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 did exist, face it!

page: 6
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by whirlwind
reply to post by grover
 



And what was Joshua doing while the sun supposedly stood still?...
Slaughtering people whose only crime was they already occupied the land God was giving to the Jews...(scratches head... hmm... sounds familiar)..
I refuse to believe in a God that condones slaughter...


You equate God with Islam? No one should judge God's actions or question them. Instead of questioning how God could do that it would be better to understand why He did that. Do you believe it was just for the land or perhaps the reason is what was going on in that city. Also, among those named to fight against were people that had mixed with fallen angels. They were an abomination to God. There was reason for what He did.

Joshua 5:14 And He said, "Nay; but as Captain of the host of the Lord am I now come." And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and did worship, and said unto Him, "What saith my Lord unto His servant?"

That was the Angel of the Lord (Christ before His 1st Advent). He held a sword, not a prayer book and He was there to lead the battle. Was it just to take land God gave to the Hebrews?


I refuse to believe in a God who choses to favor some and condemns others...I refuse to believe in a God who would stop the whole planet just so one small group can continue killing...I refuse to believe in that kind of God.


In answer to those statements you must ask yourself why. Why does He condemn some and not others? Why would He stop the planet to accomplish what He wanted done? You made this statement, "The God I have experienced is a God of love. Would that God do something so completely out of character for no reason?

The Book of Joshua is an example to us of how to reach the promised land. It holds many lessons for us during end times.


That is exactly right!!!




posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:14 PM
link   
These modern mega rip off churches and the like seem to have the made sole condition of faith to believe that Jesus suffered, died for our sins, was buried and resurrected. Which is of course the core of the Nicene Creed for sure; but there is so much more to it than that. There is the matter of living the life. These charlatans have deliberately made the faith into a faith of materialism... Jesus will reward you... you were meant to be happy, to prosper etc. and forgotten that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God... to sell all that one owns and give it to the poor and follow me etc. they have forgotten judge not lest ye be judged, to not worry about the mote in your neighbor's eye and be more concerned about the beam in your own; and have turned it into a faith of judgementalism.

Religions are what the disciples do to the teachings of the master once they realize how hard they are to live up to.

I dare say there are very few Christians in the world today. Mother Threasa with her doubts intact was more honest and Christ like than the vast majority I have met including those who insist theirs is the only path to God, regardless of religion.

Oh please spare me your sermons. I was equating nothing to Islam... I was referring to the Jews forcing the Palestinians off their lands.

[edit on 26-8-2007 by grover]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   
source from external source: online wikipaedia
Jesus as a historical person
Main articles: Historical Jesus and Quest for the Historical Jesus
The Historical Jesus is a reconstruction of Jesus using modern historical methods. Most historians consider the accounts of Jesus' life to be historically useful.

Paul Barnett pointed out that "scholars of ancient history have always recognized the 'subjectivity' factor in their available sources" and "have so few sources available compared to their modern counterparts that they will gladly seize whatever scraps of information that are at hand." He noted that modern history and ancient history are two separate disciplines, with differing methods of analysis and interpretation. [64]

In The Historical Figure of Jesus, E.P. Sanders used Alexander the Great as a paradigm—the available sources tell us much about Alexander’s deeds, but nothing about his thoughts. "The sources for Jesus are better, however, than those that deal with Alexander" and "the superiority of evidence for Jesus is seen when we ask what he thought."[65] Thus, Sanders considers the quest for the Historical Jesus to be much closer to a search for historical details on Alexander than to those historical figures with adequate documentation.

Consequently, scholars like Sanders, Geza Vermes, John P. Meier, David Flusser, James H. Charlesworth, Raymond E. Brown, Paula Fredriksen and John Dominic Crossan argue that, although many readers are accustomed to thinking of Jesus solely as a theological figure whose existence is a matter only of religious debate, the four canonical Gospel accounts are based on source documents written within decades of Jesus' lifetime, and therefore provide a basis for the study of the "historical" Jesus. These historians also draw on other historical sources and archaeological evidence to reconstruct the life of Jesus in his historical and cultural context.


