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.

 

The Evidence For Jesus' Existence Is Nothing But Hearsay

page: 13
27
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
I asked before, and I'll ask again.
What year is it?


You were answered.
You ignored the answer.

What day is it ?
Saturday here, named after the God Saturn.
Therefore, according to your stupid argument, the God Saturn exists.

What about months like June?
Named after the God Juno.
Therefore, according to your stupid argument, the God Juno exists.

What year is it?
Depends who you ask - there are various dating systems used around the world - not that sir_chancealot would ever check the facts.


Iasion




posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lilitu
But every police officer knows if he takes reports from two or more witnesses she will get two or more accounts of what happened. Fact is that eye witness accounts (or first-hand as you put it) are terribly unreliable.


We do not have ANY eye-witness reports.
We have supernatural stories from long afterwards which conflict.

If a policeman asks witnesses about an accident and hears :
* a truck smashed into a blue car in town
* a bicycle was stolen from the mine
* a red car caught fire and burned down a house
* a horse and carriage stopped and blocked traffic

Then he knows these stories do NOT tell an accurate account of one event.

That's what the Gospels are like - completely contradictory.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Do you realize that if we go by your standards then the evidence for Alexander the Great is hearsay as well?


Wrong.
We have contemporary historical accounts of Alex.
We have coins showing his actions.
We have archeology confirming some events.

For Jesus?
None.
Zero.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Parabolic
There were several people in this post arguing as to why there were little or no recorded/ written records of Jesus during the time he was actually alive. I offered a plausible reason 'why,' in that, during this time there were no sophisticated methods for keeping records.


This is complere an utter bull#.
we have many DOZENS of books from around the time of Jesus - Philo, Seneca, Plutarch, Caesar, Pliny, Cicero, etc. etc.



Originally posted by Parabolic
Most stories were passed down through the generations orally via songs, poetry, and narratives. We find Egyptian hieroglyphics written on clay or papyrus, and in early Greek as the predominant record keeping systems.


Bollocks.
You know nothing about history.
Please go study it before repeating any more of this crap.



Originally posted by Parabolic
I'm not confirming or denying that Jesus existed, I'm simply offering a reasonable premise as to why there were little or no surviving historical records of the life of Jesus during the time he was alive.


It's complete nonsense that is the opposite of the facts.
We have a LARGE number of writings from that period.
Parabolic knows nothing about this subject.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Parabolic
Except your premise is neither reasonable nor plausible as the Romans had an advanced system of writing and kept quite accurate records, many of which are known to this day. Please, enlighten me on why you think the Romans could not keep written records.


Why do you keep using bull# words like "advanced" or "real".
What the # is your point?

We DO have Roman writings from that period.
Theye did NOT realy on oral culture.

You are completely and utterly wrong.
You keep saying this nonsense without ANY facts to back you up.
Why?



Originally posted by Parabolic
To say that my premise is neither reasonable nor plausible is logically fallacious, as we'd have to first accept your unsubstantiated appraisal that Roman record keeping was indeed advanced,


What the # is your point?
What EXACTLY does "advanced" mean?
How EXACTLY would that stop Romans recording Jesus?
Why did it NOT stop them recording OTHERS?
Hmm?



Originally posted by Parabolic
and that Romans were the definitive record keepers of the time.


What the #?
Why do they have to be "the definitive record keepers of the time" JUST to have recorded Jesus or the Gospel events?

Parabolic - you have no idea what you are talking about.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
You see, all "evidence" we have the Alexander the Great lived was written about him after his death.


False.
We have contemporary evidence.
Not that you bothered to check the facts (e.g. Esagila.)



Originally posted by NOTurTypical
If we can state with certainty that this evidence rules out the existence of Jesus Christ, then it at that very moment rules out the existence of Alexander the Great.


Wrong.
The evidence for Alex and Jesus are DIFFERENT.
The stories are DIFFERENT.
It's not the same at all.

Alex is a realistic figure.
We have contemporary evidence for Alex.

Jesus is a supernatural God-man.
We have no evidence for him.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

Originally posted by Lilitu
But every police officer knows if he takes reports from two or more witnesses she will get two or more accounts of what happened. Fact is that eye witness accounts (or first-hand as you put it) are terribly unreliable.


We do not have ANY eye-witness reports.
We have supernatural stories from long afterwards which conflict.

If a policeman asks witnesses about an accident and hears :
* a truck smashed into a blue car in town
* a bicycle was stolen from the mine
* a red car caught fire and burned down a house
* a horse and carriage stopped and blocked traffic

Then he knows these stories do NOT tell an accurate account of one event.

That's what the Gospels are like - completely contradictory.


