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.
The conclusion is that Mikiel's insistence that it was all written by Jewish eyewitness followers of Jesus (I think that is what he is saying) will not stand scrutiny.quote;
In this thread, I have not even used the word " Jew." Show me where I said anything about Jews; This I gotta see.
quote;
"I already listed 14 verifications of what I consider to be credible witness of Jesus." post number? This I gotta see.
[quote=Mickiel;
problems both believing in him and understanding him. So I wonder if that is part and parcel to what he said about people " Not seeing?" You know, we just don't see it. We have the bible, we have archaeology, we have history; we have the witness of Tertullian, Lucian, Josephus, Suetonius, Thallus, Origen, the Quran, the Talmud, Pliny the Younger, Celsus, Tacitus and Sextus Julius Africanus; and we still have trouble believing and understanding.
quote]
The existence of Jesus and the information we have related to him is growing. Jesus was brought to " Caiaphas" the high priest in John 18:12-14, archaeologist have unearthed and found the bone box of this priest. Jesus is brough before " Pilate" in John 19:4-15, archaeologist have unearthed and discovered the very spot Jesus stood on before Pilate, called " The Via Dolorosa." Jesus was marched through a gate after that, Heb. 13:12 , " The Damascus Gate", Archaeologist have found that.
As they marched Jesus through the gate he was carrying a cross, the guard enlisted a cyreneian named " Simon", a black man, to help carry his cross Matt. 27:32, archaeologist have unearthed his bonebox. Jesus was then crucified on a mountian called " Golgotha - the place of the Skull", Archaeologist have that place found. He was said to have been buried in the " Tomb of Joseph", we have that tomb. Mary and Martha came from their house to be with him, archaeologist have that house. Before he was killed he prayed in the " Garden of Gethsemane", archaeologist have found that. As well as the river Jordan he was baptised in.
There is little doubt that Jesus existed and that his words were recorded in our history.
Interesting suggestion, also I never considered how much of a variety of " Listeners and their languages", if they had trouble understanding Jesus because of language. I know he was misunderstood by some, and he knew that also; In John 8:43 he observes;"Why do you not understand what I am saying? Is it because you cannot hear my word?" So there was misunderstanding for sure, be that because of a lack of spiritual discernment, or a language gap, there was a problem.
Yet 2,000 years later, he is still misunderstood, as well as unbelieved; I misunderstand him myself, although I believe in him. And the language barriers have been removed. Strange to me, the most egnigmatic figure in human history and we have problems both believing in him and understanding him. So I wonder if that is part and parcel to what he said about people " Not seeing?" You know, we just don't see it. We have the bible, we have archaeology, we have history; we have the witness of Tertullian, Lucian, Josephus, Suetonius, Thallus, Origen, the Quran, the Talmud, Pliny the Younger, Celsus, Tacitus and Sextus Julius Africanus; and we still have trouble believing and understanding.
Thats why I think Jesus meaning in John has unusual complications to the human consciousness and ability to comprehend included in it. It may well be one of the reasons he came; to conflict the human consciousness. And if that be so, then why?
Not one of them is an Eye Witness. None of the witnesses are even Jewish. Their writings are from hear say. A Jew and a Muslim finds no reference to Jesus(as) in the talmud. The Qur'an does mention Jesus(as) quite a bit and He is the most spoken about man in the Qur'an. However, the Qur'an was revealed 600 years after Jesus(as). Although I accept it as true, I can not expect a non-Muslim to also do so.
Originally Posted by Mickiel;
problems both believing in him and understanding him. So I wonder if that is part and parcel to what he said about people " Not seeing?" You know, we just don't see it. We have the bible, we have archaeology, we have history; we have the witness of Tertullian, Lucian, Josephus, Suetonius, Thallus, Origen, the Quran, the Talmud, Pliny the Younger, Celsus, Tacitus and Sextus Julius Africanus; and we still have trouble believing and understanding.
quote
The existence of Jesus and the information we have related to him is growing. Jesus was brought to " Caiaphas" the high priest in John 18:12-14, archaeologist have unearthed and found the bone box of this priest. Jesus is brough before " Pilate" in John 19:4-15, archaeologist have unearthed and discovered the very spot Jesus stood on before Pilate, called " The Via Dolorosa." Jesus was marched through a gate after that, Heb. 13:12 , " The Damascus Gate", Archaeologist have found that.
As they marched Jesus through the gate he was carrying a cross, the guard enlisted a cyreneian named " Simon", a black man, to help carry his cross Matt. 27:32, archaeologist have unearthed his bonebox. Jesus was then crucified on a mountian called " Golgotha - the place of the Skull", Archaeologist have that place found. He was said to have been buried in the " Tomb of Joseph", we have that tomb. Mary and Martha came from their house to be with him, archaeologist have that house. Before he was killed he prayed in the " Garden of Gethsemane", archaeologist have found that. As well as the river Jordan he was baptised in.
There is little doubt that Jesus existed and that his words were recorded in our history.
The location of the places are of no evidence. The name of a fictional character could be used. Suppose the name Ignatz Smith was used instead of Jesus(as) would that be proof of Ignatz Smith?
Not one of them is an Eye Witness. None of the witnesses are even Jewish. Their writings are from hear say. A Jew and a Muslim finds no reference to Jesus(as) in the talmud. The Qur'an does mention Jesus(as) quite a bit and He is the most spoken about man in the Qur'an. However, the Qur'an was revealed 600 years after Jesus(as). Although I accept it as true, I can not expect a non-Muslim to also do so.
