[NettoSuperstar!]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

and you believe that people happily died for him, and that we talk about him now with 32% of the whole world Christian?

that is even harder to believe

The powers that be decided to make a matyr out of him and well...pretty much enforced that over the years

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by NettoSuperstar!

The powers that be decided to make a matyr out of him and well...pretty much enforced that over the years

it is way too unlikely that (if you read Acts) the Church would have developed in the teeth of such persecution if peeps did not believe what he said and what they saw.

[NettoSuperstar!]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

it is way too unlikely that (if you read Acts) the Church would have developed in the teeth of such persecution if peeps did not believe what he said and what they saw.

I dont doubt Jesus was a great and good man but from a rational perspective you have to conclude that a lot of what is written is metaphor and...well, story telling, embellishment if you like, and people love to have some one to follow and guide them...the political and social situation contributed to peoples desire to follow a new religion and branch away from the Jewish faith and here was there new messiah

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

it is way too unlikely that (if you read Acts) the Church would have developed in the teeth of such persecution if peeps did not believe what he said and what they saw.

What about Scientology then? That was spawned fron L. Ron Hubbards desire to make money and have a bit of power? And look at all the followers they have. Some of them rich and powerful themselves

[NettoSuperstar!]

And look at the dominant racial groups that Islam, Christianity and Judaism are made up of, it suggests that the major religions are born out of group dynamics and power struggles within society at that time

[Stu]

Originally Posted by NettoSuperstar!

I dont doubt Jesus was a great and good man but from a rational perspective you have to conclude that a lot of what is written is metaphor and...well, story telling, embellishment if you like, and people love to have some one to follow and guide them...the political and social situation contributed to peoples desire to follow a new religion and branch away from the Jewish faith and here was there new messiah

And lets not forget the sheer cult of personality involved, which Jesus did not actually resemble [he was more than likely a colored Nazarene, possibly even with dreadlocks, or a short squat man with short hair].

The hippie image, the holy white light, the long hair, it's the perfect charismatic figure. How many of us have felt drawn to Jesus, lets face it, at one time or another because he just LOOKS like such pure peace and love?

[InOne]

It is he most likely he existed, but he was not the man of the Bible.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

"'Jesus of Nazareth' supposedly lived in what is the most well-documented period of antiquity – the first century of the Christian era – yet not a single non-Christian source mentions the miracle worker from the sky. All references – including the notorious insertions in Josephus – stem from partisan Christian sources (and Josephus himself, much argued over, was not even born until after the supposed crucifixion). The horrendous truth is that the Christian Jesus was manufactured from plundered sources, re-purposed for the needs of the early Church."

http://www.carm.org/apologetics/evid...s-andor-people

and it does beg the question what non Christian sources were you looking for? - The Nazareth Mail or the Roman Times. The written word was religion back then, even Private Eye had not been invented.

Well, he was a pretty major figure. The most important in world history, in fact, if your Christian. And yet no other documents exist, not of Jesus himself, but of what the bible SPECIFICALLY SAYS ABOUT HIM.

Of course this may have to do with the fact that mysteriously, he only had a ministry that lasted a few years, that covered a minuscule part of the globe, and upon resurrection he appeared to those same people in that same, minuscule part of the globe. Then left all the work to these strangers to write it down, where it could be easily subject to much change and bastardization, when he went back into the sky. Pretty strange for such a powerful character who, if he wanted, could enter all our minds our simultaneously appear in each corner of the globe, after all, he is omnipotent, to act in such a way. This was hwo he spread his message of saving us? The sky, by the way, the Bible describes as 'impenetrable' because heaven was not a state of mind, no, it was right up in this impenetrable dome.

Two words : Space exploration.

Pretty odd, don't you think?

[NettoSuperstar!]

Originally Posted by ProbeEight

And lets not forget the sheer cult of personality involved, which Jesus did not actually resemble [he was more than likely a colored Nazarene, possibly even with dreadlocks, or a short squat man with short hair].

The hippie image, the holy white light, the long hair, it's the perfect charismatic figure. How many of us have felt drawn to Jesus, lets face it, at one time or another because he just LOOKS like such pure peace and love?

