Proof That Jesus Of Nazareth Existed?

OFF TOPIC: Wow, so much angst. You sound like a bunch of holier-than-thou religious bigots. Wake the [oops] up and realize why we're here. Part of a discussion is offering facts to support your claims/arguments, and also refuting the claims presented by others. Also, presenting new ideas and joining in the discussion to further support the ideas given.

This is not a place to show how much you know more than the other guy. If so, maybe we should rename the thread to "Cocky Smart mouths square off about Jesus - See how you fare in the carnival of the messiah!" So, let's get back on the "discussion" and quit being so high on your horse, and remember that we are all trying to do the same thing: LEARN AND DISCUSS!

ON TOPIC: Should we mention the many references to the Jesus story being an allegory to the Sun. The story of his life and resurrection, etc has been re-told. The story began with many deities of ancient civilizations (egypt, greece, etc).

I cannot access YouTube from my corporate network, but I can point you toward this video: Zeitgeist (part 1 mainly deals with the Sun and Stars allegory of the Jesus story) I have found a couple of the references to be "off-kilter" with information I found elsewhere, but nonetheless opens us up to the idea where we might do more research.

Check this link for more information regarding the Sun allegory.
Jesus / Sun Allegory

It's interesting to note that most of the places where I have read about this allegory point to a soon-to-come astronomical alignment which involves (if i remember correctly) Sirius, Orion's Belt, Venus (and her "child") to create a Cross in the sky pointing to the Sun. Apparently, this occurred near the "birth" of jesus, and is possibly the basis of the Three Wise Men (Orion's belt) story which "points" to location of the sun. Hopefully this isn't derailing the topic too bad. Carry on my fellow thinkers!

edited for typo

[edit on 10/24/2007 by 12SeVeN34]

reply to post by 12SeVeN34


12SeVeN34 ON TOPIC: Should we mention the many references to the Jesus story being an allegory to the Sun. The story of his life and resurrection, etc has been re-told. The story began with many deities of ancient civilizations (Egypt, Greece, etc).

I cannot access YouTube from my corporate network, but I can point you toward this video: Zeitgeist (part 1 mainly deals with the Sun and Stars allegory of the Jesus story) I have found a couple of the references to be "off-kilter" with information I found elsewhere, but nonetheless opens us up to the idea where we might do more research. Check this link for more information regarding the Sun allegory.
Jesus / Sun Allegory

It's interesting to note that most of the places where I have read about this allegory point to a soon-to-come astronomical alignment which involves (if I remember correctly) Sirius, Orion's Belt, Venus (and her "child") to create a Cross in the sky pointing to the Sun. Apparently, this occurred near the "birth" of Jesus, and is possibly the basis of the Three Wise Men (Orion's belt) story which "points" to location of the sun. Hopefully this isn't derailing the topic too bad. Carry on my fellow thinkers!


Q. One: I wonder if the mixing of SON with SUN is mostly due to our English language? I wonder if this question arises in other tongues where the male child is called a “son” and the nearest star in our sky is called the “Sun” but which both words are not pronounced similarity?

I’m too much a concrete type thinker to be able to “SEE” anything in the sky but stars. The zodiac is not my forte. I also think that on a very clear night you can see a cluster of other galaxies but I may be imagining that. The only time I ever had a “clear” night was during my tour of duty in Korea, 1953-54, where there was NO backlight. (Somewhere on Google it says you can “see” no more than 6,100 stars and that only half at one time as in June and December).

Comment 1. It would seem that to establish the allegory position would first require much knowledge about the people to whom each of the books supporting that concept was written. This is a basic necessity. We must take for granted the author’s would write only what their intended audience would understand. It is not so much what we today want to make those 2,000 year old words say, but rather what did those words say to their readers 2,000 years ago?

Comment 2. I do believe the concept of Life after Death is pure Egyptian. I am not aware of any mention of that concept in the Hebrew Pentateuch.

[edit on 10/27/2007 by donwhite]

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


madnessinmysoul " . . there was actually an argument over whether or not Jesus was divine, There were 4 camps
Jesus is wholly human
Jesus is wholly divine
Jesus is partially human and partially divine
Jesus is 100% human and 100% divine
The decision over the nature of Jesus was decided by committee . .

