The Evidence For Jesus' Existence is Overwhelming

page: 3
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun

and where does it say this is jesus?

it says they beleive the message of one who was crucified and believe in an afterlife

afterlife is a common belief practically every religeon has one

where does this say jesus who did these miracles and had 12 disciples called ... and said this this and then this

and still it talks about thier beliefs not proof of jesus, scientologists believe were inhabited by dead aliens brought on interstella boeing 747's doesnt make it true

[edit on 12/9/08 by noobfun]


Jesus saith unto him, "Because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed" (John 20:29).

Thanks for prompting me to recall those beautiful words left to us by God Himself who manifested in human flesh as the Savior Jesus in His vehement bid to save mankind.




posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Boywonder13
 


The Da Vinci Code is fiction. There are many books that came out before that book which deal with Jesus and his family.
1. It took a long time to die on the cross, usually many days. Breaking the legs was a form of mercy.
2. Jesus was stabbed, but only water came out suggesting his wound was not fatal.
3. Jesus was taken down from the cross on the Sabbath.
4. His survival would explain his appearance before his disciples.
5. Jesus is said to have been in Egypt and taught mysticism there.
6. He eventually went on to India and is said to be buried there.

Many of these are speculative, what is known is that there were many new parchments and scrolls discovered that shed a lot of light on the types of peoples and their beliefs back then.

Many Christians believe Jesus was a god, and died for their sins (I didn't think gods could die). That is called faith, and it does not need facts.

Edited to add references to books to get on the subject:

www.amazon.com...=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221252737&sr=1-1

[edit on 9/12/2008 by kidflash2008]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
reply to post by Boywonder13
 

Many Christians believe Jesus was a god, and died for their sins (I didn't think gods could die). That is called faith, and it does not need facts.

Edited to add references to books to get on the subject:

www.amazon.com...=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221252737&sr=1-1

[edit on 9/12/2008 by kidflash2008]


Jesus said, “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:28). He came to give his life, to die, and his death would purchase salvation for others. This was the primary reason he came to earth. His blood was poured out for others (Matthew 26:28).

Jesus warned his disciples that he would suffer and die, but they didn’t seem to believe it. “Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. ‘Never, Lord!’ he said. ‘This shall never happen to you!’” (Matthew 16:21-22).

Jesus knew that he must die, because the Scriptures said so. “Why then is it written that the Son of Man must suffer much and be rejected?” (Mark 9:12; 9:31; 10:33-34). “Beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself…. ‘This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day’” (Luke 24:26-27, 46).

It had all been according to God’s plan: Herod and Pilate did only what God “had decided beforehand should happen” -- He even told Pilate that the greater sin was on those who had delivered Him to be crucified, not on Pilate himself.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 04:38 PM
link   
I saw a photograph of JESUS once not a painting but a photograph a real photograph it was his eyes that gave it away that it was real. The kind of thing that could not be faked
if remembered the address i would have posted it



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 05:07 PM
link   
So... the excerpts from the bible (though interesting) are hardly enough to prove anything. If we just read the bible as evidence then there would be no debate necessary.

But... as long as we are quoting the reputed works of god as evidence...

Exodus 20:2-5
2 "I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. 3 "You shall have no other gods before me. 4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me..."
This god says to his believers that they need only believe in him. Why, then, would he wish for them to have another being to worship? Some denominations answer this by saying that Jesus was not simply another being, but the son of god - which makes him divine, a part of the holy trinity. In his time on earth - according to Mark 10:18 - Jesus denies being divine: 18"Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good—except God alone." (also quoted in Matthew and Luke)

Since the bible has thus far been the only one quoted, I would also like to quote from another reputed work of the same god...
Quran 4:171:
"...Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of God, and His Word, which He bestowed on Mary, and a spirit proceeding from Him: so believe in God and His apostles. Say not "Trinity" ... for God is one God: Glory be to Him: (far exalted is He) above having a son. To Him belong all things in the heavens and on earth..."
Quran 5:75:
"Christ the son of Mary was no more than an apostle; many were the apostles that passed away before him. His mother was a woman of truth. They had both to eat their (daily) food. See how God doth make His signs clear to them; yet see in what ways they are deluded away from the truth!"
The Quran testifies that Jesus lived! Well, that he lived as other apostles did. It respects him as a messenger of god, and recognizes his works. However, it reminds the reader that Jesus was only human.

