For athiests, is the question was Jesus real or was he really the son of God? Other?

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


You believe Jesus is real because the Bible affirms that Jesus was real? What other historical documents can you present that show Jesus was real?

You also posit that Jesus (who is actually God in the flesh to most Christians) sacrificed himself to change a rule he created in the first place, just to save us from himself. Did I get that correct?

Tell me how that makes any sense, please.

ETA: Please ask yourself how his sacrifice was the ultimate one when he rose again and ascended to Heaven. All those other animals that were sacrifice and killed; they stayed dead. Not Jesus though, nope he's a special snowflake!

Theres evidence Jesus existed (excluding The Bible), his name can be traced in bhuddist documents from north-eastern Pakistan I believe, will try and find the source as I remember reading this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggges ago, but whether or not you believe him to be the son of God is a different thing, in Islam they believe him to be a messiah, born in a miracle birth but not the son of god

Originally posted by iamnang
Theres evidence Jesus existed (excluding The Bible), his name can be traced in bhuddist documents from north-eastern Pakistan I believe, will try and find the source as I remember reading this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggges ago, but whether or not you believe him to be the son of God is a different thing, in Islam they believe him to be a messiah, born in a miracle birth but not the son of god

Right, that's how I learned it too. He's not The Messiah, more of a prophet. He didn't fulfill the requirements laid out in the OT. This is why the Jews disregard him as the Son of God.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069

Historical evidence shows that he did walk among us 2k yrs ago. The Holy Bible, the Torah and the koran acknowledge this.

Yes.

The koran and Torah says he was only a prophet. They're still waiting for what they concieve as the real deal.

Wrong.
The Koran maintains that Jesus is the messiah and also a prophet. Thats why he is given the title, "al-masih" (the messiah). Ask any muslim. And Islam also teaches that Jesus will return.... and defeat the anti-christ.

The Jews, however, have a very negative view of Jesus because they see him as a false messiah.

Orthadox Jews believe in him. IMHO, This is the true difference between us. The Old Testemnt on all 3 are very similar., but Jesus coming to us is what changed all the rules. Now instead of the ritual sacrifices and such to attain God's favor, we have only to accept that God loves us so much, he gave us his son, Jesus to be killed in the most horrible way.

The bible makes it clear that keeping the law is the way to attain Gods favor..., even Jesus said so.
The only sacrifice that God wants is kindness to other people... feeding the hungry, caring for orphans and widows etc. (I can provide you with verses if you ask me to)

Also Refer to the judgement day verse in Matthew, when the people are seperated into sheep and goats, on the basis of their deeds to their fellow man, not on the basis of whether or not they accepted that Jesus was killed for their sins.

The crucifixation is recorded history. All he had to do to avoid his fate was to admit he was not the Messiah. So, unless you were unaware of this, your position is that he is not the Messiah. Help me to understand your mind set please.

But Jesus was looking to avoid his fate.
He prayed to God that "the cup be taken away"...

Jesus was marked for crucifixion because the Jews wanted him killed... not because it was all a plan to make salvation easier for people.

reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx


Yes I agree, historical evidence points towards Jesus not being real, nothing more than a Christian construct, a rip off construct at that, from the likes of Osiris and Mithras.

Originally posted by iamnang
Theres evidence Jesus existed (excluding The Bible), his name can be traced in bhuddist documents from north-eastern Pakistan I believe, will try and find the source as I remember reading this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggges ago, but whether or not you believe him to be the son of God is a different thing, in Islam they believe him to be a messiah, born in a miracle birth but not the son of god

Where he was called 'Issa', and the whole thing is highly debatable.

It eventually resulted in such as a book called: "Was Jesus a buddhist?".