[edit] Jesus as myth
Main article: Jesus myth hypothesis
Further information: Jesus Christ and comparative mythology
A few scholars have questioned the existence of Jesus as an actual historical figure. Among the proponents of non-historicity have been Bruno Bauer in the 19th century. The non-historicity thesis was somewhat influential in biblical studies during the early 20th century, and has recently been put forward in popular literature by a number of authors. Arguments for non-historicity have been advanced by George Albert Wells in The Jesus Legend and The Jesus Myth. Popular proponents have included the writers Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy in their books The Jesus Mysteries and Jesus and the Lost Goddess. Other proponents of non-historicity are Robert M. Price and Earl Doherty (The Jesus Puzzle ).

The views of scholars who entirely reject Jesus' historicity are summarized in the chapter on Jesus in Will Durant's Caesar and Christ; they are based on a suggested lack of eyewitness, a lack of direct archaeological evidence, the failure of certain ancient works to mention Jesus, and some similarities between early Christianity and contemporary mythology.[66]

Michael Grant stated that the view is derived from a lack of application of historical methods:

…if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. ... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.[67]
Overall, the unhistoricity theory is regarded as effectively refuted by almost all Biblical scholars and historians[68],[69] & [70].

en.wikipedia.org...

I think the topic is, "Was Jesus an historical figure????"

[edit on 8/26/2007 by janasstar]



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 



These modern mega rip off churches and the like seem to have the made sole condition of faith to believe that Jesus suffered, died for our sins, was buried and resurrected. Which is of course the core of the Nicene Creed for sure; but there is so much more to it than that. There is the matter of living the life. These charlatans have deliberately made the faith into a faith of materialism...


You are correct. Not all, but many churches seem to be as you depict them. The materialism is terrible. They equate "planting seeds" with giving money, not spreading His Word, as was intentioned, and as stated in the Bible.

Belief in Him is the way to eternal life but how you live your life is of such importance too.

James 2:14 What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
15.If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16.And one of you say unto them, "Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled;" not withstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?
17.Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone
.

Helping others is of great importance but that doesn't just mean to feed their body but also their soul - give them their daily bread, His Word.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by open mind
I am fed up with people denying jesus' existence, whether you are religous or not their are plenty of non religious sources from people that we KNOW exist, claiming the Jesus existed.


o right, well since you say so. I BELIVE


nah im just kidding, who cares if he excisted or not, what good is that going to do knowing that right now ? Every one has diferent opinions, "Face it" and move on.


Take Care, Vix



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
These modern mega rip off churches and the like seem to have the made sole condition of faith to believe that Jesus suffered, died for our sins, was buried and resurrected. Which is of course the core of the Nicene Creed for sure; but there is so much more to it than that. There is the matter of living the life. These charlatans have deliberately made the faith into a faith of materialism...


You've got that part right. (Those are Wolves in Sheep's clothing), some of them. Some are just foolish and God said they will be held accountable more than the lay-person for starving the flock while getting rich.


Jesus will reward you... you were meant to be happy, to prosper etc. and forgotten that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God...


O.K. Part of that is true. Jesus does "reward" us here sometimes in many different ways. He said if you love me, he and the Father would come to us and manifest his love towards us. It's joy unspeakable and full of glory! That doesn't mean money. The part about the camel... there is a custom for caravans going through the "Eye of the needle" gate in Jerusalem that they would have to unpack thier camels and have them crawl through the gate before re-packing them on the other side. Jesus does not command us to give away "everything" when we become christians, but to provide for the orphans and the widows and our brothers in need and to be "willing" to give anything for someone who needs it.


to sell all that one owns and give it to the poor and follow me etc.


