Who claimed to have met a historical Jesus ?

Since you are so convinced already with your own belief, you feel that you already know everything, then there is no point of me even having to ask you to do MORE research. I advocated for you to do more research and you resorted into insults and accusations. I guess you are the ALL Knowing God. Hatred is emanating from you and it blinds you.

I only want to engage into a healthy discussion, this is no longer healthy, I do not want to accompany you in the place where you are, it's too dark there.

The moment you believe that you found the ultimate truth, that is the time that you have lost it.

Gday,

Originally posted by boniknik
Like I said, do more research.

I already did.
I reasearched all the books you listed, NONE of them contained a claim to be an eye-witness.

Sadly,
you ignored all that research, and just kept right on preaching.

We went down to the sea at an opportune moment,

So, you ACTUALLY believe this is a claim to be an eye-witness to Jesus?
Incredible.

Firstly, this is a voyage with Paul, NOT Jesus.
Did you even know that?
Or did you think you could pretend this was about Jesus?

So, even IF this person was there, he would be a witness to PAUL, NOT Jesus - how dishonest of you.

NOT a claim to be an eye-witness to Jesus.
You are wrong again.

Originally posted by boniknik
The name of this city is HabitationI, Peter, inquired about the name of this city from residents who were standing on the dock. A man among them answered, saying, "The name of this city is Habitation, that is, Foundation [...] endurance." And the leader among them holding the palm branch at the edge of the dock. And after we had gone ashore with the baggage, I went into the city, to seek advice about lodging.

Hello?
This is a claim to have personally enquired about a city name (in a book forged centuries later.)

NOT a claim to be an eye-witness to Jesus.
You are wrong again.


So, there you have it - when pressed to cite evidence of anyone claiming to be an eye-witness to Jesus, you come up with :

* a claim to be with Paul

* a claim to have asked for a city name.


Do you actually believe these are really claims to be an eye-witness to Jesus?



K.

Gday,

Originally posted by boniknik
Since you are so convinced already with your own belief, you feel that you already know everything, then there is no point of me even having to ask you to do MORE research.

I did plenty of research,
I showed all your claims your wrong.
I showed we do not have any authentic claims to have met Jesus.

You ignored it all, and kept right on preaching.

Originally posted by boniknik
I advocated for you to do more research and you resorted into insults and accusations. I guess you are the ALL Knowing God. Hatred is emanating from you and it blinds you.

I did plenty of research - far more than you - but you just ignored it all. That's why I insulted you - you made FALSE claims, then refused to admit it, and ignored the evidence you were wrong.

THEN you pretended that the "we" passages was an eye-witnesses to Jesus!
AND that a story of Peter asking the name of a city was an eye-witnesses to Jesus also!

Incredible.
Dishonest.
False.

Originally posted by boniknik
I only want to engage into a healthy discussion, this is no longer healthy, I do not want to accompany you in the place where you are, it's too dark there. The moment you believe that you found the ultimate truth, that is the time that you have lost it.

Healthy?
Haha.

You LOST the argument, so now you run away, but still pretending you won.
Pathetic.

Why can't you just admit you were wrong?
Why is that so hard for people on this site?



K.

What happened boniknik?

Why can't you just admit error ?


K.

So,

not one single Christian writing contains an authentic claim to have met Jesus.


K.

So,
it's clear -

there is NOT ONE authentic claim to have met Jesus.


K.

It seems to be just you posting here, dude... again and again.

I've got a different perspective for you:

It doesn't actually matter whether or not we have a historical, written account from someone who met Jesus. It doesn't make a lick of difference as to whether he existed or not.

Now, I'm not saying that he necessarily performed all those miracles, nor that he is the only begotten son of God, merely that we have numerous records and testaments to his having existed at a certain time and place in history.

Feel free to doubt or question the veracity of said records, but you should know that far more has been accepted of much less in other instances.

Have a good one, dude.

Whoa, just realised the threadromancy involved here, and that I've already posted in this topic previously, numerous times.

I'll leave you to your own company, mate.

Nobody has made any verrifiable claims of meeting a historical jesus, however even if it did happen it would not change anything. The Prophet Muhammad and Joseph Smith Jr. were real people but that does not proove or back up much.

I can't give you a verified eyewitness documented in history that spoke to Jesus. OK...you win.

However, I do know that the historical contexts in which Jesus is written to have lived in is accurate. Political figures, both Roman and Jewish, are documented. The census that placed Jesus birth in Bethlehem is documented, however off by either 4-6 years, based on which history outside of the Bible you read. The culture and societal makeup of Jerusalem, the prejudices of the surrounding countryside, the traditions of birth, marriage, worship, travel, and dying are all historically accurate... even depictions of fishing villages on the sea of Gallilee are detailed.

Jesus' death by crucifiction is very detailed, even down to the wounds suffered, the resulting lungs filling with liquid shown after the legionaires piercing his side and lung. The delirium, the arrangement of those crucified, and the rush to bury him prior to Passover.

All of the towns, villages, roads, markets, squares, laws, courts, and courtyards are documented. Archeology marks most of these spots. Further, history, archeology, science, all back most of the accounts of people, places, things in the Old Testament and thus adds integrity to the accounts in the New Testament. The city of nineveh was thought a Biblical myth, until rediscovered in the late 1800s. Even National Geographic records the finding of the Exodus Path from Egypt to the Mountain of god in Saudi Arabia... by the Air force, using satellites to look for Hussein's tanks in the first Gulf War. There was a WWI chaplain turned officer that lead his British troops behind the Ottoman Turks, using a goat path described in the OT by King David.

