Jesus Who! (heaven, about, proof, history)

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by wrightclan

By your standard, virtually all historians would have to discounted, Christian or non.

Which historians would we have to discount?

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by Alpha8207

Plad, you will always have this issue. There's no way around it.

See, Lee Strobel, a former atheist, went on a quest to disprove facts and disprove Christ by writing a book called 'The Case For Chrsit.' Well, in his quest, he actually came to the realization that it's true! So the book started out as written by an atheist but by the end it was written by a Christian author.

When these folks realize it's true. They become believers.

Stop arguing the sources and start arguing the problem with the points the sources raise.

There is a very interesing site out there called www.debunkingchristianity.com. This site is run totally by ex-church ministers of all denominations, ex-professional bible apologists and people who were once fervent believers in Christianity. They have turned away from religion and now their lifes work is to expose religion for the con that it is. So you see Alpha...it's not all one way.

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by stretch00

But if the sources are invalid, then any points they raise are similarly invalid.

Lets look at Josephus for a moment, just on timeline.

He was born about 10 years after the crucifixion. But he did not start writing until he was about 40 (75ce). Therefore there is not a 10 year difference as Alpha notes, but rather a difference of closer to 45 or 50 years.

This is quite simply not contemporary. Period, end of story.

So from this point we can discuss what Josephus might have written, why he might have written it, and if there is any evidence that the manuscript was changed over the centuries.

After that, and only after that, can Josephus' writings be considered accurate, or for that matter, innacurate. The blade cuts both ways, and this could bolster either the christian or atheist viewpoint.

Any interest?

Standing by to back you up stretch.......not that you'll need it!

[pladecalvo]

Originally Posted by kaykay

This may appear to be "off topic" but please bear with me because I think it does relate to the OP aspect of "was Jesus a myth?" I would just like to ask the ones who are questioning the existence of Jesus if you have ever read the synoptic gospel accounts of Jesus in their entirety? I would submit that EVEN if there were NO extraneous writings mentioning Jesus, that the Jesus portrayed in the gospels is such a compelling, "unexpected" character that it would have been difficult to "invent" such a person. Just my opinion...but I do issue that as a challenge to those who may never have actually read the gospel accounts of Jesus.

It's very simple concept kaykay. Let me explain it to you.

They BELIEVED he existed. Just like YOU do. So what? People believe all sorts of things.

Why write about Krishna if he didn't exist?
Why write about Osiris if he didn't exist?
Why write about Odysseus if he didn't exist?
Why write about Hurcules if he didn't exist?
Why write about Odin if he didn't exist?
Why write about Harry Potter if he didn't exist?

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Odysseus - unless he was real.

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Osiris - unless he was real.

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Harry Potter - unless he was real.

People DO write legends, stories, myths. They do it today. They have always done it. People DO believe in religious myths. People DO write about religious myths.

It proves nothing - other than that people believe and write about myths.

[wrightclan]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Which historians would we have to discount?

Any who don't meet your standard of having been physically present for the history recorded.

BTW, some of the Bible writers were present in the times they recorded. You seem to have a vested interest in discounting any sources which are Christian,(or indeed any that even portray the Bible as having a modicum of validity) just because they are Christian or compatible with Biblical history. But you don't hold secular sources to the same standard.

[kaykay]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

It's very simple concept kaykay. Let me explain it to you.

They BELIEVED he existed. Just like YOU do. So what? People believe all sorts of things.

Why write about Krishna if he didn't exist?
Why write about Osiris if he didn't exist?
Why write about Odysseus if he didn't exist?
Why write about Hurcules if he didn't exist?
Why write about Odin if he didn't exist?
Why write about Harry Potter if he didn't exist?

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Odysseus - unless he was real.

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Osiris - unless he was real.

There does not seem to be any motive for people to write about Harry Potter - unless he was real.

People DO write legends, stories, myths. They do it today. They have always done it. People DO believe in religious myths. People DO write about religious myths.

It proves nothing - other than that people believe and write about myths.