If you wish not to compare the Quran and the Bible, or even acknowledge that they are of the same god that is of your own choosing - but remember that the point of this website is to deny ignorance.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by blupblup
 


I respectfully disagree. Jesus was a Jewish rabbi, and there were many others at that time, John the Baptist being one (Essene and prophet). The difference though is apparent in Jesus' message. He was not just a teacher because of: who he claimed to be (The Son of God) and His mission of creating a new religion. If you are Christian, that religion is your own. Jesus can easily be seen as a peaceful revolutionary, like MLK or Gandhi (both of whom drew influence from the historical Jesus.(1))
He possessed the charisma to draw vast crowds, and yet His followers fled at some of His claims (Literally: Eat my flesh. Drink my blood, give away everything and follow Me). The Jewish crowds wanted to make Him king because of his influence and wisdom. And yet, who writes history? Why would 'The Man' of that time (The Sadducees, the Romans, and Pharisees) bother to have Jesus recorded other than to say he was a troublemaker who preached and was killed?
The New Testament is a rarity, but in no means unique. It is a rarity because the more common people of the day wrote it (Mark, John), and managed to keep that message safe even through the persecutions that started almost immediately after Christ's death (John 20:19).
Jesus was real, is real, and will always be real. Those who sully His name in His name do not represent Him anymore than terrorists represent Islam.

And please, do not, DO NOT, quote the 19th century list of parallels between Jesus and Horus (2). That is a load of garbage. The same can be drawn between many historical figures.
1.www.geocities.com...
2.www.tektonics.org...
www.thedevineevidence.com...
[edit on 12-9-2008 by newagent89]


[edit on 12-9-2008 by newagent89]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by Bombeni
Christianity presents a founder who is unmatched in history - one who really lived, taught unlike any other, performed miracles that testified of His authority, really died, and really rose from the dead to be seen by literally hundreds before His ascension.


Yes, this is the preaching of the beliefs of Christians.


Originally posted by Bombeni
Either He existed, and was who He claimed to be - Lord and Savior; or not.


Bollocks,
He could conceivably have existed and been a nobody.
But the evidence argues he never existed at all.



Originally posted by Bombeni
If He did exist, fulfill prophecy, perform miracles, die in our place, and rise again, then you, I -- we all -- have to deal with the ramifications of this.


If Osiris did exist, fulfill prophecy, perform miracles, die in our place, and rise again, then you, I -- we all -- have to deal with the ramifications of this.



Originally posted by Bombeni
1. Non-Christian, non-Jewish sources (principally Roman, Greek). These consist of the writings of a number of Greek or Roman historians,


Well, are you going to cite them ?



Originally posted by Bombeni
and refer to the history of Jesus because of the trouble the Christian movement was causing in the empire at the time. The records are normally antagonistic, since they have nothing to gain by admitting the historicity of the events.


False.
They do NOT refer to the history of Jesus.

Instead the refer to LATER BELIEFS about Jesus.
But Jesus himself left no contemporary evidence at all.
Nor do we have any evidence of anyone who ever met the alleged Jesus.



Originally posted by Bombeni
2. Jewish sources - Josephus,


JOSEPHUS (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.


Originally posted by Bombeni
the Talmud.



TALMUD (3rd C. and later)

There are some possible references in the Talmud, but:
* these references are from 3rd century or later, and seem to be (unfriendly) Jewish responses to Christian claims.
* the references are highly variant, have many cryptic names for Jesus, and very different to the Gospel stories (e.g. one story has "Jesus" born about 100BC.)
So,
the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus,
the Talmud merely has much later Jewish responses to the Gospel stories.




Originally posted by Bombeni
3. Christian sources - the Gospels, early church fathers and historians.


Not one of which was written by anyone who ever met any Jesus - such is the consensus of modern NT scholars.


Originally posted by Bombeni
The four gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - are judged by most scholars to be reliable, historical testimony of eye-witnesses.


False.
Only faithful believers faithfully believe this faithful beliefs. Real modern NT scholars (e.g. Ehrman, Brown, Metzger) do not.

(Anyway - even according to CHRISTIANS, only TWO of the Gospels are even considered to be by eye-witnesses. Did you even KNOW that, Bombeni?)