Hehe...hes so cute though

[Patrick]

I`ve recently been abit puzzled, It annoyes me in Religion class when the Teacher says..
"Jesus then said...Jesus did...and so Jesus also..."

How the **** is there ANY Proof at all of Jesus being real?
How is there any proof he had a Beard or Long Hair?
How is there any proof he was nailed to a cross?
How do we know he wasnt a Girl?


I have been brought up to belive in him and stuff but recently i`ve began to wonder if its complete bollocks the only thing I have to hold on to the fact that he might be real is that My Family have a history of seeing spirits, and obviously there is an After life then...

But then again there could be A Heaven without a Jesus!

[Stu]

Of course there is the possibility of something mystical and/or spiritual to the universe outside Jesus.

How do we know he wasnt a Girl?

You think the Christian church would worship a woman as there messiah? Especially back in those times? They would rather a goat!

How is there any proof he was nailed to a cross?

Well, crucifixion was common in that time, and was the likely punishment for him presenting himself as a son of God to the pharisees and other Jewish elite. It's what happened AFTER the crucifixion, now that's the real fun...

Also, for the record, I think religion has no place in a school.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

and perhaps Mr Probe can give us the credentials of http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/?

Perhaps you can give us credentials for the Bible?

[Tom]

Originally Posted by Patrick

How the **** is there ANY Proof at all of Jesus being real?

Apparently there is more proof to suggest Jesus existed than Julius Caesar. That might just be a myth though I dunno

How is there any proof he had a Beard or Long Hair?

Drawings/descriptions etc

How is there any proof he was nailed to a cross?

Same as above

How do we know he wasnt a Girl?

You don't get female sons

I think he probably did exist, but probably not who he said he was. Some people think he was an illusionist or a doctor or something

[andyman]

The Jews and the Romans did have a thing for writing things down..

[Stu]

Originally Posted by Tom

Drawings/descriptions etc

How is that proof that he had long hair and a beard? If that was the case you would believe him to be the messiah. After all, it is written down...

The western image of Christ is completely false and that is a fact. Not even just the fact that he is white, but how white he is. And everything about his facial features. He looks like a ****ing stoner from Oakland.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Manuscript evidence for superior New Testament reliability is below


http://www.carm.org/questions/about-...nt-reliability

[Stu]

That website poses a terrible argument, with abstract comparisons to Plato & Homer, and merely refutes what we already know. Nobody is denying the New Testament actually exists, and was actually written within 70 years of Jesus' death. Of course it was written. A ghost writer hardly wrote it in the last few hundred years. What we are doubting is the content and the men that wrote it. And the fact that it was a rather strange way for the savior of the cosmos to spread the message.

Failed argument. Fortunately for me, while there is NOT proof that the contents of the New Testament are little more than over embellished fable, there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest the world is more than 4,000 years old, seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself.

Shucks.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by ProbeEight

That website poses a terrible argument, with abstract comparisons to Plato & Homer, and merely refutes what we already know. Nobody is denying the New Testament actually exists, and was actually written within 70 years of Jesus' death. Of course it was written. A ghost writer hardly wrote it in the last few hundred years. What we are doubting is the content and the men that wrote it. And the fact that it was a rather strange way for the savior of the cosmos to spread the message.

Failed argument. Fortunately for me, while there is NOT proof that the contents of the New Testament are little more than over embellished fable, there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest the world is more than 4,000 years old, seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself.

Shucks.

Can you provide the evidence that "... seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself. "

just the quotes from the NT would be great:

[Stu]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Can you provide the evidence that "... seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself. "

just the quotes from the NT would be great:

Why do you always reply to half of every post somebody makes and ignore the other half? It's like trying to beat arguments out of you with ... a cross.

You ARE aware Jesus was a Jew? The son of the abrahamic God? He believed in the Torah?

But if you insist...

In Christ's day, the prevailing philosophy on origins included evolution and long ages of earth history. Their view, of course, was not Darwinian evolution, but it held that the earth and the universe, acting on itself by the forces of nature (which were given names by some) had organized itself into its present state, and was responsible for all of life. The same was true for the philosophy of Moses' day, as he prepared the book of Genesis.

Genesis stands in opposition to such a view, insisting that a transcendent God, external to the universe had called the universe and all it contains into existence from nothing. Genesis further reveals the steps God took during a six-day period to bring this about, and reveals that those days were only thousands of years ago, not millions or billions.

