Sheffield

Thanks Sheffield. I wanted you to post this. My argument rests there . Jesus Doesnt exist. Figure out how

Will you please attempt to figure out what B.C .and A.D. ("Before Christ" and "After Christ") mean in relation to the calendar.

Thank you.

No I am not saying Krishna is Jesus. I am saying do you agree that Krishna Existed ?

Not a chance. Krishna no more existed that the man in the Moon.

I dont want to read all the crap that you have posted. It is just to confuse people.My question is simple : Do you agree that Krishna Existed if Jesus exists only in the domain of Literature of the believers ?

Please dont quote me sites ..I can quote you more that he doesnt exist .. so answer my question first Did Krishna exist .. If your answer is No then Jesus also did not exist.

You cannot be serious, unless you are telling me Krishna is the Hindu name for Jesus. In which case you need to worship Jesus who was real.

yo seem to be a freind of Truefusion and have come to pressurise people by repeating the lie again and again and then people will think that a lie is a true.There is no proof of Christ existing historically. Period. Do you agree to this or not ? I have given enough arguments for it and all know it is true. We are living in the age of reason and your methods of trying to say Christ existed is laughable. So do you agree that if Jesus existed then Krishna existed by the same yardstick of logic that you say : literary sources ? Yes or No i want . I dont want you to do the typical christian way of finding corners and never speaking logic and giving correct answers.

btw your statement of addressing him as Him made your cover open. You are a blind christian cult guy. Sorry to say this but that is true.

Jesus is a good saint i still agree and from the start i have said the same .. but unless archaelogical proof is found ... he is as good as a legend as Krishna or Greek Gods !

You want archaeological proof!

Christianity is the teaching of Jesus. No Jesus, no Christianity. You want proof of Him, what can't speak can't lie

http://www.sacred-destinations.com/italy/rome-catacombs

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

It is not about Jesus It is about whether Jesus existed Historically. It has been proven by comparative studies ( as the persons who belive Jesus existed and do not belive that other great people from other societies existed) , archaelogical evidence ( none ) : It is proven that Jesus did not exist at all. Because if you base the existence of Jesus on books or gospels or christian sources then the same logic is applied to Rama ( Ramayan is a book that talks about his life and actions and places ). We have to apply logic and prove things when people say our diety existed becoz it is listed in our books and yours not because there is no archaelogical evidence and we dont trust your books .. hence by this logic and this is the only logic that can be applied for such cases ..then Jesus doesnt exist. Maybe we find a edict or a paper written by him then his historical authencity will be proven .. till then he is mythological for me like any other mythological figure.

Whatever you think about Jesus this thread is still about Him.

This thread is about JESUS.

Adam and Eve were pretty stupid then for being near perfect humans. God is in their face telling them how to live and they go listen to a snake? I don't understand how that could be possible seeing as they were smart/intelligent. I do not think a god would create a man to be stupid especially if it was the first, wait he may be stupid because hes got no previous experiences and memory of any kind so everything is new to him. What ever the reason I still don't buy the story because it doesn't make sense. A lot of things are left up to interpretation and that's just not enough for me. I'm sure the bible no where states that he had blue eyes and she had brown eyes, Where did you get that? I'm sure you made it up just to justify your belief. I'm sorry but if God wanted things the way they are then there's no way we can do anything about it. Everything else is just something people conjure up just to make sense of reality.
Oh yeah by the way I like people thinking for me, Just because I don't respond in a while to my own topic I created does not mean I am not interested in the discussion. Maybe step down from your high ground once in a while.

There are no such things as talking snakes and neither are there trees of the fruit of knowledge.

It was an Old Testament parable. The snake represented satan or if you like the wrong thoughts that come into our head and the point about disobedience is that we do things KNOWING them to be wrong, this is the tree of knowledge and it gets worse when we tempt other people and lead them astray as well. By the way it could have been either Adam or Eve who did wrong and caused to other to do wrong as well. Please do not blame womankind, it is down to ourselves to do what is right and we only know right from wrong when we come of age and when we know the difference.

Adam and Eve, by whom I mean the parents of Cain and Able, were not the first people.

