Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

It has just been revealed to me that Jesus Christ never existed. I can't imagine living without this knowledge now that I have it. I feel so complete, and it feels so good to finally know the truth that Jesus Christ in fact NEVER existed.

I hope you too are able to find this truth.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Yes. The ignorance of the masses is a completely valid reason for penalizing intelligent people wanting to have a little fun. I'm so glad that we have the whims of the majority to define what is right and wrong, because reason simply isn't good enough. Puzzled Burning flags in this country should be enforced by law as simply a means of symobolism to signify the need to begin anew with the government that our forefathers intended instead of this sick perversion we have now (assuming you are from the states).

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

the_avenging_bucket wrote:

I agree that pray to the Holy Trinity we must ... the Water, the Ice, and the Holy Gas....

Um, water and ice are the same thing. Eye-wink

Let's pray to Water, the Sun, and Oxygen.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


the_avenging_bucket
the_avenging_bucket's picture
Posts: 184
Joined: 2006-06-17
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Sapient wrote:

Um, water and ice are the same thing. Eye-wink


yes but so are the father and the son... lol

Quote:

Let's pray to Water, the Sun, and Oxygen.

most excellent plan!


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

MattShizzle wrote:
But who needs evidence when you have faith? After all, Christians have no (valid) evidence. Sure they make some fake evidence up, or count the bible as evidence,

Putting the Gospels to the same standards that historians do for determining whether a given text is evidence for the events it describes, it stands up better than most ancient histories. Most ancient historical texts were written many years after the events described (often thousands, as Josephus did now and then), not by anyone who even appears to be an eyewitness (Josephus personally witnessed some, but not much, of what he wrote about, and what we have is taken from a handful of copies dating many centuries, even 1000 years in some cases, after they were written. I don't believe Tacitus personally witnessed any of it, and I know the earliest copies of his work "Annals" dates to 950 years after it was written, and we have only two ancient copies. And these are two of the most widely regarded historians of their era). For the Gospels, they were written within the same century of the events, two appear to be primarily eyewitness accounts (the other two only once or twice removed), and are taken from thousands of copies, the earliest fragments dating to within a generation or two after they were written, the earliest full copies within 2-3 centuries. So the Bible is, per historical standards, good evidence for the events it describes.

Quote:
or count frogeries that were made centuries ago as evidence. If you don't believe that there is no god and Jesus is a myth, you simply don't have enough faith!

If you believe that the major events of the Gospels never happened, then you're believing something which is contrary to the evidence. Though don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that it's necessarily wrong to do so. But pretending the evidence does not exist is wrong, however.

David


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

applesforadam wrote:
No one is doubting that matthew or john actually wrote the text.

Are you sure about that? Because quite a few people have expressed doubt about their authorship credits.

Quote:
What is being said is that what evidence do you have that would lend you to believe matthew and john were correct?

The fact that the believers from the 1st century, even those besides the Gospel authors, all spoke and acted as if they believed it truly happened. If they were lying, then they had to have known they were lying, and it's unlikely that they would have stood up to Nero and other persecutors as they did. If they were knowingly writing fiction, again, who would face persecution over a work of fiction? The other theory is that they were honest, though mistaken - that they merely THOUGHT Jesus was resurrected. There are various theories about this, but they're all too ridiculous to contemplate.

Quote:
2000 years from now do you really think we're going to be able to look at the story of paul bunyan and be able to say with 100% certainty that he did not exist? Sure, we can point to historical record and say "well no one mentioned actually meeting this giant man and his blue ox around the time he was asserted to have lived," or "the laws of science state that no such person would be possible," but according to you that is not enough evidence to disprove his existance because apparently you can't use the laws of science to disprove the notion that someone turned water into wine or any other "miracle" he was claimed to have performed and by your argument, we could use the story of paul bunyan itself as proof that he actually lived.

But we can say with pretty good certainty that people from around the time the Paul Bunyan stories were starting to spread did not act in such a way to suggest that they believed the stories were true or that Paul Bunyan really existed. But followers of Jesus did act as if they believed Jesus was resurrected, and even the non-believers in the following years never seemed to express any doubt that Jesus existed in the first place.

Quote:
It really is on the part of the person making the positive claim that jesus is who the bible claims to say he is (although the bible itself seems to refer to him both as real and mythical) and that he actually existed.

The only point I'm trying to make here is that the evidence exists. I'm not trying to prove to anyone here that the evidence proves positively that Jesus was resurrected. In fact, if someone is an atheist, I believe it would probably be impossible to convince them that Jesus was resurrected, since, if God does not exist, resurrection is impossible. There would automatically be a paradox in an atheist believing in the resurrection.

David


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

MattShizzle wrote:
Actually plenty of us doubt Matthew and John wrote the text - these texts were written MANY years after Jesus supposedly lived,

Which doesn't throw the authorship question into doubt. People are able to write about things that happened many years before, as long as they are still alive to do so. And there's no evidence that any of the four Gospels were written after the lives of their credited authors. So go ahead and doubt if you want, but don't use this as a reason to do so.

Quote:
and the names were chosen arbitrarily.

What's your evidence for this?

Quote:
Apparently, even Bible scholars don't actually believe the texts were written by the actual apostles (some of whom were almost certainly illiterate!)

Most Bible scholars do believe that the authorship credits were correct, and there's no evidence that the credited authors were illiterate, though some of the other apostles may have been.

