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 want to clairify. You are saying two things. You doubt Jesus existed. You doubt John wrote that book and you doubt John correctly quote a person who may not have existed. Rather a complex web you weave. Got proof of any of this? And remember, just because it is stated so on the internet does not make it true.
It is interesting that few doubt Mr Buddha existed, a founder of a world religion. Nor Mohammad a founder of a world religion. But when it comes to the biggest world religion some people doubt the founder existed. Funny how that works with atheists. No issue with Islam or Buddhism. Once again, funny how that works.
While it is common for atheists to question whether or not Jesus existed, I am not one who does. There is as much reason to suppose that Jesus existed as many other historical figures, including the one's you mentioned. I do question that the apostle John wrote the Gospel according to John, this is true. The Gospel has been assigned to someone named John since very early on. Many Christians assume that the author is the apostle. In fact there is nothing to connect the Gospel to the apostle, and the fact that Gospel John was written so late makes the likelihood that it was written by the apostle very doubtful. And then of course, as I pointed out, the Gospel does not identify the author, but the Epistles of John very clearly identify the author as the acquaintance of Papias, John the Elder.
Do I have any proof? I have been ladling out the proof in fact. Do you have one shred of evidence that the Gospel was written by the apostle? Or is it possible that supposition is little more than an unsupported popular tradition? But here is my complete answer to HushWhisper.
Wikipedia
Authorship, date, and origin
The Gospel of John is anonymous. Traditionally, Christians have identified the author as "the Disciple whom Jesus loved" mentioned in John 21:24, who is understood to be John son of Zebedee, one of Jesus' Twelve Apostles. These identifications, however, are rejected by the majority of modern biblical scholars. Nevertheless, the author of the fourth Gospel is sometimes called John the Evangelist, often out of convenience since the true name of the author remains unknown.
John is usually dated to AD 90–110. Notes 6] It arose in a Jewish Christian community in the process of breaking from the Jewish synagogue. Scholars believe that the text went through two to three redactions, or "editions", before reaching its current form. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John
The common tradition among Christians that the Gospel according to John was written by the apostle John is simply a popularly held assumption based on no actual evidence. Second century Christian historian Papias indicated that there were two individuals named John, one the apostle John, often referred to as the evangelist, and the second he referred to as John the Presbyter, or elder.
Writings of Papias:
One
"I received with care at any time from the elders, and stored up with care in my memory, assuring you at the same time of their truth. For I did not, like the multitude, take pleasure in those who spoke much, but in those who taught the truth; nor in those who related strange commandments, but in those who rehearsed the commandments given by the Lord to faith, and proceeding from truth itself. If, then, any one who had attended on the elders came, I asked minutely after their sayings,--what Andrew or Peter said, or what was said by Philip, or by Thomas, or by James, or by John, or by Matthew, or by any other of the Lord's disciples: which things Aristion and the presbyter John, the disciples of the Lord, say. For I imagined that what was to be got from books was not so profitable to me as what came from the living and abiding voice."
Papias (Roberts-Donaldson)
Papias indicated that he knew this second John, the Presbyter (elder), personally, and it is to this John that the author of Gospel John and the three epistles may be attributed. Why? Because although the author of Gospel John does not name himself in the Gospel, he DOES name himself in his letters.
2John.1
[1] The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth;
3John.1
[1] The elder unto the wellbeloved Gaius, whom I love in the truth.
So when you quote "Jesus said," you are really quoting an anonymously authored work written decades after Jesus was dead by an individual who in all probability never personally met Jesus. Because declaring something to be true against all odds is what faith is all about. You do have common Christian tradition to sustain you of course. What you DO NOT have however are the actual sustainable facts. And what you will discover, should you choose to examine Christian claims and Christian beliefs in detail, is that none of the assumptions commonly held by Christians actually hold up under examination of them. Christians however prefer their assumptions and generally refuse to pursue the actual facts. A classic case of, "My mind is made up, so don't bother trying to confuse me with the facts."
All four Gospels are consistent in the claim that the disciples of Jesus saw the "risen" after his execution. Who claimed to have seen the risen Jesus? His followers and ONLY his disciples.
Matthew 27:
[62] Now the next day, that followed the day of the preparation, the chief priests and Pharisees came together unto Pilate,
[63] Saying, Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again.
