It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus.
All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.
Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.
Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.
If you do not understand this, imagine yourself confronted with a charge for a crime which you know you did not commit. You feel confident that no one can prove guilt because you know that there exists no evidence whatsoever for the charge against you. Now imagine that you stand present in a court of law that allows hearsay as evidence. When the prosecution presents its case, everyone who takes the stand against you claims that you committed the crime, not as a witness themselves, but solely because other people said so. None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.
Originally posted by cautiouslypessimistic
I can't debate a sentence like "many historians believe Jesus didn't exist" --- I need references, who were these historians? Now I will concede that there are many people who don't believe Jesus existed, but when you use the term "historian" I automatically think e-d-u-c-a-t-i-o-n, not just personal gut feelings. Now, if you can give me a name of a scholar or history expert, not Anton Levey, who believes Jesus didn't exist, we can debate.
[edit on 12-9-2008 by Bombeni]
You have debated nothing, and I did give you a name (although you dont seem to want to do your own research) but you still seem to be missing the point. Why does it matter who the historians are that think this way? The point are the theories, not who made the theories.
You dont want to debate, you want people to tell you you're right.
When world historian H. G. Wells was asked who has left the greatest legacy on history, he replied, “By this test Jesus stands first.”
In C. S. Lewis's novel That Hideous Strength, the character Jules is a caricature of Wells, and much of Lewis's science fiction was written both under the influence of Wells and as an antithesis to his work. The devoutly Christian Lewis was especially incensed at Wells's The Shape of Things to Come where a future world government systematically persecutes and completely obliterates Christianity (and all other religions), which the book presents as a positive and vitally necessary act.
Originally posted by Nohup
I think it's interesting that historical proof of Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) existing is relatively easy to find, whereas proof of the Jesus as told about in the Bible stories is essentially non-existent.
Siddhārtha Gautama (Sanskrit; Pali: Siddhattha Gotama) was a spiritual teacher from ancient India and the founder of Buddhism. He is generally recognized by Buddhists as the Supreme Buddha (Sammāsambuddha) of our age. The time of his birth and death are uncertain...
... the collection of teachings attributed to Gautama by the Theravada, was committed to writing about 400 years later. "Scholars are increasingly reluctant to make unqualified claims about the historical facts of the Buddha's life and teachings."....
...The prime sources of information regarding Siddhārtha Gautama's life are the Buddhist texts. The Buddha and his monks spent four months each year discussing and rehearsing his teachings, and after his death his monks set about preserving them....
...The scriptures were not written down until three or four hundred years after the Buddha's death. By this point, the monks had added or altered some material themselves, in particular magnifying the figure of the Buddha...
Originally posted by Observer_X
Thought I would share this with all of you this makes SO MUCH SENSE.
Originally posted by Chief O
People who refute Jesus' existence are not interested whether He existed at all. They are more interested in rejecting Christ because they feel a belief in Christ would be too restrictive on their lifestyles.