Anyway, I hope and pray that oneday, you work as hard to seek salvation as you work to topple others beliefs. God Bless You

Gday,

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
I can't give you a verified eyewitness documented in history that spoke to Jesus. OK...you win.

Yup, the are no eye-witnesses to Jesus.

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
However, I do know that the historical contexts in which Jesus is written to have lived in is accurate. Political figures, both Roman and Jewish, are documented.

So what?
James Bond has real people in it (e.g. the PM.)
So does Harry Potter.
So what?

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
The census that placed Jesus birth in Bethlehem is documented, however off by either 4-6 years, based on which history outside of the Bible you read.

No it isn't.
Which is why you didn't cite any evidence.
There was NO census that matched the legend in the bible.

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
The culture and societal makeup of Jerusalem, the prejudices of the surrounding countryside, the traditions of birth, marriage, worship, travel, and dying are all historically accurate... even depictions of fishing villages on the sea of Gallilee are detailed.

So what?
Most books of fiction have real people and places!
Why you keep saying that?!
It proves NOTHING.

It shows that the Jesus is as real as Hercules or James Bond or Harry Potter.

Originally posted by AlreadyGone
Jesus' death by crucifiction is very detailed, even down to the wounds suffered, the resulting lungs filling with liquid shown after the legionaires piercing his side and lung. The delirium, the arrangement of those crucified, and the rush to bury him prior to Passover.

So what?
Harry Potter's experiences are even MORE detailed.
Therefore - Harry is MORE real than Jesus - at least according to YOUR argument.


So, there we have it -
Jesus is as real as Harry Potter or Hercules or James Bond.



K.

I love how when christians get pushed into a corner they have a canned response that whoever they're arguing with is angry and just hates god.

Yah,

anything to avoid dealing with the fact that there is NO historical evidence for Jesus at all.


K.

The way i look at it, its all about the Christ- consciousness! that all this talk is about, the name Jesus is irrelevant! my mother thought Christ was Jesus's second name! PS I also think the meaning behind the Holy Grail is the Christ-consciousness! or Nirvana! very few have truly achieved this state of Grace , Peace.

Gday,

Originally posted by Roark
It doesn't actually matter whether or not we have a historical, written account from someone who met Jesus. It doesn't make a lick of difference as to whether he existed or not.

Actually it makes a huge difference.
If there WERE numerous 1st hand accounts of meeting Jesus, it would be certain he existed.

But,
we don't have that - we have :
* STORIES from much later from people who never met him
* CLAIMS that some book authors met him
* ONE single FORGED claim to have met Jesus
* 3rd person claims ADDED to G.John

We have the same evidence for Jesus as we do for Hercules or Krishna - religious stories intended to inculcate BELIEF.

Originally posted by Roark
Now, I'm not saying that he necessarily performed all those miracles, nor that he is the only begotten son of God, merely that we have numerous records and testaments to his having existed at a certain time and place in history.

No we don't.
We don't have any RECORDS of Jesus at all.
We have later STORIES from Christians.
And we have later historical references to Christian who BELIEVED in Jesus.

What we DON"T have is actual 'records'.
But believers just LOVE to use this word, when it's really just claims and stories and beliefs - NO records at all.

Originally posted by Roark
Feel free to doubt or question the veracity of said records, but you should know that far more has been accepted of much less in other instances.

There are NO 'records'.
Which is why you conspicuously failed to cite any.

Josephus - forged.
Suetonius - not about Jesus.
Tacitus & Pliny - later reports of Christian beliefs.

There are no records of Jesus.
None.


K.

reply to post by Kapyong


blah blah blah blah blah .... nothing but thought from the mind.. do your homework instead of pasting what you don't know ..


no references, no context....certainally no student of the ancient scritpure.. yea.. and you wounder why you get no debate..

Back to the OP.... whether anyone has claimed to have met the Historical Jesus...

www.expansions.com... - Bloke by the name of Stewart Swerdlow 'claims' in the book 'Montauk - The Alien Connection' (Yes im aware you have to purchase the book) writes in chapter 13 that he time travelled back by order of the Illuminati during the Montauk Project and took a vile of his (jesus) blood, and also a failed assassination attempt on him.

The thread is not whether its fact, but whether anyone has 'claimed' to have met the historical Jesus..... Stewart Swerdlow has made that claim.

Gday,

Originally posted by Im a Marty
Back to the OP.... whether anyone has claimed to have met the Historical Jesus...

www.expansions.com... - Bloke by the name of Stewart Swerdlow 'claims' in the book 'Montauk - The Alien Connection' (Yes im aware you have to purchase the book) writes in chapter 13 that he time travelled back by order of the Illuminati during the Montauk Project and took a vile of his (jesus) blood, and also a failed assassination attempt on him.

The thread is not whether its fact, but whether anyone has 'claimed' to have met the historical Jesus..... Stewart Swerdlow has made that claim.

Actually, I asked for "AUTHENTIC" claims in the OP.
You conveniently skipped that :-)

So anyway, do you REALLY believe this crazy claim ?


K.

Gday,

Originally posted by Komodo
reply to post by Kapyong

 

no references, no context....certainally no student of the ancient scritpure.. yea.. and you wounder why you get no debate..

In fact I DID provide numerous references - many times.

But all you crazies just IGNORE the facts and keep on preaching.

Then you LIE that I provide no references.
Pathetic.



K.

reply to post by Kapyong


its an 'authentic' claim...meaning he genuinly claims to have met this jesus figure...... but i said whether its fact is another story