Did Jesus Exist?

[anwiii 17]

No Wonder the saying,

 

Ignorance is BLISS.

 

I made my decision and choose to discover TRUTH, hence I took SCIENCE stream in high school.

Then for Bliss, I dropped out of College while I was doing my Graduation.

 

 

the best of both worlds, huh? well i have heard that ignorance is bliss. i tend to agree. have you ever heard of the expression, "you can't have your cake and eat it too"? you can't have the best of both worlds when in reality there is only one world. bliss is still an illusion it's funny though. those that do search for bliss will usually come out with more truth their life's journey. it's a little ironic.

 

i remember when i was younger, praying for happiness. what i was actually praying for though was constant happiness which is actually the bliss people talk about. i also prayed other things i thought were important only to realize that the things i would want or pray for were actually distractions to life in general. what does this have to do with if jesus existed? the answer is simple. we all create our own reality at one time or another. jesus existed because people believe he existed. the more people who believe, the stronger his existance becomes. the real question should be did jesus exist as was written in the bible. the alternate question deals with a more realistic approach to try to find out who jesus really was. we can further eliminate beliefs that alter reality by asking more specific questions. one just has to use their imagination and logical deductions.

 

my personal opinion is that jesus existed, but in no way, shape, or form, existed in the way the bible portrayed. therefore, i have to also believe that the bible is not 100% accurate. when i cannot distiguish all the parts that are inaccurate, i have to illiminate the bible as any source of information to be learned from. i don't think for one second that jesus died for our sins.....but he did die as a leader and to show us the way. that in life, there will always be unselfish sacrifices we have to make for the betterment of the world as a whole. jesus was called "the son of god" where in truth, we are all children of god and in some sense need to follow in the foot steps of the child that may have been put on this earth to lead the way. at the same time, he didn't know it all. just enough to make him a good "leader". i've known many. jesus is just one.

[kobra500 1]

I would say this as an overall post: Maybe Jesus existed or maybe he didn't, for the most part it is irrelevant. If he did exist and if any of the story of him are true then he is truly a great man, but the question really is "is he the son of god" because even if you could prove he existed it's irrellivent, he most certainly didn't walk on water, he didn't cure the blind. What he did do is say things like turn the other cheek; which is pure gold in terms of morals, but he also said things like leave your family so he isn't perfect, he is JUST a man and nothing more or less. He often talked about God as a different person which makes me feel that Christianity has a cheek calling itself a monotheism and I don't care how the theologians try to spin it, you have 3 distinct Gods. I believe Jesus may or may not have existed but he certainly didn't defy physics or perform miracles. He is Just a man in history who has been written up to something he isn't or he is just a myth in history much like the ones of Greek mythology.

Edited June 10, 2010 by kobra500 (see edit history)

[sukhi 2]

the best of both worlds, huh? well i have heard that ignorance is bliss. i tend to agree. have you ever heard of the expression, "you can't have your cake and eat it too"? you can't have the best of both worlds when in reality there is only one world. bliss is still an illusion it's funny though. those that do search for bliss will usually come out with more truth their life's journey. it's a little ironic.
i remember when i was younger, praying for happiness. what i was actually praying for though was constant happiness which is actually the bliss people talk about. i also prayed other things i thought were important only to realize that the things i would want or pray for were actually distractions to life in general. what does this have to do with if jesus existed? the answer is simple. we all create our own reality at one time or another. jesus existed because people believe he existed. the more people who believe, the stronger his existance becomes. the real question should be did jesus exist as was written in the bible. the alternate question deals with a more realistic approach to try to find out who jesus really was. we can further eliminate beliefs that alter reality by asking more specific questions. one just has to use their imagination and logical deductions.

my personal opinion is that jesus existed, but in no way, shape, or form, existed in the way the bible portrayed. therefore, i have to also believe that the bible is not 100% accurate. when i cannot distiguish all the parts that are inaccurate, i have to illiminate the bible as any source of information to be learned from. i don't think for one second that jesus died for our sins.....but he did die as a leader and to show us the way. that in life, there will always be unselfish sacrifices we have to make for the betterment of the world as a whole. jesus was called "the son of god" where in truth, we are all children of god and in some sense need to follow in the foot steps of the child that may have been put on this earth to lead the way. at the same time, he didn't know it all. just enough to make him a good "leader". i've known many. jesus is just one.

