- This topic is empty.
- Posts
David and Morningstar I have said this before, but I just do not understand why you keep up with answering this Tow. You do know that the scriptures say the one that does not belief that Jesus came in the flesh is Anti-Christ. So what does good have to do with bad? Why argue with Satan. Is that wise? I have said it before we need to stop so this Tow will stop given our people a hard time. Tell me what are you trying to prove to Someone like that. He is here to cause us problems not to help us! You belief that is the right attitude to have? I do not think so, it is not Christ like, and we are to grow in Love for God, and Jesus. Let the mind of Jesus be in you. Not the mind of Anti-Christ which is Tow. I say that because that is what scripture has taught me. We cant learn from this Person. He has caused some harm according to Mandy. So why keep up with it. Stop please in the name of Jesus Christ, I ask it of you.
Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote (david @ Nov. 14 2007,07:48) Quote Jesus was a political activist.
Please show this from scripture.
Please deny it from secular sources!Stuart
David
++”He's (Jesus) clearly the most remembered and most remarkable man to ever step on the earth.
I think it is the Jesus brand developed by the church that is the most remembered and remarkable man to ever step on earth, conflated by the fanciful (and mutually copied) fictions of the gospel writers. There are at least 13 of Jesus’s foreskins known, showing that marketing people have always been quickest off the mark. Superman is equally remarkable, and equally plausible.
In any case, Muslims don’t think so. He may be known to atheists and agnostics but he is not considered remarkable. Did he step on earth at all? Well you have convinced me that actually it is far less likely than I had imagined.
++”You, are fascinated by Einstein. Well, at least I am. (still trying to figure out if his brain was normal) But to some, he's just another scientist, who was a little smarter than most. GENIUS!.
Einstein himself said that his only difference was that he stayed with a problem longer. (I think probably very much longer…).
++”He conducted an experiment with the moon and sun during an eclipe which changed the world. (In my mind.) Apparently, light can bend. Apparently, if you go in one directon (a straight line; well, as straight as a beem of light) you'll eventually (after almost an infinity of time) end up where you started. Yet you're travelling striaght! Anyway, to me, this guy is big. To some, not so much. Because he affected history and science he makes it into those kinds of books. People that are interested in those things write about him.
Didn’t he make the prediction, and others demonstrated it true by observing starlight during an eclipse? Rather makes Jesus’s alleged prophecy of the events of 70CE look a bit trivial!
++”The “list” provided is laughable and ridiculous. Most of the people on that list have no reason in the slightest to write about Jesus, any more than Martha stewart has to write about Einstein.
Most?
The lack of eyewitness accounts is not a proof. It is circumstantial evidence. Questioning the motivation of the keenest historians of Ancient Rome does not diminish it’s importance.
Stuart
Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,17:52) David and Morningstar I have said this before, but I just do not understand why you keep up with answering this Tow. You do know that the scriptures say the one that does not belief that Jesus came in the flesh is Anti-Christ. So what does good have to do with bad? Why argue with Satan. Is that wise? I have said it before we need to stop so this Tow will stop given our people a hard time. Tell me what are you trying to prove to Someone like that. He is here to cause us problems not to help us! You belief that is the right attitude to have? I do not think so, it is not Christ like, and we are to grow in Love for God, and Jesus. Let the mind of Jesus be in you. Not the mind of Anti-Christ which is Tow. I say that because that is what scripture has taught me. We cant learn from this Person. He has caused some harm according to Mandy. So why keep up with it. Stop please in the name of Jesus Christ, I ask it of you. Peace and Love Mrs.
David The same goes for Stu. Even more so, because He does not even belief in God, why would you want to have a conversation with Him, I don't get it.Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2007,21:51) Where did the ark land? Mount ararat? The one place no one is really allowed to explore? Why did it apparently land in the one place where we could not see it's physical evidence?
And where is the ark of the covenant now?
The physical evidence.
While never applying this to Jesus or the evidence of him, I've often wondered if God purposefully had these things hidden so that it wouldn't be extraordinarily obvious.
To me, the evidence that a flood happened is there. Hundreds of different cultures have flood legends, with similar stories, or elements. This hints at a common origin–the actual event.
Yet, no trace of the ark.
If it were absolutely obvious (if God went up to each person and said: “Here I am,” well….my question to you is, why doesn't he do this?
Yes and He hid his eternal son from His chosen people for 4000 years too according to the Christian bible. All those times with the various prophets and not a peep about Jesus. Are you saying G-d forgot or kept it a secret. WaitAmo 3:7 Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets.
