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: 27
27
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion
Wake up, Jeff !
This is a KNOWN FORGERY.
Another person who doesn't bother to check the facts first.
Iasion

Who was the first person that didn't check the facts?

Your proof of him not existing is very weak.

Could you possibly give evidence of the archaeological digs being bogus and that they did NOT support the evidence in the bible?

[edit on 12/9/2008 by shearder]




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion
I myself, DO believe in Christ.
(shortened)


Ok now that's a great contradiction wouldn't you say?

You have been debunking "Christ" in prior threads and now YOU say you believe in him.

Have you made up your mind yet? Who does exist - in your mind? Who did exist?

I am not knocking you - i find it interesting though.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   
I am going to shortcut this entire discussion.

Lee Strobel wrote a book called "The Case For Christ". When he started the book, he was an atheist. He decided that he was going to use the (U.S.) federal evidentiary rules as an arbiter of whether the information could be included. He knew them pretty well, considering he was an attorney at the time.

He came to the conclusion, that if he had to go before a federal jury, there was more than enough evidence THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTED IN A FEDERAL COURTROOM to prove that Jesus existed, and that he performed miracles.

Read it, then get back with me.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wildbob77
If you go back 500 years how much evidence is there to prove that your ancestors existed?
In my case, my ancestors that I can link to didn't have much wealth and/or status. I don't have anything that they produced. I don't have any writings about them.
But, I'm pretty sure that they existed.


Has anyone ever doubted your, or my, ancestors existed?
Is it even POSSIBLE for them not to have existed?
Are people influencing policy based on preaching from an ancestor who may not have existed?

No.

Completely irrelevent.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
Iasion, have you read The Bible Unearthed by Israel Finkelstein (Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University) and Neil Silberman (Director of the Ename Centre for Public Archaeology and Heritage Presentation)?
If you have, what did you think of it?


It's a great work, popular and highly influential, generally accurate and informative.

Although they do still seem to fudge a bit about some sources being as far back as David's time - based on ye olde "oral tradition".


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by shearder
Like where elsewhere? Northpole?


Like where Philo wrote e.g. - Alexandria (and/or Jeruselam.)
You seem to be arguing that a fire in ROME stopped ANYONE ANYWHERE else in the world from writing about Jesus - such as in the region where Jesus allegedly lived !

What poppycock!



Originally posted by shearder
Why should i pretend? How was it proven, conclusively, to be a fraud?


Yes.
Proven.
Conclusively.
To be a fraud.

Where have you been the last few decades?
Mars?



Originally posted by shearder
Yeah, and i am pretty good at that - trust me. Ok let me approach this from a different angle; let's consider that the bible had 60 odd authors.
Those that did write about Jesus were all smoking something?


Do you think 60 odd authors wrote about Jesus?
The actual figure is about 10 (Paul, James, John, Jude, Peter, Mark, Luke, Matthew, John.)
Have you ever looked at the contents of a Bible?

Not one of those books were written by anyone who met any Jesus. Many of them were written by others.



Originally posted by shearder
Those that did NOT meet him based writings on what was passed down to them - word of mouth. Think that is possible? So all the people that passed this information down were all deluded? If writings originated in 1950 then i can understand. BUT reference was made, to prove his existence, not too long after his death. See where i am?


No they weren't.
The early references - Paul and the early NT books - are all about the spiritual Christ. No mention of a Jesus of Nazareth, no mention of dates, places or people. No Mary, Joseph, Pilate, Lazarus, Bethlehem, Nazareth, miracles, healings .. none.

Nothing clear about a person Jesus existing can be found in Paul or the early NT books - certainly nothing anyone could argue about.

Then,
after two wars with the Romans - we start to see the Gospels appear - in the early mid 2nd century. By late 2nd century, everyone knows the Gospels and 4 of them are chosen and finally named (by Irenaeus.)


Iasion


[edit on 12-9-2008 by Iasion]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
I can't believe you actually used this? This does not prove anything either way - wouldn't you say? But if you really, i mean really, think about it - there sure is a HELL of a lot of information that backs up his existence - right?


Wrong.
You guys keep SAYING there is so much evidence.
Where is it?
None of the examples stand up to scrutiny.

If there is SO MUCH evidence - why is NONE of it a slam-dunk?
Why do apologists have to bring in such lame examples a Thallus and Phlegon, or Suetonius, or Mara bar Serapion - evidence, if you can call it that, which is as WEAK as water. Nothing solid anywhere.



