Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just as many savior myths before the Jesus one. What makes this one special?
Because Jesus was not just some mere man. He was God in the flesh, the lamb of God to take away the sins of the world.
Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me.
He is the only one qualified to be the Messiah that the Jews (and Gentiles) were waiting for.
He was crucified, died and was buried and rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven and there lives to this day.
No one else did that or had his qualifications.
You can diss every other human being but if you diss the Son of God, there is no salvation for you, no payment for your sins, no way to go to heaven, because you must love the Son of God, Jesus. or else you are doomed.
You have a chance to escape doom now. but if you reject the ONLY means of salvation, you have no chance.
You cant buy it, cant work for it, cant earn it, no, its a gift. gotta receive it.
If tomorrow you could press one of two buttons, and one button made 100% of the people believe there ever really was a Jesus.... and the other button could make 100% of people believe in the idea(s) behind Christianity.... it would be interesting to see the statistics on how many "Christians" choose each option.
I personally would not be surprised to see the results coming out looking similar to the recent referendum in Scotland.
According to Jesus , the real believers would be out voted. Matt 7:21-23
Just as many savior myths before the Jesus one. What makes this one special?
Perhaps you should educate yourself with history, or read a book, such as
"The Virgin Birth of Christ" by J. Gresham Machen. The "pagan myth" line
has been totally debunked by real scholars, you know, the ones who actually
know WTH they are talking about.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,925,051 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowball7
Perhaps you should educate yourself with history, or read a book, such as
"The Virgin Birth of Christ" by J. Gresham Machen. The "pagan myth" line
has been totally debunked by real scholars, you know, the ones who actually
know WTH they are talking about.
I just love it when members here make assertions we are to accept, but have no idea how to post references that might give those assertions a modicum of credibility.
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,925,051 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoMeO
Because Jesus was not just some mere man. He was God in the flesh, the lamb of God to take away the sins of the world.
Jesus said I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to the Father but by me.
He is the only one qualified to be the Messiah that the Jews (and Gentiles) were waiting for.
He was crucified, died and was buried and rose from the dead, and ascended to heaven and there lives to this day.
No one else did that or had his qualifications.
You can diss every other human being but if you diss the Son of God, there is no salvation for you, no payment for your sins, no way to go to heaven, because you must love the Son of God, Jesus. or else you are doomed.
You have a chance to escape doom now. but if you reject the ONLY means of salvation, you have no chance.
You cant buy it, cant work for it, cant earn it, no, its a gift. gotta receive it.
You many want to consider taking some comparative religion courses.
I read an interesting article written by Bart Ehrman and for those who are not familiar with him he's a well respected scholar yet he's renounced his evangelical roots and is considered a skeptic.
However, even he firmly asserts that those who argue against the historicity of Jesus are unqualified to do so and have agendas which cloud their objectivity.
Bart Ehrman from an article, "Did Jesus Exist?":
"This unusually vociferous group of nay-sayers maintains that Jesus is a myth invented for nefarious (or altruistic) purposes by the early Christians who modeled their savior along the lines of pagan divine men who, it is alleged, were also born of a virgin on Dec. 25, who also did miracles, who also died as an atonement for sin and were then raised from the dead."
"Few of these mythicists are actually scholars trained in ancient history, religion, biblical studies or any cognate field, let alone in the ancient languages generally thought to matter for those who want to say something with any degree of authority about a Jewish teacher who (allegedly) lived in first-century Palestine."
..."there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts...."
Here's the real reason he shares why we have persistent naysayers of the existence of Jesus:
"Why then is the mythicist movement growing, with advocates so confident of their views and vocal -- even articulate -- in their denunciation of the radical idea that Jesus actually existed? It is, in no small part, because these deniers of Jesus are at the same time denouncers of religion -- a breed of human now very much in vogue. And what better way to malign the religious views of the vast majority of religious persons in the western world, which remains, despite everything, overwhelmingly Christian, than to claim that the historical founder of their religion was in fact the figment of his followers' imagination?"