Iasion




I found a number of consistencies. For one example see below from a tax collector and a doctor...Matthew and Luke respectively...

Luke 3:7-9, 16-17
Matt 3:7b-12 Preaching of John the Baptist

Luke 4:1-13a
Matt 4:1-11a Temptation of Jesus

Luke 6:20b-23
Matt 5:3, 6, 4, 11-12 Beatitudes

Luke 6:27-33, 35b-36
Matt 5:44, 39b-40, 42; 7:12; 5:46-47, 45, 48 Love of Enemies

Luke 6:37a, 38c, 39-42
Matt 7:1-2; 15:14; 10:24-25a; 7:3-5 On Judging Others

Luke 6:43-45
Matt 7:16-20 & 12:33-35 On Bearing Fruit

Luke 6:46-49
Matt 7:21, 24-27 House Built on Rock

Luke 7:1-2, 6b-10
Matt 8:5-10, 13 Healing a Centurion's Servant

Luke 7:18-23
Matt 11:2-6 John the Baptist's Questions

Luke 7:24-28, 31-35
Matt 11:7-11, 16-19 Jesus Speaks about John

Luke 9:57-60
Matt 8:19-22 On Following Jesus

Luke 10:2-12
Matt 9:37-38; 10:7-16 Mission of the Seventy

Luke 10:13-16
Matt 11:21-23; 10:40 Woes against Galilean Cities

Luke 10:21-24
Matt 11:25-27; 13:16-17 Thanksgiving to the Father

Luke 11:2-4
Matt 6:9-13 Lord's Prayer

Luke 11:9-13
Matt 7:7-11 Asking and Receiving

Luke 11:14-15, 17-23
Matt 12:22-30 Beelzebul Controversy

Luke 11:24-26
Matt 12:43-45 Return of the Evil Spirit

Luke 11:29-32
Matt 12:38-42 Sign of Jonah

Luke 11:33-35
Matt 5:15; 6:22-23 On Light and Seeing

Luke 11:39-44, 46-52
Matt 23:25-26, 23, 6-7a, 27, 4, 29-31, 34-36, 13 Woes against Pharisees

Luke 12:2-9
Matt 10:26-33; 12:32 Fearing Humans and God

Luke 12:10-12
Matt 12:32; 10:19 Role of the Holy Spirit

Luke 12:22-31, 33-34
Matt 6:25-33, 19-21 Anxiety; Treasure in Heaven

Luke 12:39-40, 42-46
Matt 24:43-51 Watch and Be Ready

Luke 12:51-53
Matt 10:34-36 Divisions in Families

Luke 12:54-56
Matt 16:2-3 Signs of the Times

Luke 12:58-59
Matt 5:25-26 Settling out of Court

Luke 13:18-21
Matt 13:31-33 Mustard Seed and Leaven

Luke 12:23-30
Matt 7:13-14, 22-23; 8:11-12; 20:16 Exclusion from the Kingdom

Luke 13:34-35
Matt 23:37-39 Lament over Jerusalem

Luke 14:16-24
Matt 22:1-10 Parable of the Banquet


Luke 14:26-27
Matt 10:37-38 Carrying the Cross

Luke 14:34-35
Matt 5:13 Parable of Salt

Luke 15:4-7
Matt 18:12-14 Parable of the Lost Sheep

Luke 16:13
Matt 6:24 On Serving Two Masters

Luke 16:16-18
Matt 11:12-13; 5:18, 32 On the Law and Divorce

Luke 17:1, 3b-4
Matt 18:7, 15, 21-22 On Sin and Forgiveness

Luke 17:6
Matt 17:20 Faith Like a Mustard Seed

Luke 17:23-24, 26-27, 30, 33-35, 37
Matt 24:26-27, 37-39; 10:39; 24:40-41, 28 Coming of the Son of Man

Luke 19:12-27
Matt 25:14-30 Parable of the Talents

Luke 22:30
Matt 19:28 Disciples Will Judge Israel



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Heike

Surely God, in his infinite wisdom and all powerfulness, could have seen to it that sufficient evidence would remain of his Son's physical life on Earth to prove to us that that part is real?


Well I'm prety sure that there will be evidence in the after life. If God is real than when our spirits either ascend or descend,then we will have the answer.I don't think the All Mighty is worried about apeasing us by giving us proof about the existence of Christ.


Originally posted by Heike

I notice also that none of the Christians here have addressed my earlier point, which is that true followers of Christ should be able to duplicate the miracles and feats of Jesus - he said so. Why no response?


