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: 56
27
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 14 2008 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by papabryant
 


Obviously I cant link every book Iv ever read, and Im sure I wont change the christians mind on a conspiricy website, but here are some links anyway.

For a start the bible wasnt wrote in english, so a translation would never be as acurate as the original and is therefore an edit. And are you also saying out of all 5 books nothing was left out? nothing?


www.greatsite.com...

Some contradictions, I will leave you to scrutinise them.

www.sacred-texts.com...

Here is a review of the book "From Eden to Exile, Unraveling Mysteries of the Bible" by Eric H. Cline, Ph.D. in Ancient History, author, historian, archaeologist, and anthropology professor at George Washington University, where he is the Chair of the Department of Classical and Semitic Languages and Literatures.

M.A. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures at Yale University (1984), and has a B.A. in Classical Archaeology

Anyway here is a review only, if you want to read the book, buy it.

www.jewishjournal.com...

An appology to people who could provide greater "links" to further the case against it, I may be doing them an injustice by not providing everything that is available and I also couldnt be arsed. I am probably bashing my head against a brick wall in trying to show some religious person their book is fictional anyways.


And yes please do provide some facts to back up your claims its historically correct.

The Bible...The greatest fictional story ever told......

[edit on 14-11-2008 by Horus12]




posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kapyong
Gday,


Originally posted by papabryant
It HASN'T BEEN EDITED! Up until the 1940's the oldest surviving copy of the OT dated to times AFTER Christ - the Leningrad Codex. Then the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and they predate Christianity by 200 years. And the surviving OT scrolls found in the Dead Sea collection were WORD FOR WORD what the Leningrad Codex said.


Rubbish.
They are NOT "word for word" at all.

There are many differences, even in the famous Isaiah scroll which you apologists keep claiming is exactly identical.

It's not.

The various multiple MSS are all DIFFERENT.
DIFFERENCES so significant that modern bibles have been changed to match.

But of course, no matter how many times this fact is pointed out, you ignore it and keep on faithfully preaching your faithful beliefs.

Posted below AGAIN are some of the differences.

But we all know papabryant will just ignore these known facts and keep on preaching how they are "identical".

Another "liar for Christ."


And you are another "know-nothing for Atheism". We're not talking about the vaguries of competing scholars trying to translate the texts, nor am I saying there aren't scribist errors and regional variations of language between manuscripts, or that those errors and regional word uses don't get passed on to the next generation of manuscripts. These regional variations account for well over 90% of the varients people like you try unsuccessfully to cite as evidence against the Bible's religious argument. The fact that area A used 3rd person tense of the root word as opposed to the 1st person tense of the same word is not enought to change the meaning of the story in any significant way.

When dealing with ancient manuscripts, thats called word for word, and only those scholars wanting some sensationalism say otherwise.

Lets take your first example as indicative of the mistake you're making:


[Isaiah 14:30
The RSV and NRSV follow 1QIsaa in translating, “I will slay,” instead of “he/it will slay.” The Isaiah scroll seems to better fit the context in which this passage is preceded by another first person singular verb. Among the ancient versions, only the Latin agrees with 1QIsaa. Burrows finds the Qumran reading quite convincing (1955:307), and the NEB/REB concur. However, HOTTP prefers the MT, explaining the shift to third person as a reference back to “the venomous serpent” of 14:29.


The second sentence shows this is the expression of preference of the translator for the SAME original word. This is important for the production of the translation, (and real interesting to read WHY they go with the particular variation they use). All this indicates that the translator of the Latin did his translation from a text from a given region. Other texts used as their base a manuscript from another region.

Thats all. And as national unity rose, standardization increased and those regional variations that were still floating around decreased in usage as communities became more homoginized. Try reading the works of Steven Grosby, one of my former professors. He specializes in Judaism as a source of nationalistic desire.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 10:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Horus12
reply to post by papabryant
 


Obviously I cant link every book Iv ever read, and Im sure I wont change the christians mind on a conspiricy website, but here are some links anyway.
[edit on 14-11-2008 by Horus12]


Hi Horus,

I'm familiar with your second link (I don't think much of it) but I will re-review it and your other links. Thanks.

There aren't too many non primary source internet sites I use that I could offer you in return for your links. There are two, though you may already be familiar with them.

www.tektonics.org...

J.P. Holding is a friend of mine, and while some are put off by his use of satire as a rhetorical tool, his articles are impecably researched. He's about to start doctoral work at the University of Florida.

www.christian-thinktank.com...

Glenn Miller has a degree in religious studies and works as a motivational business speaker.

Hope you enjoy.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   
WoW all this proof.

Or is it!

When God tels us to go and preach his words: Do we really do that.

Or are we just preaching our own and other peoples words and interpretations of a text!
Or something just based on a roomer.

Is god really telling You and Me to preach our interpretation of his words. Or is he telling us to preach his words.

There is a big difference isn't there.

When You read something from the bible and I, and a third person. We see different things.

