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: 52
29
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Spectral Norm
I see. Then you may henceforth consider me informed of your opinion.

It's not my opinion. It is just one possibility for the double standard that you pointed out.


The question at hand is the historical authenticity of Jesus. Whether he was divine, or some sort of wisdom sage, or merely some delusional messianic rabble-rouser, is a separate issue. If one wants to believe the latter, then the claim is far less extraordinary than that of a Roman-installed Judean monarch, is it not?

It sure is but, let's be honest, for many establishing the former is the base to assert the latter and without the latter, the existance of Jesus becomes a trivial matter.




posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


Cut the dramatics . I have not condemned you for anything . Either you believe the bible is the word of God or you don't . Isn't that the question ? I do believe that it is the word of God and that Jesus is the divine Son of God who came to earth to offer Grace and Mercy . One who believe as you say , and claims to be Christian , meaning he has faith in the Gospel and the Deity that delivered it would not challenge it's authenticity . That would be like sky diving and after you jumped checking the repack date of your chute ?



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 02:47 PM
link   

SimonPeter
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


Cut the dramatics . I have not condemned you for anything . Either you believe the bible is the word of God or you don't . Isn't that the question ? I do believe that it is the word of God and that Jesus is the divine Son of God who came to earth to offer Grace and Mercy . One who believe as you say , and claims to be Christian , meaning he has faith in the Gospel and the Deity that delivered it would not challenge it's authenticity . That would be like sky diving and after you jumped checking the repack date of your chute ?


There is nothing dramatic about it. I call it like I see it.

Jesus was the son of god. The new testament was written, and redacted, by men. Men are not infallible. Men are not god. Men sometimes make mistakes. Sometimes men even make mistakes when they are writing about Jesus. There is plenty of evidence of that if you want to look at the textual evidence from that period. But you won't. My guess is that you have already decided that you know everything there is to know about it.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


It depends on the "flavor" of Christianity.

Some have the father AND the son.
Some have the father IS the son.

Some say there are no ranks of angels.
Some say that Michael was a Archangel.
Some even say Michael was actually the name of Jesus in heaven.

It goes back to the "Word was with God and the Word was God" interpretations.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 03:39 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


You say you believe ! Then you believe God is in control ! Do you believe God would let the message be compromised for people of the future to find fault with it .Why give it to start with ? Why come down and take on flesh and suffer and die for mankind . Do you truly believe ? Why would the Roman Authorities and before Catholic church not destroy the Scrolls and Gospels . Was the Jewish faith and Christian faith not a stick in their Pagan eyes .
How could doubting Thomas not hear Jesus speak and witness the marvelous works that Jesus did while being forewarned of the crucifixion and resurrection straight from his mouth and doubt ?
I judge no one . There is another who will . Straight is the gate and narrow is the path !



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 





Originally posted by SimonPeter
Clearly you need to take those verses in context .


Well, I’ve already considered the context of it…



Originally posted by SimonPeter
Joel 2 verse 28 thru 31 is talking about the 2nd coming . This has not happened yet.


Here’s part of Joel 3 below, which is in context to the previous verses in Joel 2.



Joel 3:1-2
In those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, 2 I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.


Joel 3:4-5
4 “Now what have you against me, Tyre and Sidon and all you regions of Philistia? Are you repaying me for something I have done? If you are paying me back, I will swiftly and speedily return on your own heads what you have done. 5 For you took my silver and my gold and carried off my finest treasures to your temples.


The first sentence (Joel 3:1) is in context to Joel verse 2. And it’s talking about a time when the regions of Tyre and Sidon had stolen Israel’s gold (Joel 3:4-5) and how they were going to put them on trail etc... They’re clearly talking about events in the past.



Originally posted by SimonPeter
Matthew 24 verse 29 thru 31 is talking about the 2nd coming of the Lord Jesus . This is talking about the 1st half of Tribulation not wrath .This has not happened yet .


Here is part of your first reply to me below…



Originally posted by SimonPeter
So will be that great and terrible time of the Lord. Both great and terrible for the saved who morn for their loved ones and only terrible for the unsaved.



What I’ve been trying to explain to you (twice now) which you haven’t yet addressed. Is that those verses about how one will be left and another taken etc…, and the weeping and gnashing of teeth, i.e. Hell…goes against, Jesus other words (that I highlighted in my other 2 posts), about how one will be judged by God.

This is really just further proof IMO, that those theologies were added into the texts, by men, to help fit those Old Testament traditions, which they believed (wrongly IMO) were from God.