What Opaque wants to say by ignorance is bliss is the fact that one many be ignorant and still be blissful. Ignorance from the scientific point of view
which means that not applying the mind to discriminate knowledge. this is true in many cases. For example right now the world system is in such
an unstable state of affairs due to our quest for more knowledge. knowing what is on mars , then what is on saturn , knowing if life existed on saturn;s moon , titan etc etc ...
Supposing we do find some things in these planets then what do we do ? go for pluto , then outside solar system and there is a huge huge huge huge place out there
That is why if we say we dont need to know what existed on Saturn's moon , we are embracing ignorance at the cost of curiosity ( isnt that the original sin ? . by doing this
we are getting content with what we have and and then moving towards a stable state of mind which we call bliss.

I would say this as an overall post: Maybe Jesus existed or maybe he didn't, for the most part it is irrelevant. If he did exist and if any of the story of him are true then he is truly a great man, but the question really is "is he the son of god" because even if you could prove he existed it's irrellivent, he most certainly didn't walk on water, he didn't cure the blind. What he did do is say things like turn the other cheek; which is pure gold in terms of morals, but he also said things like leave your family so he isn't perfect, he is JUST a man and nothing more or less. He often talked about God as a different person which makes me feel that Christianity has a cheek calling itself a monotheism and I don't care how the theologians try to spin it, you have 3 distinct Gods. I believe Jesus may or may not have existed but he certainly didn't defy physics or perform miracles. He is Just a man in history who has been written up to something he isn't or he is just a myth in history much like the ones of Greek mythology.

True most of the miracles that have been associated with Jesus are for making him look Divine. He was born of a Birgin , getting up after death , walking on
water etc etc . I belive that such things are added by the believers to make their God/Messenger different from others and hence a higher pedestal.
My Question is simple if Jesus was really the Son of God then why didnt he make earth heaven and why has earth become much more worse than what
it was before with dying rivers , animal slaughter more , air polluted , BP spills , people running after money and in general more lustful and unhappy ?
Clearly Jesus failed in his mission if such parameters are taken into account of the conditions of humans and earth in general.

[OpaQue 15]

I would say this as an overall post: Maybe Jesus existed or maybe he didn't, for the most part it is irrelevant. If he did exist and if any of the story of him are true then he is truly a great man, but the question really is "is he the son of god" because even if you could prove he existed it's irrellivent, he most certainly didn't walk on water, he didn't cure the blind. What he did do is say things like turn the other cheek; which is pure gold in terms of morals, but he also said things like leave your family so he isn't perfect, he is JUST a man and nothing more or less.

I think Jesus will agree to this "All humans are the AVATARs/Reflections/Images of HiM and therefore, he is the Son of God".

If my Kid tells me.... "I am son of God, you are NOT my father". I will sort of agree to him.. because, I will be happy that my child considers SOMEONE greater than me as father. If this becomes the case, I would rather try to be his friend. But I m sure, my kid wont have the balls to say this same thing to the world. LOL!! Between Son-Father, words are spoken less and FEELINGS are understood more.

This is just my view... And I hope, I haven't drifted out of the topic.

[truefusion 3]

Why is it illogical.Infact archaelogical proof is taken as a measuring stick to prove by the Church to prove that Lord Rama existed or not. Oh so you mean such a yardstick is for non -christian entities ?

Clearly then you must admit that Lord Rama existed because his records are much more in depth than that of Jesus but still the western

biased christians like to say oh your diety is just a myth and ours is true. I have more proof of Krishna who existed in3100 BC than Jesus. Entire cities have been found under water at Dwarka.