Quote:
Of course, why wouldn't Jesus have written it himself? An omniscient god certainly wouldn't be illiterate! :lol:

It was quite common at the time for teachers to do the teaching and for their students to do the writing, which is what we have. For example, Socrates taught much philosophy during his life, yet apparently never wrote anything himself, though his followers such as Plato and Xenophon did write about him.

David


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

qwak wrote:
KingDavid8 wrote:

Yes, actually. That our universe is in such a state or order that life is not only possible, but apparently inevitable - and that life can exist and thrive for billions of years without being swallowed up by the chaos we would expect in a universe that was created by random means, suggests (though by no means proves) that whatever force created the universe was purposeful. Had random, unguided forces created the universe, I find it very unlikely (though not impossible) that we'd be here for as long as we have been.

David

Please go read a science book.

The universe doesn't fit itself to life, but rather life fits itself to the universe. If the universe were in a different state, it by no means rules out life, however it may rule out our form of life.

in simpler terms, "we are here because of the universe" not "the universe is here because of us"

But I agree that we are here because of the universe, and never said otherwise. We are here because the universe is in such a state of order that life is not only possible, but apparently inevitable - and that the universe is capable of sustaining life for billions of years.

So the question is - why is the universe set up in such a way to make life inevitable and sustainable for billions of years?

David


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

The Josephus writings were a forgery. :roll:


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Socrates was illiterate. That's why. I minored in Philosophy!


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

MattShizzle wrote:
The Josephus writings were a forgery. :roll:

All of them? You're actually claiming that "Life of Flavius", all twenty books of "History of the Jews", "Flavius vs. Apion", and all seven books of "The Wars of the Jews" were forgeries? You've GOT to be kidding. Except for a handful of passages, historians consider Josephus' writings to be exactly what he wrote and generally historically reliable. I've never heard anyone claim his writings were a forgery.

David


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

There you go again. :roll:

I'm talking about the passage where Jesus was mentioned.


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

MattShizzle wrote:
Socrates was illiterate. That's why. I minored in Philosophy!

But you're forgetting the reason for Socrates' illiteracy. He believed that literacy undermines memory, that if we write things down, we tend to forget them. So even if he had learned to write, he still almost certainly wouldn't have bothered doing so. So illiteracy was, for him, a preference. It wasn't like he didn't write because he wasn't able to learn how. Even had he learned, he wouldn't have.

And actually, the belief that Socrates was illiterate (as far as I know) was merely an assumption, based on the fact that he never wrote anything down. We don't know for sure that he wasn't able to. We just know he didn't.

David


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Actually, he did write his name. On some blocks that he carved.


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Quote:
MattShizzle wrote:
There you go again. :roll:

I'm talking about the passage where Jesus was mentioned.

But why? I wasn't discussing anything about the passages where Jesus was mentioned, so what's the point of bringing it up?

I was just saying that he wasn't a witness to most of what he wrote (which is true) and that many of his writings have their earliest copies date hundreds of years after he wrote them (which is true), yet he is still one of the most regarded historians of his age (which is true). I never brought up his mentions of Jesus, directly or indirectly. So how does saying that his mentions of Jesus were forgeries respond to anything I wrote? It has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

And you accuse ME of red herrings?

David


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

KingDavid8 wrote:
Quote:
2000 years from now do you really think we're going to be able to look at the story of paul bunyan and be able to say with 100% certainty that he did not exist? Sure, we can point to historical record and say "well no one mentioned actually meeting this giant man and his blue ox around the time he was asserted to have lived," or "the laws of science state that no such person would be possible," but according to you that is not enough evidence to disprove his existance because apparently you can't use the laws of science to disprove the notion that someone turned water into wine or any other "miracle" he was claimed to have performed and by your argument, we could use the story of paul bunyan itself as proof that he actually lived.

But we can say with pretty good certainty that people from around the time the Paul Bunyan stories were starting to spread did not act in such a way to suggest that they believed the stories were true or that Paul Bunyan really existed.
David

I'm glad we can agree on that point, however, the next sentence you present is an idea of personal conviction, not historical fact. The books written about jesus (such as those by saul) do not suggest that they believed the idea of jesus to be something that actually happened. Saul in fact (in fact) places jesus in a place not on earth. The gospels obviously were not written by contemporaries of jesus, even you can accept that by any timeframe, because even the most liberal timeframe puts jesus long dead before they were written. Sure word of mouth can allow people to pass the deeds of such a man on, but it is far more likely that the ideas presented by them were never originally intended to be taken as historical truth. Word of mouth is a terribly inaccurate means of conveying information now, in a world where information is more readily available than any time in the past, so at a time during the first century, word of mouth is simply an absurd method to rely on, let alone be the sole carrier of the truths about the messiah. When someone really looks at the evidence, it can only support the non-believer, and can only make that leap of faith that theists such as yourself, david, take appear more akin to a grand canyon jump as opposed to the hopscotch jump theists claim it to be. In either event, no jump is necessary if one really is searching for the truth, because the evidence needs no such leap of faith to understand and draw rational conclusions from. No amount of trying to use historical fact and empirical evidence can ever help the case of the believer, so I make the recommendation to you in conplete honesty that you drop all attempts to rationally justify your faith because it simply cannot be done. The more evidence you present in "support" of your views only discredits you further, so you would be better off simply making empty claims and openly stating that they are matters of believing in the face of real evidence and logic. Nothing more needs to be said from you.