Well so much for that.
Quote (david @ Nov. 13 2007,22:25) Quote Wow, you misunderstood his point. –Morningstar
It's not just this point that he misunderstands. He routinely misinterprets what I'm saying and then tries to re-direct his argument with obvious spin.
Quote Keep it up Dave! Attack the 'foundation', the Jewish bible, and then Jesus has no beginning at all. Because if you prove that the Jewish scriptures are in doubt than that places the Greek Text in much more doubt because Jesus was supposed to be the Jewish Messiah! If you read my words a little better, you'll see that I said: “To me, the evidence that a flood happened is there,” and that I said:
I've often wondered if God purposefully had these things hidden so that it wouldn't be extraordinarily obvious.The obvious connection which he purposefully avoids or just doesn't get, is that there is a lot of things that you could say should have great amounts of evidence. How do you lose an ark? Why Mount Ararat?
He can't answer these questions, because it's much the same question that he's asking: “Why the supposed lack of evidence for a historical Jesus.”
So, he just avoids the question, in his style.
I really wish he would answer the question though. Or at least consider it.
Quote If it were absolutely obvious (if God went up to each person and said: “Here I am,” well….my question to you is, why doesn't he do this? Apparently we can add Noah's ark to the list of things he can't prove.
How many historians were around when the flood took place? What you say they all died? Oh you're right.Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,22:42) Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,17:52) David and Morningstar I have said this before, but I just do not understand why you keep up with answering this Tow. You do know that the scriptures say the one that does not belief that Jesus came in the flesh is Anti-Christ. So what does good have to do with bad? Why argue with Satan. Is that wise? I have said it before we need to stop so this Tow will stop given our people a hard time. Tell me what are you trying to prove to Someone like that. He is here to cause us problems not to help us! You belief that is the right attitude to have? I do not think so, it is not Christ like, and we are to grow in Love for God, and Jesus. Let the mind of Jesus be in you. Not the mind of Anti-Christ which is Tow. I say that because that is what scripture has taught me. We cant learn from this Person. He has caused some harm according to Mandy. So why keep up with it. Stop please in the name of Jesus Christ, I ask it of you. Peace and Love Mrs.
David The same goes for Stu. Even more so, because He does not even belief in God, why would you want to have a conversation with Him, I don't get it.Peace and Love Mrs.
I am just going to repeat until all with get it.Haha this so reminds me of my years as a Christian. Can't tell you how many preachers were run off from churches because they dared to preach from the bible rather than what people wanted to hear. No matter that it was from the GT but people do not like to hear certain things.
Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,22:53) Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,22:42) Quote (IM4Truth @ Nov. 14 2007,17:52) David and Morningstar I have said this before, but I just do not understand why you keep up with answering this Tow. You do know that the scriptures say the one that does not belief that Jesus came in the flesh is Anti-Christ. So what does good have to do with bad? Why argue with Satan. Is that wise? I have said it before we need to stop so this Tow will stop given our people a hard time. Tell me what are you trying to prove to Someone like that. He is here to cause us problems not to help us! You belief that is the right attitude to have? I do not think so, it is not Christ like, and we are to grow in Love for God, and Jesus. Let the mind of Jesus be in you. Not the mind of Anti-Christ which is Tow. I say that because that is what scripture has taught me. We cant learn from this Person. He has caused some harm according to Mandy. So why keep up with it. Stop please in the name of Jesus Christ, I ask it of you. Peace and Love Mrs.
David The same goes for Stu. Even more so, because He does not even belief in God, why would you want to have a conversation with Him, I don't get it.Peace and Love Mrs.
I am just going to repeat until all with get it.
Nothing Ant-Christ says I belief, so take you pick God and Jesus or Anti-Christ.Peace and Love Mrs.
Towshab you are sadly an anti-christ as of now. I agree with Mrs. that you should stop this immediately, in the name of Jesus Christ our Lord.
Quote (david @ Nov. 08 2007,21:36) If you do not believe in Jesus because you feel there is a lack of evidence he existed, I challenge you to prove that Rabbi Gamaliel (Gamaliel the Elder) was a real person. There is a reference in Acts 5:34; 22:3. According to Jewish tradition, he was the first president of the Great Sanhedrin of Jerusalem.
He occupied a high position in the highest court, the great council of Jerusalem.Except from this reference in Acts, Gamaliel isn't mentioned anywhere at all, except in a few rabbinic materials.