I would have to take a guess which I percieve as the most logical. In this day and age we are so preoccupied and brainwashed with Television,work,bills,music,internet relationships and the list goes on and on. I would have to believe that our true faith(even the most devout Christian's faith) has been so diluted over the centuries that I see it as virtually impossible. Imagine the contrast in comparison from biblical times to modern day society. As it is they say we barely use 10% of our brains capacity.

Honestly I don't have the answers and don't pretend to know. I seek the mysteries of life as you and everyone else do.I am just open minded and secure enough in my beliefs, through life experiences, to accept and respect others decisions.I'm not gonna force my views on somebody else because, me personally, I don't care or want others to push their agendas on me. Anyhow,if you find the answer,please be kind enough to share it with me, as I will do the same. Peace. DCW

[edit on 5-9-2008 by 19DCW71]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
I found a number of consistencies. For one example see below from a tax collector and a doctor...Matthew and Luke respectively...


I found a number of consistencies between The Hobbit and The Lord of The Rings.

So what?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Iasion
 


Just trying to contribute to the conversation,

that's all...

OT



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:07 PM
link   
There has been much evidence of Jesus, since Jesus left the world...take for example how human life has improved...see below...


Women. In ancient cultures, a wife was the property of her husband. Aristotle said that a woman was somewhere between a free man and a slave. According to the book Reasons for God by Tim Keller (page 249), "It was extremely common in the Greco-Roman world to throw out new female infants to die from exposure, because of the low status of women in society. The church forbade its members to do so. Greco-Roman society saw no value in an unmarried woman, and therefore it was illegal for a widow to go more than two years without remarrying. But Christianity was the first religion to not force widows to marry. They were supported financially and honored within the community so that they were not under great pressure to remarry if they didn't want to. Pagan widows lost all control of their husband's estate when they remarried but the church allowed widows to maintain their husband's estate. Finally, Christians did not believe in cohabitiation. If a Christian man wanted to live with a woman he had to marry her, and this gave women far greater security. Also, the pagan double standard of allowing married men to have extramarital sex and mistresses was forbidden. In all these ways Christian women enjoyed far greater security and equality than did women in the surrounding culture. See Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity." In India, widows were voluntarily or involuntarily burned on their husbands' funeral pyres. Christian missionaries were a major influence in stopping these century-old practices and ideas.



Here's the link should you desire to see even more benefits/evidence
www.faithfacts.org...

OT



[edit on 5-9-2008 by OldThinker]

[edit on 5-9-2008 by OldThinker]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Iasion
 


We have no evidence of him ?

How about the second largest religion in the world. What evidence do you expect to find other than the legacy left by his passage through the world, I doubt we have detailed records from the roman time referring to their occupation of the middle east, nor do we have records from writers at the time wondering where this weird jewish cult with a non existent dead leader came from.

In fact if you look at jewish writers at the time you see them readily admitting that such a man did indeed walk the earth. They where incredibly hostile to him, literally commanding that his name be erased from amongst the jews, even now internally in orthodox jewish circles Yeshua is reffered to as No One (the hebrew word for it escapes me at the moment)

I don't think there can be any doubt Yeshua of Nazeroth existed, whether he was the messiah or not, well that's a totally different story, but was there once a living breathing man whom the bible calls Jesus.

Yes.

Does that validate the new testament or the current incarnation of the christian faith on that alone, in my opinion no, but that's not what this thread is about.

[edit on 5-9-2008 by gYvMessanger]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:14 PM
link   
History is hearsay, hearword, and hearbelief. Most historical figures existed, bar none I can think of.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Ahem! ^^^^^^^

Did I make a point or not?

You see, all "evidence" we have the Alexander the Great lived was written about him after his death.

If we can state with certainty that this evidence rules out the existence of Jesus Christ, then it at that very moment rules out the existence of Alexander the Great.


Wrong. There are letters written from Alexander the Great as well as a ton of evidence that he existed while he was still alive, and not after the fact.

My God man, do a google search before you make such claims.
Why do people make such claims without actually knowing for certain?
Do you just assume things (as you do about Jesus)? Or do you simply think no one will check it out?


LOL!!!!!! The most reputable authority for Alexander the Great comes from "The Life of Alexander" by Plutarch. This was written 4 CENTURIES after his death.:

www.amazon.com...

[edit on 5-9-2008 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Ahem! ^^^^^^^

Did I make a point or not?

You see, all "evidence" we have the Alexander the Great lived was written about him after his death.

If we can state with certainty that this evidence rules out the existence of Jesus Christ, then it at that very moment rules out the existence of Alexander the Great.


Wrong. There are letters written from Alexander the Great as well as a ton of evidence that he existed while he was still alive, and not after the fact.

My God man, do a google search before you make such claims.
Why do people make such claims without actually knowing for certain?
Do you just assume things (as you do about Jesus)? Or do you simply think no one will check it out?