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


KingDavid8
Theist
Posts: 113
Joined: 2006-07-07
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

applesforadam wrote:
KingDavid8 wrote:
Quote:
2000 years from now do you really think we're going to be able to look at the story of paul bunyan and be able to say with 100% certainty that he did not exist? Sure, we can point to historical record and say "well no one mentioned actually meeting this giant man and his blue ox around the time he was asserted to have lived," or "the laws of science state that no such person would be possible," but according to you that is not enough evidence to disprove his existance because apparently you can't use the laws of science to disprove the notion that someone turned water into wine or any other "miracle" he was claimed to have performed and by your argument, we could use the story of paul bunyan itself as proof that he actually lived.

But we can say with pretty good certainty that people from around the time the Paul Bunyan stories were starting to spread did not act in such a way to suggest that they believed the stories were true or that Paul Bunyan really existed.
David

I'm glad we can agree on that point, however, the next sentence you present is an idea of personal conviction, not historical fact. The books written about jesus (such as those by saul) do not suggest that they believed the idea of jesus to be something that actually happened.

Of course they do. For one thing, they are clearly four different perspectives on the same series of events, giving differing details while agreeing on the major events. That's the kind of thing we see from independent eyewitness accounts, not from fiction. People tend to remember the most important things, but their memories are a bit fuzzy about minor details. Had the authors simply made the whole thing up, we would expect them to have agreed on the even the minor details and we'd see all details in the Gospels falling into line. Or if they'd made up their own stories separately, we'd expect very little to match up, including major events. When historians come across multiple eyewitness accounts of a certain series of events, what we see in the Gospels is the kind of stuff that convinces them that the events likely happened.

Quote:

Saul in fact (in fact) places jesus in a place not on earth.

Yes, since Jesus wasn't still on Earth during the time Paul was writing about, but had already ascended to Heaven. But Paul did clearly believe in a bodily resurrection of Jesus, so He knew Jesus had been on Earth.

Quote:
The gospels obviously were not written by contemporaries of jesus, even you can accept that by any timeframe, because even the most liberal timeframe puts jesus long dead before they were written.

That makes no sense. As long as the authors were still alive, Jesus having died wouldn't prevent them from being able to write about Him. And there's no evidence that the authors died before their Gospels were written.

Quote:
Sure word of mouth can allow people to pass the deeds of such a man on, but it is far more likely that the ideas presented by them were never originally intended to be taken as historical truth.

No, the idea that the Gospel writers were intending to write fiction does not make any sense. There was a whole lot of persecution of Christians going on. All they had to say was "No, it's just fiction - we don't believe any of this actually happened", and it would have all been over. Their actions, and many things the Christians wrote in the first century, show that they believed it was all true.

Quote:
Word of mouth is a terribly inaccurate means of conveying information now, in a world where information is more readily available than any time in the past, so at a time during the first century, word of mouth is simply an absurd method to rely on, let alone be the sole carrier of the truths about the messiah.

On the contrary, passing along information orally was taken a lot more seriously back then than it is now, considering the high illiteracy rate. These days we expect information to be written down. Back then, they relied on oral transmission. But that's beside the point, since the ones doing the writing (at least in the case of the Gospels of Matthew and John) appear by all evidence to have been the eyewitnesses themselves, so it wasn't anything they'd heard about from others.

Quote:
When someone really looks at the evidence, it can only support the non-believer, and can only make that leap of faith that theists such as yourself, david, take appear more akin to a grand canyon jump as opposed to the hopscotch jump theists claim it to be.

No, because there isn't any evidence favoring the non-theistic interpretation. There is no evidence that the people of the 1st century believed the story to be a parable, not history, or that John and Matthew were not the writers of their Gospels. I'm not saying that atheists are wrong to believe the resurrection never happened, since no atheist could believe such an event is possible, but it is a belief which is contrary to the evidence and they need to face that fact instead of denying it.

Quote:
In either event, no jump is necessary if one really is searching for the truth, because the evidence needs no such leap of faith to understand and draw rational conclusions from. No amount of trying to use historical fact and empirical evidence can ever help the case of the believer, so I make the recommendation to you in conplete honesty that you drop all attempts to rationally justify your faith because it simply cannot be done. The more evidence you present in "support" of your views only discredits you further, so you would be better off simply making empty claims and openly stating that they are matters of believing in the face of real evidence and logic. Nothing more needs to be said from you.

Actually, all that atheists need to do is say "I don't believe that resurrection is possible, so, despite the evidence for the resurrection, I don't believe it happened." I won't try to convince them otherwise. I just have a problem when atheists (or other non-believers) pretend the evidence does not exist or that there is evidence proving that the Gospel authors are falsely credited or just plain false. You're all entitled to your opinions, and can reject the Gospels however you want. But since the evidence is clearly in favor of the Gospels, don't pretend it isn't.

David


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

The evidence is about as much in favor of the gospels as it is of the moon being made of green cheese, and Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy all living together in a castle on the North Pole! :roll: Laughing out loud

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

I sure hope the moon is made of green cheese because I fucking love cheese, and with that much cheese we'd NEVER run out!

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

But it's green and that would mean it's rotten! And anyway, would you trust 4.5 BILLION year old cheese? Oh yeah, that's right, the Babble says the Earth is only 6,000 years old. Still, that's some old motherfuckin' cheese! Laughing out loud

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Wouldn't space be the ultimate vacuum bag for perishable items? Someone should probably patent it before someone else jumps on that business venture.