Originally posted by SimonPeter
Matthew 24 verse 32 thru 34 is about the second coming . Jesus is telling you when you see Israel ( the fig tree ) putting forth its branches ( Jesus just told of Jerusalem being destroyed and the Jews scattered now he is saying when they become a nation again at that time this generation or people born at that time will live long enough to see these things come to pass )meaning from March of 1948 plus 70 years or less . That doesn't leave much time .





Matthew 24:32-34
32 “Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. 33 Even so, when you see all these things, you know that it is near, right at the door. 34 Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened.


Like I was saying in my previous post. The verses above state that “this generation will certainly not pass away, until all these things have happened”

But the generation those verses were addressing, have already passed away! Those verses are talking about events, which should have already happened in the past.

In other words, they can’t be about possible future events, because the generation being addressed, has already passed away.


- JC

edit on 22-1-2014 by Joecroft because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 06:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 





Many times scripture is talking about in the future . That is what prophecy is . The Day of the Lord is judgment day .In Isaiah 53 Isaiah describes the crucifixion of Christ 700 years before it happened just like it was in the past .

Joel chapter 3 verse 2 Says I will bring down all nations ....for scattering the Jews and dividing up their land . ALL NATIONS ? Not Tyre and Sidon?That is what God says about bringing all nations against Israel .

As far as Jesus coming like a Lamb when he came to give his life for the remission of sin , and his prophecy of his future coming and you saying he will not come as King and ruler I don't know what to say but study the bible . Talk to a pastor near you and ask questions .

One question though : If Matthew 24 verse 32 about the parable of the fig tree was about past times where is Jesus now ? Because he would have come back almost 2000 years ago and Ruled for 1000 years during the Millennial Reign and then Armageddon would have already happened and we would be left behind to burn up on earth . Revelation 20 verse 8


Talk to a Preacher and go to church and many things will be answered for you .



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 06:38 PM
link   
SimonPeter
reply to post by Joecroft
 



SimonPeter IN REPLY TO JOECROFT: Many times scripture is talking about in the future . That is what prophecy is . The Day of the Lord is judgment day .In Isaiah 53 Isaiah describes the crucifixion of Christ 700 years before it happened just like it was in the past .
Talk to a Preacher and go to church and many things will be answered for you .


If you mean what you are describing above; talking to a Preacher or going to church NOW is far too late to be effective AT ALL. Circular thinking past/present masterbation as to potencial outcomes.
edit on 22-1-2014 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
reply to post by vethumanbeing
 


Yes I know . What do you say?



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Let us add a few more questions to the list, eh?

1. Why would god wait anywhere from thirty to seventy years after the fact to write accounts of Jesus?
2. Why would god write four separate accounts of Jesus, with mutually contradictory details? Why not just one?
3. Why did god wait until even later to write more accounts of Jesus that he would ultimately reject (Gospel of Peter, Gospel of Nicodemus, etc.)?
4. Why did god initially decide that Matthew 12:47 was not fit for inclusion, and then later change his mind and decide that it was okay after all?
5. Why did god initially decide that Mark 16:9-20 was not fit for inclusion, and then later change his mind and decide that it was okay after all?
6. Why did god initially decide that the epistle of Barnabas should be considered Scripture, and then later change his mind and decide to leave it out?
7. Why did god initially decide that the shepherd of Hermas should be considered Scripture, and then later change his mind and decide to leave it out?

I can go on, but that should be enough for a start.

Peace be with you.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 09:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Scope and a Beam
 
Didn't they find the bones of his brother a few years ago?



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


I didn't know that you were living at that time and know first hand that HIS Story is correct about those times . Then too Israel was under Roman rule with conflicts going on and then terrible wars drove them out of Israel .When the Gospels were written and when history says they came to light is two different things . I suppose you figure that Jesus was just a distraction in Jerusalem .And that he was not literally accosted from every angle by a people who needed some encouragement , who have been Ruled by an Edomite king and oppressed for so long and looking for any good news ? Jesus was really big news and need no introductions and there were likely literally dozens of accounts of his mission on earth .One can see that life did not end when Jesus walked this earth and those who loved and wrote about Jesus could not attend every utterance of Christ . Much of what was written down in the four gospels are in harmony . These people no doubt found the time with Jesus or the message of Jesus worth handing down to other people and worked carefully to relay it as accurately as possible as is .

Then you have discounted the Holy Spirit the Comforter that would oversee the Gospel .



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


For a Christian you protest too much against what you say you believe and doubting the validity of the New Testament as you do says much .
You read too much junk ! Exactly what is your mission ? Do you know?



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Let us take a rather specific example: The four canonical gospels report three different sayings as the last words of Jesus on the cross. Did he say all three (although, clearly, only one of them could have been last), or only one, or none of them at all?

My own view is that it is simply irrelevant. It has no bearing on who Jesus was, or what he was doing on the cross.