Jesus told that to the rich young ruler, because he thought he could follow the ten commandments a little and love his wealth and status more than God. Jesus knew his heart.

[qote] they have forgotten judge not lest ye be judged, to not worry about the mote in your neighbor's eye and be more concerned about the beam in your own; and have turned it into a faith of judgementalism.

Jesus finished by saying "thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
So many times people forget that part.




posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Wow, where did you find his bones? Did he have his dog tags with him?

Seriously though - there is no REAL evidence. If there was it would be common knowledge. Besides, what difference would it make. Those who believe would be like "told ya so" Those who don't would say "Prove that it is proof of Jesus"



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by open mind
 


What I also say about people who bash Jesus/religion over your head is that they are trying to convince themselves as much as you. A person who is secure in their religion doesn't feel get upset at the thought that you don't believe,because it doesn't change the way they feel.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover

Originally posted by janasstar
reply to post by janasstar
 

Most people commonly know that the bible itself is an historical document.


The Bible is NOT a historical document... it is an accumulation of writings from a variety of hands and times, some mutually exclusive or contradictory with many different revisions.

If you have any doubts look at the many different versions of the books of the Bible in the Dead Sea scrolls collection.


I guess we could say the same for our American History Books then. Columbus didn't discover America. I think it was already occupied when he got here. And oh boy! All the lies to the Indians (Native Americans).



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
THAT is extremely sloppy logic and a very poor analogy.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 02:22 PM
link   
has anyone here read any of Acharya S's books? The Christ Conspiracy" is a good start, she also wrote a book, "the Suns' of God" after reading those books, it really seems to me that there was no actual dude named J. Christ.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ralphino
has anyone here read any of Acharya S's books? The Christ Conspiracy" is a good start, she also wrote a book, "the Suns' of God" after reading those books, it really seems to me that there was no actual dude named J. Christ.


Along the same lines but better, The Two Babylons
it looks like it's devoted to catholicism, but it details many religions!



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ralphino
has anyone here read any of Acharya S's books? The Christ Conspiracy" is a good start, she also wrote a book, "the Suns' of God" after reading those books, it really seems to me that there was no actual dude named J. Christ.


You're absolutely correct! His name was not J. Christ! His middle initial wasn't H either.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
THAT is extremely sloppy logic and a very poor analogy.


I could say that in reference to all the remarks made against the bible.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 04:47 PM
link   
That is most certainly not true. There has been over a century and a half now of structural analysis of the Bible, of the different hands that wrote it, their time periods and of the parallel texts such as those found with the dead sea scrolls, much if not all of it done by linguists and scholars of history.

I would take these over the "work" of the so called scholars at the creation science websites and others any day.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


Then I would say, "That's your opinion, and your entitled to it."



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Choosing religion is the easy option!!!!!!



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by janasstar
Most people commonly know that the bible itself is an historical document.



A "historical document"?

In other words - a very old document which appears to tell a history of ancient times. There are many such documents, of varying quality - but no such ancient book is true just because some believer, then or now, CLAIMS it to be true.

All old writings must be evaluated by all the methods at our disposal. Christians sometimes try to argue that ancient documents can be presumed to be true, unless proven otherwise - sometimes even invoking the irrelevant phrase "innocent until proven guilty" or even invoking a supposed law of Aristotle.
Well, this is just not true - no historian presumes an ancient book to be true, and certainly not religious works, and nor did Aristotle say so. Rather all ancient writings are criticised and compared and analysed carefully to see what can be considered reliable, and what is myths and legends or lies or exaggeration or just plain error.

Consider some other ancient works -

* the Golden Ass of Apuleius -
this "historical document" tells the story of how Apuleius turned into an Ass and met the gods face to face. It dates to the very same period as the Gospels, is set in historical places and includes historical figures and events. It has speeches and stories and miracles and divine events, including an EMPTY TOMB scene!. In short it is very similar the Gospels.
eserver.org...