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Of course sending anything in to space is a bit expensive.....


Atheist_Scathe
Posts: 69
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Quote:
Say it with me now....

"Dear Water, I confess that I am a water drinker and am sorry for all the environmental destruction I've caused.

Shouldn't that bit incorporate something about secretion of water through sweat and urine? Laughing out loud

Quote:
I believe that your Son, Watery Christ, died on a cross

Or evaporated? Smiling

Quote:
for my water indiscretions. Please forgive me and I invite you, Water, to come into my heart (even though my heart is already comprised partly of water) and life as Lord and Savior. I commit and trust my life to you. Please give me the water to be what you want me to be and the water to do what you want me to do. Thank you for dying for my sins, for your free pardon, for your gift of life, and for hearing and answering prayer. Aqua!"

Yes, I know we don't have evidence for Watery Christ, but it was just revealed to me that he existed about 60 years ago.

GOOD sciuns is WATERY SCIUNS! It don't make you THINK TOO HARD or anything like that prase water prase christ!


Friend
Posts: 2
Joined: 2006-07-17
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

Sapient wrote:
It has just been revealed to me that Jesus Christ never existed. I can't imagine living without this knowledge now that I have it. I feel so complete, and it feels so good to finally know the truth that Jesus Christ in fact NEVER existed.

I hope you too are able to find this truth.

Is this a gag topic, or is Sapient serious about providing proper evidence for the case that Christ never existed?

I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm seriously interested in what arguments people here have to support their claims. If this is a gag topic, does anyone here know a good forum discussing the mythicist's case. I'm not interested in faith-based argumentation, so any believers actually buying the resurrection myth need not not respond.


applesforadam
Posts: 151
Joined: 2006-06-27
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

Friend wrote:
Is this a gag topic, or is Sapient serious about providing proper evidence for the case that Christ never existed?

There are many forgivable sins, doubting the word of Sapient however, is not one of them.

"It's not so much staying alive. It's staying human that's important." - 1984
www.myspace.com/applesforadam
applesforadam.blogspot.com


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

Friend wrote:
Sapient wrote:
It has just been revealed to me that Jesus Christ never existed. I can't imagine living without this knowledge now that I have it. I feel so complete, and it feels so good to finally know the truth that Jesus Christ in fact NEVER existed.

I hope you too are able to find this truth.

Is this a gag topic, or is Sapient serious about providing proper evidence for the case that Christ never existed?

I'm not trying to be snarky; I'm seriously interested in what arguments people here have to support their claims. If this is a gag topic, does anyone here know a good forum discussing the mythicist's case. I'm not interested in faith-based argumentation, so any believers actually buying the resurrection myth need not not respond.

Our 6th show, 13th show, and upcoming 22nd show all have some info on the lacking historicity of Christ. Show 6 available free by clicking "play past shows" above, show 13 available free on the left hand side of this page, and show 22 airs in a few weeks.

There are arguments from Rook, here. Also check out this movie, the sale ends soon. Eye-wink

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

applesforadam wrote:
Friend wrote:
Is this a gag topic, or is Sapient serious about providing proper evidence for the case that Christ never existed?

There are many forgivable sins, doubting the word of Sapient however, is not one of them.

This is a seperate topic really. We're dealing with two things here. On one hand we have sound logical and reasonable reasons to doubt the Christians savior never existed. On the other hand we have the proper proof one must have to believe in something, and that is of course, that it was revealed to me! You must be willing to accept this truth I have offered you on faith. Accept this truth with your whole heart, c'mon you know you want to.

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Friend
Posts: 2
Joined: 2006-07-17
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

Sapient wrote:
There are arguments from Rook, here. Also check out this movie, the sale ends soon. Eye-wink

I checked out the God Who Wasn't There film. It was good, but I'm more interested in detailed academic takes on the matter, specifically non-faithbased real historicity. What reasons do real historians, not religious theologians have to claim the factual existence of a Jesus figure?


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Re: Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read

Friend wrote:
What reasons do real historians, not religious theologians have to claim the factual existence of a Jesus figure?

One that performed miracles and was the son of god, or just a man that existed?

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


GrimJesta
GrimJesta's picture
Posts: 152
Joined: 2006-06-21
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

The son of God thing: none.
The man: there were plenty of Jesus guys out there. None were the son of any gods.

-=Grim=-

No Nyarlathotep, Know Peace.
Know Nyarlathotep, No Peace.


Nick
Posts: 187
Joined: 2006-08-01
User is offlineOffline
Proof that Jesus Christ never existed!!! Christians read!

Yeah! There's alot of guys named Jesus right now, walking around in Mexico. Although I hear it's pronounced differently. Sticking out tongue

Wilson: "We were afraid that if you found out you solved a case with absolutely no medical evidence you'd think you were God." House: "God doesn't limp."


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
KingDavid8 wrote:todangst

KingDavid8 wrote:
todangst wrote:
KingDavid8 wrote:
Sapient wrote:
That's impossible. Who knew him and wrote about him?

John and Matthew.

Poor choices.

The gospel of 'John' is considered to be the last of the four gospels.... and we know that Mark, the first of the "four" (There were a lot more than four, by the way, and doesn't that bother you at all? )

No, because I take any Gospel written well after the life of its supposed "author" to not mean much as far as evidence goes.

How inconsistent of you then, to not eliminate all the gospels....