 

Neolithic man came before they did and then there was the Ice Age and the Stone Age and then we had Cavemen. Adam and Eve were not the first people ever, they were living in the Bronze Age and human beings had been living long before then. Quite simply Adam and Eve were the first people in the Bible. If you read Genesis 4 you will see that Cain went to the land of Nod (another country) where they were building cities (other people) Cain was worried he might be killed by "every one that findeth me" so obviously there were other people living in other lands. Then we continue to read in Genesis chapter four that they had the harp and the organ and they were working in Brass and Iron. Clearly the Bible is not talking about early man and certainly the Bible is not talking about Neolithic man.

 

The Bible begins about 6000BC and this is why people think the earth is 6000 years old. It isn't it is about 4.5 billion years old.

Genesis 4.

"13And Cain said unto the LORD, My punishment is greater than I can bear.

 

14Behold, thou hast driven me out this day from the face of the earth; and from thy face shall I be hid; and I shall be a fugitive and a vagabond in the earth; and it shall come to pass, that every one that findeth me shall slay me.

 

15And the LORD said unto him, Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold. And the LORD set a mark upon Cain, lest any finding him should kill him.

 

16And Cain went out from the presence of the LORD, and dwelt in the land of Nod, on the east of Eden.

 

17And Cain knew his wife; and she conceived, and bare Enoch: and he builded a city, and called the name of the city, after the name of his son, Enoch.

 

18And unto Enoch was born Irad: and Irad begat Mehujael: and Mehujael begat Methusael: and Methusael begat Lamech.

 

19And Lamech took unto him two wives: the name of the one was Adah, and the name of the other Zillah.

 

20And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.

 

21And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.

 

22And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.

 

23And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.

 

24If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

 

25And Adam knew his wife again; and she bare a son, and called his name Seth: For God, said she, hath appointed me another seed instead of Abel, whom Cain slew.

 

26And to Seth, to him also there was born a son; and he called his name Enos: then began men to call upon the name of the LORD."

 

I hope this clears up a few questions.

For me its been a while since i went to church I dont know what to believe anymore. I havce been through a lot and God hasnt trully been by my side to be honest. Please dont tell me about the footsteps in the sand, it is a beautiful poem but in my life it doesnt apply because \i know for a fact that \god dont care about me or rather maybe \im not a part of his family so he does not need to do me any favours.
I also have a question if its okay with you that i stray slightly from the original topic about tongues but what does the holy spirit have to do with the falling down when prayed for. i know the bible says about being slain in the spirit but tell me its like a game a wave thats swept across churches. its not always been the case. it was like one period it was the in thing now its all faded. Some churches still do it but its not that vast now like before. Was this a phrase in christianity or was the falling down backwards thing a big exagerration.

That was the Toronto Blessing and I believe it was false.

I have also experienced hardship in my life and although I couldn't see it at the time, God brought me through it wonderfully, but it is only with hindsight that I can see this. The two ocassins when this happened were when I strayed from the Lord and was disobedient, I suffered for my sin and I tried everything in my power but to no avail, then one day I got down on my knees and cried out in agony, "Not my will Lord, but thy will be done" and I surrendered myself to him completely to do with whatever he wanted.

I got up and I was filled with a sense of peace and after that where people had been against me, I started to get letters from my solicitor with little bits of good news for a change and eventually everything worked out in a way I could never have done it. But I had to give myself over to him unreservedly and that was hard and apart from one other time, for which I have paid the penalty and rightly so, I have always tried to be obedient to his word.

I wish you well my friend.

There are several gifts of the Spirit, see 1 Corinthians chapter 12.

 

Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal .

 

For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom ;

 

to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit;

 

to another faith by the same Spirit ;

 

to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;

 

to another the working of miracles ;

 

to another prophecy ;

 

to another discerning of spirits ;

 

to another divers kinds of tongues ;

 

to another the interpretation of tongues:

 

But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will . For the body is one, and has many members,

thank you for all your quotes and all of the them are from Christian/western sources . Encyclopedia Britannica is a Christian biased knowledge base which is controlled by

Christians. I am not at all against Jesus. What I am against is the fact that when it comes to analysing other faiths persons , these same people who blindly accept the historcity as if he is an historical figure like Gandhi or Putin ... when it comes to Krishna they say he never existed.

If I have to look at a people then it would be the Jews who would say if Christ Existed and they do not now belive that he existed or any HISTORICAL records were present then :

 

Look below for the Jewish argument :

 

"

 

I was curious if the Jewish religion believes that Jesus ever existed. If not, then what evidence is used to support this belief? Thank you very much for having this medium of information available.