At the risk of repeating myself, here is my “take” on Jesus. But first a Q. Is the Aramaic word from which we ultimately derive the English “Jesus” not also the same word we derive “Joshua” from?

Judea. After the failed Simon bar Kokhba revolt of 132-135 BCE, Emperor Hadrian renamed the land Syria Palaestina after the Philistines and expanded the land far beyond its earlier extent whish was just around Jerusalem. The former area was probably about 750-1,000 square miles and the latter area was probably 8,000-10,000 square miles. My estimate. [Yet one more dispute for 2007 to resolve.] Herod’s Temple had been destroyed by Vespasian's son Titus Flavius, who led the siege and final assault on Jerusalem after Vespasian had become Emperor.

I do not believe there ever was a Solomon’s Temple. Like the Ark of the Covenant, it was legendary or mythical. I believe Herod’s Temple was the FIRST and ONLY Jewish temple ever in Jerusalem. Even Herod’s Temple was largely made of wood as it is recorded the Romans “burned” it.

The West Wall or Wailing Wall represents early efforts to reinforce the mound of earth we now call the Temple Mount. Without reinforcement, it was feared the regions frequent earthquakes would cause the mound to subside. It is also said by researchers that the West Wall has undergone extensive re-working at least 3 times between Herod and today. It is not a provable proposition to say the West Wall is the LAST remnant of Solomon’s Temple, except when speaking allegorically.

From ca. 320 CE when Emperor Constantine ordered the assembly or “construction” of the canon - the Holy Bible - until the 19th century when the German theologians began the School of Historical Criticism, the Holy Bible was taken to be both literal and true albeit no 2 people could read it and reach the same conclusion on what it actually said or meant. It suited everyone’s purposes however to endow the canon as inerrant, perfect and complete, even though it was impossible to agree on its contents. This imbued those on top with divine power.

There have undoubtedly been many alterations to the earliest texts or writings in order to reach this evolving outcome that passes for Christianity today. Comes first to my mind the colloquy between Jesus and Peter. Even Constantine’s assemblage of carefully selected bishops probably had few if any original documents. It is clear to me that people in the First Century had no concept of a highly centralized hierarchical institution labeled as a Church. All of that came much later.

Emperor Constantine. I have labeled him as the true Founder of Christianity as we know it. And no, I do not accept that Constantine was “converted” to Christianity as in St. Paul or on a bridge. Those are stories for children. I concur with those who say Constantine ADDED Christianity to his repertoire of religions in order to better UNITE his empire. He cared not a whit about any religion. He was an emperor who had killed many men to get to his post. As today, religion is just one more tool of ruler-ship.

Back to Jesus. Nowhere in any of the Holy Books is Jesus called “Jesus of Bethlehem” such as was the custom of that era to identify a person by his place of birth. This was after all, before the time of surnames, which did not come along until post Middle Ages. Although there are many who say Jesus was not a real person, that he was a compilation of the hopes and aspirations of his people who endowed him with the attributes of a god-like man, and who ultimately met his fate while endeavoring to bring his people out of captivity! Moses reborn. Hence Matthew’s account of the haj to Egypt, still the primo non-Roman place in the neighborhood.

Jesus followed John the Baptist as evidenced by His pro forma baptism. The words and dove were added later to the text. Both men wanted Rome OUT of Judea and conservative Judaism IN. I’m thinking Jesus was more akin to the Zealots than either a Pharisee (St. Paul) or a Sadducee. One of Jesus’ first 12 followers was called Simon the Zealot in Luke 6:15 and Acts 1:13. Zealots were First Century Jewish terrorists famous for murdering Jewish collaborators. (Acts is often said to be the second half of the Gospel of Luke. The same author; the complete manuscript may have been divided when a local church divided). Personal aside: I would more likely have been a Sadducee in the First Century if not a Zealot. I, like Greek Epicureans, Sadducees reject the existence of an afterlife, thus denying the Pharisaic doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead. End.

After recruiting a small cadre of devoted or loyal followers (today’s special ops), Jesus then went out to raise an army. They traveled around the countryside speaking to the locals. Now for me it is impossible to believe that Jesus was passively teaching “Love you Neighbor and Obey God.” Note: Jesus is recorded to have said “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” Matthew 22:36-40. ASV.