Ehrman continues, "With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are is pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. Moreover, we have relatively extensive writings from one first-century author, Paul, who acquired his information within a couple of years of Jesus' life and who actually knew, first hand, Jesus' closest disciple Peter and his own brother James. If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it. "
He concludes, "One may well choose to resonate with the concerns of our modern and post-modern cultural despisers of established religion (or not). But surely the best way to promote any such agenda is not to deny what virtually every sane historian on the planet -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, pagan, agnostic, atheist, what have you -- has come to conclude based on a range of compelling historical evidence. Whether we like it or not, Jesus certainly existed."
Location: In a little house on the prairie - literally
10,202 posts, read 7,925,051 times
Reputation: 4561
Quote:
Originally Posted by hd4me
I read an interesting article written by Bart Ehrman and for those who are not familiar with him he's a well respected scholar yet he's renounced his evangelical roots and is considered a skeptic.
However, even he firmly asserts that those who argue against the historicity of Jesus are unqualified to do so and have agendas which cloud their objectivity.
Bart Ehrman from an article, "Did Jesus Exist?":
"This unusually vociferous group of nay-sayers maintains that Jesus is a myth invented for nefarious (or altruistic) purposes by the early Christians who modeled their savior along the lines of pagan divine men who, it is alleged, were also born of a virgin on Dec. 25, who also did miracles, who also died as an atonement for sin and were then raised from the dead."
"Few of these mythicists are actually scholars trained in ancient history, religion, biblical studies or any cognate field, let alone in the ancient languages generally thought to matter for those who want to say something with any degree of authority about a Jewish teacher who (allegedly) lived in first-century Palestine."
..."there is not a single mythicist who teaches New Testament or Early Christianity or even Classics at any accredited institution of higher learning in the Western world. And it is no wonder why. These views are so extreme and so unconvincing to 99.99 percent of the real experts...."
Here's the real reason he shares why we have persistent naysayers of the existence of Jesus:
"Why then is the mythicist movement growing, with advocates so confident of their views and vocal -- even articulate -- in their denunciation of the radical idea that Jesus actually existed? It is, in no small part, because these deniers of Jesus are at the same time denouncers of religion -- a breed of human now very much in vogue. And what better way to malign the religious views of the vast majority of religious persons in the western world, which remains, despite everything, overwhelmingly Christian, than to claim that the historical founder of their religion was in fact the figment of his followers' imagination?"
Ehrman continues, "With respect to Jesus, we have numerous, independent accounts of his life in the sources lying behind the Gospels (and the writings of Paul) -- sources that originated in Jesus' native tongue Aramaic and that can be dated to within just a year or two of his life (before the religion moved to convert pagans in droves). Historical sources like that are is pretty astounding for an ancient figure of any kind. Moreover, we have relatively extensive writings from one first-century author, Paul, who acquired his information within a couple of years of Jesus' life and who actually knew, first hand, Jesus' closest disciple Peter and his own brother James. If Jesus did not exist, you would think his brother would know it. "
He concludes, "One may well choose to resonate with the concerns of our modern and post-modern cultural despisers of established religion (or not). But surely the best way to promote any such agenda is not to deny what virtually every sane historian on the planet -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, pagan, agnostic, atheist, what have you -- has come to conclude based on a range of compelling historical evidence. Whether we like it or not, Jesus certainly existed."
You, and him, may want to read Tom Harpur's "The Pagan Christ".
The Reverend Tom Harpur.
Some of his background:
Harpur earned an Honours B.A. in 1951 at University College at the University of Toronto, where he won the Jarvis Scholarship in Greek and Latin, the Maurice Hutton Scholarship in Classics, the Sir William Mulock Scholarship in Classics, and the Gold Medal in Classics. He went on to study Lit.Hum. ("Greats" or Classics) at Oriel College at the University of Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar from 1951 to 1954 where he read the ancient historians (Herodotus, Thucydides and Tacitus) completely in their original texts. He graduated in 1954 with the B.A and was conferred the M.A. (Oxon.) two years later. Between 1954 and 1956 he studied theology at Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, where he was a tutor in Greek. At Wycliffe he won prizes in homiletics and Greek and was the senior student and valedictorian in his graduating year. He returned to Oxford in 1962 and 1963 for his post-graduate studies where he read the Early Christian writers or Church Fathers (Patristics).