Originally posted by Bombeni
These gospels, as well as the Acts of the Apostles, the letters of Paul and the other Apostles, are judged to have been written from 40 A.D. to 100 A.D. -- all within a few decades of the life of Jesus.


False.
The real dates are 70CE - 150CE.



Originally posted by Bombeni
The early church fathers were the leaders and teachers in the church who followed the apostles - many were also disciples of these same apostles.


There is no actual evidence of anyone actually meeting or knowing Jesus. What we actually see is LATER writers making CLAIMS that earlier writers were followers of discisples etc. - when the actual writings of those earlier persons make NO SUCH CLAIMS.

Come on Bombeni -
show us ONE SINGLE book which in which the author speficially claims to have been a disciple of someone who met Jesus.


NOT a later claim by someone else, please.

I mean something clear and obvious like :
" yea verily I say to you that I, Ignatius of Smyrna did meet with the apostle Peter who met Jesus."

There is NOTHING like that.
And there most certainly is nothing remotely like :
"I, John, met with Jesus during the month of Nissan and saw him preach blah blah".

All we have is later stories, and stories ABOUT those stories, on and on....

But nothing at the epi-centre where Jesus allegedly was.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   
I am pretty sure most people would agree with a statement such as Jesus the person once existed. I would even say he was highly spiritual, maybe plugged into the network of God on a conscious level. But I would not say that he was God. Truthfully most of the bible looks like early man's interpretation of UFO, ET's and metaphysics, with human thoughts on how to either control the masses or make the ET's happy. Most likely the first idea. I believe it has taken 2000 years to get to a point where we can share multiple beliefs without fear of repercussion. Maybe 2000 years ago, to get ideas across you had to have and "awesome God".



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bombeni
Cornelius Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-120)




TACITUS (c.112CE)

Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.
* Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)
* This passage is paraphrased by Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century without attributing it to Tacitus, and may have been inserted back into Tacitus from this work.

This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but
merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)
So,
this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.




Originally posted by Bombeni
Thallus, a Samaritan-born historian who lived and worked in Rome about 52 A.D.,


No he wasn't.
This dating is based on a FALSE reading by Hudson.
See carrier on Thallus :
www.infidels.org...


THALLUS (date unknown)

We have NO certain evidence when Thallus lived or wrote, there are NONE of Thallus' works extant.
What we DO have is a 9th century reference by George Syncellus who quotes the 3rd century Julianus Africanus, who, speaking of the darkness at the crucifixion, wrote: "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse".
But,
there is NO evidence Thallus made specific reference to Jesus or the Gospel events at all, as there WAS an eclipse in 29. This suggests he merely referred to a known eclipse, but that LATER Christians MIS-interpreted his comment to mean their darkness. (Also note the supposed reference to Thallus in Eusebius is a false reading.)

Richard Carrier the historian has a good page on Thallus:
www.infidels.org...

So,
Thallus is no evidence for Jesus at all,
merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by Bombeni
But what of Jesus Christ and his impact on our world?


Jesus, HIMSELF, had NO impact at all on the world.
Jesus left NO evidence, mark, history, writing, artifact.

But later BELIEF in Jesus had a HUGE impact.

How many Christians ever met Jesus?
A few.

How many Christian believsr had to believe on hearsay?
99.9999999% of them.
Hearsay is all that is needed.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
Jesus the man existed and archeologists have found where he was born


No they haven't.

If YOU believe they have, cite evidence please.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:51 PM
link   
reply to post by newagent89
 



I respect that you respectfully disagree


But honestly, the evidence for jesus is underwhelming, maybe (other than the bible) non-existent?

I'm not going to quote the similarities between all the god's because anyone who has researched anything on religion will probably know that already.

Also, if you are a believer, any evidence or proof i could come up with isn't going to change your mind?

It is a pointless exercise...


You and others believe and that's great... i don't as nothing I've ever read seen or heard has even come close to convincing me.

i went to religious primary and secondary school and had the stuff drummed into me, but even at an early age i questioned some of the stuff and always got the same phony answers.

I respect your belief, and if it helps in your life, great!

I have argued with people on the subject of religion in a few threads on here and usually get the same old answers, so i have my beliefs/thoughts/opinions, you have yours.

Enjoy your life and do good things and you can't go wrong.