Then we turn it into what we interpret or into what others have interpreted.
But aren't we moving away from the word of God by doing that. And moving into what we think God is saying or implying.

I am just wondering. Haven't you thought about that possibility!

Don't God somewhere in the Bible tell us, not to mix or replace his words with ours.

Have we really thought about what We are doing.

I got a question:

Is God telling you to save your self.

Is God telling you to teach others Your interpretations of his words. Is it your job to tell me that i am wrong.
Or is it up to our selves to figure it out.

What we are doing is dangerous and wrong. Its not our job to affect others with our opinions and interpretations. Its up to our selves to figure it out.
Your job is to preach the word of God to others. Not to pollut other minds with your thoughts.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
THESE ARE NOT MY WORDS.




You are simply wrong about the evidence concerning Jesus. Matthew, Mark, John, Peter and Paul were all eye witnesses and wrote down their record after Jesus returned to heaven. This is hard evidence. To disprove this evidence you must impeach the witnesses.


i was just wondering if this was true?



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 05:20 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 

Such wonderful sources. Thank you for posting all this information. This should make those not so sure think twice. I will hope they will anyway.

Peace,
Grandma



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
reply to post by papabryant
 

Very Good Links.........thank you!

Peace,
Grandma



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by OldMedic
 


Jesus may have existed and he may not have.
However, there's a fine line that you're missing.
The other historical figures, though they may not be 100% verified, are not based on stories which have extraordinary events such as Jesus or Hercules.
Do you believe that Hercules was a real person?

You see, when the only story you have to verify a historical figure is more fiction based than historical, then a person can indeed question if that person lived.
Hercules may have existed simply without the magical powers, just as Jesus may have.
But how many people do you see that believed Hercules was a real man?
The field isn't level.



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
Gday


Originally posted by Ghost147
THESE ARE NOT MY WORDS.



You are simply wrong about the evidence concerning Jesus. Matthew, Mark, John, Peter and Paul were all eye witnesses and wrote down their record after Jesus returned to heaven. This is hard evidence. To disprove this evidence you must impeach the witnesses.


i was just wondering if this was true?


I hear they are not your words, but here is my response to whoever wrote it :

Absolutely certainly not true.


Paul
Paul was not an eye-witness to Jesus, even according to Christian tradition - he merely had some VISIONS of Christ YEARS afterwards.

So what?
People have VISIONS of Christ, Mary, Buddha, Krishna, Xenu, and many more, to this day - so what ?


Mark
Mark was not an eye-witness, even according to Christian tradition - he was allegedly Peter's secretary in Rome, and never met any Jesus.

NT scholars say G.Mark was written by someone who knew little of Judea or the Jews (because he makes so many errors of geography and culture) probably in Rome (he has to keep explaining things in Roman terms.) Like all the Gospels, G.Mark was un-named until late 2nd C.


Matthew
Christians believe Matthew was an eye-witness, but NT scholars don't - they say G.Matthew was copied from G.Mark by an anonymous writer not an eye-witness. Like all the Gospels, G.Matthew was un-named until late 2nd C.


John
Christians believe John was an eye-witness, but NT scholars don't - they say G.John is a late work, and dependent on earlier works - written by an anonymous writer not an eye-witness. Like all the Gospels, G.John was un-named until late 2nd C.


Peter
The two letters of Peter are the clearly not by anyone who ever met any historical Jesus. They are written late, certainly not by Peter, certainly not by any eye-witness - so say NT scholars.


Luke
Luke was not an eye-witness, even according to Christian tradition - he was allegedly Paul's travelling companion and never met any Jesus.

NT scholars say G.Luke was copied from G.Mark in late 1st C. by someone who never met any Jesus. Like all the Gospels, G.Luke was un-named until late 2nd C.


James
Same with James - this letter was obviously not written by any eye-witness to Jesus. It doesn't even mention ANYTHING about any historical Jesus at all. The writer of this letter had clearly never even HEARD of a historical Jesus, let alone been his brother. Go READ this book and look for ANY HINT that the writer knew anything about a historical Jesus. There is none at all. But no faithful believer ever notices this glaring fact.



NONE of the NT documents are by eye-witnesses - according to modern NT scholars.

But,
faithful BELIEVERS tell a different story.

They faithfully believe all the stories are true, and that all the books are by eye-witnesses (even Mark and Luke, who were NOT eye-witnesses even according to CHRISTIANS !)


The most faithful apologists are the LEAST knowledgable about their own stories.


K.


[edit on 15-11-2008 by Kapyong]



posted on Nov, 15 2008 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Kapyong
 


thank you very much. this had me stumped for a bit.

can you please link me to your information though?

[edit on 15/11/08 by Ghost147]



posted on Nov, 16 2008 @ 03:46 AM
link   



posted on Nov, 16 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by Ghost147
thank you very much. this had me stumped for a bit.
can you please link me to your information though?
[edit on 15/11/08 by Ghost147]


Well,
much of this comes from books by modern scholars, such as :

www.amazon.com...

www.amazon.com...

