Bible verses clearly condone the Killing of Gays and Witches.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Fromabove
Jesus Christ is God, and Jesus is the salvation of the world. The Bible is the inspired word of God, not religion. Religion is man's attempt to impress God, Jesus is God's attempt to reach man. Crimes and corruption within organized religion are not the fault of the Bible or Jesus, but of man.

OK - - so who/what exactly is Jesus?

There is absolutely zero real proof of his existence. He exists only in writings.

reply to post by Annee


ANCIENT HISTORY DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! Everyone that's dead only exists in writings. If you're standing on a grave, how do you know who is buried there? Because of the writing on the tombstone. History works on the basis of how likely something is based on writings. Not proof. When it comes to historical figures like ancient philosophers or ancient rulers or biblical figures It works the same way. But there's no proof the tombstone isn't fake, it's just not likely.

Take the Pharaohs for example. We just have writings and hieroglyphs (which are also just writings) and the pyramids which are really just big tombstones. When it comes to details like their names, their life stories, and how long they ruled then all you have is texts. You can't look at a mummy and tell if his name was Bob or not. Sometimes the mummy isn't even there anymore. You have to look at the writings. It's all based on writings.

We don't really have any original ancient documents. All we have are copies. To determine if historical figures really existed we use textual analysis. Such as the dialect the work was written in or if they can cross reference what the author is saying with what other authors of the same time were saying. Or does another author that we know existed ever write about this person? Or why would someone write this if it isn't true?

For example, the NT isn't written by just one guy. It has multiple authors that tell the same story. Why would they conspire to write it if Jesus didn't exist? How did they all come up with the same story if Jesus didn't exist? Where did they meet if Jesus didn't exist? All the copies weren't all made by just one person either. So we know there was most likely earlier originals that they were copying and that the copies aren't forgeries. We can compare the copies to each other to see what the original text was too.

You'd have to come up with a new explanation that explains all these things. You'd also have to explain why some historians wrote about Jesus that weren't even Christian. And your explanation would have to be simpler than that he was real. If it's not, then the simpler explanation that, Jesus was real. Is probably the correct answer as it is the more likely one.

Some people say there aren't very many writings proving Jesus existed, but that's a myth. It doesn't work that way. It isn't based on how many texts there are. It's based on how likely something is, but there are more than most atheists think there are. The truth is, there are enough writings that show Jesus was more likely to have existed than other historical figures that nobody ever questions the existence of and probably more evidence for Jesus then there was for anyone else from his time period.

Sure, maybe Jesus wasn't real, but if not, we should be questioning the existence of a lot of other historical figures first before we even get to Jesus. Like Socrates for example. But I never hear anyone bring him up. I've never seen anyone start a thread saying, there's no proof Socrates existed! GREEK PHILOSOPHY IS A FRAUD!

I see Jesus threads all the time though. We must ask ourselves why? Because it's his message they want to attack. Nobody today really gives a crap about what Socrates had to say. So we see, it's the message that's the problem. Not the person.

Because if it was really about evidence then how to do I know any ancient historical figures really existed? Those authors could have been lying too. What am I supposed to say? That every ancient author is just a big big liar and it's all made up and you're all just big poopy heads! It's not a very intelligent argument. It's better to go with the likelihood of the texts.

Most scholars, even most critical scholars, agree that there probably was a man named Jesus and most even agree that it is likely that a tomb was found empty after a crucification. So, there's enough that if you throw Jesus out the window, you're basically throwing all ancient history out with him and all the writings and all the historians and all the scholars except for the ones that support your view. You're basically using the, everyone is a poopy headed liar argument, and it's just not convincing.

To say there's a small chance he might not have existed. That you might be able to get away with, but if you say he definitely did not exist, well the evidence just doesn't support that at all. He most likely did.

Most everything we "know" about the ancient world is based on the consensus of scholars and historians on texts. They have reached a consensus that there was a man named Jesus. Yes some disagree, but to disagree is to be in the minority view right now and leaves you having to explain a lot of things that really only make sense if Jesus was real.

This link gives a good talk about it.
www.youtube.com...

We all know and have evidence that Israel was destroyed after the Romans left in 70AD, Jesus of the Bible spoke that every stone would be broken in two after he leaves and can be found that way today.

Much evidence such as Jewish symbols like the Menorah can still be found and dug up in Israel.

With all this history one has to think what exactly happened there and why, all because of a mythical person or because of a real person and all because of religion?

en.wikipedia.org...(Temple)

Archaeological evidence, including depictions by artists who had seen the menorah, indicates that they were neither straight nor semicircular but elliptical.[6] Until 2009, the earliest preserved representation of the menorah of the Temple was depicted in a frieze on the Arch of Titus, commemorating his triumphal parade in Rome following the destruction of Jerusalem in the year 70.