The Entire astronomical data in mahabharata has been correlated to the times mentioned in Mahabharatha. Works of Krishna himself i.e. the Bhagavat Gita have existed which

is the best divine book one can get. SO then why is that such other non - christian people are put into the strict scrutiny of Archaelogy and Jesus is exists even though not a single shred

of evidence has been found if he existed ? Do you agree based on your logic that books are historically written are proof enough of a person then do you belive that Lord Krishna existed ?

 

 

It is about which side you are . Since you dont have a good argument for Jesus to have existed you say that majority of what are myths are history. Clearly you dont provide evidence for his existence other than Christian

sources which are as reliable as trusting a jungle shaman for his claims to be 5000yrs old.

 

 

believing in what Jesus said is different than logic. I have said i believe in what Jesus said as i also belive in what

bahais have sid or Muhammad has said. Jesus did not say anything new it was already said by Buddha in much more logical and truthful manner. I dont need to do any homework for gospels

as i go for logic not for reading infinite views on gospels. Gospels written 100yrs later or at the time of Jesus doesnt prove Jesus existed archaelogically or logically.

 

Finding a statue, an ornament, or anything that is attributed to some historical figure does not prove that this historical figure existed. All it could prove is that there was mention of such a figure during the time the archaelogical discovery is dated to. Finding Scripture from Christianity is no different than finding Scripture from Hinduism or Buddhism. Again, monuments built for a historical or mythical figure does not itself prove the existence of the figure.

 

According to my logic, i do not agree that historical writings necessarily prove the existence of the very thing it writes about, but that also does not mean they did not exist.

 

Both logic and Christianity do not allow for a god or deity to have inherent characteristics of creation, hence why any deity that inherently bears such characteristics are deemed as false gods in the Abrahamic religions. I will not deny that Krishna existed at some point, i will only assert that he could not have been a (true) deity or god.

 

I do not believe it can be proven that Jesus did not say anything new. I will agree that it is impossible to state something that will not have the same meaning if worded differently, but i would not say that such a thing means nothing new was mentioned concerning Jesus and the Buddha; it may be the case that nothing new was mentioned by Jesus concerning prophecy, though.

 

True, writings do not necessarily prove the existence of anything, but, as mentioned before, our limitations concerning history forces us to find means of attaining historical accuracy from what we do have.

 

My Question is simple if Jesus was really the Son of God then why didnt he make earth heaven and why has earth become much more worse than what

it was before with dying rivers , animal slaughter more , air polluted , BP spills , people running after money and in general more lustful and unhappy ?

Clearly Jesus failed in his mission if such parameters are taken into account of the conditions of humans and earth in general.

 

According to Scripture, Jesus was part of the creation of the heavens and earth. John makes this clear (which some other authors touch upon). According to Scripture, God saves perfectly; that is, He does not fail to save. This does not imply that He will save everyone, nor does it mean that saving one person magically makes the world a better place to live in. Why is the world full of evil? That is not the fault of God or Jesus, and is a question best left to be asked to the evil doers.

[sukhi 2]

Finding a statue, an ornament, or anything that is attributed to some historical figure does not prove that this historical figure existed. All it could prove is that there was mention of such a figure during the time the archaelogical discovery is dated to. Finding Scripture from Christianity is no different than finding Scripture from Hinduism or Buddhism. Again, monuments built for a historical or mythical figure does not itself prove the existence of the figure.

 

According to my logic, i do not agree that historical writings necessarily prove the existence of the very thing it writes about, but that also does not mean they did not exist.

 

Both logic and Christianity do not allow for a god or deity to have inherent characteristics of creation, hence why any deity that inherently bears such characteristics are deemed as false gods in the Abrahamic religions. I will not deny that Krishna existed at some point, i will only assert that he could not have been a (true) deity or god.

 

I do not believe it can be proven that Jesus did not say anything new. I will agree that it is impossible to state something that will not have the same meaning if worded differently, but i would not say that such a thing means nothing new was mentioned concerning Jesus and the Buddha; it may be the case that nothing new was mentioned by Jesus concerning prophecy, though.