I don't need a book to tell me that.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by Nohup
I think it's interesting that historical proof of Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) existing is relatively easy to find,


Hmmm,
I haven't found much historical proof of Buddha.

Would you care to cite it please ?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by kidflash2008
The archeologists have an idea Jesus as a human being did exist, but the divinity was added later by the Church.



Rubbish. This is straight out of the Da Vinci code.

In fact - the exact opposite is true - as shown by reading the NT in sequence of writing :

* Paul
* early epistles and books
* Gospels
* later fathers

Paul and the early epistles have a supernatural Risen Christ - a God-man not put at any time or place in history. No mention of the Gospel stories of the Life of Jesus on Nazareth.

LATER,
the Gospels stories arise, only THEN do Christians start telling stories about a man Jesus located in history.

Check out this chart which makes it clear :
members.iinet.net.au...
Please do have a look at it, it's very informative.


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   
After being rude to everyone who came to your thread to ask questions... you have still not answered one GREAT question.

Why did no one decide he was important enough to write about until 40 years after his death. By that time, those who could remember him were all gone.

Comparing him to real historical figures, ie George Washington, doesn't work. They have people writing about them durring their lives and directly after their "feats".

If jesus accended into heaven for all to see, it would have been written down by everyone who knew how to write as soon as they got their head back on straight.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by kidflash2008
Jesus was not from a poor family. He was from a royal bloodline, and could claim the throne legally from Herod. There is evidence to suggest he survived being crucified, including the guards not breaking his legs, and his wife Mary rubbing his face with a cloth that could of knocked him out.


So,
why can't you post any evidence for your claims?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   
Hiya,


Originally posted by Bombeni
The post is titled "Overwhelming evidence that Jesus Existed" --- which I have more than aptly spelled out.


But,
the evidence you posted was ANYTHING but over-whelming.

You posted some faithful beliefs by faithful believers, and a couple of items which didn't stand up to scrutiny.

We are distinctly UNDERWHELMED by the "evidence" so far.
Is that all you have ?


Iasion



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   
People wrote about Hercules who's father was god and mother was mortal... he must be real too!!!!

There is ZERO evidence in this thread which has done nothing but make chistians look like more gullable whack jobs then they already did. You are not doing anything here positive for your religion. Please realize that before you do more harm.

And your ATS points right now are 666, more great evidence to prove jesus lived right


[edit on 12-9-2008 by breakingdradles]



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:24 PM
link   
The evidence of Christ's existence is in the New Testament. Vivid accounts written to within 50 years after Christ's death. There was not enough time for myths and legends to arise. Secondly the writers of the Gospels believed in speaking the truth. They were not politicians. There is no way eleven of the twelve apostles would allow themselves to be martyrd for a lie! How come the apostles who felt tired, scared and dejected after the arrest and crucifixion of Jesus were soon after filled with renewed zeal and conviction, ready to take on the oppressive might of Rome? Something profound and dramatic must have occured. This fellow: Jesus Christ, did resurrect. There is no question about it. St Paul was a hard working Christian, a meticulous writer, fastidious to the core. He interviewed the apostles to make certain that he was not preaching a lie. They gave him their first hand experiences. The New Testament even goes into details about how the apostles argued over whether gentiles should be circumcised! These are not made up stories but historical facts. St Paul was a historical figure and was martyrd in Rome. The suffering of the early Christians was immeasurable and we should be grateful to them for preserving timeless teachings such as sincerity, justice, faith, philanthropy, heroism and love. The apostles were historical figures. All were martyrd apart from St John. I wonder who they were preaching about if Christ did not exist. Silly atheists ask where is the evidence of Christ. It is obviously in the New Testament. We are dealing with historical figures not myths.
As for ridiculous sceptics who doubt Christ's miracles and resurrection they have to understand one quintessential fact: these is nothing impossible for Yahweh God. It was God that conferred on Jesus the power to perform miracles. It was God that raised Him from death. Atheists and sceptics will just have to chew on these facts. Remember that atheists cannot explain how matter came to be or the energy that gives life. They have no answer! Like Lucifer, they have rebelled against God and try to deceive humanity with lies.



posted on Sep, 12 2008 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Chief O
 


Just so that you understand... not all that are asking "where is the evidence of Christ" are atheists. And when talking about "God" realize that this thread is not debating whether or not there is a divine power, but rather if Jesus lived.





new topics
 
9
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join