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.

 

Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

page: 38
29
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 08:15 PM
link   
My last attempt here before I bash my head on my keyboard and remember why I can't have nice things again...


[W]e have to explain the origin of Christianity, and in so doing we have to choose between two alternatives. One alternative is to say that it originated in a myth which was later dressed up as history. The other is to say that it originated with one historical individual who was later mythologized into a supernatural being.

George Walsh, The Role of Religion in History, New Brunswick: Transaction, 1998, p. 58

I mean, even the OPPONENTS of early Christianity aren't found to deny Jesus' existence....and even now opponents still don't deny his existence...for example...




What particular historian would you like to contact you to further discuss the matter? And more importantly, will even their expert analysis convince you?

A2D




posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 08:25 PM
link   

colbe

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I will admit that I can get riled about the debate of religion (being that I'm ex-Catholic and this stuff really hits home for me) and the hardheadedness of some of the religious posters can fuel it. Also, I'm bored at work, and this is the thread that I'm currently most active on

edit on 10-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



Krazysh0t,

Aren't you "hardheaded" to deny God? Naaah.

You have the grace given in the Sacraments on your soul. I'll offer prayers too, God is working you. All the world will be enlightened unless you die before the divine "awakening." Also called the Great Warning.


Uh oh, I left out a word, the word "on."

"God is working ON you."



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 08:48 PM
link   

colbe

colbe

Krazysh0t
reply to post by Astyanax
 


Ok, I'll take that into consideration. I will admit that I can get riled about the debate of religion (being that I'm ex-Catholic and this stuff really hits home for me) and the hardheadedness of some of the religious posters can fuel it. Also, I'm bored at work, and this is the thread that I'm currently most active on

edit on 10-1-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



Krazysh0t,

Aren't you "hardheaded" to deny God? Naaah.

You have the grace given in the Sacraments on your soul. I'll offer prayers too, God is working you. All the world will be enlightened unless you die before the divine "awakening." Also called the Great Warning.


Uh oh, I left out a word, the word "on."

"God is working ON you."


Dont take this the wrong way well on second thought do. Look when people are having a debate on religion comments like these do nothing but cloud the issues. Please stick toi the topic were debating historical Jesus not god or if he waas the son of god. There is some serious debates i would love to get into about comparative religions but ATS is not the place because people dont discuss they preach.Look ive debated krazyshot through most of this he is at least intellectually honest but when you do this this brings emotions in to the issue.



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 08:53 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 



There is some serious debates i would love to get into about comparative religions but ATS is not the place because people dont discuss they preach.

Well, dragon, I think ATS is a perfectly good place 'to get into it'.....

there are people here who want to discuss comparative religions.

Give us a chance. Start a thread!


edit on 1/10/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 10:25 PM
link   

wildtimes
reply to post by dragonridr
 



There is some serious debates i would love to get into about comparative religions but ATS is not the place because people dont discuss they preach.

Well, dragon, I think ATS is a perfectly good place 'to get into it'.....

there are people here who want to discuss comparative religions.

Give us a chance. Start a thread!


edit on 1/10/14 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)


When i was in college i did a thesis basically explaining how religions evolved from some primal religion most likely africa. where for example when they ate the flesh of an animal they believed they were gaining the power of that animal. Later this would turn into sacrifices to gain the power of god. They saw just the act of moving as thought or will so they figured if they could will movement of themselves well this same thing caused plants to grow or the sun to move. This later roles into a god controlling the suns movement because they believed that again there had to be thought or will to movement. And alot of what we attribute to religions like the great flood mentioned in religions that never as far as we can tell had contact is almost ill say a genetic memory. This is why people fear snakes and always seem to have similar phobias. Think how many things people can be scared of and then how many millions chose spiders or snakes for example.Did you know that evil snakes is in alot of religions.Hey the bible starts out with a serpent. Theres no reason this should be so but it is.
edit on 1/10/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
A2D:

Don't smash your keyboard or your head. Let's approach the question a different way.

You've presented your evidence, others have presented theirs. Our opinions on all "sides" of the issue remain basically the same. (Although, I will admit, I have had to tear into some of my own beliefs as we've gone through it to figure out why they're there.)
(That's the value of our discussions, by the way.)

Your posts seem a bit ... COMMITTED, you might say to getting one or more of us on the "no Historical Jesus" side to ... what? Admit defeat? Accept Jesus? Go against everything our reason and experience tells us in light of the evidence?