Btw he's also mentioned in the autonomous religion of John the baptist's followers, where Jesus is called 'the deciever messiah' (it's uncertain if this is a reference to a person Jesus or the character painted mainly by pauline christians).

reply to post by bogomil

Btw he's also mentioned in the autonomous religion of John the baptist's followers, where Jesus is called 'the deciever messiah' (it's uncertain if this is a reference to a person Jesus or the character painted mainly by pauline christians)

You must be referring to the Mandeism.
They hold John the Baptist in high regard, along with a few of the early biblical patriarchs, but consider Jesus, Moses, Abraham as false prophets. Strange.

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


I figure he probably was real - but was not the son of "God". He was just a man.

But a very good man, very charismatic and kind and was preaching a message of tolerance, peace, kinship, respect and love at a time when fear of the unknown ruled peoples' lives.

Any supernatural powers or his divination were only associated to him after his death - he didn't walk on water or heal the lame, etc. Just a man, like me. But more tolerant

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by bogomil

 

Btw he's also mentioned in the autonomous religion of John the baptist's followers, where Jesus is called 'the deciever messiah' (it's uncertain if this is a reference to a person Jesus or the character painted mainly by pauline christians)

You must be referring to the Mandeism.
They hold John the Baptist in high regard, along with a few of the early biblical patriarchs, but consider Jesus, Moses, Abraham as false prophets. Strange.

edit on 28-7-2011 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)

Insofar as all religionist/semi-religionist claims are "strange".

App. 20 % of mankind has similar beliefs to those of the mandaeans (on certain central cosmogonic points); in different ways considering 'creation' (of cosmos), as interfered with.

From a rational perspective, this is less un-reasonable than an alleged creator saying: "Now see what YOU made me do". With the associated 'message' about it wrapped in endless circle-argumentation.

Hijacking gifted individuals who try to cut through the semantics and social/'spiritual' engineering has always been popular amongst the monopoly-seeking.

"If you can't beat them, infiltrate them".

reply to post by Max_TO


LOL That’s the best reply you have? The ancient astronaut theory might not be right, but at least they have more evidence to back up their theory than a book. How to you explain all the ancient structures around the world that are over 5K years old? According to your fairy tale, the earth was created 5k years ago.. how do you explain things like fossils? Is SCIENCE a big conspiracy?

For those of you who suggested an ancient aliens thread.. a.) learn how to use the search feature on ATS and you'll find that there are many threads already b.) if you don't like to read, watch the Ancient Aliens series. They are on their 3rd season now. Seasons 1 & 2 total 17 episodes.

After you learn something about the theory, you can start your own thread to debate it. There's a lot of HARD evidence that is SET into STONE to support this theory.

All of us "atheists" replied to your thread about Christianity.. from what I see on ATS, the atheists tend to know just as much, if not more about Christianity than Christians do.... and the Christians tend to know almost nothing other than Christianity. That's the funny thing with Christians. They don't take them time to look at other people's ideas. You'll read the bible cover to cover 100 times but you won't pick up The Torah and read it, just to see what it's about. You don't have to agree with the AA theory.. but how about you try learning something about it before you dismiss it as a fairy tale. I've learned all about your religion... and while I don't dismiss Jesus as a real person with real ideas... I don't believe I need to life my life around Christian ideas and the teachings of Christ. Just to avoid going to "hell"

Guess what Christian... when you die, you're going to the same place as the rest of us.. no matter what your religion, race, or sexual orientation is... no matter if you’re a priest or murder... we're all going to the same place when we die.... IMO :-)

reply to post by Hillbilly123069


Historically, there's no way to prove Jesus existed.

Even if we could prove he existed;

-there's no way to prove the immaculate conception (born of a virgin) but parthenogenesis isn't unheard of.

-there's no way to prove his divine miracles (healing at sundown, walking on water, water to wine)

-there's no way to prove the ressurection - And coming back to like seemed to be a common thing at the time:

Matthew 27:52: And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose,

So what makes Jesus special? Ressurection seems to be a commonality for the time.