 

True, writings do not necessarily prove the existence of anything, but, as mentioned before, our limitations concerning history forces us to find means of attaining historical accuracy from what we do have.

 

Well finding a ornament /cloth/necklace doesnt prove but it when you have radioactive carbon dating of a structure and reference to that person does prove

that the figure existed.

 

Look at Ashoka the Great who was also tried by british/christian colonists to prove that your King nevre existed but proven later

to be true :

From Wiki :

Ashoka was almost forgotten by the historians of the early British India but James Prinsep contributed in the revelation of historical sources. Other important historian was British archaeologist Sir John Hubert Marshall who was director-General of the Archaeological Survey of India. His main interests were Sanchi and Sarnath besides Harappa and Mohenjodaro. Sir Alexander Cunningham, a British archaeologist and army engineer and often known as the father of the Archaeological Survey of India, unveiled heritage sites like the BharhutStupa, Sarnath, Sanchi, and the Mahabodhi Temple; thus, his contribution is recognizable in realms of historical sources.

Edicts of Ashoka -The Edicts of Ashoka are a collection of 33 inscriptions on the Pillars of Ashoka, as well as boulders and cave walls, made by the Emperor Ashoka of the Mauryan dynasty during his reign from 272 to 231 BC. These inscriptions are dispersed throughout the areas of modern-day Pakistan and India, and represent the first tangible evidence of Buddhism. The edicts describe in detail the first wide expansion of Buddhism through the sponsorship of one of the most powerful kings of Indian history.It give more information about Ashoka's proselytism, Moral precepts, Religious precepts, Social and animal welfare .

these are Edicts written on them : BY Ashoka so they have to written by Him

 

The same has been applied to every figure but as far as Christ is concerned , there is no proof of such kind and hence we have to consider him a mythological figure. Dont you agree to the principles of logic or are you just a brainwashed Cult follower of Church ?

Also abour Krishna , In this universe if God is all powerful but he cannot come down as human form to correct things on earth , then I dont think he is God.

Because then he is just a hypocrite who just talks about things to do but himself doesnt do it. Krishna is the GOD incarnate which means He is Himself God

who is everything. Poor people with unevolved brains think that how Can God come as Human when God Can come as anything only then He is God.

Krishna today is considered the God of Management and increasingly the Bhagvat Gita is being used in place of Art of War to lead a strategies.

Bible is about stories whereas Bhagavat gita is about the LAWS, not some tribal stories.

Infact it fits perfectly as Krishna has Said that i have innumerable forms some of which are seen by some as light some as Jesus and when you pray to those Gods you reach their heavens as promised by your Gods. Thus Krishna is so benevolent to say worship other Gods. Does this statement is Said by Jesus too or just worhship their Father and rest all are wrong ? Tell me please for this question.

Infact I have more proof than your Father God with Krishna. Dwarka has been found underwater , his pictures by belivers , Bhgavat gita , Astronomical data matches.

As For your Father God , what is the proof other than the beilvers say they have seen etc ? No Proof at all. Infact I find a Sun worshipper more credible than worshipping

a monothesitic tribal demiGod that has all human characteristics except that it doesnt want to show itself

[truefusion 3]

Well finding a ornament /cloth/necklace doesnt prove but it when you have radioactive carbon dating of a structure and reference to that person does prove

that the figure existed.

 

Look at Ashoka the Great who was also tried by british/christian colonists to prove that your King nevre existed but proven later to be true :

From Wiki :

 

The same has been applied to every figure but as far as Christ is concerned , there is no proof of such kind and hence we have to consider him a mythological figure. Dont you agree to the principles of logic or are you just a brainwashed Cult follower of Church ?

 

Also abour Krishna , In this universe if God is all powerful but he cannot come down as human form to correct things on earth , then I dont think he is God.

Because then he is just a hypocrite who just talks about things to do but himself doesnt do it. Krishna is the GOD incarnate which means He is Himself God

who is everything. Poor people with unevolved brains think that how Can God come as Human when God Can come as anything only then He is God.