Originally posted by shearder
Yes not absolute evidence. But isn't it weird that people were recorded worshiping "Christ"? This Christ, by biblical records, was also Jesus. Doesn't take a scientist to realise something was up with all these people worshiping someone called Christ. No?


Weird that people worshipped a God?
Not weird at all.

What's weird is your insistence that this is proof of a historical person Jesus when it says nothing of the sort. It's about people singing HYMNS to a God! How on earth does that mean the God was really a man who existed?
How?
Why?



Originally posted by shearder
And people all made up the same stories and they were recorded because why? It wasn't important to them? Or this "so called" Christ was just a cool name that people used? These writers who were supposedly "credible" were willing to write a whole lot of BS and blow there credibility?


Paul created the core story about Iesous Christos the divine being.
Long afterwards 'Mark' wrote a story based on it.
Others copied this story of Jesus.
Others wrote about it.
Others believed it.

Did Tolkein blow his credibility?
Did Homer?




Originally posted by shearder
Then how about this?


An opinion from some guy?
Worthless.
Show some actual examples of Chrestus used for Christ and I might agree.

Anyway -
was Jesus in Rome causing disturbance in the 40s?
Chrestus seems to have been.



Originally posted by shearder
Whose scrutiny?


Posters in this thread, myself included.



Originally posted by shearder
I think there is not enough evidence, regardless at how long we make this thread, to prove he didn't exist.


How could there be evidence he DIDN'T ?

If YOU believed he existed, it's up to YOU to give evidence, otherwise Jesus should be considered a myth.




Originally posted by shearder
the evidence found at archaeological digs supports, ACCURATELY, information in the bible. Or, possibly those archaeologists were also smoking something? Same stuff as the guys writing the bible?


There is NO archeological evidence for Jesus or the Gospels events.
None.
It's you with the smoking problem, methinks.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
2008 years from WHAT EVENT?


You DO realise that the year is WRONG, don't you?

You do realise that when the A.D. system was created CENTURIES after the alleged Jesus, Little Dennis got it wrong!

The date of Jesus birth, even according to Christians, is NOT 1 A.D.

The fact that the dating system is WRONG, shows that believe in Jesus is WRONG.


(I see sir_chancealot will never address the issue of month and day names, so I thought I'd take another tack.)


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
Who was the first person that didn't check the facts?


You.


Originally posted by shearder
Your proof of him not existing is very week.


How CAN there be proof of someone NOT existing?
Can YOU prove Bacchus does NOT exist?
What poppycock.

If YOU think he existed, then YOU better produce some evidence, else we can conclude Jesus was myth.



Originally posted by shearder
Could you possibly give evidence of the archaeological digs being bogus and that they did NOT support the evidence in the bible?


What the ?
There are NO digs which support the existence of Jesus, nor the Gospel events.

None.
What on earth are you on about?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
Ok now that's a great contradiction wouldn't you say?


No.
You just don't understand.

Christ exists - a spiritual being, or entity, or energy - perhaps Paul's Christos is what we call our "soul" now - who knows.

But,
Jesus of Nazareth did NOT exist as a historical person.

Tell me you CAN grasp the distinction, shearder?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
I am going to ask for the third time. And so far, no one has answered me.

What year is it again?

In answering that question, you'll have all the proof you need.


Why it is the year 2008 CE, good sir. Did you hit your head? Amnesia is a serious condition which should be checked.


2008 years from WHAT EVENT?


About 2000 years from the time that a fable became popular, and the ignorant masses took it as fact, as they had no resources to check for themselves.
What's your point?



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
I am going to shortcut this entire discussion.


*yawn*


Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Lee Strobel wrote a book called "The Case For Christ".


Which has been thoroughly debunked by Earl Doherty, here :
jesuspuzzle.humanists.net...



Originally posted by sir_chancealot
When he started the book, he was an atheist.


No he wasn't.
He lied.



Originally posted by sir_chancealot
He decided that he was going to use the (U.S.) federal evidentiary rules as an arbiter of whether the information could be included.


Completely irrelevent to the subject at hand.
We are arguing history.
Not a court case.



Originally posted by sir_chancealot
He came to the conclusion, that if he had to go before a federal jury, there was more than enough evidence THAT WOULD BE ACCEPTED IN A FEDERAL COURTROOM to prove that Jesus existed, and that he performed miracles.


A conclusion which is both wrong, and irrelevent.