Seems he already has a leg-up on Jesus then since rabbinic materials do not mention Jesus. So Gamaliel existed according to Talmud and your bible while only your bible says Jesus existed. Seems Gamaliel has more proof of existence.Quote (acertainchap @ Nov. 14 2007,11:43) I am confused. Who is this Gamaliel? 
Chap I have no Idea and I do not want to know either. Nothing that He has said has done others on this website any good. Ask Mandy how many P.M. she has gotten, because our Brothers and Sisters are so confused because of Him. I do not read His Post. I just glands at it now so I can rebuke Him. Seems some kind of other scriptures. Not out of the NKJ Bible or OKJ Bible. The Jewish People have so many Books about the 5 Books of Moses its ridiculous. I know because we had a Jewish Lawyer. Also my Husband used to work for a Jewish man. But these were good People that did not go and try to convince others of wrong doing, like Tow is.
Peace and Love Mrs.
Quote So Gamaliel existed according to Talmud and your bible while only your bible says Jesus existed. Seems Gamaliel has more proof of existence. –towshab
Of course, he is wrong again. He is mentioned in the Tulmud in a handful of places.
http://www.watch.pair.com/HRChrist.html
(Are people actually falling for this stuff?)
While it may not speak well of Jesus, he is in the Tulmud.
http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/Despatch/Jews05.htm
“Jesus was a magician….Mary was an adulteress”. (Shabbath 104b, p.504).Google “Jesus and Tulmud.”
Of course, this won't prove anything to you, because the Tulmud came later.
So, neither does it therefore prove anything about Gamaliel.While on the subject, of ones who apparently didn't exist, because of absense of evidence, my next post:
HANNIBAL CHALLENGE
Did Hannibal really exist?I want to wrap up by showing how easy it is to produce a scenario where we can deny the historicity of a major public figure. When I published this spoof on the Secular Web's discussion board it was taken seriously even though with hindsight it seems ridiculous. The comments in italics are annotations to bring out points of similarity with the various Jesus Myth ideas in currency.
I would invite any Jesus Mythologist to explain to me the substantial differences between their theory and the spurious one below.
To ask whether or not the great Carthaginian general Hannibal every actually existed might seem rather pointless. An exercise for a student learning about the nature of historical evidence perhaps but not something any serious scholar would waste time on. But maybe we should not be too hasty in acquiescing with the opinion of establishment historians (in other words, there's a plot by academics stifling debate).
In fact, although there is plenty of writing about Hannibal, none of it is contemporary and there is no archaeological evidence for him at all (not surprising given the Romans razed the city from whence he came). Furthermore he is not mentioned in any Carthaginian sources – incredible given he was supposed to be their greatest leader (there are no Carthaginian sources as the Romans burnt their city down)! We find when we actually try to pin him down he tends to recede further into the mists of time. His exploits, such as leading elephants over the Alps, are clearly legendary (the sceptic pretends to be incredulous but seems happy to buy his own amazing theory) and it is not hard to find a motive for the creation of this colourful character by Roman writers (as long we can invent a motive for fabrication we can assume that fabrication exists).
Rome and Carthage were great trading rivals in the Western Mediterranean and it did not take them long to come to blows. Rome signed a peace treaty but, under the leadership of the elder Cato desperately wanted to rid itself permanently of the competition. (this is actually true and so helps to hide when we slip into fantasy) They needed an excuse and the idea they came up with was brilliant. Like all ancient civilisations, the Romans rewrote history as it suited them to demonstrate their own prowess. (a useful and exaggerated generalisation) Consequently we should not be surprised to find that they invented a great enemy from Carthage to demonstrate the threat still existed and justify a further war to wipe them out.
The author of the fiction was Cato himself (we need someone to point the finger at and note how there is no distinction made between the background material above and theorising here) who we know wrote the earliest Roman History (true as well, actually). But it was intended simply as a justification for a further war with Carthage. It contained the details of Hannibal's alleged campaigns against the Romans including victories on Italian soil (it might well do but Cato's history has conveniently not survived). Cato brilliantly combined the truth with his own anti-Carthaginian propaganda with the intention of goading Rome into another wholly unjustified war with the old enemy (give the fabricator lots of credit for his invention). Once the war was over and Carthage razed to the ground, the Romans were able to ensure that only their version of history survived (this is important as it enables all other sources to be declared forgeries).
Therefore the myth of the great Carthaginian war leader became fact and later Roman historians like the notoriously unreliable Livy (we have to denigrate counter sources) simply assumed Cato's fabrications were true (because the ancients were stupid and simply could not do any research themselves).
http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htmNOT3IN1,
MANDY,
ETC,
OR ANYONE WHO has started to question anything based on what this guy has been saying: SNAP OUT OF IT!