What is it that you want, and further, why do you care what we (I) think about Jesus? A different opinion is not a threat.

~~~~~~

To answer your question about the Jews inventing Christ, I'll admit, those are some good points to consider (and that was not my "thesis" you asked for a scenario, I gave you one) ... and they're the same points to consider if you believe that the Jews (some Jews) ACCEPTED the Jesus you believe existed. One of the greatest TABOOS in archaic Judaism was anything that made an image of YHVH ... and Jesus would have been the ultimate Image, right? They were repulsed by the idea. One of the greatest revolts in Jerusalem erupted when Caligula tried to put his image into the Temple. Even the histories you want to accept state that the "Christian" cult was primarily Jewish into the end of the first century.

The same reasons you give are the same reasons for Jews NOT to accept "Jesus" and become the seed-bed for Christianity.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 




Ok one more time at the time of christ there was a group known as nazarites they were a Jewish sect being jewish jesus probably was one at one time.



"Nazarites" are those who have taken the vow of Numbers 6.


And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying,

2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When either man or woman shall separate themselves to vow a vow of a Nazarite, to separate themselves unto the Lord:


Jesus, if he existed, and John the Baptist, both may have taken the vow. Seems logical.

He shall be called a Nazarene (Matt 2:23)


Theological scholar James Tabor wrote:

The earliest followers of Jesus were known as Nazarenes, The Jesus movement was from early on referred to as the “Nazarenes,” which roughly translates as the “the Messianists” or the people of the “Branch” clas-pages.uncc.edu...



Protestant historian Philip Schaff noted:

Thus, originally the term Nazarenes appears to be applied to all Christians, and not some small part of it, as it is being applied to those that agree with the Apostle Paul.



Scholar Ray Pritz noted:

this Nazarene Christianity was the dominant form of Christianity in the first and second centuries…

The Nazarenes were distinct from the Ebionites and prior to them. In fact, we have found that it is possible that there was a split in Nazarene ranks around the turn of the first century. This split was either over a matter of christological doctrine or over leadership of the community. Out of this split came the Ebionites, who can scarcely be separated from the Nazarenes on the basis of geography, but who can be easily distinguished from the standpoint of Christology.



Now while most people understand that the early Christians were called Nazarenes, most simply do not realize that the Nazarenes had Judaeo-Christian practices that dated from the original apostles that they never changed.


SOURCE



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 12:35 PM
link   

BO XIAN
reply to post by wildtimes
 


The notion that there IS NO objective right or wrong

is a lie, a seduction, a deception literally from the pit of hell.

I don't give that idiocy much quarter.


Nowhere did I discern arrogance in your postings.

But I would have to become dead in order to overlook the arrogance of some who get off on saying that Jesus never existed.

I am waiting for some of them to start demonstrating their new age powers:

"Hey everyone, LOOK! I can manipulate the energy on my CRT screen, using MY HANDS.

That is all my power, debunk THAT!"

(yes I have seen these sort of threads, and they usually get edited when the stimulants wear off, or, pulled, if they do not).

Talk about arrogant....

I actually enjoy your thoughts, Bo, despite my personal struggles with organized religion. I have witnessed many abuses at the hands of zealots that would have made death seem like a dream. You may not agree with this, but imo, many of the flock are led astray, big time.
Perhaps they have Jesus, and Jesus will be their golden ticket passport, but 'twofold the child of hell' is one that sits staring from the ashes, after these little sessions. I think that a lot of the followers are sick, and being in disharmony, they are desperate, and will bash anyone whose wholeness offends them, simply because the name 'Jesus' doesn't begin, and end, each and every spoken thought.

# 124
edit on 11-1-2014 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 01:06 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWhiteKnight
 


imho, you make reasonable points.

I have so many balls in the air at the moment, I'm sorry I don't have a more meaty response.

I certainly agree that many ostensible believers are on thin ice, at best.

And the Book says . . . let the one who stands, take heed, lest he fall.

Blessings,



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 01:30 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Nazarenes were a group in existence before Jesus many of them became christians but christians were not necessarily nazarenes. Reread your quotes for context. It is accepted by most historian that nazarenes had a split namely some became christians. The term was Judaizing Christians at that time. Meaning they believed in christ yet still followed Jewish traditions. Nazarenes were jews but not all christians were.Nhere were multiple sects of christianity in the 1st century.In Fact its almost impossible to distinguish the Nazarenes from the Ebionites.The Ebonites followed his teachings however did not believe in his divinity. So basically what you are telling us is that early Christians were jews wow real shocker there huh?

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWhiteKnight
 



Nowhere did I discern arrogance in your postings.

But I would have to become dead in order to overlook the arrogance of some who get off on saying that Jesus never existed.

Wait. Who said anything about Bo being 'arrogant'? What about the reply he made to me prompted this?