LOL!!!!!! The most reputable authority for Alexander the Great comes from "The Life of Alexander" by Plutarch. This was written 4 CENTURIES after his death.:

www.amazon.com...

[edit on 5-9-2008 by NOTurTypical]


Ok so there was no Jesus or Alexander the Great. Does that satisfy you? Personally I do not need to believe in Alexander for any reason either so who cares if either exsisted. Of course Alexander the great is just a little easier to believe in since his biographies are not filled with David Blaine style magic tricks, talking bushes and snakes, invisible men, giants, angels, people who live centuries long, raising the dead, and on and on. You see, that crazy stuff, that helps kill some credibility.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Azrael75
Of course Alexander the great is just a little easier to believe in since his biographies are not filled with David Blaine style magic tricks, talking bushes and snakes, invisible men, giants, angels, people who live centuries long, raising the dead, and on and on. You see, that crazy stuff, that helps kill some credibility.


Actually, yes there are. lol There are some really, really odd things written about him in his biographies. Supernatural and embellished facts. Not that it matters- it's just funny. It does kind of make a point, though. Historians can at least acknowledge He existed- they just deny all the crazy 'super hero' stories told about him. Skeptics about Jesus can't even do that. They can't say, 'Ok. So He was a genuine historical figure. He just wasn't God, ok?'



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 07:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Do you realize that if we go by your standards then the evidence for Alexander the Great is hearsay as well?


Wrong.
We have contemporary historical accounts of Alex.
We have coins showing his actions.
We have archeology confirming some events.

For Jesus?
None.
Zero.


Iasion
I'm wrong??

Looks like you haven't done your homework:




Much of this confusion can be traced to the oldest available sources of information we have about Alexander. None of these sources are primary, but some of them were written by authors with access to primary resources. These main sources were written by Arrian, Plutarch, Justin, Diodorus and Curtius. The works about Alexander which have been written relying upon these sources are understandably inconsistent with one another, because these oldest sources are themselves inconsistent.


www.dragonrest.net...

"NONE OF THESE SOURCES ARE PRIMARY"

"BECAUSE THESE OLDEST SOURCES ARE THEMSELVES INCONSISTENT."

Like I said before, if we use your same standards for Alexander the Great then we know he didn't exist.

1. No primary sources
2. Inconsistent sources.



[edit on 5-9-2008 by NOTurTypical]



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:07 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I've read similar things as well- and not from Christian sites- that there are no surviving contemporary accounts of Alexander. And many of his biographies date upwards of five centuries after his life.

And the things about the coins? I almost wanted to laugh at that. There are depictions of many figures- both fictional and historical. Physical depictions do not verify anyone's historicity. Like the Harry Potter analogy someone used. There are pictures of him 'doing things' but that doesn't mean he is real. If Christians provided a self portrait of Jesus that dated to 30 A.D. with His bloody fingerprint on it, it would still be denied by the hardcore skeptics. So, I guess they can go play or do whatever it is they do.



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
"NONE OF THESE SOURCES ARE PRIMARY"
"BECAUSE THESE OLDEST SOURCES ARE THEMSELVES INCONSISTENT."
Like I said before, if we use your same standards for Alexander the Great then we know he didn't exist.
1. No primary sources
2. Inconsistent sources.
[edit on 5-9-2008 by NOTurTypical]


What on earth does your magic word "primary" mean here?
Why don't you actually SHOW those "inconsistencies"?
Hmmm?

Why did you simply ignore the contemporary historical evidence of Esagila's astronomical diary? There is no such evidence for Jesus.

Why did you simply ignore the contemporary historical evidence of coins showing Alexander during his life? There is no such evidence for Jesus.

Why did you simply ignore the contemporary historical evidence of cities founded by Alexander during his life? There is no such evidence for Jesus.

Playing word games with the word "primary" does not change the facts :
* we DO have multiple corroborating contemporary historical evidence for Alexander.
* we do NOT have ANYTHING like that for Jesus or the Gospel events.

And what is this nonsense about "inconsistency"?
Hmmm?

Please produce the evidence for these "inconsistencies"
AND
explain why they prove Alexander did not exist.

Alexander was a completely plausible human being, (about whom some wild stories have been told.)

But Jesus is a supernatural god-man who is nothing like normal people. His story is completely IMPLAUSIBLE.

AND, there is NO evidence for him.

It's obvious -
Jesus is a myth.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 5 2008 @ 08:09 PM
link   
I brought it up for a reason, the MOST authoritative source about ATG was written 400 years after his death.

I don't fire off shots unless I know where they are going.


lol



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join