[64] Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night, and steal him away, and say unto the people, He is risen from the dead: so the last error shall be worse than the first.
And this is EXACTLY what occurred. Roughly six weeks after Jesus was crucified his followers began spreading the rumor that Jesus had risen from the dead.
Acts 1:
[9] And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.
And where was the risen man NOW? He flew off up into the sky and disappeared into the clouds. So, who saw the "risen" Jesus? His followers and ONLY his followers. Who saw the "risen" man fly off up into the sly? His followers and ONLY? Individuals who have been indoctrinated from birth to accept the story as undeniably true is who. Individuals who have been conditioned their entire lives to accept the story uncritically on blind faith.
Exactly the same way as Muslims and Hindus and Buddhists, etc., have been conditioned from birth to accept their religious indoctrination uncritically from birth. In other words, people who LOL at any and all claims that THEIR beliefs are not the real and true beliefs.
Some people seek after signs and wonders because they do not believe the signs and wonders which have already been performed. The Pharisees of Matthew 12 were just such a lot. Jesus had been performing miracles for quite some time when a group of scribes and Pharisees came to Him with an insolent demand to see another sign. In response, Jesus condemned them as “wicked and adulterous” (Matthew 12:38-39).
They were “wicked” in that they refused to believe the signs and wonders Christ had already performed. “In spite of his wonders, they did not believe” (Psalm 78:32). Their hearts were hardened towards the truth, even after numerous public miracles. Nothing would make them believe; their hearts were as pharaoh’s, hardened after witnessing so many of Moses’ miracles in Egypt (Exodus 9:34-35).
Being born and raised in the South, I grew up in church (baptist and Pentecostal) and I have studied the Bible somewhat and try to live an honest life despite mistakes and temptations, but I can't help but think their is more than one way. If Christianity is the only choice and I grew up in a region that practiced another religion, then does that mean I'm doomed?
I was hanging out in the book store yesterday and chatted with a fella that told me his mom was a Buddhist monk and his dad was Christian. He stopped practicing Christianity because someone told him his mother was going to hell.
Is it that man has corrupted religion so badly that's why so many are turned off by Christianity in particular? I'm starting to get to the point where I believe God is love and my religion will be love. People use religion as a means for their own political gains and hate agenda, but then I see the other side of Christians really walking the walk. I sifted through some of the atheist forums just to get a glimpse of why some have parted with religion all together.
All religions can't be wrong, but I can't help to know what the Bible has told me.
OP, if you count Buddhism as a religion, then, no, not all religions lead to God.
Then give it! You made the claims. Give proof. Don't turn tables after making claims. I've made no claims, but you have. Prove what you say is true. The burden of proof is always on the person making the assertion.
I suspect you have none, because you asked me to provide proof of something I never mentioned in this thread.
Check it out:
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
You are saying Jesus said these things - how do you know that? You read it in the bible? How do you know the bible is not a lie? How do you know Jesus was not lying? How do you know you are not believing a lie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
How do I know I am not believing a lie? Well, I'm not believing anything. For example, I don't believe the claimed utterances by Jesus are factual. I don't know for a fact whether they are or not but until someone provides proof I will remain unconvinced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tired of the Nonsense
John 14:6
6 Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. (NIV)
Did Jesus say that he was the only path to God? Actually it was the author of Gospel John who said that. No one really knows who wrote Gospel John, but it was clearly written many years after the time when Jesus was supposed to have lived and died. Jesus himself wrote nothing, so you have to simply assUme that that Jesus himself said it. And this is where that blind faith stuff comes into play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
Just want to clairify. You are saying two things. You doubt Jesus existed. You doubt John wrote that book and you doubt John correctly quote a person who may not have existed. Rather a complex web you weave. Got proof of any of this? And remember, just because it is stated so on the internet does not make it true.
It is interesting that few doubt Mr Buddha existed, a founder of a world religion. Nor Mohammad a founder of a world religion. But when it comes to the biggest world religion some people doubt the founder existed. Funny how that works with atheists. No issue with Islam or Buddhism. Once again, funny how that works.
And another poster who demands proof of something I never said in this thread, yet fails to provide proof his or her assertions:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
1. you have proof Jesus existed?
2. you have proof John wrote the book?
