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: 38
27
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Dude, Jesus Christ existed some 2,000 years ago. It's in 6th Grade textbooks.




posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by shearder

Originally posted by TruthParadox
So you're saying that because the Bible makes mention of places which are known to exist, then everything else in the Bible is accurate?

Did i say that or are you hoping you can I assume this is what you hoped i said?? Nope - easy huh? It's not what i said


Well then what was your point? You've stated several times that archeological evidence points to a historical Jesus. My logic stands, your logic crumbles. Archeological evidence of a place does not confirm a story that makes mention of that place. It's really quiet simple. I believe a 5 year old could grasp it. Why can't you I wonder.

Just to refresh your memory, you stated that John's description of the Pool of Bethesda is accurate, and therefor his description of Jesus is accurate. Are you consistent? Because I have an accurate description of the White House. I also claim that the pink unicorn of death lives in this White House.
Admit that the pink unicorn of death exists, or admit that your 'logic' is not logical in the least.


Originally posted by shearder

Wow...
It's only evidence that those places existed, not that Jesus ever lived.
Allow me to adopt your logic for a second. If I write about a pink unicorn of death which lived in the white house, then that must be true, right? After all, the white house exists, therefor the whole story I just fabricated is factual.

NOT my logic - YOUR reasoning and comprehension. But hey, it takes all sorts and i forgive you!


YOU are the one that pointed to archeological evidence as evidence of Jesus' existence. It is YOUR flawed logic, not mine. I am merly pointing out your flawed logic which you still can not seem to grasp.


Originally posted by shearder


What evidence? Your evidence is based on asumption, just as your religion is. Do you even know the definition of evidence?

Oh? Pictures are assumptions? Archaeology is an assumption? What tree did you happen to fall out of old boy?


No, pictures are not assumptions. Taking a picture of a place that existed and was written about in a fable, and then assuming that the fable is true is the assumption. The fact that you can not grasp this is beyond comprehension.
Wow.
Allow me to state that backwards as well.
Wow.


Originally posted by shearder


First, might I suggest learning how to read, or at least take those blinders off when you do so. He never agreed that there are records of Jesus. He stated that there are records from Rome and Jerusalem during this time, proving that your point as to why there are no contempory records is false. Instead, you ignore his point and act as though you have won the argument, when the logic simply flew over your head.

LMAO - oh that was rich!! Someone actually took the bait!!! Dude you are a gas! You should be on stage!


What bait? You made a blatantly obvious error, and now you're trying to look like you did it on purpose? Jesus Christ man that is sad. Do you need me to explain it to you again?

1) You stated several reasons why there is no contemporary record of Jesus.
2) We have records of others from this time, so these reasons do not stand.
3) Iasion pointed this out, and you ignored the logic and instead acted as though you had won.
4) I point out how Iasion was right, and you were not able to comprehend it.
5) You then make a bigger fool of yourself by not being able to comprehend my post either.

Read this quote from Iason about 10 times until it makes sense to you.



Do we have records from Jerusalem?
Yes.
Shearder's claim is false.
Sheredr says we have no records of Jesus, because we have no records at all - because they were all burned !
Of course, we DO have records from Rome, Jerusalem, and other places - showing shearder's claim is nonsense.



Originally posted by shearder

So you do believe in Hercules? Afterall, many of the places he visited existed as well, therefor Hercules must have existed.

I seriously hope you are joking.

Are you Iasion TOO? I understand English is not everyone's first language but this is ridiculous.

Do you actually type this stuff? Do you read it back before you post?


If my logic is flawed, then state how it is flawed. You resort to personal attacks because you have no logic to back your claims, nor do you have an argument to denounce mine. There is archeological evidence for MANY fables. According to you, this proves their existence. You can't seem to comprehend that the people writting the fables in their day would make stories BASED on places. You can't seem to grasp that if you were consistent in this 'logic', you would also believe in Paul Bunyan, Santa Claus (the North Pole exists, so he must as well), the pink unicorn of death, Hercules, etc.
The ignorance of this argument of archeological evidence is painful. How is it that you can not grasp that this is not evidence of Jesus' existence?



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by Deaf Alien
It is quite possible that he was telling the truth about Jesus as a man. We do not know for sure. That's the point.
It gets stranger when people start writing him as a son of god, performing miracles and flying in the clouds, etc. We have no point of reference for that.
People wrote about 12 Olympians living on Mt. Olympus. Mt. Olympus is very much a real place. Since those people wrote about a real palce, does that mean they were telling the truth about those 12 Olympians?