There are historians and scholars who doubt whether or not Jesus existed. As far as I can tell, most believe that there is enough validation to say, "Yes, a man named Jesus existed." It still doesn't mean he was "God."

But, never mind.
Tried to figure out if I'd dome something or said something offensive.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 01:44 PM
link   
At a gross level the Bible is occasionally historically accurate. However, with many important details the Bible is the sole source of data, so it’s impossible to independently confirm its claims. Worse, much of the Bible is hearsay (and based on the Gospels, there’s some discrepancy within the Bible between what was heard and what was said.) Even concerning the issue of the very existence of Jesus, the only independent sources of evidence are suspect (such as a transcribing Monks’ suspected forgery in Josephus, for example).

Besides, just because the Bible says there was a war between the x’s and y’s doesn’t validate the whole thing. After all, that’s like saying that everything in “Gone With the Wind” is true because there really was a Civil War.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Like I said earlier in this thread, the Nazorean were a sect of the Essenes that lived on Mount Carmel, just a hop, skip and a jump from the tiny farm settlement and large funerary of Nazareth. Coincidentally, Elijah's cave is near the base of Mount Carmel, where a young Jesus, if he existed, probably played. It's interesting to note the Elijah theme in the story of Jesus.

It is my belief that Jesus, if he existed, was an Essene and was of the Nazorean sect, although he may have been raised with the Therapeutic Essene of Egypt. The Essene were waiting for the "Good Teacher" to return and to interpret the (corrupted) Torah. It seems that Jesus fit that bill of their reincarnated teacher.

The first Christians were Nazarene, because Jesus was a Nazorean, not because of a place. This is what the Roman Catholic church had to hide. Jesus was just a man who lived and died, and the Essene knew this. As Catholicism took over, Jewishness became illegal and the Essene, (Nazarene) had to go. This is the real conspiracy of Christianity. In my humble opinion.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:09 PM
link   


Somehow I doubt that "Jesus of Nazareth" used that tone with the folks sitting in his audience. But maybe it's just me.
reply to post by wildtimes
 


He had a few words here and there, which words today would have landed his ass in jail. Given the miracles he showed to glorify God, I assure you that, were Jesus to have arrived in this age, he'd be arrested today, and tomorrow he would be found swinging from the ceiling, because they left the maniac alone in his cell, but forgot to collect his belt.

The corrupt in spirit hate those who are gifted. Either they want his power, such as they had never seen, or they want to annihilate his record from history. They simply cannot acknowledge that he was one with God; that the source of those miracles was not within their stature, or grasp. They are looking for the magic wand. They will be looking for it, forever. Happy hunting.

Jonah ring a bell?

Bo is correct in that we have come not one inch from the day he was killed by the mob. But now we have failed missile launches to act as decoys for signs in the sky. If anything, today it is even worse. The children of satan will do as their father did, with nary a thought for it, of course, as 'there is no such thing as objective right or wrong'.

I include among his audience those at the temple, whose tables he overturned.

Yes, I'd say that Jesus took on some pretty severe tones. Funny things happen when God consciousness takes root in a brain. Gifts such as discernment appear from nowhere, and can read through a voice that is crafted for sweetness, in pursuit of personal glory and gain, before it is even heard. This is especially true when this voice, or prompting, is within the mind of the one whose roots are growing into God. One cannot judge another without judging self.



# 125


edit on 11-1-2014 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWhiteKnight
 



Given the miracles he showed to glorify God, I assure you that, were Jesus arrested today, tomorrow he would be found swinging from the ceiling, because they left the maniac alone in his cell, but forgot to collect his belt.

I'm assuming you are being sarcastic here. Correct?

The corrupt in spirit hate those who are gifted. Either they want his power, such as they had never seen, or they want to annihilate his record from history. They simply cannot acknowledge that he was one with God; that the source of those miracles were not within their stature, or grasp.


Wow. Okay.





Now that's what I would call "arrogance."
But, again: Maybe it's just me.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:35 PM
link   

vethumanbeing

GalzuFromQ

texastig

windword
LOL! The Bible doesn't prove the Bible is true! You can't use the Bible to prove Bible stories are true!


Yes they are true, because the Bible is 66 books, written by over 40 authors over a time span of 1,500 years
with the message of redemption of mankind through the Lord Jesus Christ who died for our sins.


Seems you know the path to redemption, may I ask... what is the path to redemption? Melchizedek is the Lord, AKA the holy spirit... not Jesus.


That order of the Melchizedek is not one to be trifled with; and Jesus was just a templated form of.


I know, I'm _VERY_ familiar with The Order of Melchizedek.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

wildtimes
reply to post by TheWhiteKnight
 



Given the miracles he showed to glorify God, I assure you that, were Jesus arrested today, tomorrow he would be found swinging from the ceiling, because they left the maniac alone in his cell, but forgot to collect his belt.

I'm assuming you are being sarcastic here. Correct?

