actually more evidence and I know all the Christians here will thoroughly enjoy it:

www.thenazareneway.com...



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuRe EnErGy
The body is the church, where the egos live....


I didn’t realize you were into studying the bible. AWESOME! Let’s get into some bible study right now.

There are many passages concerning the ego in the bible:


Matthew 23:12

12For whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted.



Philippians 2:3-4

3Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. 4Each of you should look not only to your own interests, but also to the interests of others.



1 Peter 3:3-4

3Your beauty should not come from outward adornment, such as braided hair and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes. 4Instead, it should be that of your inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight.




Originally posted by PuRe EnErGy
Do you want your church to be a den of thieves or rapists?


No, and I would recommend that everyone choose the church that teaches from the bible over the one that full of rapists and thieves. This is fairly basic stuff that you should have learned by now.

As for the rest of your post. *Yawn* You represent your group well.



posted on Dec, 19 2006 @ 04:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by NowAmFound
shi and madness: It is evident that you guys aren't listening. You're like broken records. We've discussed this issue already. What about burden of proof in this circumstance do you not understand. Go back and read what I've written. You're wasting both my time and your own.


you've simply stated that we need to DISprove something that you have yet to prove is true

benev brought up the fact that the burden of proof rests on you, you ignored that

but, i actually have brought forth something to disprove, at my other thread (shameless plug here) Did Jesus Exist -- The Probing Mind

and yet you STILL claim i've shown nothing....



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 8  9  10    12  13 >>

log in

join