It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I don't really care about the person, I care about Jesus' message, and it was and is beautiful and profound, one path to enlightenment/salvation. Idol worship serves no one. Whether or not he lived the message ascribed to him is one to me that makes sense and seems to be the best way to live your life, but this of course is just my own opinion.
i don't buy into the one path to salvation
what if a man was born was a good person and lived a good life life but never knew of your God would he still go to heaven ?
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus. (Romans 2:14-16)
And that slave who knew his master's will and did not get ready or act in accord with his will, shall receive many lashes, but the one who did not know it, and committed deeds worthy of a flogging, will receive but few. And from everyone who has been given much shall much be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more. (Luke 12:47-48)
reply to post by reject
The word "debunker" is not magical. It doesn't just make the facts go away. I am not "debunking" anything.
The facts of early Christian symbolism are well-known. The scholarship is considerable.
The "cross" was not used in the first century. Fish, anchors, a bit later the chi-rho ... but not crosses.
You're merely trying to muddy the water here. The facts are clear.
The first century ossuaries may be early Christian, but the scratches on the outside don't prove it.
Just because it was "universally acknowledged" and "extensively adopted" at later dates doesn't mean it was not used by earlier 1st century Christians when they were just starting out and they were still a persecuted few (as evidenced by archaeology), does it?
You're merely playing "what if" games here. You're making an assumption based on your belief. Do you have any physical evidence, perhaps the archeology you mention, that demonstrates the use of the Cross as a Christian symbol before the end of the 2nd century.
If not, you can always just state that you "believe it to be true," that your "heart tells you it is," instead of pretending that there's physical evidence for baseless claims.
edit on 19Wed, 26 Feb 2014 19:40:38 -060014p072014266 by Gryphon66 because: Yeah.
reply to post by Scope and a Beam
Last night we celebrated New Years eve and it's A.D. 2014. Just go to Wikipedia and look up A.D., B.C., C.E. and B.C.E.......all referring to the " the year of our lord "(Jesus ). I think that will convince you that Jesus is accepted and was written about in a historical sense.
wow such a week argument
Ophiuchus13My thought is, the Christ is not something that is, and then is not. He is something that come repeatedly, like the seasons. When you think about the different religions with similarities throughout, it makes sense that an all-encompassing being would come to the different peoples' in ways that they would be able to relate to. IMO, Jesus was one face of many, like the faces of mankind itself. He appears as he needs to, when he needs to. Or so it seems to me anyways.
There is physical proof of Jesus' existence. He is truly present in the form of ordinary bread and wine, His most precious body & blood, at Holy Mass and Holy Communion, for He has said so.
I thought the word "Christ" in Greek meant 'Brother' not savior, so the whole Christ business of labling is vanquished.
arpgmeChrist means anointed, not "brother". I'm not sure where you got that from.
Scope and a Beam
Was Jesus made up?
This is a TON of information about the man we know as Jesus and all of it comes from witnesses who were HOSTILE to the truth claims of Christianity!
Is There Any Evidence for Jesus Outside the Bible?
History is a VERY effective form of mind control.
"Here is a fact: There is far more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for virtually anyone in ancient history. Anyone who peddles that “Christ-myth” theory, does NOT do so on the ground of historical evidence. The fact of Jesus Christ in history is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as is the fact of Julius Caesar. Get this straight. It is not historians who promote the “Christ-myth” notion. ...his alleged words and actions were documented by numerous people." LINK
"The falsification of history has done more to impede human development than any one thing known to mankind" - Rousseau
“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”
“There are two histories: official history, lying, and then secret history, where you find the real causes of events.” ~ Honoré de Balzac
Only Almighty God is to judge the soul.
Scope and a Beam
I don't mean to enrage anyone here, but there seems to me that there's no solid proof that Jesus actually existed. Of course the bible says he did, but I don't trust the bible as it is not a first-hand account and has been, in my opinion, warped over the years by the Church to fit its own personal agenda, and not that of the people following it.
So I've been looking online for interesting nuggets of proof, or at least evidence, that Jesus existed. I am not an atheist and I am not trying to rattle religious cages, but I just don't see any hard proof really. It seems weird too that there were supposedly well respected historians who lived in the same time and same area as Jesus, yet they never recorded his supposedly mind blowing acts of miracle.
I know about Flavius Josephus, but he didn't see Jesus first hand either so I'm a bit skeptical of that.
Personally I believe Jesus probably existed, and was effectively a freedom fighter. He was a revolutionary who did great things, like feed poor people when it seemed there was no way to help them. But I don't believe the stories of miracle are literal interpretations. I think they're metaphors. This makes sense to me especially when looking at the Middle East--the culture lends to myths being created and extraordinary stories being passed on as a way to explain something big.
But still, I thought I'd just post to ask what people's opinions were on this? Do you feel all the records were destroyed? Was Jesus made up? Is it just a mix up of us calling him Jesus, when in fact we should be looking for Yeshua? I'm very happy to be proved wrong here and am interested in anyone's theories, so please don't think I'm trying to flame anyone's beliefs.edit on 1-1-2014 by Scope and a Beam because: (no reason given)