3. you have proof John correctly relayed what he heard? Ask any police detective or investigator. they will tell you that eye witnesses are the worst as they never get facts right.
Got proof of any of this?
He did indeed say TRUTH, He did not say He was THE ONLY TRUTH...
Quote:
Originally Posted by HushWhisper
"...no man commeth to the Father but by Me".
Your a liar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HushWhisper
Sick of reading the lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
You are saying Jesus said these things - how do you know that? You read it in the bible? How do you know the bible is not a lie? How do you know Jesus was not lying? How do you know you are not believing a lie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
Proof! We want proof, as atheists are fond of saying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 303Guy
Yes - we want proof.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr5150
Then give it! You made the claims. Give proof. Don't turn tables after making claims. I've made no claims, but you have. Prove what you say is true. The burden of proof is always on the person making the assertion.
I suspect you have none, because you asked me to provide proof of something I never mentioned in this thread.
...
And another poster who demands proof of something I never said in this thread, yet fails to provide proof his or her assertions:
I asked another poster some questions - how does that translate into making claims?
Above is the conversation as it unfolded. I was responding to Hush calling zthatzmanz28 a liar.
But since you have taken it upon yourself - how do YOU know those things are not lies? I'm not saying they are lies although I will say I do not accept them to be truths and will not until satisfactory proof is presented. So convince me.
Some people seek after signs and wonders because they do not believe the signs and wonders which have already been performed. The Pharisees of Matthew 12 were just such a lot. Jesus had been performing miracles for quite some time when a group of scribes and Pharisees came to Him with an insolent demand to see another sign. In response, Jesus condemned them as “wicked and adulterous” (Matthew 12:38-39).
They were “wicked” in that they refused to believe the signs and wonders Christ had already performed. “In spite of his wonders, they did not believe” (Psalm 78:32). Their hearts were hardened towards the truth, even after numerous public miracles. Nothing would make them believe; their hearts were as pharaoh’s, hardened after witnessing so many of Moses’ miracles in Egypt (Exodus 9:34-35).
This is not going to convince anyone but the one who already believes. It is of course a circular argument using the Bible to prove the Bible, and really not a very sound circular argument so to speak ) because it isn't relying on Bible evidence of its' truth, but that there were doubters back than refutes the doubters now.
In order to provide a bit more, Nonsense-tired pointed up the pertinent point that Matthew said that claims that the disciples took the body away were circulating in his day. He of course portrays this as a lie, but after all the jews were on the spot. They knew the disciples who were all Jews. Matthew wasn't - he was demonstrably a grek Christian (he couldn't read Hebrew and didn't understand the scriptures), so who are we going to believe?
Well, according to the Believers, The Greek Christians because they revelled in representing the Pharisees - who in fact were the party that Jesus and his disciples surely belonged to - as "Wicked".
Now, there are some points above about the burden of proof. For myself, I do think the burden falls on the doubters to show why they don't believe the Gospels are a reliable account. I have given just one small point above. There are many, many more and the biggest and best is lockdown evidence that the solid -body resurrection is an invention.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 07-09-2017 at 07:33 AM..
Proof! We want proof, as atheists are fond of saying.
I never demand proof, though 'proof' is indeed demanded regularly by those who dismiss things like evolution. In demanding proof, they only demonstrated their ignorance of science.
I do, however, require substantive evidence for claims, the amount of evidence required being proportional to the extraordinariness of the claim. Thus, 'there was a carpenter named Jesus in Jerusalem two thousand years ago' requires only minor evidence to be accepted. Not proof (indeed, such a thing cannot by definition be proven). On the other hand, 'there was a Jesus who was the son of a deity and the messiah and performed miracles rose from the dead' requires extensive evidence for any rational person to believe. And, no, the fact that someone 'feels it in their heart' or 'just knows it to be true' or 'my favorite ancient book says so' isn't squat as far as evidence goes. As a belief, it has no more rational merit than that of Zeus or Valhalla or leprechauns.
You will have to do way better than that.
Dad is alive and well, standing in front of his son in full view. Dad hasn't cruelly tortured and murdered someone elses son. And so on.
Or one of his own sons .
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.
) because it isn't relying on Bible evidence of its' truth, but that there were doubters back than refutes the doubters now.