When God stepped into the space/time universe which He had created He stepped into a world dominated by those who denied His creative acts, and whose intellectual descendants still refuse to honor Him as Creator. And so, as we try to form our own beliefs about creation, it would behoove us to discern His views on creation and to believe likewise. When we examine His teachings, we will find that Jesus was not only the Creator, He was also a "creationist." Let us briefly look at some of the passages which reveal this: No natural process was responsible for creation—rather, God, Himself, created: ". . .from the beginning of the creation which God created" (Mark 13:19).

The cosmos had a definite beginning. Matter is not eternal: "...such as was not since the beginning of the world (Greek kosmos) to this time" (Matthew 24:21).

The world had been "founded." Not just coalesced from interstellar dust. ". . .for Thou lovest Me before the foundation of the world" (John 17:24).

Even the sun was of God's doing: ". ..He maketh His sun to rise" (Matthew 5:45).

As to plants and animals, each created "kind" was of a different sort: "Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles" (Matthew 7:16)? Furthermore, God had made provision for even the birds (see Genesis 1:30): "Behold the fowls of the air: . . .your heavenly Father feedeth them" (Matthew 6:26).

The Sabbath was a day of rest in commemoration of the completed creation: "The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27).

Men and women were created at the start, not 4,000,000,000 years after the start: "From the beginning of creation God made them male and female" (Mark 10:6), and the union of Adam and Eve forms the basis of our doctrine of marriage: "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh" (Matthew 19:6).

The two supposedly contradictory accounts of creation in Genesis 1 and 2 are fully compatible: "Have ye not read that He. . .made them male and female [quoting Genesis 1 :27], and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: And they twain shall be one flesh?" [quoting Genesis 2:24] (Matthew 19:5).

These and other teachings of Christ, when coupled with the total lack of any reference to evolution or long ages, give us complete confidence that our Lord, the Creator, accepted the Genesis account of creation in its most literal sense. Dare we believe otherwise?

1. The Bible nowhere allows for long ages.
One can search the Scriptures (see my book Biblical Creationism for proof) from beginning to end without finding even a hint of evolution or long ages. To Jesus, every "jot or one tittle" of Scripture was divinely inspired (Matthew 5:18) and He warned us severely against adding any other words to it (Revelation 22:18). The Bible, therefore, would certainly not leave the vital doctrine of creation open to human speculation.

2. The Bible explicitly states how and when creation took place.
Although many evangelicals have long equivocated as to the meaning of the "days" of creation, this type of ad hoc handling of Scripture is never justified in the context, and Christ Himself would never have interpreted them as indefinite ages of some kind. Not only is "day" (Hebrew, yom) defined in this context the first time it is used (Genesis 1:5), but the writer conclusively restricted its interpretation to the literal meaning by numbering the days ("first day," "second day," etc.) and by indicating their boundaries ("evening and morning"), both of which restrictions elsewhere in the Old Testament limit the meaning to literal days. The question seems to be even more firmly settled when God wrote with His own finger that "in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the [seventh] day, and hallowed it" (Exodus 20:11), thereby basing our calendar's seven-day week on this primeval creation week. Jesus referred to this divine example when He said that "The sabbath was made for man" (Mark 2:27) to meet our weekly need of rest from work.

3. The Lord Jesus recognized that men and women existed right from the beginning.
The current opinion is that the cosmos evolved about 16 billion years ago, the earth about 4.6 billion, primitive life perhaps two billion, and human life about one million years ago. The Lord Jesus, on the other hand (who was there, having Himself created all things—note John 1:1-3), taught that men and women were made essentially at the same time as the cosmos itself, when He said that "from the beginning God . . . made them male and female" (Mark 10:6). "The beginning" obviously was a reference to Genesis 1:1, and Christ was specifically citing Genesis 1:26.

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female (Mark 10:6).This makes it clear that Jesus taught the creation was young, for Adam and Eve existed ‘from the beginning ’–not billions of years after the universe and Earth came into existence.

Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh (Matthew 19:6)

Have ye not read that He…made them male and female [quoting Genesis 1 :27], and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: And they twain shall be one flesh? [quoting Genesis 2:24] (Matthew 19:5)

Heck, even if you disagree with these biblical quotes and make the excuse that Jesus was NOT a creationist, which is odd considering HE IS GOD AND THE OLD TESTAMENT IS MEANT TO BE GOD'S DIRECT WORD STATING CREATION it proves my other point that the Bible is open to SO MANY interpretations that it is fallacy.

You believe in the Trinity, right? One of the central doctrines of Christianity that states Jesus is the son of God and in a sense, God himself, right? AND he was a Jew who believed in the Torah, right? So why would he not believe what is essential HIS OWN STORY/HIS FATHERS OWN STORY about HIS/HIS FATHERS creation?

It's like an extra two hours being added onto the Titanic movie, stating the ship did not in fact sink, there never was a ship, and Leonardo DiCaprio does not in fact exist, nor did he ever.

The point is beyond ridiculous. Once again, the Bible is completely incompatible with the proof that the world is more than 4,000 years old.

Thank you and goodnight.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by ProbeEight

Why do you always reply to half of every post somebody makes and ignore the other half? It's like trying to beat arguments out of you with ... a cross.

You ARE aware Jesus was a Jew? The son of the abrahamic God? He believed in the Torah?

But if you insist...<snip>

and my question was where did you get the 4000 years from in the Bible, or from what Jesus said "there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest the world is more than 4,000 years old, seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself.

and your un-sourced cut and paste "article" did not say.

nice

by the way did you say anything about the jesusneverexisted site, ie who wrote it and what are its credentials?

[Stu]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

and my question was where did you get the 4000 years from in the Bible, or from what Jesus said "there is plenty of evidence out there to suggest the world is more than 4,000 years old, seemingly against the beliefs of all the New Testament writers and even Jesus himself.

and your un-sourced cut and paste "article" did not say.

nice

by the way did you say anything about the jesusneverexisted site, ie who wrote it and what are its credentials?

The articles I pasted were from a Christian Apologists site. Yes, Christians who believe the world is only 4,000 years old. And they are full of quotes directly from the Bible about Jesus speaking of such creationist topics as Adam & Eve. Now it might not exactly be 4,000 years, that's obviously just a creationist estimate thrown out there, but whatever. Jesus believed in Adam & Eve. He believed God created two humans at the very start. Actually, he believed HE created two humans from the very start I suppose, considering Jesus is God. You cant refute it. Jesus believed in Genesis. He was a Jew. It was his fathers, and in a sense, his word. His story of creation. But you choose to ignore all of that in my previous post. How mature of you.

As for the Jesus Never Existed website, who knows. Look it up yourself if you are so interested, like you always tell me. I am not banging the mother of it's creator. I have no idea who is behind it. You really should not be asking questions about source and truth, especially when you are a believer in the Bible. Well, at least most of it. You don't seem to want to believe in the Genesis creation story, even though that's what your messiah believed.

A pity. This is getting more hilarious by the minuet.

[Beastie]

I am Jesus

[Stu]

Originally Posted by thebeast

I am Jesus

Praise the loah-dah!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by ProbeEight

The articles I pasted were from a Christian Apologists site. Yes, Christians who believe the world is only 4,000 years old. And they are full of quotes directly from the Bible about Jesus speaking of such creationist topics as Adam & Eve. Now it might not exactly be 4,000 years, that's obviously just a creationist estimate thrown out there, but whatever. Jesus believed in Adam & Eve. He believed God created two humans at the very start. Actually, he believed HE created two humans from the very start I suppose, considering Jesus is God. You cant refute it. Jesus believed in Genesis. He was a Jew. It was his fathers, and in a sense, his word. His story of creation. But you choose to ignore all of that in my previous post. How mature of you.

As for the Jesus Never Existed website, who knows. Look it up yourself if you are so interested, like you always tell me. I am not banging the mother of it's creator. I have no idea who is behind it. You really should not be asking questions about source and truth, especially when you are a believer in the Bible. Well, at least most of it. You don't seem to want to believe in the Genesis creation story, even though that's what your messiah believed.

A pity. This is getting more hilarious by the minuet.

F
A
I
L

[teabag.]

i think all the stories about jesus and that is just a load of stories made up and then called the bible
i dont beliee in jesus