Proof of Jesus?

[wayseer]

I'm really amazed that people keep citing sources like Josephus and Tacitus as being acceptable sources as they were written within 100 years of Jesus' life.

Then you are easily amazed - and if you are easily amazed then you not amazed at all but probably bored than anything else.

Have you ever bothered to inform yourself? Probably not - ignorance is such bliss.

 

[Grazer]

The 2 best sources we have for Alexander the great are written 300/400 years after him but they are considered reliable

http://publicchristianity.org/library/can-we-trust-the-bible

 

[AwakenedOne]

You should have asked him to prove that Christ didn't exist.

The only way you can prove Christ is to become like Christ and let non believers see Christ in you by your actions of love. If you see someone and need and give to them, they will see Christ in you.

LOVE is the only way non believers will ever get to 'see' Christ.

 

[Atothetheist]

You should have asked him to prove that Christ didn't exist.

The only way you can prove Christ is to become like Christ and let non believers see Christ in you by your actions of love. If you see someone and need and give to them, they will see Christ in you.

LOVE is the only way non believers will ever get to 'see' Christ.

One can't disprove a historical figure because Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. (jk)

Btw Grazer, can you please stop linking to a christian website, the bias is seeping through the webpage and into my mind.

Try secular, or at least apthetic sources.

Btw, there is more to Alexander than just writings, you at least can accept that, right?

Jesus is only in the Bible, Alexander built monuments, and conquered lands. Plus there are multiple documents about him that corraborate with what happened during that time period.

Just a cursery google search has shown me you theists like to use him a lot to compare to Jesus.

 

[Atothetheist]

You should have asked him to prove that Christ didn't exist.

The only way you can prove Christ is to become like Christ and let non believers see Christ in you by your actions of love. If you see someone and need and give to them, they will see Christ in you.

LOVE is the only way non believers will ever get to 'see' Christ.

By love I supposse you mean faith.

 

[AwakenedOne]

By love I supposse you mean faith.

No, I mean love. Jesus said, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father."
Because all of Jesus words and actions came from the Father.

It's the same with us. If your words and actions come from God than those who have seen those words and actions have seen the Father.

You can have faith in God but still not see him. You can believe in God and still not see Him. Faith without works is dead. If you manifest the love of God through your actions than you are manifesting God.

If I know someone is in need financially and I give them some money to help them, or food or whatever, than that act of compassion is a manifestation of God. Whether or not they recognize God in that is up to them. Many people do not have eyes to see or ears to hear.

 

[Atothetheist]

No, I mean love. Jesus said, "If you have seen me you have seen the Father."
Because all of Jesus words and actions came from the Father.

It's the same with us. If your words and actions come from God than those who have seen those words and actions have seen the Father.

You can have faith in God but still not see him. You can believe in God and still not see Him. Faith without works is dead. If you manifest the love of God through your actions than you are manifesting God.

If I know someone is in need financially and I give them some money to help them, or food or whatever, than that act of compassion is a manifestation of God. Whether or not they recognize God in that is up to them. Many people do not have eyes to see or ears to hear.

Sorry, but whatever good, or bad, deeds I do are soley mine, they aren't manifestations of anything but my drive of feelings to help people.

 

[AlexBC]

If I know someone is in need financially and I give them some money to help them, or food or whatever, than that act of compassion is a manifestation of God. Whether or not they recognize God in that is up to them. Many people do not have eyes to see or ears to hear.

That's...reaching. Atheist groups hand out food to the homeless, can lend money to a friend in need. They don't even believe in God.

 

[Atothetheist]

The 2 best sources we have for Alexander the great are written 300/400 years after him but they are considered reliable

http://publicchristianity.org/library/can-we-trust-the-bible

They are comsidered reliable,Grazer, by historians.

Josephus is disputed, and its reliablility IS suspect.

Taticus is generally accepted to be authentic though, but that authenticity is only applable to the fact that they have reasonably decerned that he did indeed write it.

This does not all mean that Jesus was the Son of God.