In 2009, however, the ruins of a synagogue with pottery dating from before the destruction of the Second Temple were discovered under land in Magdala owned by the Legionaries of Christ, who had intended to construct a center for women's studies.[7] Inside that synagogue's ruins was discovered a rectangular stone, which had on its surface, among other ornate carvings, a depiction of the seven-branched menorah differing markedly from the depiction on the Arch of Titus, probably carved by an eyewitness to the actual menorah present at the time in the Temple at Jerusalem. This menorah has arms which are polygonal, not rounded, and the base is not graduated but triangular.

Representations of the seven branched candlebrum have been found on tombs and monuments dating from the 1st century as a frequently used symbol of Judaism and the Jewish people
Text

en.wikipedia.org...

The Siege of Jerusalem in the year 70 AD was a decisive event in the First Jewish-Roman War. It was followed by the fall of Masada in 73. The Roman army, led by the future Emperor Titus, with Tiberius Julius Alexander as his second-in-command, besieged and conquered the city of Jerusalem, which had been occupied by its Jewish defenders in 66. The city and its famous Second Temple were destroyed in 70.

The destruction of the temples (both first and second) is still mourned annually as the Jewish fast Tisha B'Av. The Arch of Titus, depicting and celebrating the Roman sack of Jerusalem and the Temple, still stands in Rome.
Text

Matthew 24
The Destruction of the Temple and Signs of the End Times
1 Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. 2 “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”
Text

A destroyed Temple is evident today where the Jews pray at the Western Wall.

en.wikipedia.org...

Construction 19 BCE

According to the Tanakh, Solomon's Temple was built atop the Temple Mount in the 10th century BCE and destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE. The Second Temple was completed and dedicated in around 19 BCE Herod the Great began a massive expansion project on the Temple Mount. He artificially expanded the area which resulted in an enlarged platform. Today's Western Wall formed part of the retaining perimeter wall of this platform. Herod's Temple was destroyed by the Roman Empire, along with the rest of Jerusalem, in 70 CE during the First Jewish-Roman War.
Text

Wow! I just have to wonder how these things happen.

I mean to use the Bible to justify such horrific actions is just wrong.

The Bible states that courts are to be established in order to establish guilt or innocence.
Deut 16:18

The Bible also states that more than one witness is required in a case that carries capital punishment.
Num 35:30

Both Atheists and Christians use the "death penalty" clauses to justify their positions, however they never mention the fact that Bible says that before a penalty can be administered, there must be a court decision.

J.

Originally posted by tinfoilman

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by Fromabove
Jesus Christ is God, and Jesus is the salvation of the world. The Bible is the inspired word of God, not religion. Religion is man's attempt to impress God, Jesus is God's attempt to reach man. Crimes and corruption within organized religion are not the fault of the Bible or Jesus, but of man.

OK - - so who/what exactly is Jesus?

There is absolutely zero real proof of his existence. He exists only in writings.

reply to post by Annee

 

ANCIENT HISTORY DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY! Everyone that's dead only exists in writings. If you're standing on a grave, how do you know who is buried there? Because of the writing on the tombstone. History works on the basis of how likely something is based on writings. Not proof. When it comes to historical figures like ancient philosophers or ancient rulers or biblical figures It works the same way. But there's no proof the tombstone isn't fake, it's just not likely.

OK - - what do you have that was written at the time Jesus supposedly existed - - - directly about him?

I'm no expert - - - but I have been following this stuff for about 20 years. And to my knowledge there isn't any.

I know there was a couple passages attributed to Josephus - - that have been proven false.

Originally posted by tinfoilman
Most scholars, even most critical scholars, agree that there probably was a man named Jesus and most even agree that it is likely that a tomb was found empty after a crucification.

Really? And what critical scholars would that be?

Forget an empty grave - - - is there any proof of a Crucification? I don't think there is. I could be wrong - - - but I don't think any proof of that has ever been found.

1st Corinthians 1 denotes, The Jews require a sign, the Gentiles seek after wisdom; to the Jews, Christ crucified is a stumbling-block, and to the Gentiles foolishness: that no flesh should glory, to the Jews Christ (the First) manifested the power of God, and to the Gentiles Christ (the Last) manifests the wisdom of God.

To one who is conceitedly wise, it doesn't matter what you say: for to them knowledge should be verifyable by one who does not believe it; such a one has no concept of faith: for faith to them is foolishness. Someone who concerns themselves with nature will not receive anything that is presented to them regarding the spiritual: they will always seek proof, looking without, instead of looking within; meanwhile they are living proof, more powerful than any written word can witness.

reply to post by JerryB08


totally agree with this, even though im not christian and more into the occult or cult like such, there are many bibles in this world true or not, there has been plenty of times and decades that humans might have even added through the bible that however would of been a human that has done so, if you read about enoch it will also tell you that the churches burned the historical writings and beliefs of enoch because it accepted some parts the bible today does not, if they had the will to do so then what else would stop them from doing so to the common bible if it wasnt what fit their thoughts