The corrupt in spirit hate those who are gifted. Either they want his power, such as they had never seen, or they want to annihilate his record from history. They simply cannot acknowledge that he was one with God; that the source of those miracles were not within their stature, or grasp.


Wow. Okay.





Now that's what I would call "arrogance."
But, again: Maybe it's just me.





Not joking one bit.

What is so difficult to see about it?

I thought you like history?

In my opinion, you are discounting that evil exists. You are unfamiliar with the spirit head that lures you. You are on the playground with a bag of marbles, trying to get your portion, and it all seems well and good. A little ouija, a little witchcraft, anything to catch a drift of another realm, never realizing that with power, evil becomes expert at masking itself.

You bluntly say that Jesus never existed. You have no idea who you are serving.

Since I am not impressed by less than Godly powers, I am never wounded or offended by those who simply want to play new age.
The ones that hurt are, ironically, the ones that claim that there is God, and then attempt to shove my square head through their round institutional holes.

Christ I do hold dear, but I almost never think about him. His idolators suffice to remind me of him, and that I am on the wrong path, continually. I avoid them, but try to understand their heart. It is a distinct possibility that they all get a pass. God has unlimited power, after all.

Crystals, science, and magic wands, don't do it for me. Neither do their fruits. They don't taste right. At the bottom of it, when they graduate from trinket class, they will be as you. They will agree that Jesus never existed.

Things have never been more naked.

Just my humble opinion.

# 126
edit on 11-1-2014 by TheWhiteKnight because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   

windword
reply to post by dragonridr
 


Like I said earlier in this thread, the Nazorean were a sect of the Essenes that lived on Mount Carmel, just a hop, skip and a jump from the tiny farm settlement and large funerary of Nazareth. Coincidentally, Elijah's cave is near the base of Mount Carmel, where a young Jesus, if he existed, probably played. It's interesting to note the Elijah theme in the story of Jesus.

It is my belief that Jesus, if he existed, was an Essene and was of the Nazorean sect, although he may have been raised with the Therapeutic Essene of Egypt. The Essene were waiting for the "Good Teacher" to return and to interpret the (corrupted) Torah. It seems that Jesus fit that bill of their reincarnated teacher.

The first Christians were Nazarene, because Jesus was a Nazorean, not because of a place. This is what the Roman Catholic church had to hide. Jesus was just a man who lived and died, and the Essene knew this. As Catholicism took over, Jewishness became illegal and the Essene, (Nazarene) had to go. This is the real conspiracy of Christianity. In my humble opinion.


Though i agree with most of what you say his religious beliefs as a child obviously changed since he no longer followed many of their teachings including sacrifice.My view from the dead sea scrolls is that jesus was a coptic we see many similarities. At some point he came into contact with them perhaps through visiting egypt.And i dont think there is anything the vatican is worried about as far as its roots. Everyone knows Jesus was a Jew and yes probably at some time a nazarite.Even in the bible we see it was prevalent in the area for example they would Abstain from wine, wine vinegar, grapes, raisins, intoxicating liquors.Though Jesus found it acceptable to drink wine. Then there was Not to become impure by corpses or graves but again jesus would touch corpses.

Nazarenes were really a small community at the time where alot of his followers came from but not all of them.For example as he went to Bethsaida for example and had sermons they were not nazarenes. So no one refers to the christians as nazarenes but many nazarenes became christians. To the romans these people were simply the followers of christ to themselves they used the term brother or disciple. At 107 AD is where the Greek term "Katholikos" (meaning universal) first appears in the Letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyrnaeans.

en.wikipedia.org...

So at least from that point on they called themselves catholics.Now there were individual sects as i said early but they again were local variations on a bigger theme.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 





At 107 AD is where the Greek term "Katholikos" (meaning universal) first appears in the Letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyrnaeans.

en.wikipedia.org...

So at least from that point on they called themselves catholics.Now there were individual sects as i said early but they again were local variations on a bigger theme.


Except, the message we get from Jesus was not one that could be considered "universal" or "Katholikos". Catholicism is very much NOT anything near what Jesus taught.



posted on Jan, 11 2014 @ 03:07 PM
link   

windword
reply to post by dragonridr
 





At 107 AD is where the Greek term "Katholikos" (meaning universal) first appears in the Letter of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Smyrnaeans.

en.wikipedia.org...

So at least from that point on they called themselves catholics.Now there were individual sects as i said early but they again were local variations on a bigger theme.


Except, the message we get from Jesus was not one that could be considered "universal" or "Katholikos". Catholicism is very much NOT anything near what Jesus taught.


Very true you can see how much Saul of Tarsus changed christianity under his guidance. He believed he was acting under devine intervention i personally think he was acting in his own self interests. But i will say without him christianity would have died as a religion and never become the dominate religion in the world either but this is a whole topic for another thread.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 35  36  37    39  40  41 >>

log in

join