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: 34
27
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   
It does matter what we can proof or not proof God is real God has a son and we can have life after death. You cant stop the true. You cant stop what will happen or come to pass and you will see the truth of the matter.




posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by slymattb
You will never actually find prove of God or his Son Jesus Christ.


well, thank you for the post. its rare to find a religious person who will agree that there is no proof jesus existed. i believe we may one day find proof, but you're welcome to your opinion.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 06:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

Because that is what the evidence shows.
That is what scholarship agrees.



Hmmm, should be easy to link a source to substantiate all of your scholarly opinions then.

Do you feel like you are above all of us, therefore, your credibility should not be questioned?



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 06:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by mhc_70

Originally posted by Jen639682
Everything in history is hearsay really. You take one single event and ask five different people to go into detail about it. These five people come from five different backgrounds and give five completely different accounts of an event. Therefore you cannot say with complete truth that Jesus did not exist or that he was not the "Savior" and vice versus. It all in a matter of opinion. We cannot ever be truly certain about any event in history because of this.


Why then do many people, including wiki, accept many other events in history, that have nothing but hearsay to give them credibility, as factual history?


One more time... archeology



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by slymattb
Heres the problem with proof. God does'nt want proof. He wants free will. There cant be free will with proof. God want faith, he want his children to follow by faith. You will never actually find prove of God or his Son Jesus Christ.

I dont want proof. I want my faith in God to grow strong so that one day when God calls on this soldier I might have my sword and Shield with me. God bless and go in his spirit.


Here lies the problem. People put faith in anything so easily. Look at muslims. They don't want proof. They want their faith in Allah to be strong so that one day when Allah calls on them they will fight. Allah bless them as well.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by slymattb
It does matter what we can proof or not proof God is real God has a son and we can have life after death. You cant stop the true. You cant stop what will happen or come to pass and you will see the truth of the matter.


Belief in God is a personal thing. It is between you and God.

However, proof of the bible and Jesus as God DOES matter because the church has been brainwashing and controlling the masses for centuries. This is obviously a conspiracy to enslave people. The more proof or the more we show that there are no proof of Jesus existing, the more church lose their power over people. See?

Religious people are not aware that the wool have been pulled over their eyes. They are not aware that they are being controlled by the church (or the elite few).



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Jesus' message was directly given to the peasantry, it would seem the reason why much was not written about him during his lifetime. In most cases, peasants could not read or write. On top of that, there were many people who claimed to be the messiah, conducted healings, and died upon a cross. Therefore Jesus' life was not much different or seen differently from others during his era. It was not until after he died that his importance was cherished and given weight and this was partly due to the oral traditions of the peasantry and Jesus' apostles including Paul who was particularly important in spreading the word.

This is how I see it at least!



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jen639682
This is how I see it at least!

That's fine. That is your right. This is a personal thing.

The real problem is: the church and christians have been pushing their beliefs on others, trying to control people. Thank goodness things have changed alot since early 1900's. But still, some preachers are still trying to influence politics today. Some are trying to pass a law that make it a crime for someone to be gay or teach evolution in school. They actually want them thrown in with other criminals! The list goes on and on.

We should be glad for the skeptics. They keep things in balance and keeping outrageous theories from getting out of control.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

One more time... archeology


I guess if you choose to believe there is a shortage of archeology to verify the authenticity of the Bible, thats your choice.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by mhc_70

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

One more time... archeology


I guess if you choose to believe there is a shortage of archeology to verify the authenticity of the Bible, thats your choice.


all you've been doing is setting up straw man arguments and you're rapidly losing credibility. we're talking here, in this thread, about a historical, living jesus and the lack of contemporary evidence. that's not a choice.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:36 PM
link   
I have spent a good amount of my life being skeptical of the religion I was brought up in. I have researched plenty and have kept an open mind, even going to the extremes of aliens. I just can't seem to believe that we are here without a reason whether it be Jesus/God or some Alien named Bob (made Bob up obviously, using it to make a point). It just seems pointless for there to be no existence after this. My experiences in my life lead me to believe there is a God and he had a son named Jesus. But these are my experiences and like I said before, everyone experiences something different. I cannot prove to anyone whether or not Jesus was real nor will I try. It almost pointless. Its not something we can prove with hard evidence just like most things in history. I bet we take a typical textbook from about 50 years ago and compare to ones we have now and there would be significant changes. New finding, new beliefs, new opinions. Just make your own opinion on something and make it your own. Who is to say your wrong or right? Not me!