They are not "eye" witnesses, but they are verifiable witnesses in history. Historical writers are verifiable, they are called historians and they recorded our history. Just as the archaeology is a verifiable part of our history no matter what skeptic denys it.
They are not "eye" witnesses, but they are verifiable witnesses in history. Historical writers are verifiable, they are called historians and they recorded our history. Just as the archaeology is a verifiable part of our history no matter what skeptic denys it.
That is true. But their records are only as reliable as what was given to them. They are relying on what they were told, not what they have seen. They come down to be third party reports from alleged witnesses.
For example there are a very large number of Historians that have reported on Muhammad(PBUH). Do you accept that as proof Islam is the one true religion, like I do? Do you believe Muhammad(PBUH) caused the Moon to have split? The mountain, at which the miracle is said to have been seen still exists, that can be proven historically and through Geology. While I believe it to be true, I suspect you would want more evidence than what is said in the Qur'an and what some historians have said.
That is true. But their records are only as reliable as what was given to them. They are relying on what they were told, not what they have seen. They come down to be third party reports from alleged witnesses.
For example there are a very large number of Historians that have reported on Muhammad(PBUH). Do you accept that as proof Islam is the one true religion, like I do? Do you believe Muhammad(PBUH) caused the Moon to have split? The mountain, at which the miracle is said to have been seen still exists, that can be proven historically and through Geology. While I believe it to be true, I suspect you would want more evidence than what is said in the Qur'an and what some historians have said.
When we are discussing events that occured over 2,000 years ago, I think all party reports are needed, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on. The further back we go, the more this obsession with first hand witnesses needs to be dilouted. Ancient history has no cameras, the word of mouth is our camera. As is archaeology our camera, and there is plenty of archaeology and word of mouth that confirms Jesus existence.
As far as this " One true religion" business, in my view, there is no such thing, and has never been such a thing. The trueness of any religion lays in the heart of the individual, not in the halls of history. Religion is mans effort to understand the divine, and there is no such thing as only one race being the embodiment of that search , or one group, or one culture, or one gender, or one sect; all of that is selfish illusion.
Well John obviously wrote the books bearing his name, 1st, 2nd and 3rd John, the book of John and many scholars agree he wrote Revelations. If he had other writings, I just don't know. I mean good greif, is it hard to figure out an author when the books are entitled in his name? Johns purpose in writing the gospel of John is clear in 20:31;" That you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." I mean people back then didnot believe. Much of the book is just a personal witness from him. The son of Zebedee and one of the twelve, he obviously furnishes a very personal observation of Jesus, attestation of factual events and catalog of Jesus conversations.
I mean one who sees the execution of events can give personal testimony even in judicial proceedings; that is law. So Johns witness was not only credible, but legal.
Actually, not so much. John of Patmos (author of Revelation) and the Apostle John are considered to be two different people by most biblical scholars.
There is not consensus on the Johnanine works. 2 John and 3 John are considered to have the same author, but 1 John and the Gospel of John had different authors.. Some have even suggested the Gospel of John to have possible roots in Gnosticism. Most scholars agree that the gospel nor the letters of John were written by the Apostle John himself or any other eyewitness. Many have stated that John was quite dead by the time the Gospel was written.
In reality, there are few works in the New Testament whose authorship is more debated than the Johnanine books.
When we are discussing events that occured over 2,000 years ago, I think all party reports are needed, 1st, 2nd, 3rd and so on. The further back we go, the more this obsession with first hand witnesses needs to be dilouted. Ancient history has no cameras, the word of mouth is our camera. As is archaeology our camera, and there is plenty of archaeology and word of mouth that confirms Jesus existence.
As far as this " One true religion" business, in my view, there is no such thing, and has never been such a thing. The trueness of any religion lays in the heart of the individual, not in the halls of history. Religion is mans effort to understand the divine, and there is no such thing as only one race being the embodiment of that search , or one group, or one culture, or one gender, or one sect; all of that is selfish illusion.
I probably used a poor example. the point being that without eyewitness reports or solid verification the reports came from actual witnesses, the less certain we are of the accuracy.
Also all historians are biased as their sources will be seeing from their own view point. the further back we go, the less reliable. Even as recent as WW2 the reports will differ among German, American, French, Japanese, Russian witnesses. If say 1000 years from now the only reports of WW2 that can be found are from the Russian view, that Generation will be convinced Russia saved the world from Naziism.
Actually, not so much. John of Patmos (author of Revelation) and the Apostle John are considered to be two different people by most biblical scholars.
There is not consensus on the Johnanine works. 2 John and 3 John are considered to have the same author, but 1 John and the Gospel of John had different authors.. Some have even suggested the Gospel of John to have possible roots in Gnosticism. Most scholars agree that the gospel nor the letters of John were written by the Apostle John himself or any other eyewitness. Many have stated that John was quite dead by the time the Gospel was written.
In reality, there are few works in the New Testament whose authorship is more debated than the Johnanine books.
I disagree, the book of John was written c. A.D. 85-95, the books of 1st, 2nd and 3rd John was written in c. A.D. 90-95 and the book of Revelations was written in c. A.D. 95 all perfectly aligned during his lifetime. This is the consensus with the scholars that I know of as well as the Scofield scholar group of the New American Standard. They are the same John.
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.