Various sites can be handy :

NT canon :
ntcanon.org...

Church fathers here :
www.newadvent.org...


K.



posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 01:56 AM
link   
Nothing like a religeous discussion to get folks blood boiling.


I personally believe this guy existed. Was he the son of God? Did he have amazing powers? Hard to say imo, I wasn't there. But.. did he exist? I DO believe that. Perhaps he was just a great prophet, or a brilliant, 2k old Ghandi-like figure who really put a kink into people's beliefs systems back then.

There are just too many seperate accounts on ancient scrolls, far from one another, to discount this imo. I do believe, from an archaeological standpoint, there was a guy named Jesus that did exist. And while all of you may want to argue back and forth until the cows come home, neither will be able to prove he did or did not exist.

But for what it's worth, there are many third party sources that authenticate many events in the past. It's sort of funny and ironic, that something with perhaps two sources can be considered to have happened without a doubt, yet with Jesus, there can be dozens of seperate accounts of his existance, and yet somehow it's bunk.

I do think he existed, but whether he was what was depicted in the Bible is another matter.



posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 02:18 AM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Nothing like defending one's perception of reality which one has banked his eternal life on.

Yeah, you know you are right, bro.

People don't want to be wrong about this sort of thing and there is a foul mix of pride and fear that make so many willing to argue as long as they have to to preserve that perception. That kind of thing IMO is a blinder to real truth, whatever that may be.



posted on Nov, 17 2008 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


Read the book "From Eden to Exile, Unraveling Mysteries of the Bible" that is from an archaeological standpoint and raises a lot of issues regarding the bible being based on historical fact.



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 06:12 AM
link   
Ok here you go:
www.youtube.com...

Not only that, hundreds upon hundreds of people witness Christ Crucified and the Roman Gov was threatening these witnesses that if they keep on repeating this, they also will be crucified .....and hundreds did get crucified for refusing to stop telling others about Jesus' resurrection.

If you truly and genuinely become a Christian, you will experience God directly and mystically and will know through direct subjective experience that Jesus exists, and did back then as well.

everything else is speculation, Jesus' non existence really can't be taken seriously in Academia and general history, in fact Im surprised this was even posted!!!!

WOW

[edit on 18-11-2008 by dominicus]



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


is jesus not mentioned in the quran as a prophet?



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by dominicus
If you truly and genuinely become a Christian, you will experience God directly and mystically and will know through direct subjective experience that Jesus exists, and did back then as well.


I guess I was never a true Christian then
. Sure, I felt feelings that made me think Jesus existed. It's amazing what the mind will conjure up.
Of course, I've had dreams that have seemed more real than real life.
I suppose according to your line of thought, lucid dreams are real just because they seem so.



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 02:51 PM
link   
Gday,


Originally posted by dominicus
Not only that, hundreds upon hundreds of people witness Christ Crucified


Nonsense.
One man had a VISION of Christ, and he claimed 500 others also had a VISION of Christ - so what?

People have visions of Krishna, Zeus, Xenu to this day - so what?



Originally posted by dominicusand the Roman Gov was threatening these witnesses that if they keep on repeating this, they also will be crucified.....and hundreds did get crucified for refusing to stop telling others about Jesus' resurrection.


Rubbish.
That never happened.
But Christians repeat it to each other so often, that some actually believe it.

The Romans punished those who failed to obey Roman law and bow to the Golden Eagle - Christian, Jew, or pagan - NOTHING to do with their beliefs, just whether they would obey Roman law.



Originally posted by dominicus
everything else is speculation,


Christian beliefs are all speculation, with no evidence.



Originally posted by dominicus
Jesus' non existence really can't be taken seriously in Academia and general history, in fact Im surprised this was even posted!!!!
WOW


Jesus' non existence is indeed taken seriously by some scholars (the few who aren't also faithful believers), and increasingly so.

Of course, faithful true believers just ridicule the idea without addressing the facts - because they must ignore the fact that there is ZERO evidence for Jesus, even when we would expect it.

The evidence is clear - Jesus was a complete myth.


Kapyong


[edit on 18-11-2008 by Kapyong]

[edit on 18-11-2008 by Kapyong]



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 03:12 PM
link   
For believers on this site to go this far to try to disprove ones who do not see or understand God's true word,is a waste of time,because if you tell them the truth,and they do not understand,then they are lost,and will stay lost until God himself intervenes in their life.

"Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. . . .Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. . . . lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." - Mt. 15:8

First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. They will say, "Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation."
-2 Peter 3

The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.2 Peter 3:9

Matt 15:14: "They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch."

'Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know.' Jeremiah 33:3

"But the Spirit [the Holy Spirit] explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons..." (1 Tim. 4:1).

" Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time."

-1st John 2:18

"For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." -Romans 10:3,4

"For behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven . .. " (Malachi 4:1). "... Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth".



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 53  54  55    57  58  59 >>

log in

join