Great! Now show me any 10 people who were willing to die (and did!) to defend the "truth" of the Olympians living on Mount Olympus. When you can do that, THEN we can have a meaningful discussion There is absolutely NO indication that people were willing to die for the "gods", but there is absolute, historical records indicating all the early church fathers died defending Jesus Christ as both God and Man.

You really think martyrs are unique to Christianity? What about Islam? Buddhism?



If we use YOUR SAME STANDARDS on everything else, we have to throw out the entirety of history. I say that the story of the Olympians was never true, and that it was just some really great fiction, and the people of Rome knew that. Can you prove otherwise? Can you prove Alexander the Great actually existed. Now remember, I get to pick "scholars" who are going to say with every bit of eyewitness evidence you bring up: "I'm sorry, we believe that is a fable, written hundreds of years after his death". Not hard to "disprove" a theory when you get to set the standard for rules, is it?

Why keep bringing up Alexander the Great? We have discussed this over and over and over and over again. THERE ARE ARCHEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE FOR HIS EXISTENCE. Other than that, Alexander the Great is just a story, just a hearsay. History is based on archeological evidence and first-hand accounts.



EVEN HIS ENEMIES ACKNOWLEDGED HE PHYSICALLY EXISTED. EVEN HIS ENEMIES ACKNWOLEDGED HE DID MIRACLES. Only, they said he did them from the power of the devil.

Who said that? The bible?



The Gospels have been tracked back MUCH earlier than "scholars" would have you believe. They have been traced back to having been written at a time when there was STILL living eyewitnesses who could have said "This isn't true", if it had never happened.

Please, please, please show that. So far, we have not seen any! So far, you have shown the gospels, Josephus, etc. The earliest we could find is what? 70AD?



But, the point is this: Like all unbelievers, you don't give a rat's behind about the truth.

Then, please tell me, why are we digging this? Why are we wanting more evidence? Please tell me that. WHY? Not giving a rat's behind about the truth? HA!



You want people to tell you what your ears itch to hear. Because if Jesus Christ existed, and was who he said he was, you don't get to do whatever the hell you want to do anymore. You have a greater responsibility. And like children, these unbelievers want to continue in their irresponsibility.

This is getting off topic. This is going into morality debate.



And as for Paul, he was a member of the Sanhedrin. So, it is VERY likely that he actually sat in on Jesus' trial.

Maybe, maybe not. WHO KNOWS? Paul didn't say anything about that.



Besides that, how do you account for the miracles that occurred AFTER Jesus death, resurrection, and ascension? How do you account for the miracles that the writers of the letters (to call them "books" is a bit of a misnomer, because they are actually letters to people.) saw with their very own eyes, for which they WERE eyewitnesses?

Do you really think that the miracles are really unique to Christianity? There are many religions, you know.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox
Read this quote from Iason about 10 times until it makes sense to you.



Do we have records from Jerusalem?
Yes.
Shearder's claim is false.
Sheredr says we have no records of Jesus, because we have no records at all - because they were all burned !
Of course, we DO have records from Rome, Jerusalem, and other places - showing shearder's claim is nonsense.




There are 4064550 men in the U.S. named "James".

Jesus was a very popular name in Jesusalem.

I believe, if he wanted to be worshiped, he would 1)be here in PERSON fighting right now and 2)left better evidence of himself so the people he wanted to worship him would have something other than "faith" to believe in.

Clearly, the message was more important than the man.

That we all have access to God inside of us, without submitting to human dictatorship.

[edit on 16-9-2008 by mmariebored]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:46 PM
link   
[edit on 113030p://bTuesday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:47 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 




I am not here to force doctrine, or convince anyone,we live in a time of incredible arrogance against christians,

I did post much more then just a few words,

that all went unheeded,

shaking dust off feet,

toodles



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grafilthy
Quick question......for the Christians....

What happened to all the people who live before Jesus???? Did they all go to hell for not believing in someone who did not exist yet?


Start a thread.

That would be off topic



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stormdancer777
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


I am not here to force doctrine, or convince anyone,we live in a time of incredible arrogance against christians,

Isn't it the other way around? We live in a time of incredible arrogance of christians against the rest of the world.



posted on Sep, 16 2008 @ 11:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Grafilthy
 


Nope. He held the UNIVERSE in his hands.. what does that say?

I, for one, wouldn't mess with him!