Quote:
wasn't written until after 70 AD, so that rules out the John author as an eyewitness.

Quote:

I'm not following you. Given that (per the evidence) John was alive when Jesus walked the Earth and lived until almost 100 AD,

Sorry, I can't take this seriously.

Quote:

And there's no evidence that Mark's Gospel couldn't have been written before 70 AD.

Actually, there's very solid proof - he writes about the fall of the temple in jerusalem that occured after 70ad.

Quote:

As for Matthew, the Matthew author himself invalidates himself as an eyewitness. In chapters 27 and 28 he makes it clear that he is referring to events that occured well before the time he was writing in.

Quote:

Why does this invalidate him?

Because he refers to the events as if they happened long ago.... so this writer is writing decades later.... making it highly unlikely that it was an eyewitness, as this would make him an aged codger at a time when people simply did not live that long.

Quote:

And Matthew chapter 21, verses four and five are irrefutible proof that the matthew writer merely took from the Markian source and from the Old testament to tell his story.

Quote:

Since Matthew writes about a whole lot of stuff that wasn't in the Gospel of Mark or the Old Testament, then clearly he had sources beyond that...

But this doesn't mean that he used real sources of information.

Quote:

such as his own experiences.

That's a non sequitur.

Quote:

In those verses, he has 'jesus' riding two animals:

21:4 All this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, "All this was done, that it might be fulfilled"
21:5 Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek, and sitting upon an ass, and a colt the foal of an ass.

Based on his MISREADING of Zechariah 9:9

9:9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy King cometh unto thee: he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.

Matthew misreads the original and has jesus riding TWO animals when the original writer only meant one!

This is proof that the matthew author took stories from the OT, and that he did NOT actually witness the events he wrote on!

Quote:

At worst, it just shows that he misread the OT, not that the event he is describing wasn't witnessed by him.

Why is he even reading the OT in the first place, if he's writing a supposed eyewitness account?!

Clearly he never witnessed this!

Quote:

If he saw the two animals, and mentally referred back to Zech 9:9 (thinking it was about two animals), then I could see him deciding to mention it,

You'll just say whatever it takes to cling to your belief, won't ya?

Quote:

Since the book of mark, the first gospel, is clearly a midrash of the OT - we can clearly see that most of the claims are simply stories taken from books of the old testament. So this refutes the idea that ANY of the gospels are eye witness accounts:

http://users2.ev1.net/%7Eturton/GMark/GMark01.html

Quote:

That's a presumptive and subjective argument that most scholars don't buy.

That's a naked assertion. Read the site and learn.

Quote:

Quote:

I already knew before anything was revealed to me that first hand accounts of Jesus don't exist.

Quote:

And you know this how? It's true that we only have copies of the original texts, not the original texts themselves, but the evidence consistently and overwhelmingly points to John and Matthew having written, or at least dictated, their texts,

And you know this how? What "evidence" are you pointing to?

Quote:

The fact that every authorship credit we see for those Gospels goes to John and Matthew.

This is simply false.

Quote:

When scholars

Which scholars?

Quote:

. Also, we have confirmation of the authorships from Irenaeus, Diatessaron, Papias, and Theophilus, as I already mentioned.

But we don't have how they justified their claims. That's the key point.

Quote:

Quote:
and for the copies we have to be relatively faithful to the originals

Wow! How can you know this without having an original!?

Quote:

I didn't say we "know",

Yeah, you did.

Quote:
Quote:

, with no more than a handful of passages in any kind of reasonable doubt.

Again, how can you know this without an original?

Quote:

Again, we can't "know",

Right.

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


QueefsR4Quitters (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
All claims of jesus derive

All claims of jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!

Not one eyewitness of the alleged Jesus ever wrote about him*.

*Please understand that the stories themselves cannot serve as examples of eyewitness accounts since they came as products of the minds of the unknown authors, and not from the characters themselves.


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
QueefsR4Quitters wrote:All

QueefsR4Quitters wrote:
All claims of jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!

Not one eyewitness of the alleged Jesus ever wrote about him*.

*Please understand that the stories themselves cannot serve as examples of eyewitness accounts since they came as products of the minds of the unknown authors, and not from the characters themselves.

Agreed on all counts.... but then there is this putative evidence found on youtube, which purports to be an actual video of jesus, after the resurrection.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZwHTDgHYUU

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


QueefsR4Quitters (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
todangst

todangst wrote:
QueefsR4Quitters wrote:
All claims of jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!

Not one eyewitness of the alleged Jesus ever wrote about him*.

*Please understand that the stories themselves cannot serve as examples of eyewitness accounts since they came as products of the minds of the unknown authors, and not from the characters themselves.

Agreed on all counts.... but then there is this putative evidence found on youtube, which purports to be an actual video of jesus, after the resurrection.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZwHTDgHYUU

LMAO!!!


gdon
Theist
Posts: 86
Joined: 2006-03-06
User is offlineOffline
QueefsR4Quitters wrote:All

QueefsR4Quitters wrote:
All claims of jesus derive from hearsay accounts.

Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Jesus ever mentions him!


I think we can rule out historians mentioning Jesus before he existed.

QueefsR4Quitters wrote:
Not one eyewitness of the alleged Jesus ever wrote about him*.

Paul purportedly lived during the time of Jesus, though he never claims to have met him.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." -- Author unknown


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Agreed on the "before" part,

Agreed on the "before" part, although he may have meant that in terms of prophecy.