* the Iliad -
this "historical document" is famous and very well attested indeed. This work was seminal in Greek culture (in ancient Greece "getting an education" meant learning Homer) and includes real places and realistic people - to the Greeks, Homer was like the Bible.
classics.mit.edu...

Both of these writings are similar to the Gospels and are similarly true - i.e. not particularly true at all. In other words being a "historical document" means nothing about a book's truthfulness.


Iasion



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 05:05 PM
link   
I haven't posted here in a long time, but I just want to throw my opinion out there.

In a world where the demons walk the Earth, where the people who have the power are using it to destroy our link with God, where wars are waged and lives are lost because of these people, I find it hard not to believe in Jesus and God.
I've read a lot of crap on ATS over my 4-5 years coming here and I rarely if ever post. I find it miraculous that people will do their very best to believe in something so vague and without any substantiated proof such as Reptilian aliens or a base on the dark side of the moon from blurred NASA images, but then deny the very existance of the most influential person to ever walk the Earth. Why? Because his name is associated with a belief? Religion? Try your hardest to be one of those atheists who will stop at nothing to push their beliefs but you're only doing their work for them.

To think of the many people here to claim religion to be responsible for all the wars in the world all the famine and all the corruption are using it as a scapegoat to be sacrificed according to their overlords wishes. Human nature is to blame for all the wars around the world. The difference of our skin was enough to cause genocide. If there was no belief system in the history of man believe me, we would find something to fight over. It always facinates me to hear the notion that if you're slightly intelligent you must be atheist because those who believe in a God are brainwashed idiots who'll believe anything. I find it to be quite the opposite. Those who cannot see the relationship of science and spirituality will forever be in doubt.

It is easy to get caught up in the daily happenings of your world and completely miss what is going on right now. This site has a wealth of information, and many of it corrosponds one way or another back to the bible. Such topics as 9/11, NWO, and the erosion of the American constitution as well as the NAU. It has been all foretold in the book of revelation and it is coming true right before your eyes word for word. How long will you deny such accuracy? Until the Reptillian man named Cheney decides to take off his mask and have a good laugh?

The reason such topis like these get to me so much is because of the empathy I feel for all living things, and those people who come here and start shouting "LOLOMGZEIGEIST" (Despite almost all of it being revealed to be half truths and outright lies) have really lost their way in being in touch with spirituality. To think that evil is winning and there is nothing I can do about it upsets me, and the thought of sitting idlely by because everyone is entitled to their beliefs is even more upsetting. There is nothing more I would like than to live in peace here on Earth and win this war on our souls just like the rest of you. But to engage in such discussions about whether or not Jesus existed will most definitely bring out the worst in both sides.



posted on Aug, 26 2007 @ 05:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
The issue is not whether Jesus or any other Biblical figure ever existed, it is how they existed. Even if Jesus was a fictitious character made up by the authors of the Gospels, significant portions of his character had to be based on real people that were living and teaching at the same time and place as Jesus.


Rubbish.
The Gospels stories are based on the Tanakh and pagan literature.


Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Let us use Homer Simpson from the Simpsons as an example. We all agree Homer Simpson is not a real person. This does not mean that Homer Simpson does not exist at all. In fact, there are thousands of Homer Simpsons out there who eat donuts, drink beer, are fat, and balding. The real Homer Simpsons of the world served as a basis for the fictional character.


Right.

So you are saying that Jesus is JUST AS REAL as Homer Simpson.



Originally posted by hotpinkurinalmint
Similarly, even if Jesus is a fictional character, we cannot discount him as completely the figment of the gospel authors' imaginations. Just as Simpsons writers base Homer's character largely on real people, the gospel writers too based Jesus on a real person or real people.


What?
Are you saying ALL fictional caharacters are real?

So,
Jesus is just as real as Luke Skywalker?


Iasion


[edit on 26-8-2007 by Iasion]

[edit on 26-8-2007 by Iasion]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join