Au contraire! Jesus was seeking out recruits to overthrown the Roman occupiers of Judea in general and Jerusalem in particular. Whether or not Jesus was worried over the extra-religious practices in the Temple (maybe added to texts later?), He knew well that Jews everywhere considered the Temple to be the focal point of their theocratic society. The man who freed the Temple from uncircumcised Gentiles occupation is the same man all the Jews looked forward to, the true messiah. The same man who can restore the ancient faith of Moses, Abraham and Isaac.

From the Holy Writ we learn that 3,000 or 5,000 men were gathered in the desert near Jerusalem. I for one give little or no credence to the numbers recited in the Holy Bible. Ancient Hebrew does not include numbers. They did have words to express numbers, but those are hard to translate. Sometimes a word may mean only “a lot of people” but the translator feels obliged to assign it a definite value. I assure you the enumerations in Exodus and Numbers are not genuine.

The numbers we use today came from the 16th and 17th centuries. IMO is it best practice to divide most biblical numbers by 100 or by 1000. Only then can the story be made to fit the geography and sharp limitations on the resources required to support large numbers of people. Primarily scarce water but also disposal of human waste is an issue that cannot be ignored. For example, we know a human has 4 liters of water in his body. When that level falls to 2 liters, he dies. If you exert yourself, you will need even more water. Water does not renew itself. water weighs 8.33 pounds per gallon, about 4 liters. It would take 1 man for each 8-10 men to carry water every day which allows none for cooking, washing or waste disposal.

People did not go wandering about the desert in the First Century. In a subsistence society, if you are not a producer and producing, then you are a consumer and consuming. Someone will have to give you (or sell) a liter of water, a half kilo of dried fruit and vegetables and a tea-cup of olive oil. Every day. To furnish this daily ration would have required a lot of money from the Treasury overseen by Judas Iscariot.

Jesus’ plan must have been like this: On a day certain - the day before Passover - the volunteers would have walked to a central meeting place just out of sight of Jerusalem. On foot in hilly Judea a man could make 1-2 miles an hour, 6-10 miles in a day. He would arrive at the rendevous too tired to fight that day. He would need one or preferably 2 days to rest and to get ready for some organized assault on Jerusalem, lest it be just a large crowd or mob. Unarmed, that is, armed only with sticks and stones, Jesus’ followers must have surprise on their side or face certain death at the hands of the Roman soldiers posted in Jerusalem. Untrained as they were, it was likely any who did follow Jesus into Jerusalem broke and ran at the first sight of well armed, highly disciplined Roman soldiers.

Jesus had planned that he and his 12 close followers - later called apostles - would overcome the Temple Police mainly by surprise, and once capturing the Temple, then throw open the city gates to the 3,000 men waiting just outside. Then the general populace, seeing the influx of so many men, would join in the action thereby subduing the superior armed but vastly outnumbered Romans. But alas, the Jesus Plan failed at the Git-Go. The Temple Police may have had good intel about the Jesus Plan. In any case, when Jesus attempted his Temple takeover, it failed. He along with some others, fled to their fall-back position, now known as the Garden of Gethsemane. The Romans, alerted by the Temple Police, soon tracked the Jesus Group to the Garden and captured them after a brief tussle. And as they say, “The rest is history.”


[edit on 10/27/2007 by donwhite]

Originally posted by donwhite
Is the Aramaic word from which we ultimately derive the English “Jesus” not also the same word we derive “Joshua” from?

Yes.

From ca. 320 CE when Emperor Constantine ordered the assembly or “construction” of the canon - the Holy Bible

No such events took place. Constantine had no involvement in the canon.

- until the 19th century when the German theologians began the School of Historical Criticism, the Holy Bible was taken to be both literal and true

Origen and the school of Alexandria certainly proposed that the bible should be read allegorically, and that some portions of it contained no literal meaning (vide. De principiis).

The German Tubingen school is now discredited, and its studies considered too arbitrary and subjective.

There have undoubtedly been many alterations to the earliest texts or writings in order to reach this evolving outcome that passes for Christianity today. Comes first to my mind the colloquy between Jesus and Peter. Even Constantine’s assemblage of carefully selected bishops probably had few if any original documents. It is clear to me that people in the First Century had no concept of a highly centralized hierarchical institution labeled as a Church. All of that came much later.

The letters of Ignatius say otherwise, written ca. 105 AD.

Emperor Constantine. I have labeled him as the true Founder of Christianity as we know it.