As for Paul, yes, Paul would have been a contemporary, but he doesn't count, as he never witnessed anything Jesus did. In fact, he only wrote after his conversion in the later years of his life (before he died). Not one jot was taken any earlier, which is strange if he had been preaching (As is according to Acts) ever since the days of Jesus.

So for twenty years (At least) he preached and preached and even became a Bishop yet he never once jotted down an inkling during those years? I can't believe that especially if he had heard about Jesus before his conversion, and especially if he had talked to and preached for twenty years. No minister can not mention a miracle of Jesus within five minutes of meeting you!

And Paul doesn't seem to believe that Jesus was a real person, and he certainly knows nothing of Jesus' ministry or life, even after speaking to Peter and James (And this is pretty damaging to you because you ignorantly claimed that James mentioned in Galatians was literally the brother of Jesus - which is not the case). Had Jesus been real, certainly when he ran into Titus, Peter, James or Barnabas he would have recounted several key facts about Jesus.

Or even a quote or a statement from the lips of Jesus himself, but we get none of this. None. So Paul doesn't count, and the only way he does is if you review an alternative perspective of what Paul believed.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


gdon
Theist
Posts: 86
Joined: 2006-03-06
User is offlineOffline
Rook_Hawkins wrote:As for

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
As for Paul, yes, Paul would have been a contemporary, but he doesn't count, as he never witnessed anything Jesus did. In fact, he only wrote after his conversion in the later years of his life (before he died). Not one jot was taken any earlier, which is strange if he had been preaching (As is according to Acts) ever since the days of Jesus.

So for twenty years (At least) he preached and preached and even became a Bishop yet he never once jotted down an inkling during those years? I can't believe that especially if he had heard about Jesus before his conversion, and especially if he had talked to and preached for twenty years.


I'm not sure that we can conclude "we have no writings of Paul from that period, therefore Paul didn't write anything in that period". How would you go about proving such a case?

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
And Paul doesn't seem to believe that Jesus was a real person, and he certainly knows nothing of Jesus' ministry or life, even after speaking to Peter and James (And this is pretty damaging to you because you ignorantly claimed that James mentioned in Galatians was literally the brother of Jesus - which is not the case). Had Jesus been real, certainly when he ran into Titus, Peter, James or Barnabas he would have recounted several key facts about Jesus.

Jeffrey Jay Lowder on Internet Infidels writes here in an article refuting Craig:
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/empty.html

The historical value of 1 Cor. 15:3-8 cannot be overemphasized. Not only is it an account of the resurrection written by someone who claimed to have personally seen an "appearance" of Jesus after his death, but also it is the earliest of all extant resurrection accounts... unless Paul was a total "recluse" (which I agree seems unlikely), it is quite probable that Paul would have talked with other Christians about the resurrection.

Lowder believes that Paul knew about a historical Jesus, and met early Christians.

Rook_Hawkins wrote:
Or even a quote or a statement from the lips of Jesus himself, but we get none of this. None. So Paul doesn't count, and the only way he does is if you review an alternative perspective of what Paul believed.

The standard perspective of Paul by most Bible skeptics is that Paul was a contemporary of Jesus who wrote about him and met the first Christians.

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." -- Author unknown


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Quote: The standard

Quote:

The standard perspective of Paul by most Bible skeptics is that Paul was a contemporary of Jesus who wrote about him and met the first Christians.

If he met anyone with any real knowledge of a 'jesus', he demonstrated a rather bizarre lack of curiosity about any details. And seeing that he equates his vision of jesus with the supposed 'eyewitnessing' of others, we really need to question your claim here....

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


gdon
Theist
Posts: 86
Joined: 2006-03-06
User is offlineOffline
todangst wrote:Quote: The

todangst wrote:
Quote:

The standard perspective of Paul by most Bible skeptics is that Paul was a contemporary of Jesus who wrote about him and met the first Christians.

If he met anyone with any real knowledge of a 'jesus', he demonstrated a rather bizarre lack of curiosity about any details. And seeing that he equates his vision of jesus with the supposed 'eyewitnessing' of others, we really need to question your claim here....


There are two parts here: (1) evidence from what Paul says about Jesus, (2) evidence from what Paul doesn't say about Jesus.

"(2)" gets quite a bit of focus in debates on historicity on the web. AFAIK, those Bible scholars who are skeptics who have given an opinion have pretty much ruled out the significance of the silence in Paul. The only thing to compare against is the Gospels, and since the historical detail in the Gospels has been questioned, comparing details in Paul with the Gospels is problematic. Also there is very little historical details about anything in Paul's writings.

Perhaps the RRS can interview Peter Kirby, Jeffrey Jay Lowder or other historicist secular scholar on this topic on their radio program?

"You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into." -- Author unknown


darth_josh
High Level DonorHigh Level ModeratorGold Member
darth_josh's picture
Posts: 2650
Joined: 2006-02-27
User is offlineOffline
Both parts have been equally

Both parts have been equally addressed in public debates concerning 'historicity'.
It becomes a 'crazy, ignorant, or lying' episode with only ancient writings as reference.
What about option #3?
Where did the epistles and the gospels derive from in the first place?
If you are asking us to have faith that either Paul or the gospels is correct then we arrive at the obvious conclusion that neither is true based upon any evidence. (see definition of 'faith')
Would it really make a difference to you if one more biblical scholar or ancient historian came on the show? Or are you just looking for affirmation of your judgment concerning the rrs?
www.freethoughtmedia.com has a listing of shows to listen to and ask questions. Dr. Price would love to hear your questions, I'm sure. Of course, I'm also sure that he'll call you on the 'faith' in the gospels/epistles thing as well.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Rook_Hawkins
RRS CO-FOUNDER
Rook_Hawkins's picture
Posts: 1322
Joined: 2006-02-11
User is offlineOffline
Actually, I think this is

Actually, I think this is one of those Todangst and Rook Hawkins shows soon to come to this board as content. What do you think todangst? Want to hammer away at Gdon tomorrow over skype?

