Jump to content
Check your account email address ×

Did Jesus of Nazareth actually exist?


Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, Steve753 said:

Well said.

:bc:

Thanks, I tried to keep my latent hostility and excessive drug use in check when making that post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
39 minutes ago, HSR said:

Thanks, I tried to keep my latent hostility and excessive drug use in check when making that post.

The struggle is real.

:bc:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said:

How many jews are that skin colour?

:lol:

Poor Karen.

Derp.  Being Jewish is a religion, not a regional location.  Sure it started in a region but God damn you are dumb as fuck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Deephaven said:

Derp.  Being Jewish is a religion, not a regional location.  Sure it started in a region but God damn you are dumb as fuck.

:lol: AC :owned: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ArcticCrusher said:

How many dark skinned jews do you know?

I'll bet every single one 2050 years ago was dark skinned. Definitely not the white dude up on every cross in existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
1 minute ago, HSR said:

I'll bet every single one 2050 years ago was dark skinned. Definitely not the white dude up on every cross in existence.

The 3 Wiseman were named Abdullah, Salim and Mohammed and Mary's name was Fatemah.

:lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Steve753 said:

The 3 Wiseman were named Abdullah, Salim and Mohammed and Mary's name was Fatemah.

:lol:

:lol: RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!  :lol2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, HSR said:

I'll bet every single one 2050 years ago was dark skinned. Definitely not the white dude up on every cross in existence.

That's faith.

We're you ass raped by a priest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
47 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said:

We're the Roman's dark skinned as well?

:lol:

You've got alot of questions(weird ones I might add) for someone who thinks they know everything.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Highmark said:

Funny nobody can prove he didn't exist or do the things written in the New Testament either.

https://hopeondemand.com/article/lee-strobel-4-proofs-of-the-resurrection

JESUS WAS DEAD

Did Jesus die on the cross? Was he dead? Virtually every scholar on planet Earth concedes that Jesus was dead after crucifixion. We have no record of anyone, anywhere, ever surviving a full Roman crucifixion. Even the Journal of the American Medical Association publish a peer reviewed reviewed scientific medical study of the evidence for the death of Jesus and said, “Clearly the weight of the evidence indicates that Jesus was dead even before the wound was inflicted.” Even the atheist New Testament scholar Gerd Lüdeman says, “Historically it’s indisputable that Jesus was dead.” So, Jesus was dead.

EARLY ACCOUNTS FOR THE RESURRECTION

The second category of evidence is the early accounts we have for the resurrection. In other words, I used to think is an atheist that the resurrection was a legend and that took a long time to develop in the ancient world. What I learned is that we have preserved for us a creed of the earliest Christian Church. A creed that is an eyewitness-based report of the resurrection of Jesus. Now this creed has been dated back by scholars to within months of the death of Jesus — within months. That is historical gold. So, we’ve got a news flash from ancient history on the resurrection.

THE EMPTY TOMB

The best evidence for the empty tomb is even the opponents of Jesus implicitly admitted the tomb was empty. When the disciples began proclaiming that Jesus had risen what the opponent said was, “The disciples stole the body.” They’re conceding that the tomb was empty, they’re just trying to explain how it got empty. So, everybody’s conceding that the tomb was empty. How it got empty is the real issue, and that goes to the fourth category of evidence, which is eyewitnesses.

THERE WERE EYEWITNESSES

For most of what we know about ancient history, it comes from one or maybe two sources of information and yet for the conviction of the disciples that they encountered the resurrected Jesus, we have no fewer than 9 ancient sources inside and outside the New Testament confirming and corroborating the conviction of the disciples that they encountered the risen Christ.

 

The 9 ancient sources are like 3 (the gospels were clearly copied/referenced from one to another.  

Jesus appearing after death is dependent on one or two hallucinations by his followers.

The likely route was the crucified body was probably dumped in the mass graves that the Romans used for their crucified/executed bodies.

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Highmark said:

:news:

https://christiancourier.com/articles/a-tough-journalist-looks-at-the-case-for-christ

Dr. Craig Bloomberg, a professor in Denver, argued persuasively that the Gospel accounts were written within the lifetimes of those who were witnesses to the life of Christ. By way of contrast, the two earliest biographies of Alexander the Great were written more than four hundred years after the Greek ruler’s death—yet they are considered reliable. The Gospels tower above that sort of evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus

When Strobel interviewed eighty-four year-old scholar, Dr. Bruce Metzger of Princeton Seminary, he was talking to one of the world’s foremost authorities in the matter of textual evidence for the authenticity of the New Testament. Metzger overwhelmed the inquiring lawyer with devastating evidence. He pointed out that there is a mountain of manuscript data for the authenticity of the New Testament documents, while the writings of Tacitus and Josephus, for instance, are anthills by way of comparison.

There is no conclusive authorship of any of the gospels.  No one knows who wrote them.  We can clearly see that they were copied and influenced by each other, yet they still have discrepancies between them.

They are not considered reliable historical documents.

Neal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

There is no conclusive authorship of any of the gospels.  No one knows who wrote them.  We can clearly see that they were copied and influenced by each other, yet they still have discrepancies between them.

They are not considered reliable historical documents.

Neal

This is incorrect.
Also, Jesus is mentioned in many historical documents along with many historical locations like Jerusalem. 

Edited by stinkipinki
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...