This suggests only a poor education, tho.

And no, I do not accept that Constantine was “converted” to Christianity as in St. Paul or on a bridge.

His legislation is entirely pro-Christian. That is fact, not theory. He used to preach sermons to his court, and his courtiers had to think up excuses to get out of them. So is that. There is no evidence for the idea that he was not sincerely enthusiastic. The attack on his sincerity was originally hoked up as part of anti-Hapsburg propaganda in the 1840's. See the recent translation of the "Life of Constantine" by Eusebius, done by Cameron and Hall.

I have snipped the remainder of this post. There is a term for people who make up false stories about others. Please have more respect for yourself than to become a liar.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Originally posted by 12SeVeN34
ON TOPIC: Should we mention the many references to the Jesus story being an allegory to the Sun. The story of his life and resurrection, etc has been re-told. The story began with many deities of ancient civilizations (egypt, greece, etc).

All of this breaks down when examined, tho. It's a crude lie, put out by the malicious in order to deceive the ignorant.

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Here's some info. that may shed some light.

www.tombofjesus.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 7-8-2009 by Sargoth]

Roger Pearse, nothing you say is fact, and stop trying to turn this thread into a slanging match.
This suggests only a poor education.

reply to post by madnessinmysoul


unbelievable.

Im not sure if this thread is about "is Jesus the son of God" or "Did Jesus actually exist in earthly form"

But i ASSUME its the latter.

Histrocity of Jesus

There's some evidence contained therein.

Though im sure all the haters out there will call it nonsense.

its funny how the undeveloped human ego works:

Evidence against you is farce
Lack of evidence isn't needed to prove something you believe in.


Ones Ego is never wrong...except to everyone around them.



You can believe Jesus is not the son of God if you want. In order to believe it, you must have faith. If you don't have faith, well...its your life, do what you want...just stay out of mine.

But you can't disprove the evidence. It's existed everywhere.

Argue about rather or not he's the son of God, fine.

But obviously there was someone who existed back then that, at the very least, a LOT of people THOUGHT was the son of God...therefore they wrote about him.

Follow the link & read up well. It's all there. If you dare.

[edit on 23-12-2009 by Snarf]

Gday,

Originally posted by Snarf
There's some evidence contained therein.

Sure,
evidence of Christians.

But,
No evidence of JESUS :

Josephus - corrupt.
Tacitus - evidence of 2nd Christian beliefs.
Suetonius - not about Jesus.
Pliny - evidence of 2nd Christian beliefs.
Thallus, Phlegon - don't actually mention anything about Jesus, just an eclipse that DID happen.
Talmud - bizarre stories from centuries later


There is NO hard evidence for Jesus, just STORIES.

Originally posted by Snarf
But you can't disprove the evidence. It's existed everywhere.

WHAT evidence?
You didn't cite any.


K.

Originally posted by Alien Abduct
Because Christianity was a new religion it was looked at as a cult. The Government at the time burned documents according to Biblical history.

I have seen a lot of argument that the Bible is one big lie and Jesus never existed. I have also seen remarks about Jesus being a magician of some sort.

If you are going to start a thread, pls cite some sources to support your "lot of argument". I am not aware of any ancient or modern Jewish or Arab historians that have or do deny the physical existence of Jesus of Nazarath. This has never been a principal line of disagreement....

reply to post by Kapyong


See, the problem with people like you is that i could invent a time machine, take you back in time, have you get your picture taken with Jesus Christ, and you'd still say it was fake, that i spiked your drink with some super-hallucinogenic

All we have of ancient history *IS* stories. Why? Because we didnt have video cameras, digital cameras, etc.

We have art, music, literature, etc, all talking about Jesus Christ.

From different religions and different languages.

And still you say no proof exists.

I refuse to argue any longer with a brick wall. You have no interest in exploring the truth, you wish to hide behind a veil of bitter ignorance and be happy.

Enjoy.

Gday,

Originally posted by pumpkinorange
I am not aware of any ancient or modern Jewish or Arab historians that have or do deny the physical existence of Jesus of Nazarath. This has never been a principal line of disagreement....

Really?
Then you haven't studied the subject much.