 

Thank you for your question. The fact is that the Jewish religion is as varied in its beliefs as the number of Jewish people in the world.

 

There are some Jewish people that believe that Jesus never existed – that he is a legend like Robin Hood or King Arthur. There are others who believe that he existed, but not as the G-d/man savior that Christianity has made him out to be. Many of these believe that he was simply a second-Temple Jewish man with some different perspectives who gained a following, but proved, just as dozens of others had done, to not be the messiah.

 

There are references to someone with his name in the Talmud. However, because of the time at which this man had to have lived, it cannot be the same Jesus.

 

The only proof for the existence of Jesus is the New Testament itself,there is no outside evidence for his existence. Even the often quoted Jewish Historian Josephus' passage about Jesus has been proven to be a forgery.

 

Many people claim that the mere fact that Jesus has made such a global impact is proof enough of his existence, but that brings into the argument the impact of Robin Hood, Santa Claus, the tooth fairy, etc. The book of Mormon has the same proof for its existence and christians will tell you its not the truth.

 

But even so, admitting that he existed still does not prove that he was the messiah.

 

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

"

 

enemities of Jews and Christians apart , why would the Jews not admit that he existed as they agree to existence of Muhammad who was from the same geographical region ?

 

My hunch will be that he existed because without fire there cannot be smoke. clearly Jesus existed but if he existed them so Did Rama , Krishna applying the same logic.

 

 

It is a massive subject and it is far too complex to deal with in a few words, but the Jews knew Jesus right enough and I did post evidence of that from Jewish sources. We have to face it that people do invent religions, and gods and we only have to look at the Greek gods for example, the other thing is that the Jews also worshipped false gods and graven images, the Golden Calf for example and did not always worship the true God unfortunatly.

 

The sources I gave are genuine and that web site you pointed to is misleading. Just as an aside would you believe me if I said Robin Hood was genuine?

 

Have a look at my web site here.

 

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

God bless.

Why are people religious? It is because they have had a like vision with them and god like hanging out?
I mean, I'd seriously appreciate someone going in-depth about why religion makes sense and why it makes sense to be religious.

I've never really thought about religion until now since I've been atheist my entire life.


Can someone explain a little bit like what the bible and stuff say? I heard about it from a friend but I'm not interested until now because I got shot and I survived and I don't understand why. I was supposed to die but I didn't.


Thank you.

That's like asking why are people golfers, or why are they historians. For someone who doesn't play golf or is into history it might seem silly to walk miles hitting a small ball with a long stick! What sort of fetish is THAT!

I think people who criticise religion do so in ignorance and in their ignorance they get the wrong idea. I was never into history but the more I learn about medieval England the more fascinated I become and it is the same with theology. The deeper you go the more fascinating it becomes and the more you learn the more it gels into a cohesive whole.

People can talk about football for hours but until you go to matches, and play it for yourself you can never "know" football like a footballer and the idea of twenty-two grown men chasing a bag of wind around will seem forever silly, untill you become a footballer and then you see it like you have never seen it before. All I can say to people is to get off the sideline and into the changing room, become a Christian, study the Bible, pray, open up your heart to God and a whole new world will enter in.

All the best.

I grew up a christian, but lately I have been losing my faith so to speak, and in that process have been doing a lot of research about the bible and the stories it contains. I have found some surprising things, and this thread is to discuss one of them, the fact that there are no literary accounts of Jesus outside of the gospels and the fact that the books of the bible were written between 50-150 years after jesus was crucified.
Philo of Alexandria is probably the most famous ancient author who spent much time in Jerusalem during the early first century, and it is surprising that he mentions nothing about Jesus nor any of the other figures of the early Christian movement. There are about 50 other such authors with no such mention. The earliest mention of "Jesus of Nazareth" is in the genuine Pauline epistles, but to this Paul, Jesus is an entirely heavenly figure, with no mention of the Gospel biography and no time assigned to His earthly life. The Gospel stories themselves, of course, date from much later. The earliest "mention" (if it can be called that) is a third or fourth century interpolation by an unknown but plainly Christian hand into the text of Josephus. If it were genuine it would date from about a century after Jesus, but the interpolation makes it impossible to know for sure if Jesus was really mentioned there. There are, dating from the second century, a few other non-Christian mentions, but none of such a nature that they need be taken as anything more than authors repeating the then-current Christian claims. The Pauline epistles are excellent sources for the understanding of the nature of the Christian movement in the middle of the first century. If read critically and without the encrustation of later developed notions. What they show us is a Christian movement largely limited to Hellenes of Asia Minor, a few scattered churches, actively expecting an upcoming upheaval where Jesus "returns" and sets up his kingdom. These Christians seem to have no notion of the "Jesus" of today as described in the Bible. He was considered, instead, a pre-historic figure who lived in mythic time. This is standard Greek mystery cultism, with a Jewish veneer, just as other Greek mystery cults took an Egyptian or a Thracian or a Persian veneer.