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server, which houses Celebrity Atheists. Books by Rook Hawkins (Thomas Verenna)


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
Will he come on too? He just

Will he come on too?

He just called you a loony fundy, except that he conceded that you critically examined your beliefs... but what make a fundy a fundy in the first place?

Their dogmatic refusal to question their beliefs!

If this 'be' his logic, I'm not all that concerned....

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


DelphicRaven
DelphicRaven's picture
Posts: 101
Joined: 2006-08-17
User is offlineOffline
This thread sparked a minor rant... sorry everyone.

This probably has been stated before...

But I really didn't want to read through umpteen pages of stuff to see if it has been, so if it has been, I'm sorry but I'm also restating.

It was written a few times, and I hear it a lot, "how could you possibly know, did you live during the time of Jesus".

Answer: Um, no... but it's not looking too promising that you did either.

The books that even wrote ABOUT Jesus didn't come to be until YEARS after he died. So did the authors of those books (who still, might I add, remain nameless) know Jesus? What's even cooler is that almost every culture from around the world has somewhere in their mythology a figure that is much like Jesus. Most of the stories predate the story that we are being fed.

It never ceases to amaze me when people say "Jesus lived, the bible told me so". The bible also says that incest is okay. Maybe I should run off and marry my dad. The bible was written over 2000 years ago, translated, and mistranslated more times than even biblical scholars can account for...

I'm sorry, believe Jesus existed or don't, but don't put your salvation on some book that is written by a bunch of people no one can even name, or pinpoint down to geographical location. If your "saved" you "saved" yourself. What is so wrong about being accountable for our own emotions anyway? Why do we have to say "Jesus did it" for it to be "so"? Isn't it just as good if "I" did it? Prayer didn't accomplish it, but hard work did. "Two hands working did more than 50 clasped in prayer." Isn't there some form of beauty in all humanity can accomplish?

So, forgive me... or don't, because I really don't care. However, I'd rather have faith in MYSELF, who I KNOW exists, than some imaginary guy that is alive but isn't alive at the same time and has these fantastic magic powers the best fantasy novel writers can think up... because some book that is over 2000 years old, completely crusty and filled with holes told me so.

I rather like the beauty of what humans can accomplish, and I think belief in imaginary friends rather discredits the beauty and intelligence of human kind.

--Sarah--

Prayer: How to do nothing and feel like your doing something.


afroguy56 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
stupid and what proof do you have

To start things off i would like to know how this was revealed to you cause first if your only going to give us your word that he didn't exist cause it was reveald to you then why should we trust your word its the same aspect as the word of the New Testament and there is more proof for that then your word?


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
afroguy56 wrote:To start

afroguy56 wrote:

To start things off i would like to know how this was revealed to you cause first if your only going to give us your word that he didn't exist cause it was reveald to you then why should we trust your word its the same aspect as the word of the New Testament and there is more proof for that then your word?

and yet, no one comes up with such proof...

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Louis_Cypher
BloggerSuperfan
Louis_Cypher's picture
Posts: 529
Joined: 2008-03-22
User is offlineOffline
I posted this on ano0ther forum site, long ago...

Let’s examine the story of the birth of jesus, shall we?

Luke 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be taxed.
Luke 2:2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)

Matthew 2:1 Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,

This neatly frames the timeline of the events preceding the birth of jesus. He was born after the census of Cyrenius and during the last years of the reign of Herod the Great. It is clear, concise and unequivocal, it is also historically impossible.

Here are the facts, Herod the Great, died in the year 4 BCE.
Cyrenius became Governor of Syria in the year 6 CE, partly due to Herod’s death.
If you accept the part of the story that tells us that Joseph packed up the pregnant mizzus and made the trip to Bethlehem because of the census decreed by Cyrenius, then the parts about Herod, particularly the ‘slaughter of the innocents’, wherein Herod ordered every child under age 2 in the region to be killed become absurd. Since Herod was dead at least ten years past, the slaughter story, the wise men from the east, indeed, the reason for Joseph and family to high tail it to Egypt at all disappears in a ‘poof’ of reality.

We are left with an obviously bogus nativity tale, and the credibility of the story tellers in doubt. The evidence points to the inescapable conclusion that the gospels were written not by eye witnesses to events, but by outsiders with only a vague knowledge of the geography and history of the region, and vivid imaginations as well as a willingness to plagiarize freely, thus repeating and amplifying errors.

LC >;-}>
 

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.


Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7522
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
afroguy56 wrote:To start

afroguy56 wrote:

To start things off i would like to know how this was revealed to you cause first if your only going to give us your word that he didn't exist cause it was reveald to you then why should we trust your word

I felt the word.  I felt it in my heart, it's not just "my word."

 

Quote:

its the same aspect as the word of the New Testament and there is more proof for that then your word?

I felt it in my heart, the new testament is just words, with no proof.  My proof is that it was revealed to me, this knowledge, I now know for sure in my heart.