I am not talking about motives. I'm talking about how the "character and personality" of Jesus is portrayed. He is "unexpected." He says and does what you would not expect HIm to. My point is that He would be difficult to "invent" in the way He is portrayed. He is NOT what you would expect Him to be. People can believe in something all day long, but they can't necessarily invent a character that behaves like Jesus did. Yes, I realize to you this does not constitute any kind of "proof," but again, I say to people who don't believe in Jesus...read the gospel accounts. See what you think.

[Alpha8207]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

There is a very interesing site out there called www.debunkingchristianity.com. This site is run totally by ex-church ministers of all denominations, ex-professional bible apologists and people who were once fervent believers in Christianity. They have turned away from religion and now their lifes work is to expose religion for the con that it is. So you see Alpha...it's not all one way.

Do a google search for (ex atheist) and see what you come up with.

What's your point? I didn't say certain believers have never turned from the faith. But you don't set out to write a book against something and wind up being in favor of it just on a whim.....

Ahh, pladecalvo, you filp you flop, you change your stance, you say 'There's no evidence of Jesus' and when someone hits you with some you say 'I didn't say there may have not been a guy named Jesus blah blah blah...'.

Very tired, plad.

Non-believers read your posts and think 'yeah, that's it' and believers read your posts and say 'that's not what he said a few posts back...'

Anyway, one thing is absolutely, 100%, inarguable and agreeable between me and you....and that is, one day, we'll both know for sure.

[pladecalvo]

[quote=Alpha8207;686092]

Ahh, pladecalvo, you filp you flop, you change your stance, you say 'There's no evidence of Jesus' and when someone hits you with some you say 'I didn't say there may have not been a guy named Jesus blah blah blah...'.

Very tired, plad.

Alpha, we have already discussed this and my OP makes it quite clear that I am referring to JC. Why do you keep insisting that I'm referring to 'Jesus the man'? I've told you before and I'll tell you again:

I AM QUITE OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT A MAN NAMED JESUS EXISTED BUT HE WAS NOTHING MORE THAN ITINERANT REBEL-ROUSER WHO FELL FOUL OF THE AUTHORITIES.

[Alpha8207]

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

Alpha, we have already discussed this and my OP makes it quite clear that I am referring to JC. Why do you keep insisting that I'm referring to 'Jesus the man'? I've told you before and I'll tell you again:

I AM QUITE OPEN TO THE POSSIBILITY THAT A MAN NAMED JESUS EXISTED BUT HE WAS NOTHING MORE THAN ITINERANT REBEL-ROUSER WHO FELL FOUL OF THE AUTHORITIES.

Well, the only reason I say that is, based on every single post you have in this thread. I don't remember a single one that tried to convince anyone Jesus is the Son of God. That being said, every single example of evidence outside the Bible that has been laid out for you as evidence of Jesus the Man, you have a problem with. It's probably all my fault.

Had I realized your issue was solely in Jesus Christ's deity and authority and your denial of both, I would have left it alone with our first two posts...

Originally Posted by pladecalvo

I contend that JC, Son of God is a myth!

Originally Posted by Alpha8207

Let me know how that works out for ya.

ONCE AGAIN, as long as you are saying that you do not discount that Jesus the Man walked the Earth, I'll let time prove out the OP for you!

Blessings.

[pladecalvo]

[quote=Alpha8207;686236]

Well, the only reason I say that is, based on every single post you have in this thread. I don't remember a single one that tried to convince anyone Jesus is the Son of God. That being said, every single example of evidence outside the Bible that has been laid out for you as evidence of Jesus the Man, you have a problem with. It's probably all my fault.

Read the thread again.

Had I realized your issue was solely in Jesus Christ's deity and authority and your denial of both, I would have left it alone with our first two posts...

Read the thread again.

ONCE AGAIN, as long as you are saying that you do not discount that Jesus the Man walked the Earth, I'll let time prove out the OP for you!

I don't..... as I've told you on previous occasions!