The Evidence For Jesus' Existence Is Nothing But Hearsay

reply to post by iismtivu

Free will is an illusion, and with out knowledge of the future, makes any decision genuine (effectively). You can believe what ever you like.

so.... if i did know the future and did nothing to change it???? by your logic that would still not be free will?????? so what would be free will in that case?????

reply to post by iismtivu


In the multiverse reality, to know even a few moment of the future you would have to have almost infinite memory space. There are plenty of outcomes to everything and they ALL are the real outcomes. It's called quantum physics.

So... by that logic.... if a particular outcome becomes reality in our universe i.e. becomes my future....then that is not free will? just because it's not in all places of the multiverse?????

reply to post by iismtivu


No. All outcomes are equally likely to occur, in fact all of them will occur. Every moment something can occur, more universes are made so that all the outcomes do occur. You could know what could happen but there is no way to say what will happen.

However, ol' Werner Heisenberg taught us that the future is unknowable anyway. In physics, the more you know where a quantum particle is, the less you know about it's speed, and vice verse.

Freewill is hence an unbreakable illusion, our futures are set, they are many however.

mmm well i wish i could be in the one(multiverse) where i have bazillions of dollars.....

reply to post by iismtivu


Perhaps you should work on a quantum tunnelling device, like in the sliders show.

reply to post by Good Wolf


mmm..... actually i might have accidentally done something like that....
when i can get the money together i will have to try and reproduce what i have done.....

I read the first verse of genesis one more time and science shows there is a factual reason for day and night, how much more religious mumbo jumbo is there in that book created by men? Jesus may be only an archaic revolutionary or he is again some fictional character of good and right.

Gday,

Originally posted by Soulfear
The original poster seems to be saying that because no one was there at the time of Jesus and with him what they write is heresy

Pardon ?!
Not heresy - but HEARSAY.
Can't you tell the difference between these two words ?

Originally posted by Soulfear
I find that many people that make statements like this seem to already have a set agenda to prove so to say

Well, faithful true believers clearly have a set agenda - to preach their faithful beliefs as truth.

Originally posted by Soulfear
Not very many people really question the fact that Jesus existed they only question what that means for them

Wrong.
A great many writers, and modern sceptics DO in fact question whether Jesus existed. The faithful do everything they can to dismiss this idea out of hand, or just ignore it and hope it will go away.

Originally posted by Soulfear
1. A good portion of the New Testament was written by his own Disciples that walked and talked with him and were around him personally...Matthew, John, Peter ect.

Wrong.
Completely and utterly totally wrong.

This faithful belief is endlessly repeated by faithful believers,
but modern NT scholars agree differently -
NOT ONE SINGLE BOOK of the nT was written by anyone who mret Jesus[.b]. Faithful believers simply ignore this conclusion.

Originally posted by Soulfear
2. Even Muslims believe Jesus existed and was a prophet

So what?
Muslims believe Mohamed flew to Jerusalem on a magic animal - do you believe that?

No?
Oh, so you only agree with Muslim beliefs that support YOUR beliefs, and reject all others.

In other words - you believe what you believe - and you think that is evidence?

Originally posted by Soulfear
3. Interesting how you do not question whether or not Muhammad existed or not

Not interesting at all.
THIS thread is about Jesus' existance.
Other threads may discuss Mohamed's existance.

Obviously you had no idea that some writers DO question Mohamed's existance.

Originally posted by Soulfear
4. Also Jews don't question the existance of Jesus

Some DO, and some don't - so what?

Originally posted by Soulfear
Sometimes you just have to be honest with yourself and also try doing some real research ,to just try prove what you want the outcome to be

Well, I HAVE.
But you clearly HAVEN'T.
All you have done is preach the usual faithful beliefs - which differ from the actual facts determined by experts.

If you ever bother to really actually DO some research - I mean actual modern mainstream NT scholarship such as Metzger, Ehrman or Brown e.g., not just asking your pastor - you will find your faithful beliefs are not supported by the facts at all.



Kapyong


[edit on 28-11-2008 by Kapyong]

[edit on 28-11-2008 by Kapyong]

reply to post by AlexG141989


Well if you think there is no proof that Jesus existed, one should research The Lost Tomb Of Jesus. They found and validated his limestone ossuary as well as his and Mary's family members in the same tomb... They also without a doubt have found the Ark in Turkey, they have confirmed with ground sensing radar and X-Ray imaging that it is indeed a huge ship with the exact dimensions described in the Old testament

reply to post by moocowman

There is as much evidence that Jesus actually lived as there is for other historical figures, many having lived much later. Bear in mind that historical figures and celebrities (people) who have died in just the last 300 years still lie in unknown vaults, crypts and graves, yet to be found or are difficult to locate. Most people are not aware that preacher schools of every variety conduct entire, semester long courses, on examining and putting to question the subject of the historical Jesus; did He actually live? This question is at the root of establishing a foundation from which to lead others, since it is human nature to pose this question.

Christ, The Name, is not just a habit, belief and choice, but also a historical person, a proper name, The Noun. Have you ever stopped to think that the Bible itself is THE extra-biblical source you seek; was at one time uncollected, independent writings, written over a millennium of time, written by authors unknown to one another for differing purposes, all independently with one, a thread undiscernable to one another, yet common to all, for future or then present purpose? The books in the New Testament are those extra-biblical sources you are saying supposedly don't exist. They were those sources before they became "the bible"; very strong charges from you, but I am afraid, terribly wrong.

You will find no accomplished scholar, living or dead, more certified in his field, than F.F. Bruce. What you say is akin to denial in the extreme, but as is often found, a trend of denial fed by pseudo-pop intellect, since it is easier to believe and parrot the negative than it is to investigate the positive; simple, scholarly inquiry would show otherwise. Your assertion, put forth as fact, sounds just like the lines in the article I here post, but are soundly rejected by the evidence. Your strong assertions deserve a strong reply and unfortunately, it is impossible for me to reply without commenting on the backdrop of attitudes that have shaped the type of charges you make; primarily an attitude fed by lack of inquiry or scholarly pursuit.

Extra Biblical Writings about Jesus
Christianity.net ^ | Michael Gleghorn
www.freerepublic.com...

Posted on Monday, December 20, 2004 2:08:56 AM by STD

Ancient Evidence for Jesus from `Non-Christian' Sources


Evidence from Tacitus


Although there is overwhelming evidence that the New Testament is an accurate and trustworthy historical document, many people are still reluctant to believe what it says unless there is also some independent, non-biblical testimony that corroborates its statements. In the introduction to one of his books, F.F. Bruce tells about a Christian correspondent who was told by an agnostic friend that "apart from obscure references in Josephus and the like," there was no historical evidence for the life of Jesus outside the Bible.[1] This, he wrote to Bruce, had caused him "great concern and some little upset in [his] spiritual life."[2] He concludes his letter by asking, "Is such collateral proof available, and if not, are there reasons for the lack of it?"[3] The answer to this question is, "Yes, such collateral proof is available," and we will be looking at some of it in this article.


Let's begin our inquiry with a passage that historian Edwin Yamauchi calls "probably the most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament."[4] Reporting on Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:


Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hate

www.youtube.com...