Krishna today is considered the God of Management and increasingly the Bhagvat Gita is being used in place of Art of War to lead a strategies.

Bible is about stories whereas Bhagavat gita is about the LAWS, not some tribal stories.

 

Infact it fits perfectly as Krishna has Said that i have innumerable forms some of which are seen by some as light some as Jesus and when you pray to those Gods you reach their heavens as promised by your Gods. Thus Krishna is so benevolent to say worship other Gods. Does this statement is Said by Jesus too or just worhship their Father and rest all are wrong ? Tell me please for this question.

Infact I have more proof than your Father God with Krishna. Dwarka has been found underwater , his pictures by belivers , Bhgavat gita , Astronomical data matches.

As For your Father God , what is the proof other than the beilvers say they have seen etc ? No Proof at all. Infact I find a Sun worshipper more credible than worshipping

a monothesitic tribal demiGod that has all human characteristics except that it doesnt want to show itself

 

Radioactive carbon dating, likewise, does not prove the existence of any written character. All it can do is provide a time period of the object itself, not the character who is written about. Again, monuments, statues, and the like do not prove the existence of the written characters. For example, the pillars of Ashoka only prove that Buddhism was practiced during whatever time they are dated to. It is indeed tangible evidence for the existence of Buddhism, but that is not tangible evidence for the existence of the Buddha, Krishna or whoever it mentions. One need not be brainwashed by any so-called cults to know and see this. There are also many ancient drawings of Jesus. It is uncertain whether or not Jesus looks like that, but it is practically certain that Jesus did have long hair, since that was a custom of the Nazarene tribe. Do these drawings necessarily prove Jesus's existence? No, they don't.

 

God is indeed capable of taking on human qualities; there is no doubt concerning that possibility. No one said He was incapable of doing so. What makes a god a false god deals with the entity's characteristics and attributes. If inherently they are creation, then they are false gods. By ''creation'' i do not necessarily mean man-made, though it does include it. And if He so wishes not to take on human qualities, it does not make Him a hypocrite, for duties are attributed accordingly based on responsibility.

 

Jesus says to worship only the Father, which is the one true God. Jesus fully acknowledges that there is only one God, and that God is the one who sent him. He does not deny the existence of false gods, even if these false gods never really existed (i.e. not a human that was being exalted to the status of a god, but a truly fictional figure).

[sukhi 2]

Radioactive carbon dating, likewise, does not prove the existence of any written character. All it can do is provide a time period of the object itself, not the character who is written about. Again, monuments, statues, and the like do not prove the existence of the written characters. For example, the pillars of Ashoka only prove that Buddhism was practiced during whatever time they are dated to. cults to know and see this. There are also many ancient drawings of Jesus. It is uncertain whether or not Jesus looks like that, but it is practically certain that Jesus did have long hair, since that was a custom of the Nazarene tribe. Do these drawings necessarily prove Jesus's exis It is indeed tangible evidence for the existence of Buddhism, but that is not tangible evidence for the existence of the Buddha, Krishna or whoever it mentions. One need not be brainwashed by any so-calledtence? No, they don't.

 

God is indeed capable of taking on human qualities; there is no doubt concerning that possibility. No one said He was incapable of doing so. What makes a god a false god deals with the entity's characteristics and attributes. If inherently they are creation, then they are false gods. By ''creation'' i do not necessarily mean man-made, though it does include it. And if He so wishes not to take on human qualities, it does not make Him a hypocrite, for duties are attributed accordingly based on responsibility.

 

Jesus says to worship only the Father, which is the one true God. Jesus fully acknowledges that there is only one God, and that God is the one who sent him. He does not deny the existence of false gods, even if these false gods never really existed (i.e. not a human that was being exalted to the status of a god, but a truly fictional figure).

 

Well the Edicts have been created by Ashoka Himself with his own signature. you dont belive in radio carbon dating then as I said you are proving yourself more and more an illogical cult follower who at all costs want to reject logic for the sake of this own benefit of false beliefs. These are proper edicts of Ashoka mentioning the signatory as Ashoka himself. Ashoka's life is more logical than Jesus's life.