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by shearder
 


GOD is nothing more than an iconic image for that big business called Church. How much money has been made in HIS name? Think of him more like Jack from Jack in the box.

Analogy:

You see HIS image outside of the business, plus displayed inside. You see his offerings on display inside, someone preaches his words, and you make a donation to seek salvation for your hunger.

Seem all too familiar?




posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox
I believe a 5 year old could grasp it.

Glad you have managed it now.



Just to refresh your memory, you stated that John's description of the Pool of Bethesda is accurate, and therefor his description of Jesus is accurate.

Unfortunately i don't have the space for drawing little pictures, SOOO, I didn't state that, it wasn't something i thought up, I merely presented, not stated, EVIDENCE base on an archaeological dig that substantiates the fact that the baths John described in the bible was accurate - the baths John described were part of what he was saying about Jesus. Or do you think he just threw that Person in the mix because he couldn't think of anyone else? It backs up what he was saying about Jesus which backs up and adds credence to the fact that Jesus did exist.

Now wasn't that easy?



Originally posted by shearder
NOT my logic - YOUR reasoning and comprehension. But hey, it takes all sorts and i forgive you!

YOU are the one that pointed to archeological evidence as evidence of Jesus' existence. It is YOUR flawed logic, not mine. I am merly pointing out your flawed logic which you still can not seem to grasp.


Read my previous response above again.



Originally posted by shearder
LMAO - oh that was rich!! Someone actually took the bait!!! Dude you are a gas! You should be on stage!


What bait? You made a blatantly obvious error, and now you're trying to look like you did it on purpose? Jesus Christ man that is sad. Do you need me to explain it to you again?


Yeah... BUT before you do, read what he said then, carefully think how i could have said what i did
Unfortunately I have had MANY (about 18) years of reading documents, legal and contractual in nature, and perhaps, and this is wrong, I assume others also have the skill to read, understand and respond - i apologies for this. I try and make it pretty easy. Once you graduate and leave school you may have that opportunity too.



Do we have records from Jerusalem?
Yes.

What records do you have?? Can you give me a few links. Thanks. Obviously they should be authentic and contemporary. Lets say they should be about hmmmm... who paid taxes in Jerusalem before Jesus arrived. Those would be documents that should exist. It's an example. Perhaps you and Iasion could work on it together? HEY, a project hehehe cool huh


Originally posted by TruthParadox
You resort to personal attacks because you have no logic to back your claims

Take a good look at the above... really look at it. Then, review the entire thread. I wasn't making personal attacks, i was pointing out the obvious. Get it????


There is archeological evidence for MANY fables.
I haven't studdied this. Could you give me archaeological evidence of, lets say, 7 fables?

According to you, this proves their existence.
Nope, according to you, if there is evidence that proves what was written in the bible exists, and i believe it (obvious), then fables are also true. Those were not my words - deal with it. It is also PROVEN to exist here. Once again this is only ONE area i have given
Oh, take note of the website! AND, added bonus, has nothing to do with Fables



You can't seem to comprehend that the people writting the fables in their day would make stories BASED on places. You can't seem to grasp that if you were consistent in this 'logic', you would also believe in Paul Bunyan, Santa Claus (the North Pole exists, so he must as well), the pink unicorn of death, Hercules, etc.
Santa Clause was real
- do some research then add it to your book of fables. And those aren't all Fables. Please be explicit not implicit. However, i do note that James Bond has fallen out of the "Fables" classification. We are moving in the right direction people!!! Soon we will prove the pink unicorn of death exists!!! (oh for those that didn't get it - that was a joke
)


The ignorance of this argument of archeological evidence is painful. How is it that you can not grasp that this is not evidence of Jesus' existence?

How is it that you cannot grasp that places that are proven to exist - as mentioned in the bible, in MANY cases, have Jesus as the subject? Coincidence? Or, do you think they all sat around a table - the authors that is - and threw names into a hat and then pulled out "Jesus" then all agreed to visit places and make up stories which include that name? However there is one point i agree with you on - in fact it IS THE most sensible point you have made thus far - "TruthParadox said: The ignorance of this argument of archeological evidence is painful." It sure is son, it sure is!!

Ah, please remember to give archaeological evident of 7 places mentioned in fables. Hell, just post the links. Perhaps create a new thread and do that?
There are about 100 Aesop's fables. Perhaps use them? Oh, Harry Potter isn't in there - but he also fell out of the mix so i thought maybe yuo guys proved he existed?