Harpur was ordained a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada in 1956. He served as a curate at St. John's York Mills, Toronto from 1956 to 1957. From 1957 to 1964 he served the parish of St. Margaret's-in-the-Pines in Scarborough, Ontario. During this time he lectured on ancient philosophy part-time at Wycliffe College. From 1962 to 1963 he spent a further year at Oriel College, Oxford, doing postgraduate research in Patristics and New Testament studies.
Academia[edit]
From 1964 to 1971, Harpur was an assistant professor and then a full professor of New Testament and New Testament Greek at Wycliffe, and from 1984 to 1987 he was part-time lecturer on the Theology and Praxis of Mass Media course at the Toronto School of Theology in the University of Toronto.
You, and him, may want to read Tom Harpur's "The Pagan Christ".
The Reverend Tom Harpur.
Some of his background:
Harpur earned an Honours B.A. in 1951 at University College at the University of Toronto, where he won the Jarvis Scholarship in Greek and Latin, the Maurice Hutton Scholarship in Classics, the Sir William Mulock Scholarship in Classics, and the Gold Medal in Classics. He went on to study Lit.Hum. ("Greats" or Classics) at Oriel College at the University of Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar from 1951 to 1954 where he read the ancient historians (Herodotus, Thucydides and Tacitus) completely in their original texts. He graduated in 1954 with the B.A and was conferred the M.A. (Oxon.) two years later. Between 1954 and 1956 he studied theology at Wycliffe College, University of Toronto, where he was a tutor in Greek. At Wycliffe he won prizes in homiletics and Greek and was the senior student and valedictorian in his graduating year. He returned to Oxford in 1962 and 1963 for his post-graduate studies where he read the Early Christian writers or Church Fathers (Patristics).
Harpur was ordained a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada in 1956. He served as a curate at St. John's York Mills, Toronto from 1956 to 1957. From 1957 to 1964 he served the parish of St. Margaret's-in-the-Pines in Scarborough, Ontario. During this time he lectured on ancient philosophy part-time at Wycliffe College. From 1962 to 1963 he spent a further year at Oriel College, Oxford, doing postgraduate research in Patristics and New Testament studies.
Academia[edit]
From 1964 to 1971, Harpur was an assistant professor and then a full professor of New Testament and New Testament Greek at Wycliffe, and from 1984 to 1987 he was part-time lecturer on the Theology and Praxis of Mass Media course at the Toronto School of Theology in the University of Toronto.
He completely disagrees with your author. I would suggest he at least as, if not significantly more, qualified.
It isn't necessary for me to base my belief on Ehrman or any other human but when dealing with the question of whether or not Jesus was real modern day skeptics speak as if they have it right and the billion plus have it wrong. I would say in the least that is presumptuous.
You and I as is Ehrman and Harpur..here today and gone tomorrow... but the Christ is alive and well and for many a Christian though we die it's our exercising faith in him that leads to everlasting life and by him that we gain knowledge of our heavenly Father.
BTW you may want to re-read the book by Harpur and the quote about Horus on page 5, "On the other hand, Christian theologian Ward Gasque surveyed twenty contemporary Egyptologists. He asked them about the relationship whether Horus experienced a virgin birth. Ten responded; they unanimously agreed that there is no evidence that Horus was born of a virgin."
This atheist believes there was an historic Jesus.
Jesus is the most controversial individual in history. Both Christian and secular writers have written about Him. He is mentioned in the Jewish Talmud.
If the unbelieving Jews could erase Jesus from history, they certainly would do so. He's in their books even.
To deny Jesus as a historic individual has no merit whatsoever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
