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.

 

Did Jesus Exist -- The Probing Mind

page: 6
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

there aren't even documents written by people that lived during the "life of jesus" to support his existence

[edit on 1/17/07 by madnessinmysoul]


You never answered my question.
Are you saying that the 12 apostles were born AFTER Jesus died?




posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 03:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by tylersch
You never answered my question.
Are you saying that the 12 apostles were born AFTER Jesus died?


i'm saying that there are two possibilities

1: they never existed
2: if they existed, they didn't write anything down



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

Originally posted by tylersch
You never answered my question.
Are you saying that the 12 apostles were born AFTER Jesus died?


i'm saying that there are two possibilities

1: they never existed
2: if they existed, they didn't write anything down


Then who wrote the Gospels?



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by tylersch
Then who wrote the Gospels?


some people who heard the preachings of the "evangelists" matthew, mark, luke, and john and decided to write them down and give the messangers credit

that's what the evidence points towards
all evidence for the gospels points towards authorship no earlier than 70 CE (i'm pretty sure that would be the gospel of mark)



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 05:38 PM
link   
And what evidence is that?



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
that's what the evidence points towards
all evidence for the gospels points towards authorship no earlier than 70 CE (i'm pretty sure that would be the gospel of mark)


So what you are saying is that an old man can't write?
I have an 88 year-old friend that is so smart and literate he could probably write you under the table.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by rocknroll]



posted on Jan, 18 2007 @ 05:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
So what you are saying is that an old man can't write?
I have an 88 year-old friend that is so smart and literate he could probably write you under the table.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by rocknroll]


no
i'm saying DEAD men can't write
considering that life expectancy was much lower back then, 70 would have been an astronomical age for people to live to
combine that with the uncanny ability the roman empire had to martyr christians
...

do you get my point?


Originally posted by tylersch
And what evidence is that?


various people have brought it up on other threads
just look through ATS and BTS and you'll find it
i just don't feel like reposting it
normally, i get a bit ticked when someone tells me to look up information myself, but this is different because people have actually brought up this point many times before so it's conveniantly already on ATS

[edit on 1/18/07 by madnessinmysoul]



posted on Jan, 19 2007 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
that's what the evidence points towards
all evidence for the gospels points towards authorship no earlier than 70 CE (i'm pretty sure that would be the gospel of mark)


So what you are saying is that an old man can't write?
I have an 88 year-old friend that is so smart and literate he could probably write you under the table.

[edit on 18-1-2007 by rocknroll]


However, if you write so long after the events, you will likely make huge errors in details.

Much psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony made immediately after events can be suspect, just think how this applies 40 years after an event.

But, as madness says, people just didn't tend to live that long in those days.

[edit on 19-1-2007 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
However, if you write so long after the events, you will likely make huge errors in details.

Much psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony made immediately after events can be suspect, just think how this applies 40 years after an event.


nice point there
eyewitness testimony can already be relatively skewed (though somewhat reliable) after a few minutes


anyway, people seem to be ignoring this discussion
why?

A: they can't prove "jesus" existed
B: they can't back up their claims of contemporary accounts of jesus
C" they can't help but resort to forcing us (mainly mel and me) to prove the existence of other historical figures
or is it
D: none of the above?



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   
*doublepost*

[edit on 20-1-2007 by rocknroll]



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
considering that life expectancy was much lower back then, 70 would have been an astronomical age for people to live to

do you get my point?

To be honest, I never really "get" your point at all. Because your point is always misleading from the Truth.

So, you know for a fact that the apostles didn't write the Gospels?
And you know for a fact that nobody lived past the age of 70 back then?
Wow, you must have a time machine.

Me, I have something that you know absolutely nothing about at all...
...faith.



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
However, if you write so long after the events, you will likely make huge errors in details.

Not if you are "divinely" inspired by the Holy Spirit when you write the account down.
If you don't believe this, it is because you are like madness, and don't possess faith.
I'm sorry for both of you that you have no faith to profess.


Originally posted by melatonin
Much psychological research shows that eyewitness testimony made immediately after events can be suspect, just think how this applies 40 years after an event.

LOL! We're not talking about the OJ murder, Jon Benet Ramsey, or the Kennedy assassination.........we're talking about God and His Son, Jesus Christ.
Your logic is amazing.


Originally posted by melatonin
But, as madness says, people just didn't tend to live that long in those days.

Where did you guys buy these time machines?
I want one.



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 06:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
I'm sorry for both of you that you have no faith to profess.


That's OK, RnR, no need to apologise. I don't find it a problem.

I was just trying to not bring magic into the account (i.e. holy ghosts and stuff).



[edit on 20-1-2007 by melatonin]



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
I'm sorry for both of you that you have no faith to profess.



actually
i have faith to profess
i have faith in humanity
faith in my friends
faith in my family
and, to much smaller degree, i have faith in myself



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
I was just trying to not bring magic into the account (i.e. holy ghosts and stuff).


It's not magic....it's God.
Again, disrespect.



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
\actually
i have faith to profess
i have faith in humanity
faith in my friends
faith in my family
and, to much smaller degree, i have faith in myself


LOL! I must be psychic. I knew you were going to say this.
Bwahahahahahaha! Humanity.......whatta laugh!
And when your friends, family and "yourself" let you down, who do you turn to?
And don't ever say you've never let yourself down, because this would be saying you've never ever felt guilty in your life........and guilt is the gift of the Holy Spirit.



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by rocknroll
It's not magic....it's God.
Again, disrespect.


OK, I honestly apologise if you found that disrespectful


Lets call it 'supernatural' then. I was just keeping supernatural actions out of my post.

It's sort of against my nature to mention such things as explanations...




posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:54 PM
link   

It's sort of against my nature to mention such things as explanations...


Really? Just take a look at yourself and the world around you, and see what a miracle it is that anything exists at all.



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by melatonin
Lets call it 'supernatural' then. I was just keeping supernatural actions out of my post.

God is "supernatural",
Isn't that obvious?

Oh, that's right, you don't believe.
Nevermind.

[edit on 20-1-2007 by rocknroll]



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 08:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by thehumbleone

It's sort of against my nature to mention such things as explanations...


Really? Just take a look at yourself and the world around you, and see what a miracle it is that anything exists at all.


well, it's not really a logical argument. If it didn't exist I wouldn't be able to see it.

I don't find such arguments compelling. The best argument for a creator is the fact the cosmological constants are just right, but the idea of a creator with a cosmological constant adjuster (TM) isn't really compelling either. We have a sample of one, maybe other universes do exist with changed constants, at this point, we don't know...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join