[edit on 17/9/2008 by shearder]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 01:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by gavron
GOD is nothing more than an iconic image for that big business called Church. How much money has been made in HIS name? Think of him more like Jack from Jack in the box.

Analogy:

You see HIS image outside of the business, plus displayed inside. You see his offerings on display inside, someone preaches his words, and you make a donation to seek salvation for your hunger.

Seem all too familiar?


Yeah, i saw this in threads all over the place. Perhaps post it there.

Glad i could help.


[edit on 17/9/2008 by shearder]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder


Start a thread.

That would be off topic


yawn. I am still waiting for the archeological evidence of Jesus that I asked for several pages back.



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 02:39 AM
link   
reply to post by shearder
 



Unfortunately i don't have the space for drawing little pictures, SOOO, I didn't state that, it wasn't something i thought up, I merely presented, not stated, EVIDENCE base on an archaeological dig that substantiates the fact that the baths John described in the bible was accurate - the baths John described were part of what he was saying about Jesus. Or do you think he just threw that Person in the mix because he couldn't think of anyone else? It backs up what he was saying about Jesus which backs up and adds credence to the fact that Jesus did exist.

Now wasn't that easy?


That is the most twisted logic I have seen in a long time. I can describe my bedroom. I can describe so perfectly that anyone who came upon it in the future could easily verify this was the place in question. Now I can add dragons, the Easter bunny, little green men all to my description. Does that prove those things are true too? Is it archeological evidence of those things or of that place?



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by MorningStar8741
 


How ever you see things or read things is your business.

Go and do some research for yourself. You're on your own now



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by shearder
 


So you waste all thist time screaming that there is evidence and before you ever present it, you run off. Do not tell me to do my research. I have, it turned up NO archeological evidence of Jesus. You are the one that claim it exsists, so make with it. Unless you really have nothing to back that up but hope and faith. That is fine to, but I would not use that shoot my mouth off post after post after post crying about proof you never produce.

And what do you mean read things how I like? You claime archeological proof of a person and then you give us a description of a place?????? That is proof of ... drum roll please...... the place. Nothing more. Anything else is a leap in faith with NO logice whatsoever upon which to find a foothold.

[edit on 17-9-2008 by MorningStar8741]



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by MorningStar8741
So you waste all thist time screaming that there is evidence and before you ever present it,

Where have you been? I started and it became apparent i was wasting my time



Do not tell me to do my research. I have, it turned up NO archeological evidence of Jesus.
uhuh... You did? You haven't look far enough have you. You could uncover some VERY interesting stuff if you tried



You are the one that claim it exsists, so make with it. Unless you really have nothing to back that up but hope and faith. That is fine to, but I would not use that shoot my mouth off post after post after post crying about proof you never produce.
There has been no reason to post anymore evidence UNTIL such time as people like you researched a little more. However, between comparing archaeological proof with the existence of pink unicorns and Jesus the audience is not mature enough to handle anything further. I never started this thread so the onus is not on me to prove anything. I offered what is easily available - anything more is a waste of time - right now.


And what do you mean read things how I like? You claime archeological proof of a person and then you give us a description of a place?????? That is proof of ... drum roll please...... the place. Nothing more. Anything else is a leap in faith with NO logice whatsoever upon which to find a foothold.

With your paragraph above you have proven my point even further. I offered something and the expectation is that someone would look further into it - but, instead, it was likened to fables. Why should I do all the work if i am actually wasting my time?



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:19 AM
link   
OK let me add this - for fun - the fact that Noah's Ark was found probably also means that it doesn't mean Noah existed - right?

Now that is the logic being used. Get the point?



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
OK let me add this - for fun - the fact that Noah's Ark was found probably also means that it doesn't mean Noah existed - right?

Now that is the logic being used. Get the point?


Really? where is this ark? I have seen it claimed to be found in 4 different places and yet there is no actual piece of the ark or any scietific agreement of ANY ark. Care to provide the proof of that? And again, it would not prove Jesus exsisted though would it?



posted on Sep, 17 2008 @ 04:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by shearder
OK let me add this - for fun - the fact that Noah's Ark was found probably also means that it doesn't mean Noah existed - right?

Now that is the logic being used. Get the point?


Or, let me be to you, the good Christian representative you have been by providing your own words back as a response.


Start a thread.

That would be off topic


and


Yeah, i saw this in threads all over the place. Perhaps post it there.

Glad i could help.




top topics



 
27
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join