Originally posted by sir_chancealot
Read it, then get back with me.


I did read it.
I did get back.
It's bollocks.

Such is the mind of the believer.

In sir_chancealot's mind, no-one could POSSIBLY have read it, because if they HAD, they would agree with him, because sir_chancealot KNOWS everyone WILL agree with him if they read his favourite believer's book.

In the addled mind of a believer, the ONLY reason a person could disagree is because he hasn't read his favourite believer's book yet.

In sir_chancealot's mind, all he has to do is MENTION Stobel, and everyone will read it and instantly be convinced.

Sir_chancealot cannot even imagine the possibility that people could actually read his favoured book and disagree with him - oh no !

Because that would mean the book might be wrong.
Which would mean he might be wrong.
And he cannot even admit such a thing is possible.


Such is the mind of the apologist.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by shearder
 


no - he has not - try reading his posts

he has questioned the EVIDENCE that christ existed

i am going to make the wild assumption that he nelieves in jesus based on faith alone



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

Like where Philo wrote e.g. - Alexandria (and/or Jeruselam.)
You seem to be arguing that a fire in ROME stopped ANYONE ANYWHERE else in the world from writing about Jesus - such as in the region where Jesus allegedly lived !

What poppycock!
Nope, not arguing that at all. You have lost my point.


Yes.
Proven.
Conclusively.
To be a fraud.

Where have you been the last few decades?
Mars?

That does not prove to me it was proven to be a fraud. That i was possibly on Mars is for a different thread. But this has to do with how they proved it was a fraud. There were only a few cases where it was examined. The last was when there was some sort of technologically advanced mechanism of testing. Not to mention 30 minutes
. The bible supports the markings on the shroud. So either it is real OR it was done by a very artistic doctor or someone who knew how the body works VERY VERY well.


Do you think 60 odd authors wrote about Jesus?
The actual figure is about 10 (Paul, James, John, Jude, Peter, Mark, Luke, Matthew, John.)
Have you ever looked at the contents of a Bible?
Not one of those books were written by anyone who met any Jesus. Many of them were written by others.

Again you missed the point. It goes hand in hand with what was written about - yes, not just Jesus - other events are ALSO in the bible. So they too must be ALL wrong because all events were not personally observed, in the 66 books, by most of the authors.

There is more proof that he did exist that didn't exist. So if we are going to say AH but they didn't record a "Jesus" only a Christ but again, "Jesus" existed - a rose is still a rose by any other name.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
The bible supports the markings on the shroud. So either it is real OR it was done by a very artistic doctor or someone who knew how the body works VERY VERY well.


The Bible is so vague you can, and people do, literally use it to prove anything and everything.


Originally posted by shearder
There is more proof that he did exist that didn't exist. So if we are going to say AH but they didn't record a "Jesus" only a Christ but again, "Jesus" existed - a rose is still a rose by any other name.


There is no proof of Jesus at all. There is proof that there was a sect of Gnostics who worshipped a saviour called "Christos" but that does not mean Jesus existed as you believe he did.

The Bible is also the worst kind of thing to present as evidence because it clearly an agenda; to make you like it. Aside from the entire OT not actually happening, it appears that most of the NT is complete shash too.

Israel Finklestein and numerous other archeologists have dug around in the Middle East for years and come to the conclusion that there is no evidence to support any of it.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by ignorant_ape
 


OK. I give up - you read everything hence your comment. Perhaps 1. read the title and 2. read his comment - again


He doesn't exist. Never has. There you go. Now you guys can sleep tonight.

A famous saying springs to mind...

And guys, just because you cannot find something on the internet to either back up or deny fact doesn't mean it didn't, or doesn't, exist. But you do realize that? Yes?


[edit on 12/9/2008 by shearder]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
The Bible is so vague you can, and people do, literally use it to prove anything and everything.

You can use that.



Originally posted by shearder
(shortened) - a rose is still a rose by any other name.
Originally posted by C.C.BenjaminThere is no proof of Jesus at all. There is proof that there was a sect of Gnostics who worshipped a saviour called "Christos" but that does not mean Jesus existed as you believe he did.

You did read that didn't you?


The Bible is also the worst kind of thing to present as evidence because it clearly an agenda; to make you like it. Aside from the entire OT not actually happening, it appears that most of the NT is complete shash too.

