It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by 1PLA1
This "debate" appears to be a one-sided debate.
Bibledefender presented a good case. The other guy didn't bother to engage in debate. His posts "prove it" were very disappointing and seemed particularly childish.
This was a debate, not a court of law.
I believe there are enough non-Biblical historical writings that discuss Jesus to prove that He did exist.
There are plenty of Jewish religious texts that prophesy a Jewish Messiah, prohesies which Jesus fulfilled, to indicate Jesus was that Messiah.
All-in-all, we will all know the truth eventually.
Originally posted by randomname
Someone puts a gun to your head and asks u a question; did you see Santa Claus. if you say yes he pulls the trigger, if you say no, you can go.
That is what St. Peter and the early Christians faced.
Except it was the romans asking the question, Jesus was the subject and they weren't using bullets to kill you but horrible crucifixions or throwing you to lions to be eaten alive in front of 70,000 screaming Romans.
They all chose death because to not do so would be a lie.
A con artist, a thief or a liar would never give choose to die if faced with those options.
Originally posted by AdamsMurmur
reply to post by windword
You need to fit The Hanged Man in there somewhere. At least according to fundamental Christian beliefs. But the interesting thing about the Fool is that it's not only the first but also the last card. When you finally find clarity, you become like a child again, which the fool also represents. Children are closer to the truth than most adults are. They see the world in wonder and don't discriminate against it. So you come full circle and realize there was nothing to realize.edit on 16/8/12 by AdamsMurmur because: (no reason given)
Gary Robert Habermas (born 1950) is an American evangelical Christian apologist, historian, and philosopher of religion.
So, the historical question remains. What happened that fateful Easter morning? What happened that could make disciples believe something so much that they willingly suffered and died for? What happened that changed the enemy of Christians (Paul) to suddenly convert without any prior motive to? What could have happened that changed the once skeptical brother of Jesus (James) into becoming a leader of the Christian church in Jerusalem? What happened at the tomb that emptied it?
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
Gary Robert Habermas (born 1950) is an American evangelical Christian apologist, historian, and philosopher of religion.
And? Care to discredit what Dr. Habermas SAID rather than Dr. Habermas? This isn't criminal court. All you've done with the above statement is displayed a circumstantial ad hominem fallacy.
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by bibledefender
So, the historical question remains. What happened that fateful Easter morning? What happened that could make disciples believe something so much that they willingly suffered and died for? What happened that changed the enemy of Christians (Paul) to suddenly convert without any prior motive to? What could have happened that changed the once skeptical brother of Jesus (James) into becoming a leader of the Christian church in Jerusalem? What happened at the tomb that emptied it?
I'll tell you. Jews are very pragmatic people, if they hadn't seen certain signs from Yeshua, they never would have believed in him. Jews require signs to believe, they require proof. There were several false messiahs to come before Messiah and they were all discovered counterfeits and summarily executed after their rebellions were put down (as attested to by Gamaliel). No jew would have died in Yeshua's name if they believed him a liar. Neither would any jew have stolen Messiah''s body, he was crucified just before Passover which was a High Sabbath and it was unlawful for a jew to do any work during the weekly sabbath and the High Sabbath which in this case was when Yeshua was crucified before.
We can draw from this example of the jews to ferret out false Messiah's. There are prophetic requirements that must be met to determine Messiah. Messiah must be born in Bethlehem, be a jew and of the seed of King David, and he had to appear before the destruction of second Temple. So with these requirments in mind we can easily strike down any would be false Messiah's in our time, leaving only one option for Messiah. Yeshua ha'Neseret (Jesus of Nazareth).edit on 16-8-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by lonewolf19792000
reply to post by mkmasn
The first christians were not gentiles, they were jews. Christians are jews, adopted into the House of Israel through the blood of Christ. Jesus converted tens of thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands during his ministry and they were all jews, because he didn't come to any but the lost sheep of Israel. For the first several years only jews were preached to, the gentiles didn't get the message until later.
According to islam, jews and christians are the same, they call us the "people of the book" and this is why they are told not to be our friends or they would be one of us, so they use taqiyya to feign friendship so they can use us for the cause of Allah. Orthodox jews may not believe yet, but the time is drawing nigh where they will soon enough. It's not uncommon to see messianic jews and christians worshipping in the same churches, all people are the same under one Master.
Originally posted by mkmasn
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
Gary Robert Habermas (born 1950) is an American evangelical Christian apologist, historian, and philosopher of religion.
And? Care to discredit what Dr. Habermas SAID rather than Dr. Habermas? This isn't criminal court. All you've done with the above statement is displayed a circumstantial ad hominem fallacy.
It's not a discredit to the good doctor, it's a discredit to his results.
Originally posted by mkmasn
Originally posted by AdamsMurmur
reply to post by windword
You need to fit The Hanged Man in there somewhere. At least according to fundamental Christian beliefs. But the interesting thing about the Fool is that it's not only the first but also the last card. When you finally find clarity, you become like a child again, which the fool also represents. Children are closer to the truth than most adults are. They see the world in wonder and don't discriminate against it. So you come full circle and realize there was nothing to realize.edit on 16/8/12 by AdamsMurmur because: (no reason given)
Aren't the translations for Crucifixion in Latin or Greek "hanged?" I remember reading this somewhere.