At best, it confirms what I already believe, a person by the name of Yeshua got exectued. ( Actually, it would have been for treason, and the Romans burned the bodies of traitors, they would have never been able to give him a burial, much less have a body for him to return to.)

 

[Grazer]

They are comsidered reliable,Grazer, by historians.

Josephus is disputed, and its reliablility IS suspect.

Taticus is generally accepted to be authentic though, but that authenticity is only applable to the fact that they have reasonably decerned that he did indeed write it.

This does not all mean that Jesus was the Son of God.

At best, it confirms what I already believe, a person by the name of Yeshua got exectued. ( Actually, it would have been for treason, and the Romans burned the bodies of traitors, they would have never been able to give him a burial, much less have a body for him to return to.)

Never said it did prove Jesus is the Son of God. The question was over whether Jesus existed so I posted a link to an interview with an historian studying the topic. Seemed sensible to me. The Josephus passage is widely believed to have been exaggerated as opposed to have been out-n-out forged based on other copies of the documents that we have. The passage contains details which makes it another piece of evidence to support his existence. The other question has been over the reliability of the Bible in terms of whether it has been changed over time. Again the interview shows the evidence for why due to the sheer number of surviving copies (and early copies) shows that it hasn't changed much at all (99.5% pure as some scholars have put it) But again, doesn't prove Jesus is the Son of God. As John Dickson puts it; a well preserved mistake is still a mistake (https://publicchristianity.org/library/christianity-on-the-chopping-block)

Can you provide evidence that this is what happened to Jesus? That his body was burned as opposed to be being buried? The question is not what usually happens but what actually happened.

Edit: I use PublicChristianity.org because I've found them to be the most balanced

 

[AwakenedOne]

Sorry, but whatever good, or bad, deeds I do are soley mine, they aren't manifestations of anything but my drive of feelings to help people.

Yes, if you have a drive to help fellow man than you are doing very well and I commend you. I believe that God is love. I don't blame you for rejecting the religious version of 'God' that man has created. The God that christians say only pre ordained a select few and then would send billions and billions to hell for eternity. Yeah, I don't accept that 'god' either because only a sadistic, evil entity would be capable of such things. I totally understand the reasons you don't believe in that 'God'.

As far as athiests and giving. It's sad when many athiests do more for their fellow man than many so called Christians.

 

[AwakenedOne]

That's...reaching. Atheist groups hand out food to the homeless, can lend money to a friend in need. They don't even believe in God.

Yeah, its sad when many athiests do more for their fellow man than many so called Christians. I think it's good that they do good deeds. At least they got something right.

 

[AlexBC]

Yeah, its sad when many athiests do more for their fellow man than many so called Christians. I think it's good that they do good deeds. At least they got something right.

I don't know whether to take that as a compliment or not

 

[Atothetheist]

Who is Ambassador of Christ? I know it is one of the forum users here.


In otherwords, who has this forum picture:

 

[Free]

Who is Ambassador of Christ? I know it is one of the forum users here.


In otherwords, who has this forum picture:

Eh? What does this have to do with the topic?

NM. I know what you're asking and why but it's still off topic. And, no, I don't know.

 

[Atothetheist]

Eh? What does this have to do with the topic?

NM. I know what you're asking and why but it's still off topic. And, no, I don't know.

Sorry, Free. But we got a user called "Ambassador of Christ" on another forum we are on, and I could've sworn I remembered that picture being on this forum. Seeing that he started adressing me on the atheistic forum counterpart of this thread, I thought he might have been one of the people that responded.

I was just wonderin who he is just because I remember that photo, and I, for curiosity's sake, am really interested in knowing who he/she is.

 

[Free]

Sorry, Free. But we got a user called "Ambassador of Christ" on another forum we are on, and I could've sworn I remembered that picture being on this forum. Seeing that he started adressing me on the atheistic forum counterpart of this thread, I thought he might have been one of the people that responded.

I was just wonderin who he is just because I remember that photo, and I, for curiosity's sake, am really interested in knowing who he/she is.

I know. I was just visiting there to check them out. I don't recognize their posting but I didn't look too hard. I can't say I recognize the pic either but who knows.