You surely don't believe YOU just said this... do you?? The Bible was not only written after Jesus, Christ, etc etc etc, it was written between 1500B.C. and 100A.D. by people from Africa, Europe and Asia. It was also not written by only one person with an "agenda". It also contains a number of different books with MANY different messages including subjects like theology etc.


Israel Finklestein and numerous other archeologists have dug around in the Middle East for years and come to the conclusion that there is no evidence to support any of it.
Cool. We leave it there then


I can guarantee that had the Baghdad batteries not been found we would also believe modern man invented electricity. Do you get my point? Yes, off topic - it isn't about these items. But, there is a point that I hope you get.


[edit on 12/9/2008 by shearder]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 08:51 AM
link   
MOYERS: But aren’t many visionaries and even leaders and heroes close to the edge of neuroticism?

CAMPBELL: Yes, they are.

Tête à Tête

MOYERS: How do you explain that?

CAMPBELL: They’ve moved out of the society that would have protected them, and into the dark forest, into the world of fire, of original experience. Original experience has not been interpreted for you, and so you’ve got to work out your life for yourself. Either you can take it or you can’t. You don’t have to go far off the interpreted path to find yourself in very difficult situations. The courage to face the trials and to bring a whole new body of possibilities into the field of interpreted experience for other people to experience – that is the hero’s deed.

CAMPBELL: The reference of the metaphor in religious traditions is to something transcendent that is not literally any thing. If you think that the metaphor is itself the reference, it would be like going to a restaurant, asking for the menu, seeing beefsteak written there, and starting to eat the menu.

For example, Jesus ascended to heaven. The denotation would seem to be that somebody ascended to the sky. That’s literally what is being said. But if that were really the meaning of the message, then we have to throw it away, because there would have been no such place for Jesus literally to go. We know that Jesus could not have ascended to heaven because there is no physical heaven anywhere in the universe. Even ascending at the speed of light, Jesus would still be in the galaxy, Astronomy and physics have simply eliminated that as a literal, physical possibility, But if you read "Jesus ascended to heaven" in terms of its metaphoric connotation, you see that he has gone inward – not into outer space but into inward space, to the place from which all being comes, into the consciousness that is the source of all things, the kingdom of heaven within. The images are outward, but their reflection is inward. The point is that we should ascend with him by going inward. It is a metaphor of returning to the source, alpha and omega, of leaving the fixation on the body behind and going to the body’s dynamic source.

MOYERS: Aren’t you undermining one of the great traditional doctrines of the classic Christian faith – that the burial and the resurrection of Jesus prefigures our own?

CAMPBELL: That would be a mistake in the reading of the symbol. That is reading the words in terms of prose instead of in terms of poetry, reading the metaphor in terms of the denotation instead of the connotation.

MOYERS: And poetry gets to the unseen reality.

CAMPBELL: That which is beyond even the concept of reality, that which transcends all thought. The myth puts you there all the time, gives you a line to connect with that mystery which you are.

Shakespeare said that art is a mirror held up to nature. And that’s what it is. The nature is your nature, and all of these wonderful poetic images of mythology are referring to something in you. When your mind is simply trapped by the image out there so that you never make the reference to yourself, you have misread the image.

The inner world is the world of your requirements and your energies and your structure and your possibilities that meets the outer world. And the outer world is the field of your incarnation. That’s where you are. You’ve got to keep both going. As Novalis said, "The seat of the soul is there where the inner and outer worlds meet."

MOYERS: In classic Christian doctrine the material world is to be despised, and life is to be redeemed in the hereafter, in heaven, where our rewards come. But you say that if you affirm that which you deplore, you are affirming the very world which is our eternity at the moment.

CAMPBELL: Yes, that is what I’m saying, Eternity isn’t some later time. Eternity isn’t even a long time. Eternity has nothing to do with time. Eternity is that dimension of here and now that all thinking in temporal terms cuts off. And if you don’t get it here, you won’t get it anywhere. The problem with heaven is that you will be having such a good time there, you won’t even think of eternity. You’ll just have this unending delight in the beatific vision of God. But the experience of eternity right here and now, in all things, whether thought of as good or as evil, is the function of life.

CAMPBELL: This is an absolute necessity for anybody today. You must have a room, or a certain hour or so a day, where you don’t know what was in the newspapers that morning, you don’t know who your friends are, you don’t know what you owe anybody, you don’t know what anybody owes to you. This is a place where you can simply experience and bring forth what you are and what you might be, This is the place of creative incubation. At first you may find that nothing happens there. But if you have a sacred place and use it, something eventually will happen.