 

Now to more logic to you : You say drawings should prove existence of Jesus . How ? I have proven how radiocarbon dating and edicts prove Ashoka Existed. Prove it with Logic not by belief.

 

What are the false characteristics of God that you mention that makes a God false ? Dont quote some scriptures and say becoz it is in Scriptures hence it is true. Even if you quote Scriptures , you have to prove them true by logic.

 

Jesus says to worship only the Father, which is the one true God : why should one belive this statement made by some person who doesnt even exist ? What authority does Jesus has to say this and to be accepted by people who know nothing about the True God ? The statement of yours that others were false Gods as said by Jesus .. same can be applied to Jesus and Jesus's Father God ? why not ? Why are you trying to say that following just one God is true when there are millions of other Gods who have done good work to their societies too ?

 

Any Law or statement should be universal that is why Krishna is considered supreme all over the world for saying : there are many gods that you can worship and attain their heavens. Rather than go about by duping people and saying : My God is true and your's false. How Evil is such a statement !

Edited June 11, 2010 by sukhi (see edit history)

[truefusion 3]

Well the Edicts have been created by Ashoka Himself with his own signature. you dont belive in radio carbon dating then as I said you are proving yourself more and more an illogical cult follower who at all costs want to reject logic for the sake of this own benefit of false beliefs. These are proper edicts of Ashoka mentioning the signatory as Ashoka himself. Ashoka's life is more logical than Jesus's life.

 

Now to more logic to you : You say drawings should prove existence of Jesus . How ? I have proven how radiocarbon dating and edicts prove Ashoka Existed. Prove it with Logic not by belief.

 

What are the false characteristics of God that you mention that makes a God false ? Dont quote some scriptures and say becoz it is in Scriptures hence it is true. Even if you quote Scriptures , you have to prove them true by logic.

 

Jesus says to worship only the Father, which is the one true God : why should one belive this statement made by some person who doesnt even exist ? What authority does Jesus has to say this and to be accepted by people who know nothing about the True God ? The statement of yours that others were false Gods as said by Jesus .. same can be applied to Jesus and Jesus's Father God ? why not ? Why are you trying to say that following just one God is true when there are millions of other Gods who have done good work to their societies too ?

 

Any Law or statement should be universal that is why Krishna is considered supreme all over the world for saying : there are many gods that you can worship and attain their heavens. Rather than go about by duping people and saying : My God is true and your's false. How Evil is such a statement !

 

Perhaps you should reread my statement for sake of clarification, for i have not mentioned the words you claim i have said. I did not say i don't believe in radioactive carbon dating; i did not say drawings prove the existence of anything that has been written about. But i would like to hold you to your assertion that Ashoka's life is more logical than Jesus's life, for i do not know of any part of Jesus's life that is illogical, nor have i ever heard of the life of Ashoka, let alone Ashoka himself (assuming it is a he). But also, tell me, what is the difference between something written in stone and something written on paper, that is, concerning one's existence? If the very writings on paper are not enough to prove someone's existence, why would writings on a stone prove someone's existence? I do not see how anything i have said does not involve logic.

 

A true god is an uncreated, eternal entity. It follows, therefore, that anything created cannot itself be a true god. It can be a false god, a so-called god, but never a true god. Is this not reasonable? I have yet to quote Scripture as evidence for any of my statements, so i do not see any reason to tell me not to quote from Scripture. However, i did provide some Scriptural knowledge in response to what you have requested from me. But that is not to say that Scripture does not contain logic.

 

Simply stating that Jesus doesn't exist doesn't prove that he doesn't. According to Scripture, the authority which Jesus has to do and say things comes from God. He does not have to say whatever he said to be accepted. In fact, just like you are reacting, so is it written of how some people reacted to what Jesus said to them. To any ignorant person, it is blasphemous to state that you have similar authority to that of God. According to Scripture, many people tried to stone him to death for merely making such claims.

