A Challenge for Christians: Show Us Your Very Best Proof For Jesus (Jews, exist)

[maat55]

Originally Posted by pneuma

well when people take what is written in mythos as literal of course it contradicts itself.

and the thing everyone seems to forget is the bible was written by many different people during different ages.

I have no problem with the Bible as folklore. My trouble is with it being claimed the inerrant words of a god.

[maat55]

Originally Posted by pneuma

your correct it is nonsense to believe if someone demolishes my house I am responsible for it.

Not if it is understood via the mind of Christ.

However if you are referring to extreme fundamentalisms of any kind, be it christian, Islam, atheism you would be correct; humanity would be better off without them.

We are merely the rodents that act instinctively. You need to properly define the house and those destroying it.

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by pneuma

Your insistence on some historical writings that date back to the time of Jesus is just being plain bias on your part.

It does not matter when someone writes about history if the history is an accurate account and can be verified via other sources.

In the link I gave earlier I used other sources to show the gospel account of the nativity is an accurate historical account.

You wanted proof outside of the bible, I gave you some, yet you carry on as though no one has given you any proof except bible speak. Your bias is simply getting in your way. You do not have to agree with what I wrote thrill, but to continue as though no one has given you any proof outside of the bible just shows me your bias.

Are you really after the truth or just the truth you want to hold to?

Originally Posted by maat55

The gospels and other parts of the Bible contradict themselves. Added is that the whole Bible is biased. This does not constitute historical evidence.

pneuma, why is this stuff so difficult for you to comprehend? Even maat55 can see you're just painting circles around yourself.

I insist on historical writing because anyone, Christians not counted, would insist on historical verification before believing in someone and the gospels in particular and the Bible in general simply DO NOT QUALIFY as historical writing by any mainstream historians.

What Are the Gospels?
Neither biographies nor objective historical accounts, the gospels resembled religious advertisements.

The Story Of The Storytellers - What Are The Gospels? | From Jesus To Christ | FRONTLINE | PBS

So #1 it is not bias on my part if any normal rational person would insist on some outside proof from someone insisting they believe in a person no substantiated by any extra-religious writings.

#2 How in hell can the nativity account in the gospels be accurate when they are two entirely different accounts in Matthew and Luke?

The gospels attributed to Matthew and Luke narrate very different stories about the birth of Jesus. Matthew says that Jesus' family was from Bethlehem, that wise men brought gifts to their home, that they escaped to Egypt when Herod the Great ordered to kill all children under the age of three and that they moved to Nazareth because they could not go back to Bethlehem (no census or baby in a manger); Luke says that Jesus' family was from Nazareth, that they went to Bethlehem for the census of Quirinus (at least a decade after Herod the Great was no longer the ruler of Judea), and they went to Jerusalem after 41 days then Nazareth right after (no wise men, guiding star or mass killing).

Since the stories are incompatible, can we conclude that at least one of them was invented? How can we tell which is true, if any?

If one witness says "I saw a white man behind the wheel" and another man says "I saw a black woman behind the wheel" what do we do with their accounts? Duhhh!

#3 I refuted all the outside proof. That includes Tacitus, Josephus, Suetonius, and Mara bar Serapion. Josephus has been proven to be an interpolation and the others don't mention Jesus by name.

So that's the end of the story. Where else do you want to take this? There's no proof for Jesus Christ. Period.

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by maat55

I have no problem with the Bible as folklore. My trouble is with it being claimed the inerrant words of a god.

For me, that isn't even the question to be asked. The question is; does it tell the truth, at all?

There seems less and less reason to credit much of it. There is history, yes, but not as much as we once thought. And what there is, ir merely a background to religious spin. The siege of Tyre was turned into a prophecy - retrospectively. The siege of Jerusalem was turned into a miracle when it was a deal between the two sides.

The idea of any input from a god, never mind inerrant input, seems utterly ludicrous.

[GldnRule]

Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER

For me, that isn't even the question to be asked. The question is; does it tell the truth, at all?

There seems less and less reason to credit much of it. There is history, yes, but not as much as we once thought. And what there is, ir merely a background to religious spin. The siege of Tyre was turned into a prophecy - retrospectively. The siege of Jerusalem was turned into a miracle when it was a deal between the two sides.