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Kayla (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
ok ok ok I"ve read through

ok ok ok

 

I"ve read through alot of what has been said but I haven't read it all. Sorry if I'm just re-stating facts that someone already has.

 

FIRST off, lets look at the Bible as any old book...

such as Homer's "Illiad"

Homer's "illiad" was written in 800 B.C. & the eariest copies are from 400 A.D. Thats a 400 year time gap from when it was first written to when it was first copied. There are exactly 643 different copies if the "Illiad" they are 95% correct with the original. As to my knowledge the original of th "Illiad" does not exist, but we know that the book is 95% accurate with the original because if you line all the copies up only 5% of the words or phrases are different. so the other 95% that ALL THE OTHER COPIES HAVE WRiTTENm in them was also written in the original

 

Ok...so now lets take a look at the Bible....

 

The New Testament was written from 50 AD to 100AD.

about 114 AD there were fragment of the New Testament copied. this is a 50 yr time gap

About 200 AD whole books were copied, this is a 100 yr time gap

about 250 AD mos of the New testamnet was copied down, 450 yr time gap

and finaly about 325 AD the omplete New Testament was being copied 225 yr time gap.

 

in all there are 5,366 different copies of the Bible. & it is 99% accurate to the original!!!!!

we know this because just like in the "Illiad" we can line all the books up and they match all except 1%

This adds up to about 40 lines in the books & none of these lines had anything to do with any miracles, or prophacies made.

 

SO...this proves that the Bible isn't just some big fish story that someone just cooked up & it got bigger and bigger as time went by....

NOW...to prove that he actually existed....

"Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, "

                                               -Cornelius Tacitus "Annals"[Christus is actually another spelling for Christ] Cornelius was a roman historian that old or Nero persecuting Christians. He was not a Christian, but actually openly mocked them. but he WROTE ABOUT JESUS...PERIOD...   "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was the doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day."                                                            -Flavius Josephus "Antiquities"Josephus was a Jewish historian who became commander of Jewish forces in Galilee in AD 66 which is just after Christs time. He also write about James and ow he was put to death in AD 62 Then ther is Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote a letter o his son in AD 73 & refers to Jesus as the King of Jews & that they (he Jews) had crusified him. & both Thullus & Phlegon confirmed that the earth became darker when Jesus Christ was crusified. SO...Here is plenty of historical & logical explantions as to why Jesus exists. Now please if you still think that your evidence beats mine please feel free to share it with me...My name is Kaylamy e-mail is southernchick470@hotmail.com

 

 


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1223
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
False Prophet

Kayla wrote:

 

Ok...so now lets take a look at the Bible....

 

The New Testament was written from 50 AD to 100AD.

about 114 AD there were fragment of the New Testament copied. this is a 50 yr time gap

About 200 AD whole books were copied, this is a 100 yr time gap

about 250 AD mos of the New testamnet was copied down, 450 yr time gap

and finaly about 325 AD the omplete New Testament was being copied 225 yr time gap.

 

in all there are 5,366 different copies of the Bible. & it is 99% accurate to the original!!!!!

we know this because just like in the "Illiad" we can line all the books up and they match all except 1%

This adds up to about 40 lines in the books & none of these lines had anything to do with any miracles, or prophacies made.

 

SO...this proves that the Bible isn't just some big fish story that someone just cooked up & it got bigger and bigger as time went by....

NOW...to prove that he actually existed....

"Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, "

                                               -Cornelius Tacitus "Annals"[Christus is actually another spelling for Christ] Cornelius was a roman historian that old or Nero persecuting Christians. He was not a Christian, but actually openly mocked them. but he WROTE ABOUT JESUS...PERIOD...   "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was the doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day."                                                            -Flavius Josephus "Antiquities"Josephus was a Jewish historian who became commander of Jewish forces in Galilee in AD 66 which is just after Christs time. He also write about James and ow he was put to death in AD 62 Then ther is Mara Bar-Serapion who wrote a letter o his son in AD 73 & refers to Jesus as the King of Jews & that they (he Jews) had crusified him. & both Thullus & Phlegon confirmed that the earth became darker when Jesus Christ was crusified. SO...Here is plenty of historical & logical explantions as to why Jesus exists.

 

 

The "evidence" you provided was put here to test our faith. 

It was revealed to us that there would be false prophets who would try to deceive us into believing jesus existed.  But as followers of the One True Revelation, we will never believe.

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


ronin-dog
Scientist
ronin-dog's picture
Posts: 419
Joined: 2007-10-18
User is offlineOffline
"No, since John lived until

"No, since John lived until almost 100 AD, and Matthew's was written 80 AD at the latest, with the 60's or early 70's being more likely, and while we don't know when he died, we do know of most of the deaths of "major players" that happened prior to 70 AD, like Steven (34 AD), James (44 AD), and Paul (67 AD). Had Matthew died prior to 70 AD or so, the facts would probably be known to us. "

Wow, those are some good life spans for back then, so John lived till around 120 years old or so in a time when the everage life expectancy would be <50?

I read the bible and saw the light! It is a load of rubbish. I can't believe anyone would believe it. Not only that, the story is horrifying. Who would follow such a cruel god except out of fear (as he commands).

Nice thread, Sapient, I can't believe how riled up you got them with just a couple of simple statements.

Zen-atheist wielding Occam's katana.

Jesus said, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Luke 12:51