Perhaps we have humored him far too much. This idea is a ridiculous one. And while it's fun to delve into conspiracy theory type stuff, this is apparently causing some to actually fall into this realm of delusion.
The idea that Jesus never existed has been around in the areas of Gospel research for centuries but never been able to become an accepted theory.
WHY?
This is because it is simply a bad hypothesis based on arguments from silence, special pleading and an awful lot of wishful thinking.
We have a very convenient situation for the Jesus Mythologists:
Until Christianity had spread no one except Christians would be interested in Jesus but all later records are ruled out as they are tainted by association with Christianity. This sort of special pleading (a fallacy in reasoning) is one of the reasons that modern historians have no time for these theories as they are set up to be impossible to disprove.
In fact, Christian evidence for a human Jesus who was impaled is trustworthy because it ran counter to the myths of the time and suggested that he had suffered a humiliating death. If they made it up and then suppressed the truth with clinical efficiency, why did they come up with a story which even the Christian apologist, Tertullian, admitted was absurd?
Sometimes Jesus Mythologists will produce long lists of writers none of whom have the slightest reason to mention an obscure Jewish miracle worker and somehow think this strengthens their point.
This is sheer deceptive tactics. Don't be fooled by them.
In fact, it has all the relevance of picking fifty books off your local library shelf and finding that none of them mention Carl Sagan. Does that mean he did not exist either?
The people in that list have little reason to mention Jesus, except for one.
Jesus was not even a failed military leader of the kind that Romans might have noticed – especially if he had been defeated by someone famous.
The only historian who we might expect to mention Jesus is Josephus, a Jew who wrote a history of his people up to 66AD, which is called 'Jewish Antiquities'.
In fact, Josephus does mention Jesus twice and so Jesus Mythologists have to devote a lot of attention to attacking the relevant passages.
Their job is made easier because Josephus, a Pharisee probably felt nothing but contempt for Jesus which meant later Christians tried to 'correct' his negative wording.
As far as I can tell, today, the question of Jesus' historicity is effectively dead in the scholarly community.
It's remaining proponents tend to be amateurs who evangelize their creed on the internet. Anyone who disagrees will be labeled an apologist.
Robert Van Voorst, notes that Jesus Mythologists have failed to “explain to the satisfaction of historians why, if Christians invented the historical Jesus around the year 100, no pagans and Jews who opposed Christianity denied Jesus' historicity or even questioned it.” (“Jesus Outside the New Testament” (2000) p 15 )
Claims that the Jesus Myth has never been seriously refuted by mainstream scholarship are false.
(R.T. France, The Evidence for Jesus; Robert Van Voorst, Jesus Outside the New Testament; Maurice Goguel's Jesus the Nazarene; Shirley Case's The Historicity of Jesus; Smith, Morton “The Historical Jesus” in Jesus in Myth and History (ed. R. Joseph Hoffman and Gerald A. Larue), Buffalo, 1986; Marshall,I. Howard I Believe in the Historical Jesus Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1977; Conybeare, Fred C. The Historical Christ London, 1914; Wood, Herbert Did Christ Really Live? London, 1938)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis:
““The idea of Jesus as a myth is rejected by the majority of biblical scholars and historians. In 2004, Burridge and Gould stated that they did not know of any “respectable” scholars that held the view today. (Burridge, R & Gould, G, Jesus Now and Then, Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004, p.34.)
The classical historian Michael Grant writes:
“To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.” (Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels. Scribner, 199.)”Quote (david @ Nov. 14 2007,17:52) Quote So Gamaliel existed according to Talmud and your bible while only your bible says Jesus existed. Seems Gamaliel has more proof of existence. –towshab
Of course, he is wrong again. He is mentioned in the Tulmud in a handful of places.
http://www.watch.pair.com/HRChrist.html
(Are people actually falling for this stuff?)
While it may not speak well of Jesus, he is in the Tulmud.
http://www.despatch.cth.com.au/Despatch/Jews05.htm
“Jesus was a magician….Mary was an adulteress”. (Shabbath 104b, p.504).Google “Jesus and Tulmud.”
Of course, this won't prove anything to you, because the Tulmud came later.
So, neither does it therefore prove anything about Gamaliel.While on the subject, of ones who apparently didn't exist, because of absense of evidence, my next post:
I would ask that you provide real evidence that you yourself directly pull from the Talmud and not just link to anti-semitic sites that prove nothing. Until such time your links are pure anti-semitic rubbish and quite revealing of your anti-judaic character.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