 

[NeonMoment]

Hello,

I, like A2, am an atheist. I think I have been--in the very least I have been sceptical--my entire life. The question he has posed is a completely valid one, and I can't seem to find any relevant or convincing arguments here that answer it.

What I want to know is how you can have so much faith in a Bronze Age superstition. Why aren't you compelled by the Icelandic Sagas to believe in Odin or Thor? About as much writing exists about Zeus, Hera, Heracles as there does about Jesus and Yahweh. So why are you so willing to put your 'faith' in what you were told by humans about a book written by humans? It seems to me it isn't 'god' you have faith in, but other human beings. Why is it so unreasonable for people like A2 and I to demand more than that? To not make decisions based on the words of others with no substantiating proof? I trust verifiable, repeatable, and visible evidence before I trust anything. Historical sources are never deemed completely reliable, but they are always ALWAYS read with that bias in mind.

As to Alexander; yes, the earliest remaining sources describing him and his campaign are hundreds of years after his lifetime. There are many disagreements in the sources about particular events (Ie, if he cut the Gordian knot or if he pulled the holding pin) but there is no doubt in scholarship that he was a real man. That he lived, and that he really did lead a campaign across the Mediterranean. I accept these basic, verifiable facts because--while the sources are not as old as we would like--there are countless accounts. None of them first hand, but they don't have to be. To substantiate his existence we only need one or two sources--separated by great geographical distance--to make an educated assumption that the person in question was real. More importantly, Alexander left behind a legacy and material evidence of his existence--the Hellenistic world was not an illusion-- that is not difficult to verify, and Macedonia did keep a record of their Kings. But it is impossible to make any solid statement of fact about the specifics of his campaign because we simply cannot verify that the testimonies of Plutarch, Quintus, Diodorus, Pliny, Arrian, Cleitarchus, Justin, Valerius, or Aelian (to name only a few) are completely factually accurate. But we aren't making that claim, are we?

The fact that theists struggle to come up with even one such account - Josephus- whose validity is HIGHLY in question, when I can name nine such accounts of Alexander makes them not even in the same arena to be compared. We can prove Alexander existed, and even if you can prove conclusively that Jesus existed, you can't prove anything else about him because the records simply don't exist. We don't claim anything extraordinary or supernatural about Alexander, but you want to claim all kinds of things about Jesus when you can't even verify he was a real man to any satisfiable degree.

 

[wayseer]

Hello,

I, like A2, am an atheist. I think I have been--in the very least I have been sceptical--my entire life.

Seems you are more confused as anything else.

The question he has posed is a completely valid one, and I can't seem to find any relevant or convincing arguments here that answer it.

The 'here' is indicative of your ideology - you could look elsewhere and readily find your answer. Why do you demand that your get answered 'here'?

What I want to know is how you can have so much faith in a Bronze Age superstition.

The same reason others have faith in the stock market - another Bronze Age superstition perhaps?

So why are you so willing to put your 'faith' in what you were told by humans about a book written by humans? It seems to me it isn't 'god' you have faith in, but other human beings.

Again - the same reason you put faith in those human who write books about flying airplanes.

I trust verifiable, repeatable, and visible evidence before I trust anything.

Then I fail to understand why your are 'here' - you would be unlikely to be supplied answers from those supposedly engage in Bronze Age superstition.

... but you want to claim all kinds of things about Jesus when you can't even verify he was a real man to any satisfiable degree.

And ... you seemed to have answered your own question.

I think you are right - you are very confused.

 

[Grazer]

Think I've posted this before but its worth repeating. Eminent classical historian Professor Graeme Clark, who is not a Christian, has gone on record as saying;

"Frankly, I know of no ancient historian or biblical historian, who would have a twinge of doubt about the existence of Jesus Christ. The documentary evidence is simply overwhelming"

Professor Craig Blomberg gives a great overview of the historical evidence;

http://publicchristianity.org/library/can-we-trust-the-bible

I also recommend the writings of N.T. Wright who has written several excellent books on the historical evidence for Jesus.

Sent from my HTC Desire S using Tapatalk 2