The idea of any input from a god, never mind inerrant input, seems utterly ludicrous.

Of course it is an "input from a God".
Everything is. It is The All God Show, all the time.
It happens that metaphorical characters in the Bible are representations of God, and that which comprises God.

The Universe/All That Exists is meritoriously titled "God":
ALL THE ENERGY/MATTER THAT EXISTS AND HAS EXISTED (The Universe) has all the attributes definitive of a God Entity...and thus IS GOD.
We KNOW:
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, has rearranged itself so as to produce everything that has ever existed in Reality...from the smallest particle to the biggest Galaxy.---SOURCE/CREATOR 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, possess knowledge of all that is known at any given time.---ALL KNOWING 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, occupies all places in Reality.---ALL PRESENT 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, accounts for all the energy and force that exists in, acts upon, and controls, Reality.---ALL POWERFUL 100%
~~THE UNIVERSE and that which comprises it, is capable of all the seeing that has ever occured. ---ALL SEEING 100%
I could go on...but these are the attributes known to be definitive, demonstrative, and indicative of a God Entity.
Religions use metaphorical and allegorical characters and stories to describe all of this.
THE UNIVERSE is as "Godly" as it gets...from ANY reasonable assessment.
If THE UNIVERSE doesn't cut it as GOD, nothing would...and we may as well not even have such a word/term/title.
But we do. THE UNIVERSE certainly qualifies as "GOD"...and it has all those "Qualities" 100%.

The Bible is from God...anything and everything in Reality is by and through God.

[NVplumber]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

There it is. Show us exactly what you have that convinces you Jesus was a real person. It cannot be from the Bible because those writings are not considered historical evidence by non-biased Biblical scholars.

Go on. Show us something extra-Biblical that proves Jesus existed--ANYTHING, artifacts, a grave, a monument, an ossuary containing his bones, a relief, just anything-- and then let us examine it and if it is convincing I know that I will change my belief and say that he truly was the Son of God.

Go ahead!

There has been a considerable amount of research done on Jesus. That He was indeed a real person isn't a subject in dispute amongst historical researchers.
The Roman Empire itself was fundamental and irreversiblely changed by Jesus' teachings. Pretty ick accomplishment for someone who wasn't real. So you're claiming that all the changes brought to the entire world via Jesus was a clever contrivance and that nobody ever actually saw the man? That a group of people just made him up and maintained that illusion?

And other figures in history like say Leonididis, Alexander, Atilla, for ack of the same "proof" you ask for regarding Jesus do you also believe they were made up as well? That He was indeed of divine origin may be open for discussion. But his actjal, physical existence is not widely in dispute. Not sure exactly where it is you're hoping to go with this.

[thrillobyte]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40 View Post
There is enough food in the world to take care of everyone. So why is this God's fault? You have corrupt leaders who sieze food and aid supplies for their own evil greed. I don't blame God for the starving people of North Korea. I blame Kim Jong-un.

Why do you blame Kim, jeff? Wasn't he placed in power by God? So then he is doing God's will. Let's read Romans 13 and see what Paul says about Kim:

All of you must obey those who rule over you. There are no authorities except the ones God has chosen. Those who now rule have been chosen by God. 2 So whoever opposes the authorities opposes leaders whom God has appointed. Those who do that will be judged.

As I read it you're wrong to blame Kim and you will be judged for it, jeff because he was put there by God. Yes or no?

[TRANSPONDER]

Originally Posted by NVplumber

There has been a considerable amount of research done on Jesus. That He was indeed a real person isn't a subject in dispute amongst historical researchers.
The Roman Empire itself was fundamental and irreversiblely changed by Jesus' teachings. Pretty ick accomplishment for someone who wasn't real. So you're claiming that all the changes brought to the entire world via Jesus was a clever contrivance and that nobody ever actually saw the man? That a group of people just made him up and maintained that illusion?