There have been many writers and historians who have doubted Jesus' existance :

C.F. Dupuis, 1791, Abrege De L'Origine Des Cultes
Robert Taylor, 1829, Diegesis
Bruno Bauer, 1841, Criticism of the Gospel History of the Synoptics
Mitchell Logan, 1842, Christian Mythology Unveiled
David Friedrich Strauss, 1860, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined
Kersey Graves, 1875, The World's Sixteen Crucified Saviours
T.W. Doane, 1882, Bible Myths and their Parallels in Other Religions
Gerald Massey, 1886, Historical Jesus and Mythical Christ
Thomas Whittaker, 1904, The Origins of Christianity
William Benjamin Smith, 1906, Der vorchristliche Jesus
Albert Kalthoff, 1907, The Rise of Christianity
M.M. Mangasarian, 1909, The Truth About Jesus ? Is He a Myth?
Arthur Drews, 1910, The Christ Myth
John M. Robertson, 1917, The Jesus Problem
Georg Brandes, 1926, Jesus – A Myth
Joseph Wheless, 1930, Forgery in Christianity
L.Gordon Rylands, 1935, Did Jesus Ever Live?
Edouard Dujardin, 1938, Ancient History of the God Jesus
P.L. Couchoud, 1939, The Creation of Christ
Alvin Boyd Kuhn, 1944, Who is this King of Glory?
Karl Kautsky, 1953, The Foundations of Christianity
Herbert Cutner, 1950, Jesus: God, Man, or Myth?
Guy Fau, 1967, Le Fable de Jesus Christ


Some modern authors include :
Earl Doherty, Professor G.A. Wells, Robert M. Price, Hermann Detering, Freke and Gandy, P. Alfrani.


The Jesus Myth theory is growing, believers just ridicule the idea, but can't produce any hard and certain evidence for Jesus - just CLAIMS and BOOKS and books about claims and claims about books.

But,
NOT ONE writer claims to have ever MET Jesus, or Mary, or Joseph etc. (just the forged 2 Peter.)


K.

Gday,

Originally posted by Snarf
reply to post by Kapyong

 

All we have of ancient history *IS* stories. Why? Because we didnt have video cameras, digital cameras, etc.

We have art, music, literature, etc, all talking about Jesus Christ.

Just as we have for Hercules, Osiris, Ulysses, Bacchus etc.
Do you believe THEY are real?
Why not?
Why believe Jesus then ?


So,
Why don't you produce some EVIDENCE for Jesus and show me wrong then?

Instead, when I challenged your claims, you abuse me and run away.


K.

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,

Originally posted by pumpkinorange
I am not aware of any ancient or modern Jewish or Arab historians that have or do deny the physical existence of Jesus of Nazarath. This has never been a principal line of disagreement....

Really?
Then you haven't studied the subject much.

Sorry, but no. I am talking about the physical existence of the man named Jesus of Nazarath. Not his claims to be the Christ. Stay on point, pls. Excerpt and quote me claims that the man named such didn't exist.

reply to post by Alien Abduct

You make a huge error if you think Christians rely on historical 'proof's'.

Jesus is said to have only written once and in the presence of antagonists.

"Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not." John 8:6

So all the documents are third person accounts of some kind.

The Gospels you mention are written in a style known as Midrash...
...a Hebrew form of public proclamation...
...a rhetorical device similar to modern homiletic sermons...
...that were later written down and preserved.

Most of the remaining New Testament documents were personal letters directed to specific individuals or groups...
...who were already converted and were wrestling with the new dialectic of Spirit and flesh that happens.

These are not, and never were intended to be 'proofs'...
...and they are certainly not scientific documents...
...although many historical facts contained in them have been objectively verified...
...and there is some contemporary extra-biblical references that reflect on some events.

Christians do not rely on documents...
...Christians are a group of individuals that have come to know 'the Spirit of Jesus'...
...the documents are simply a witness to certain historical events...
...that can awaken the 'faith' that is the first step and the precursor to the reception of the Spirit.

A person who knows the Spirit needs no external proof.

The only reason we use these documents is to establish the 'babes' among us...
...and as a device to awaken faith in others.



[edit on 25/12/09 by troubleshooter]

No the gospels aren't proof that Jesus actually existed. They were written down 70-100 years after his death and noone knows if his disciples actually wrote them.

Gday,

Originally posted by pumpkinorange
Sorry, but no. I am talking about the physical existence of the man named Jesus of Nazarath. Not his claims to be the Christ. Stay on point, pls.