Even if all the above miracles (and magic) is true;

- it still doesn't prove he was the son of God
- it still doesn't prove that his ethical and moral preaching was the best

We can't prove Socrates existed either, but his wisdom doesn't come with supernatural strings attached, or bizarre magic tricks that we are supposed to believe are special powers.

Originally posted by iamnang
Theres evidence Jesus existed (excluding The Bible), his name can be traced in bhuddist documents from north-eastern Pakistan I believe, will try and find the source as I remember reading this aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggges ago, but whether or not you believe him to be the son of God is a different thing, in Islam they believe him to be a messiah, born in a miracle birth but not the son of god

Ah, one of the 'secret lives' of jesus involved traveling around and learning about their religion and theology. Is that what you're referring to?

I'd imagine, if those documents were solid enough to be proof, they'd also strongly discourage the Son of God claim. The idea of the son of the one true god, sitting down and respectfully learning about the ideals from what he would know to be false beliefs, is fairly preposterous.

the cult of MIthras was around the same time as Jusus, Mithras also had a virgin birth, also had twelve followers, going back further there are other 'gods' that had virgin births, twelve followers...............

reply to post by Wolf Eyes




You didn't even read my posts did you ? You only got as far as my comment regarding AA before you exploded , didn't you ? Got to ask , was it the fact that I was able to spot you as an AA believer so quick that put you over the top ?

Go back , reread , then we can address what I did say .

Originally posted by Wolf Eyes

reply to post by Max_TO

 

LOL That’s the best reply you have? The ancient astronaut theory might not be right, but at least they have more evidence to back up their theory than a book. How to you explain all the ancient structures around the world that are over 5K years old? According to your fairy tale, the earth was created 5k years ago.. how do you explain things like fossils? Is SCIENCE a big conspiracy?

For those of you who suggested an ancient aliens thread.. a.) learn how to use the search feature on ATS and you'll find that there are many threads already b.) if you don't like to read, watch the Ancient Aliens series. They are on their 3rd season now. Seasons 1 & 2 total 17 episodes.

After you learn something about the theory, you can start your own thread to debate it. There's a lot of HARD evidence that is SET into STONE to support this theory.

edit on 28-7-2011 by Wolf Eyes because: (no reason given)

Sorry friend but this is so out there I simply can't reply .

Originally posted by OMsk3ptic
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx

 

Yes I agree, historical evidence points towards Jesus not being real, nothing more than a Christian construct, a rip off construct at that, from the likes of Osiris and Mithras.

I really wish people would stop saying this. Ask any major archeologist if there is enough evidence to support whether or not if Jesus was a real person and they will most likely tell you something like this:

There are more than 24,000 partial and complete manuscript copies of the New Testament. There are also some 86,000 quotations from the early church fathers and several thousand Lectionaries (church-service books containing Scripture quotations used in the early centuries of Christianity). No other book is even a close second to the Bible on either the number or early dating of the copies.

The average secular work from antiquity survives on only a handful of manuscripts; the New Testament boasts thousands.

Bottom line: the New Testament has an overwhelming amount of evidence supporting its reliability and the existence of Jesus. Now whether or not if he was the Son of God will always be open for debate until he returns. But without question, the evidence is overwhelming that there was such a person on earth during those times.

The oldest reference there is comes from Josephus, In his book, Antiquities of the Jews, which he finished in the year A.D. 93 or 94, Josephus refers to Jesus twice. I'll quote the Arabic version because scholars agree that it is the most accurate:

The Arabic version reads as follows:

"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, XVIII.III.3

Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James. Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews XX.IX.I

Now of course many of you will reject his statement as well, but according to archeology it is a fact that Jesus was a real person.

reply to post by pikestaff

The iconic scenes of Mithras show him being born from a rock

Source

Now if we can call being born from a rock a virgin birth then i just don't know what to say .

There are many claims such as this throughout the conspiracy world , how ever when one does some independent research on these claims one will often find a rather large distortion of excepted fact .