I am a Christian, despite your claims, lately in boldface, that I am not. These claims, too, are largely irrelevant to my spiritual outlook.

Lastly, I am not aware that I have a mission. Perhaps you could tell me what it is, since you are so clearly adept at dictating to me what I think.

Peace be with you.



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


I do agree that there is three versions reported . How do you know he did not say all three and the person recording or helping to record it remembered only a portion of the last words or walked off because he could not stand to witness the terrible suffering . The crucifixion lasted 6 hours and there were earthquakes and rumblings .
How come the FBI and Police can't get their stories right and they have cameras and video recorders .



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 





Originally posted by SimonPeter
Many times scripture is talking about in the future . That is what prophecy is . The Day of the Lord is judgment day .In Isaiah 53 Isaiah describes the crucifixion of Christ 700 years before it happened just like it was in the past .


Not sure why your tying in a prophecy about Jesus crucifixion, to support Jesus second coming…?

Prophecies have taken place in the Old Testament, but that doesn’t mean that every prophet is making a prophecy, on every page, in the Old testament.



Originally posted by SimonPeter
Joel chapter 3 verse 2 Says I will bring down all nations ....for scattering the Jews and dividing up their land . ALL NATIONS ? Not Tyre and Sidon? That is what God says about bringing all nations against Israel.


But the phrase “all nations” has nothing to do with Tyre and Sidon. You’re completely miss-understanding, what I’m trying to point out.

“All Nations” is talking about the gathering of all of Israel’s tribes (Nations) who are going to put Tyre and Sidon, on trial, for stealing their Gold. The time period is clearly set in the past.



Joel 3:1-2
In those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, 2 I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat. There I will put them on trial for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.


The first words “all nations”, is still talking about all the Israel tribes and nations, who will put them (Tyre and Sidon) on trail, because they stole their Gold etc…So the phrase “all nations” is being tied into an event, that took place in the past.

And the last word “nations”, is about the tribes/nations of Israel being scattered. And who scattered them…According to the context of the verses, they were scattered because of the actions of “Tyre and Sidon”, which is an event which happened in the past.




Originally posted by SimonPeter
As far as Jesus coming like a Lamb when he came to give his life for the remission of sin, and his prophecy of his future coming and you saying he will not come as King and ruler I don't know what to say but study the bible. Talk to a pastor near you and ask questions.


I don’t need to talk to a pastor, Jesus and God, have already led me into the real truth!



Originally posted by SimonPeter
One question though : If Matthew 24 verse 32 about the parable of the fig tree was about past times where is Jesus now ? Because he would have come back almost 2000 years ago and Ruled for 1000 years during the Millennial Reign and then Armageddon would have already happened and we would be left behind to burn up on earth . Revelation 20 verse 8


But this is my point. They added/edited those verses about Jesus coming back, with punishment and wrathful intentions etc…to keep people in fear. The book of revelations is not from God IMO, and was only added to support that theology.

Those things are not of the Father and (for the last time) Jesus version of justice and judgment, mentioned in the verses (Luke 6:31, Luke 6:37 and Matthew 7:2), goes completely against a wrathful God, that sends people to Hell/destruction/eternal torment, unjustly. One is the truth, and the other is a lie…IMO

Only when you seek the spirit of truth, can you be guided into the truth. No man can give it to you, but God can, if you seek out his guidance.


- JC



posted on Jan, 22 2014 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Joecroft
 


Do you go to church ? Have you talked to your Pastor about it . That would be the way to go with your question .



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 09:09 AM
link   

SimonPeter
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


I do agree that there is three versions reported . How do you know he did not say all three and the person recording or helping to record it remembered only a portion of the last words or walked off because he could not stand to witness the terrible suffering . The crucifixion lasted 6 hours and there were earthquakes and rumblings .
How come the FBI and Police can't get their stories right and they have cameras and video recorders .


How do I know? That is exactly my point, my friend. I don't know and neither do you. The best that I can do is to make an educated guess based on a close read of all information available to me. That seems like a better approach than, "Some guy told me so and, you know, he's really holy, so he must be right." God gave me a talent for rational analysis, not to mention languages; seems a pity to waste them.

And my guess is that it is possible, maybe even likely, that none of the evangelists were present at the events they describe. Mark, in particular, seems dreadfully ignorant of the geography of Palestine for someone who was supposedly living there. It is possible, maybe even likely, that they were dependent in their accounts on an oral tradition that had been passed down to them through an intervening generation or generations.

Maybe, I'm wrong. Does it really matter that much?

Peace be with you.