I was.
That's exactly what we are talking about -the existance of Jesus.

Because YOU claimed no-one doubted Jesus' existance.

So I posted a lengthy list of authors who DID exactly that - argue that Jesus did not exist.

This proves your claim was wrong. But then you tried to change the subject to 'Christ' instead of Jesus.

But it's nothing to do with Christ at all.

It's about JESUS not ever existing as a historical person.

Originally posted by pumpkinorange
Excerpt and quote me claims that the man named such didn't exist.

OK -
How about Earl Doherty
"The five Main Articles following this Preamble present the basic case for the non-existence of an historical Jesus."
www.jesuspuzzle.humanists.net...

A whole web site for you to read.
I look forward to your response to that site.

Some more excerpts :

Piece No. 1: A CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE

The Gospel story, with its figure of Jesus of Nazareth, cannot be found before the Gospels. In Christian writings earlier than Mark, including almost all of the New Testament epistles, as well as in many writings from the second century, the object of Christian faith is never spoken of as a human man who had recently lived, taught, performed miracles, suffered and died at the hands of human authorities, or rose from a tomb outside Jerusalem. There is no sign in the epistles of Mary or Joseph, Judas or John the Baptist, no birth story, teaching or appointment of apostles by Jesus, no mention of holy places or sites of Jesus’ career, not even the hill of Calvary or the empty tomb. This silence is so pervasive and so perplexing that attempted explanations for it have proven inadequate.

...

Piece No. 3: REVEALING THE SECRET OF CHRIST

Paul and other early writers speak of the divine Son of their faith entirely in terms of a spiritual, heavenly figure; they never identify this entity called "Christ Jesus" (literally, "Anointed Savior" or "Savior Messiah") as a man who had lived and died in recent history. Instead, through the agency of the Holy Spirit, God has revealed the existence of his Son and the role he has played in the divine plan for salvation. These early writers talk of long-hidden secrets being disclosed for the first time to apostles like Paul, with no mention of an historical Jesus who played any part in revealing himself, thus leaving no room for a human man at the beginning of the Christian movement. Paul makes it clear that his knowledge and message about the Christ is derived from scripture under God’s inspiration.

...

Piece No. 4: A SACRIFICE IN THE SPIRITUAL REALM

Paul does not locate the death and resurrection of Christ on earth or in history. According to him, the crucifixion took place in the spiritual world, in a supernatural dimension above the earth, at the hands of the demon spirits (which many scholars agree is the meaning of "rulers of this age" in 1 Corinthians 2:8). The Epistle to the Hebrews locates Christ’s sacrifice in a heavenly sanctuary (ch. 8, 9). The Ascension of Isaiah, a composite Jewish-Christian work of the late first century, describes (9:13-15) Christ’s crucifixion by Satan and his demons in the firmament (the heavenly sphere between earth and moon). Knowledge of these events was derived from visionary experiences and from scripture, which was seen as a ‘window’ onto the higher spiritual world of God and his workings.

...


K.

Or
M.M. Mangasarian arguing Jesus did not exist :
www.gutenberg.org...


Historian Robert Price argues he didn't exist :
www.amazon.com...


K.


[edit on 27-12-2009 by Kapyong]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Keep that in mind, no matter what the topic is.

Dr. J. Allen Hynek came to a conclusion about ufos and aliens.

Funny even a man of his caliber in science, would come to the conclusion
that they are demonic. Werner Von Braun said what?

That our Govt. was planning a FAKE alien invasion to keep us living in fear.

You can listen to lies, or evidence of the lies, in the light of a truth that fortold such things would come to pass. The Bible is that truth and that light.

Everything that is left to unfold that is prophecy will happen. Just as the
prophecys of the past. God is on a roll and I doubt very much he is going to slow down.
Listen to the hear say of someone who speaks for aliens/demons. Any thing but what has proven it self over and over through thousands of years to be nothing but truth. Woe to those who choose to be foolish
just when it counts the most. Pitiful.
Jesus Christ is Lord.
Nothing can change that.
All these lies are exactly what the Bible says will come. That is why it is written " keep your eyes on the Lord and on him only". So you don't drift.

Snarf

unbelievable.

Absolutly I would love to pick up where you left off partner if I may?


[edit on 27-12-2009 by randyvs]