 

It is indeed possible to state that Jesus or the God of the Abrahamic religions do not exist. But i find the Abrahamic religions more ''down to earth'' than any other. Why would one claim that there is only one God? The universe can only imply one God; there is no reason to assume that there is more than one God. Multiple gods also seem counter-intuitive, perhaps for that very reason.

 

I would not agree that any statement or law should be universal, for that implies that truth is playful. There can only be one truth to any contradicting matter. It is not possible to say that there are multiple ways to heaven if each way contradicts the other or if one bears no heaven or hell (which itself is likewise a contradiction). If it is true that Krishna said what you said he said, then my doubt that he is any kind of god has further increased.

[OpaQue 15]

Ok. This is my view.

 

There has been NO GOD directly landing on Earth with Super Natural Powers... If this is true, I m sure, its not come out of a humans womb.

 

However, all humans accept Consciousness and also believe in Super Consciousness.

 

Many humans can taste Super Consciousness by meditation AND Pranayam or Breathing Techniques. (the correct ways) & drugs.

Spiritual Books are merely Cleansing Tools to clean your mind and convert any faith to wisdom)

(Drugs which claim to expand your consciousness simply makes your situation even more difficult)

 

Some Blessed humans can attain & MAINTAIN Super Consciousness even while performing their duties.

 

Some of these humans are declared (by giving a name) and are called AVATARs when they are in Super Conscious MODE.

 

I do not think any enlightened HUMAN will call himself God.

 

 

NOW Coming to Point :-

 

Just how its difficult to interpret the details of your dream to another person. Similarly, I feel, it must be difficult for these SAINTLY people to express their true connection & feelings through words. Imagine Jesus already knowing that we all are made of atoms and molecules and he had understood the theory of relativity then (e=mc2) How do you expect this man to TELL you the TRUTH ???? Today, We do 15-20 year of Grade by Grade - SCHOOLING to understand these so called BASICS ?

 

If Einstein could realize the relation between MATTER and ENERGY, so could have Krishna, Jesus and Buddha?

 

How do you expect an AVATAR to explain Darwins Evolution to any common man?

[sukhi 2]

Perhaps you should reread my statement for sake of clarification, for i have not mentioned the words you claim i have said. I did not say i don't believe in radioactive carbon dating; i did not say drawings prove the existence of anything that has been written about. But i would like to hold you to your assertion that Ashoka's life is more logical than Jesus's life, for i do not know of any part of Jesus's life that is illogical, nor have i ever heard of the life of Ashoka, let alone Ashoka himself (assuming it is a he). But also, tell me, what is the difference between something written in stone and something written on paper, that is, concerning one's existence? If the very writings on paper are not enough to prove someone's existence, why would writings on a stone prove someone's existence? I do not see how anything i have said does not involve logic.

 

A true god is an uncreated, eternal entity. It follows, therefore, that anything created cannot itself be a true god. It can be a false god, a so-called god, but never a true god. Is this not reasonable? I have yet to quote Scripture as evidence for any of my statements, so i do not see any reason to tell me not to quote from Scripture. However, i did provide some Scriptural knowledge in response to what you have requested from me. But that is not to say that Scripture does not contain logic.

 

Simply stating that Jesus doesn't exist doesn't prove that he doesn't. According to Scripture, the authority which Jesus has to do and say things comes from God. He does not have to say whatever he said to be accepted. In fact, just like you are reacting, so is it written of how some people reacted to what Jesus said to them. To any ignorant person, it is blasphemous to state that you have similar authority to that of God. According to Scripture, many people tried to stone him to death for merely making such claims.

 

It is indeed possible to state that Jesus or the God of the Abrahamic religions do not exist. But i find the Abrahamic religions more ''down to earth'' than any other. Why would one claim that there is only one God? The universe can only imply one God; there is no reason to assume that there is more than one God. Multiple gods also seem counter-intuitive, perhaps for that very reason.