MOYERS: So the experience of God is beyond description, but we feel compelled to try to describe it?

CAMPBELL: That’s right. Schopenhauer, in his splendid essay called "On an Apparent Intention in the Fate of the Individual," points out that when you reach an advanced age and look back over your lifetime, it can seem to have had a consistent order and plan, as though composed by some novelist. Events that when they occurred had seemed accidental and of little moment turn out to have been indispensable factors in the composition of a consistent plot. So who composed that plot? Schopenhauer suggests that just as your dreams are composed by an aspect of yourself of which your consciousness is unaware, so, too, your whole life is composed by the will within you. And just as people whom you will have met apparently by mere chance became leading agents in the structuring of your life, so, too, will you have served unknowingly as an agent, giving meaning to the lives of others, The whole thing gears together like one big symphony, with everything unconsciously structuring everything else. And Schopenhauer concludes that it is as though our lives were the features of the one great dream of a single dreamer in which all the dream characters dream, too; so that everything links to everything else, moved by the one will to life which is the universal will in nature.

It’s a magnificent idea – an idea that appears in India in the mythic image of the Net of Indra, which is a net of gems, where at every crossing of one thread over another there is a gem reflecting all the other reflective gems. Everything arises in mutual relation to everything else, so you can’t blame anybody for anything. It is even as though there were a single intention behind it all, which always makes some kind of sense, though none of us knows what the sense might be, or has lived the life that he quite intended.

MOYERS: And yet we all have lived a life that had a purpose. Do you believe that?

CAMPBELL: Wait a minute. Just sheer life cannot be said to have a purpose, because look at all the different purposes it has all over the place. But each incarnation, you might say, has a potentiality, and the mission of life is to live that potentiality. How do you do it,’ My answer is, "Follow your bliss." There’s something inside you that knows when you’re in the center, that knows when you’re on the beam or off the beam, And if you get off the beam to earn money, you’ve lost your life. And if you stay in the center and don’t get any money, you still have your bliss.

MOYERS: I like the idea that it is not the destination that counts, it’s the journey.

CAMPBELL: Yes. As Karlfried Graf Durckheim says, "When you’re on a journey, and the end keeps getting further and further away, then you realize that the real end is the journey."

The Navaho have that wonderful image of what they call the pollen path. Pollen is the life source, The pollen path is the path to the center. The Navaho say, "Oh, beauty before me, beauty behind me, beauty to the right of me, beauty to the left of me, beauty above me, beauty below me, I’m on the pollen path,"

MOYERS: Eden was not, Eden will be.

CAMPBELL: Eden is. "The kingdom of the Father is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it."

MOYERS: Eden is – in this world of pain and suffering and death and violence?

CAMPBELL: That is the way it feels, but this is it, this is Eden. When you see the kingdom spread upon the earth, the old way of living in the world is annihilated. That is the end of the world, The end of the world is not an event to come, it is an event of psychological transformation, of visionary transformation. You see not the world of solid things but a world of radiance.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:05 AM
link   
reply to post by sir_chancealot
 



As I recall when I read The Case for Christ, I got the definate impression that lee Strobel most definately struggled around the topic of Josephus.Ie Strobel accepting that Josephus had been doctored and probably by a christian in order to create evidence of christ.

The case for christ did not impress me in the least as any sort of case for anything, I was not suprised to read strobel desperately try and make facts fit.


Interestingly enough I was given this book by a christian who had baught it to prove to me that the Jesusgod had some sort of extrabiblical historicity. Needless to say the dude who gave me the book had not actually read it himself but had acted upon the christian premise, " if another christian who souds like he knows what he's talking about said it's true then it must be".

Lee Stroble proved Jack# to anyone but himself and other gullable believers.


I like to live in a nicely decorated house but am totally ignorant to colour schemes, if my ex wife had claimed beige is beautiful who the hell was I to no accept what she told me,. My life would have been hell if I'd asked my neighbours wife he opinnion of beige LOL.


Again, there is no evidence other than hearsay to prove the reality of the jesugod, and christians are too afraid of hell to question why they believe what they do.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 09:40 AM
link   
[christians are too afraid of hell to question why they believe what they do.]

Why would Christians be afraid of hell when they do not think they are even going there ?
If anything its those who say they do not believe in Hell who are afraid of even talking about it.

I have no fear of Hell whatsoever .



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 24  25  26    28  29  30 >>

log in

join