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 07:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Convex
 



Whose position have I misrepresented?

Herdotus is accepted as "The Father of History" because some of his writings have been verified through archeology, but alot lot more about history, has been verified by archeology, is revealed in the Bible, but it is not accepted to be factual.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by mhc_70
reply to post by Convex
 

Herdotus is accepted as "The Father of History" because some of his writings have been verified through archeology, but alot lot more about history, has been verified by archeology, is revealed in the Bible, but it is not accepted to be factual.


Yes many places in the bible have been discovered and verified by archeology. Myths and stories can be written around real events and places. This is not the topic here.

The topic is: Are there any first-hand accounts and archeological evidence for Jesus' existence?



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deaf Alien

Originally posted by mhc_70
reply to post by Convex
 

Herdotus is accepted as "The Father of History" because some of his writings have been verified through archeology, but alot lot more about history, has been verified by archeology, is revealed in the Bible, but it is not accepted to be factual.


Yes many places in the bible have been discovered and verified by archeology. Myths and stories can be written around real events and places. This is not the topic here.

The topic is: Are there any first-hand accounts and archeological evidence for Jesus' existence?


There have been many pieces of first hand account evidence presented in this thread.

I am trying to understand the double standard when all this evidence is claimed to be a forgery, but other, less founded, evidence is accepted as factual.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by mhc_70

There have been many pieces of first hand account evidence presented in this thread.


as far as i know, no one in this thread made the discovery for themselves that these accounts are forgeries. this is the stuff that should be left up to the experts. thankfully none of us need to, the experts have spoken.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 08:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by mhc_70

I guess if you choose to believe there is a shortage of archeology to verify the authenticity of the Bible, thats your choice.


Not starting a fight here but, what evidence is that? I do not think that the thread is disputing a story or two in the bible might be true. They were not all about Jesus. This is about Jesus. Where is all the "archeology to verify the authenticity of" Jesus? Just asking.



posted on Sep, 15 2008 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Convex
so far you're provided some proof of pontius pilate,

No i didn't




the fact that the pool of bethesda might have existed, etc but still nothing about jesus himself.

You also missed it - right? Why would so many facts be substantiated which would prove he existed and yet everyone who refers to him i.e John writing about him in the baths is BS'ing?

Your arguments are just very weak guys - very weak.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion

Originally posted by mhc_70
LOL, then Iasion I challenge to provide us with some authentic writings about Pilate from an author that you haven't labeled a forgery.


Easy.
Josephus.
Philo.
Tacitus.
What was your point?
Iasion


So, What is your verdict?? See below:

Originally posted by IasionJOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),
* The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early Church fathers who reviewed Josephus.
* Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present c.200CE.
* The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.
* The other tiny passage in Josephus refers to Jesus, son of Damneus. The phrase "so-called Christ" may have been a later addition by a Christian who also mis-understood which Jesus was refered to.

An analysis of Josephus can be found here:
www.humanists.net...

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
But, yes, it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.


What is your verdict? You are really on the fence aren't you? You don't really know which way to go - right? You are a little confused?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iasion
This is a real place, mentioned in the NT.
So what?

You really, actually believe this is archeological evidence for Jesus?
Wow.


I guess you have fallen into the hole that warns about argung with certain types. There is no further hope



In which case you must believe Hercules was real, and Odysseus, and Demeter, and Harry Potter, and James Bond ....
They all have real places mentioned in their stories.
This is ridiculous.

What is your point with this? Besides James Bond being based on a real person who was in the service - what was your point?


No serious educated adult could consider a mention of a real place to be archeological evidence.

Now that's got you all confused - hasn't it ol' boy. If it is real it exists - If it was dug up by archaeologists - it exists. If it exists it is definitely evidence - wouldn't you agree?
You are seriously off the rails aren't you? Let me dissect this - ok what you are saying is that IF someone says they know New York existed in 2000 years ago it actually didn't EVEN if archaeologists unearthed it?


Like I said -
there is no historical and archeological evidence for Jesus or the Gospel events.
Iasion

You are going to stick with this huh? Cool. I won't feed you any more evidence. You are grasping at straws. You see your arguments slipping away VERY quickly.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 31  32  33    35  36  37 >>

log in

join