 

I would not agree that any statement or law should be universal, for that implies that truth is playful. There can only be one truth to any contradicting matter. It is not possible to say that there are multiple ways to heaven if each way contradicts the other or if one bears no heaven or hell (which itself is likewise a contradiction). If it is true that Krishna said what you said he said, then my doubt that he is any kind of god has further increased.

 

I do not think you are worth debating. All your statements are counter - contradicting. One one hand you say before that i woulkd not take radio carbon dating as evidence and now you say you know all this. Knowing all this doesnt make the point .. The point is whether Jesus existed or not and you have no proof still to give to me other than lofty talks which are based on blind faith. You find Abrahamic more down to earth ??? what is the meaning of that ? Born of Virgin , miracles , coming back after death etc are down to earth things ??? The only down to earth story is of Buddha. No Miracles only plain logic and psychology has been applied. Have you read anything from him ? Also your talk that Jesus had authority from God is not convincing. There are many God Men who claim around the world that they have authority from God even today and they are doing great work too and they have millions of followers too. So the chosen one can be anyone. Also you have not read Krishna's work and hence please dont comment on something that you have not read.

We are not here to discuss religion which you keep bringing in. We are here to discuss whether Jesus existed historically and all here agree that he did not exist histroically. We are not here discussing the bible. We can do that in another thread and trust me Bible has good and bad .. lies and truths like most of the other religious books. Bible infact I dont even consider to be a highest moral book because it is so childish to read in front of Buddha's work or Krishna's Bhagvat Gita. I will start a thread for the same in sometime. Also one last question i Like Jesus can you publicly admit that you have same feelings for Buddha ?

Edited June 12, 2010 by sukhi (see edit history)

[Sheffield 0]

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."

Edited June 12, 2010 by truefusion (see edit history)

[sukhi 2]

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 SOURCES

Are 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."

 

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://www.jewishanswers.org/ask-the-rabbi-1689/did-jesus-ever-exist/

 

"

 

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.

[Sheffield 0]

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.

Edited June 12, 2010 by Sheffield (see edit history)

[jackknife 0]

I would say this as an overall post: Maybe Jesus existed or maybe he didn't, for the most part it is irrelevant. If he did exist and if any of the story of him are true then he is truly a great man, but the question really is "is he the son of god" because even if you could prove he existed it's irrellivent, he most certainly didn't walk on water, he didn't cure the blind. What he did do is say things like turn the other cheek; which is pure gold in terms of morals, but he also said things like leave your family so he isn't perfect, he is JUST a man and nothing more or less. He often talked about God as a different person which makes me feel that Christianity has a cheek calling itself a monotheism and I don't care how the theologians try to spin it, you have 3 distinct Gods. I believe Jesus may or may not have existed but he certainly didn't defy physics or perform miracles. He is Just a man in history who has been written up to something he isn't or he is just a myth in history much like the ones of Greek mythology.

Walking on water, curing the blind and diseased, turning water to wine, multiplying food etc.... are indeed amazing but not some great miracles bestowed upon the holy descendants only..... these are arts or SIDDHIs of vedic origins and were practiced by many many sages over the eons. These are yogic arts, and they needed 1000s & 1000s of hours of practice and meditation. Not any and every sage could do these but the most trained ones only... Infact the mastery of these arts/siddhis was the competition & benchmark of these sages who wanted to attain perfection. By perfection i mean not 'enlightment' but the achievement of the complete control on wat the human body can do, when the mind & soul combine into one..... can call that the trinity...

So it is not unusual for Jesus Christ a jew to have known, come across, learnt & mastered these art/siddhis.... palestine's not that far from India, u kno... u cud always take the silkroute....

Jesus Christ was a sage who was enlightened, wanted to serve the mankind, show the astray the path, exhibited the powers (miracles) of the human body to show wat each and one of us can achieve if we want to....... That obviously is rebellion in a religiously controlled society... hence got prosecuted... this chain of events created the awe we call CHRISTIANITY.... when this awe was politicised it became a religion.....

So my advice to u is it is worth following a man who spoke of love, peace and brotherhood rather than wasting your life not knowing wat to do and whom to follow... inshort... chuck the facts, follow the essence...