And other figures in history like say Leonididis, Alexander, Atilla, for ack of the same "proof" you ask for regarding Jesus do you also believe they were made up as well? That He was indeed of divine origin may be open for discussion. But his actjal, physical existence is not widely in dispute. Not sure exactly where it is you're hoping to go with this.

The church was an evolutionary process. based first on the disciples and a messianic Judaism which was not invented by Jesus but inherited from John the baptist - and even that had precedents - and then taken by Paul and adapted for his gentile fellow -citizens by scrapping all the Jewish laws, then further adapted by the early Greek Christian church to reflect their (traditionally anti -Jewish) views and in particular making Jesus as much a godlike figure as Hercules or Dionysius, and finally turned into a state cult (not THE State cult(1) for political reasons by Constantine.

The input of the Historical Jesus (a failed messiah who paid the price of rebellion - as the gospels still all agree) into the Church is pretty miniscule.

In fact the historical Jesus qhestion is much like a lot of historical questions. There are reasons to credit the reality of Alexander, Leonidas and Atilla and no real reason to say they were totally invented. But there are nearly always some politically slanted aspect in the record that may require consideration and some mythical elements (e.g the Gordian knot episode) that sound dubious today. But the point really is that there is no belief -system based on accepting their story as true; no requirement that we live our lives according to their words and example, and certainly no threat of eternal punishment (never mind social persecution) if we refuse to believe that Alexander was a real God.

(1) or on 2nd thoughts maybe - in conjunction with the sun -god/Helios -identification of himself -it was.

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

From a subjective (individual) perspective one could ask 'What use is a God if He's not going to interact with his creation?" Good question. Only He knows. Myself, I cannot figure out why a God would set up such a system that includes such suffering and tragedy for the vast majority of humankind. I don't just mean disease and natural disasters but I also mean the deadly creatures like small spiders that bite us in the night and then we get Necrotizing fasciitis that causes us to die in agony after weeks of intense suffering. I have no idea why things are set up this way.

Why did God set things up like this and leave? What kind of a God creates flesh eating bacteria and cancer in children? That sort of thing distorts the whole concept of "love," doesn't it! And maybe the obvious answer is that NO God is responsible for these things at all, and never was. Maybe the universe has no ultimate goal other than ongoing change caused by random chance. Scientifically speaking, quantum mechanics drives all change. And unfortunately random change can lead to things like flesh eating bacteria and cancer in children just as indiscriminately as it can lead to an island sunset and a five dollar milkshake.

[pneuma]

Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER

You know that doesn't work. Of course I agree that man is responsible for trying to make the world better - because there is only us capable of doing so.

Trying to fix that which they demolished is always a good start.

But, if there was a hands -on god, there might be a case for saying 'cut down the rain forests - you deserve what you get', but someone that masterminded the church even interfering with Paul's free will (according to the writer of Acts) in order to do it. That god couldn't send a message or two of good advice to a few people where it counts?

But that doesn't even address naturally occurring bad stuff that does no good and teaches us nothing. Yet the bod who can still a storm, part a sea and apparently made the whole shebang to start with, can't even warn of a Tsunami let alone prevent it.

But He did and he does warn people, they just don't listen. People were warned that the water break would not stand up to a large hurricane long before New Orleans was devastated by a large hurricane. If they had of listen to those who warned them then New Orleans might not have been so devastated.

Pneuma - there's just us. There's no god You know it. I know it.

You got the evidence to support you statement of fact?

P.s the analogy of the house is of course inaccurate. It looks on the face of it ok, like the parable of the Barber. But like that parable it fails because God can do anything - so we are told.

That is your concept of God, not mine. God cannot sin, therefore God cannot do everything.

Ok, so God builds a perfectly good house and we come and ruin it. So nobody even turns up to tell us how to look after it? Even without that, if the bulder doesn't turn up with a wrecking ball himself, you'd think an omnipotent landlord would stop someone else doing it.
Old son,. the excuses don't work.

He did tell us how to look after it, we just did not and don't listen. We are starting to get the picture now, but the damage might be irreversible

We are on our own doing our best with the hand nature dealt us. That works.

Nature is nature, we have screwed nature up by destroying much of it, so don't blame nature for humankind's destruction of it. Nature did not deal us this hand, we did.