Edit: Can't find where I read that... it may have been from Latin or Greek, not sure. Maybe my mind is playing tricks on me.edit on 16-8-2012 by mkmasn because: (no reason given)
Their own version of Matthew, however, may have been a translation of the text into Aramaic. Jesus himself spoke Aramaic in Palestine, as did his earliest followers. It would make sense that a group of Jewish followers of Jesus that originated in Palestine would continue to cite his words, and stories about him, in his native tongue. It appears likely that this Aramaic Matthew was somewhat different from the Matthew now in the canon. In particular, the Matthew used by Ebionite Christians would have lacked the first two chapters, which narrate Jesus' birth to a virgin - a notion that the Ebionite Christians rejected. There were doubtless other differences from our own version of Matthew's Gospel as well.”
“Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes shall be they of his own household.” Again in Luke 12:49-53, the Lord said: “I came to send fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how distressed I am till it is accomplished! Do you suppose that I came to give peace on earth? I tell you, not at all, but rather division. For from now on five in one house will be divided: three against two, and two against three. Father will be divided against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.” So, as shocking as it may sound, Jesus said that He came into this world to bring division. But, before we pursue this subject any further, it is absolutely essential that we understand the statements made in Isaiah 9:6; 2 Thessalonians 3:16; and Luke 2:14. First of all, one can be sure that these statements do not contradict what Jesus said in Matthew 10:34-36 and Luke 12:49-53. The Bible, the inspired word of God, does not contradict itself! In Luke 2:14, the angels and host of heaven are speaking of the peace that would, as a result of this child's work, be able to exist between God and man. As Romans 5:1 says, “having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” This peace was being bestowed upon all of mankind “through Jesus Christ” (Acts 10:36), and the “glory” for all of this belongs to “God in the highest.” “But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast” (Ephesians 2:4-9). In other words, all of mankind became the enemies of God through sin, and the only way they could be at peace with Him was through His goodwill or grace. This, and this alone, is that of which Luke 2:14 speaks. Yes, it would be true that men who were at peace with God through Jesus Christ would also learn how to be at peace with each other (Romans 12:18; Hebrews 12:14; 1 Peter 3:11),
Originally posted by mkmasn
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
Jesus doesn't fit the bill, unless you are to take a non literal approach to the bible. Seed of David. Since Jesus was born of a virgin, he doesn't come from David's bloodline.
So since we have to take a metaphorical approach to the bible in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled, the whole thing is just a spiritual guide, not an historical account of what happened.
1.Jesus was indeed crucified and buried. This is attested to not only in the Gospels, but also by Paul and extra-biblical sources. And is admitted to as fact by almost all scholars.
2. Jesus' disciples believed that He rose from the dead and appeared to them. This is attested to by the fact that they willingly suffered for that message. That is accorded to in Acts, as well as extra-biblical sources and is also accepted as historical fact by nearly all scholars.
source
For many Christians, to question the description of Jesus' birth as related in the Bible is unthinkable. They believe that the Bible is the "word of God", an infallible record of the Almighty's influence on his creation, and therefore to be taken at face value. However, a careful study of the nativity narratives of Matthew and Luke indicate that the supposedly unerring "word of God" is full of contradictions and inventions. The most plausible conclusion is that the familiar Christmas stories in Matthew and Luke are religious myths, awkwardly grafted onto an earlier non-miraculous tradition about Jesus' birth.
They appear to be legends recorded by later Jewish-Christian apologists who were attempting to explain the origins of a man whom they considered divine. In this sense, the authors employed the familiar Jewish practice of the time known as "midrash" to illustrate and prove their points; that is to say, they liberally interpreted and expanded on texts and prophesies in the Jewish scriptures. The miraculous birth stories also served other purposes, namely, to rebut the contemporary inferences about the illegitimate birth of Jesus (Matt. 1:18-19, Mark 6:3, John 8:41) and to counter charges that he was possessed by the devil, rather than the spirit.
3. Paul, who was an enemy of the church suddenly changed. This is stated by Paul himself in a number of N.T. texts and have claimed to have seen the risen Christ. Usually people will convert on the word of someone else, that is a secondary source. But Paul's conversion is due to something that he himself experienced. That is a primary source. Again, almost all scholars accept this as fact.
4. James, the skeptical brother of Jesus, suddenly changed. This is attested to in the Bible, and extra-biblical source reports that he was a strict Jew. The Bible also testifies that after the Resurrection, James became a leader of the church.
5. The tomb was found empty. This is accepted by the majority of scholars also (Gary Habermas did a study on the state of scholarship to date. He reports that 75% of scholars agree that the tomb was indeed found empty).
Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by bibledefender
A theory will never explain facts.
Historical facts are just stories - his story (the person who wrote it).
There is one universal truth, everything else is a theory.