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Spectral Norm
 


You seem to think it is very important .You even suppose that there was errors and by your assessment there was errors . You are intent to believe there were errors and yet still claim to believe it . You need to circle the wagons and hold council to find out what you really believe !



posted on Jan, 23 2014 @ 12:21 PM
link   
I have always been particularly interested in religion and spirituality but over the years I have had to completely change my perspective. Initially, as with every other child who went to school I was indoctrinated into the state religion and also when I had to attend church.

To deal with what I actually believed, I decided to read the bible from cover to cover and I wonder exactly how many people have read this book. If you have, I bet you got the shock of your life. Some of the things in the Old Testament are pure evil, they tell of killing people who you have coerced into joining you and then when they are circumcised you dash in, grab their goods and murder them. So much for honour - perhaps that's were honour among thieves originated. The tale of the concubine is a disgrace and the manner in which many of the men behaved is beyond belief. They make people living today virtually look moral and decent.

I asked when I went to church at a meeting how many had read the bible cover to cover and not one could honestly say they had. Most said, 'only the relevant parts' e.g. the bits that suited them.

When you get to the synoptic gospels they should concur with each other but we can't even get a list of past kings etc to tally.

I had always accepted that Jesus actually lived, although his life story didn't make sense, and nowhere else other than by Christian writers/interpolations was he mentioned. Now had the Romans crucified him, then there would be records of his trial, criucifixation, his history and crimes. There are none and the Romans kept meticulous records - we even know their laundry bills from that era by no Jesus,

Recently I read the story of Apolonius the Nazarene of Tyana, a man exactly the same age as Christ, born of a virgin etc etc. Here, we have a holy man, unmarried, vegetarian, ascetic, didn't drink alcohol and who lived the life one would have expected of a holy man. He gave away his wealth, travelled the Roman Empire and went as far as China, India and Egypt and his beliefs formed the basis of a religion that people were following. Apparently Nero and Domitian hated him and considered his teachings a threat to their God-status, when he was arrested he disappeared. The parallels between him and Jesus are incredible in that one could say that Jesus is modelled on Appolonius because many people considered him an actual God because he raised the dead, carried out miracles, cured the sick, disappearing when threatened, etc. The pictures Wiki show of him will astound you but read further than Wiki on him.

What is interesting is that he went to live his last years on Patmos and its probably him who wrote Revellation. We have no idea of who John the Divine actually was yuet he is credited with its authorship.

'Its worth thinking that the amount of the New Testament devoted to Jesus is considerably less than that for Paul but surely one of the apostles who Jesus had taught not only his message but also how to heal and carry out miracles, should have carried on Jesus's message not someone unschooled by Christ. Paul's coming into the story makes no sense when other disciples were around with the real message. But where is there any information about any of the apostles after the crucifixion. We are told Christianity spread like wildfire but surely the apostles would have been the spearhead of this movement but they are absent. Silent in fact. It was Appolonius's teachings that were spreading.

When the Roman Empire was failing Domitian suddenly had a miraculous change of religion and eventually Constantine rewrote Apolonius's teachings and created Christianity as its known today to be the official religion of Rome and all those in the Empire. He adapted it by removing vegetarianism to allow meat eating and allowed alcohol. He removed reincarnation so that a soul and heaven and hell could be introduced - He removed all reference to Appolonius by burning various libraries as in Alexandria which we know curiously was done by 'the christians' and adapted Apolonius's teachings, swappedJ him for the ficticious Jesus's and rewrote a few things to help the Empire along by sayings which included Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's eg be good Christians and pay your taxes to Rome.

Although I expect many will be running for the hills at what I suspect is the biggest ever conspiracy in religion. I can actually accept Apolonius as a holy man and make sense of his life, travelling, learning and how he put his beliefs into a coherent religion. We know reincarnation comes from India where we know he studied. One can also see what was decided at Nicea to know that Constantine adapted the teachings of Apolonius. I have always had a feeling that Jesus's life was never right and we were looking at something that was not as it was written because so much didn't make sense and the idea of blind acceptance of religion is merely a copout against questions that cannot be answered.

I apololgise if I offend anyone but personally I prefer the truth or at least an effort to get at the truth even though it might mean coming out of a comfort zone. A lot of what Jesus is reputed to have taught, Aponolius did, so one's personal beliefs are not such a shift its really the substitution of a real man whom we know existed.

When it comes to religion today and the wealth accumulated by our religious guardians such as the Pope one has to ask oneself is this one of the reasons why the church wanted education stopped for the peaple in the past and why it stopped the bible being printed in English so people couldn't read it. The actions of the church can certainly be explained if they had something as monumental as there being no real Jesus to hide. The Pope today is a very different man to the ascetic Apolonius people regarded as a God and that should tell us a lot.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 49  50  51    53  54  55 >>

log in

join