One may surmise that, since this Heavenly Jesus never appears, that these churches evolved over time into the Christianity with the Gospels and the earthly Jesus story as later developments, which were then compiled into the modern day bible in 325 AD at the first council of Nicea.

How is it that there are no writings about jesus during his lifetime, or even within one generation AFTER his lifetime (people lived much shorter lifes back then, 50 years was close to the life expectancy of the time)

I happened across this site by accident. I think most people at the time of Jesus were illiterate and even today if it wasn't for the media I doubt we would have much of a record and Samuel Pepys diary is an example of how scarce written records were even in his day. However I hope this helps a little bit:

PAGAN SOURCESAre full of hatred for example in the "Acts of Pilate", and must have been used in the pagan schools to warn boys against the belief of Christians (Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl.", I, ix; IX, v);


TACITUS
The testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) states that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procurator Pontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickedness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy.

Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confuses the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv) and (Tacitus, Annals, 15, 44)


SUETONIUS
Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero,xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church. (Clau., xxv).


PLINY the YOUNGER
Of great importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christian belief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).


LUCIAN
In the second century Lucian sneered at Christ and the Christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to Christ's death on the Cross, to His miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the Christians ("Philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "De Morte Pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to Christ in Numenius (Origen, "Contra Cels", IV, 51), to His parables in Galerius, to the earthquake at the Crucifixion in Phlegon ( Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of Celsus, as quoted by Origen (Contra Cels., passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the Gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of Christ may be, they bear at least testimony to His existence, to His miracles, His parables, His claim to Divine worship, His death on the Cross, and to the more striking characteristics of His religion.

THALLUS
An ancient historian who confirmed the fact that the land went dark when Jesus was crucified.


MARA BAR-SERAPION
Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion, who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King.


JEWISH SOURCES
The later Jewish writings show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Holy Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr.Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667),

With the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii)
With the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696),

With the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713),

With His miracles (Origen, "Contra Cels", II, 48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op.cit., 6, 7, 17),
With His claim to be God (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699)

With His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit.,699 700; cf. "Sanhedrin", vi, vii).

Celsus (Origen, "Contra Cels.", II, 55) tries to throw doubt on the Resurrection, while Toldoth (cf. Wagenseil, 19) repeats the Jewish fiction that the body of Jesus had been stolen from the sepulchre rather than Jesus was risen from the dead.


JOSEPHUS Jewish historian (AD 37-100) wrote of Jesus:
"About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man, and He drew to Himself many Jews and when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him. The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day." (Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 )


PHLEGON the Gentile Historian
"Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus. Origen and Philopon, De. opif. mund. II21
"And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place ..."
Origen Against Celsus


The historical character of Jesus Christ is also attested by the hostile Jewish literature of the subsequent centuries. His birth is ascribed to an illicit ("Acta Pilati" in Thilo, "Codex apocryph. N.T., I, 526; cf. Justin, "Apol.", I, 35), or even an adulterous, union of His parents (Origen, "Contra Cels.," I, 28, 32).

There are many Jewish writings that show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr.Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667),

With the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii),

With the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696),
With the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713),

With His miracles (Origen, "Contra Cels", II, 48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op.cit., 6, 7, 17),

With His claim to be God (Origen, "Contra Cels.", I, 28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699)

With His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit.,699 700; cf."Sanhedrin", vi, vii).


So significant is Jesus in man's history that the Encyclopedia Britannica has 20,000 words in describing this person, Jesus. His description took more space than was given to Aristotle, Cicero, Alexander, Julius Caesar, Buddha, Confucius, Mohammed or Napolean Bonaparte.

Here is a quote from the Encyclopedia Britannica concerning the testimony of the many independent secular accounts of Jesus of Nazareth:
"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries."