Heck, it's proof Jesus never even existed.

1st Major Examination

I kicked this off by asking the christians of this forum, to describe the life of Jesus to me, and the results I found are exactly as I had expected, and planned. First off, I asked people to relay the story of Jesus' life to me to the best of their knowledge. Now, this being on the internet, I got a good few answers where people would just divert me to some website that says everything, but some people took the time to type it out themselves, and they had a pretty good idea of what happened. But even so, we come across some small contradictions, of which I'm going to make full use of.
I'll add some info, I can't remember everything so I'll say some basics....

He was born to the virgin Mary in the spring, around 25 years before AD yearline started.

When he died, the Christians went into hiding, and Apostle Peter(St. Peter) became the first pope of the Catholic Church.

Just two basic facts.

Peter didn't know it if so Vrait. He never claimed to be a leader. But on to what you asked, he was born of a virgin named Mary. He was a carpenter by trade. When he was about 30 he was baptized by John the baptist and the Holy Ghost descended upon him "as a dove," and God said "this is my son, in whom I"m well pleased." After that, I could go into detail, but I'll just say he had a ministry for 3 years in which he healed the sick, raised the dead, and did a bunch of miracles to spread God's message. He also had 12 close followers, named later apostles, and many other not-so-close followers. After his ministry he was crucified in the time of Tiberius Caesar on Mt. Calvary (also known as Golgatha "The Place of the Skull") and then rose again on the 3rd day, before ascending into heaven 40 days later. That's about it.
http://www.godonthe.net/evidence/rapture.htm

theres a LOT of stuff about the rapture. it might interest you.

Now this is a story all about how
The world got twisted upside down
Now I'd like to take a minute just sit right there
I'll tell you how I became the savior of a place called the Earth

In West Bethlehem born and raised
Carpentering is where I spent most of my days
Chillen out maxin' relaxin' all cool
Walkin' across the water in my neighbor's pool
I got in one little crucifixion and the people got scared
But three days later I floated up in the air

Or something like that.
That was epic...
there's a crucial part of Jesus' time on earth, when he rose from the dead it proves there is a life beyond this one.

all the ministries we know of are recorded in the NT gospels. read up from the source.
Jesus was a man that was fully man and fully God. Born circa 3 A.D. (ironic, I know...) He was born of a virgin named Mary. He came to earth in the form of a human because He had to die in order for us to be freed from sin (the bad things we do) and for us to get to go to heaven. He died by being nailed to a cross. He rose from the dead on the third day after He died, then stayed with his followers for forty days. After those forty days, He rose from the ground and went up to heaven.

I'd suggest you try reading the Bible. Go to biblegateway.com and type "Matthew 1" in the search bar, and start reading!

PM me if you have any questions, and I'll be more than happy to answer them!
Now, there's no real contradictions there, everyone had a good idea, and I'm sure if I were talking to them in person, they'd be able to tell me more about the life of Jesus, for instance:

Virgin Mary, Joseph, His time in Bethlehem, Harrid, John The Baptist, His miracles, healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, his ministry entering Jerusalem, The Last Supper, Ponce Pilate, The Jewish Mob, crowning of thorns, Jesus on the cross, the ressurection and the ascension.

I'd say what I said above is a pretty good review of Jesus' supposed life on earth, I can obviously go into more detail on the above, but as just bullet points, it's a good outline of what happened. And I'm confident that the christians here could relay a lot of it to me, and there would be very little contradiction amongst each other, because they've all been told the story. They can go into good detail on it all, it's been relayed to them countless times, they know it.

So what about after Christ ascends to heaven?
the apostles did a great deal.
i mean think about it, a simple rumor can spread through an entire school, so wouldnt you think a religion taught by the man who died for our sins would spread through the world?
ps. im very bad at debating things in forums so beware :(
Let's see if I still remember some things of history class:
When Jesus was still alive, christianity was already popular with(by, in, don't know which word to use) the poor and with women. Other religions excluded poor and sick people and women. Jesus spoke to the people a lot. The Roman ceasar who ruled then was afraid of christianity. The main reason is that the Christians wouldn't honour the ceasar. More and more people became Christian because the majority of the people were poor and the Christians helped them with money and stuff. Emperor Constantine made it official religion of the land because that would help him get support from the people. It is said that it has something to do with a dream and a victory but it is most likely political. Through wars and sieges Christianity spread from Greece to Perzia and Northern Europe. From then missionaries were send to concurred (?) grounds to speak and preach Christianity. Christianity was then spread in the entire Western world. It spread to other continents through the trade federations like the VOC. I believe that's how it went. I hope this answers your question.
Peter established the Catholic Church as the first pope after Jesus died. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John (yes, the four gospel writers) traveled great distances and spread Catholicism to many far off lands. John was known for his numerous treks in Asia. Paul led the established Catholic parishes in different cities (Rome, Corinth, Ephesis, etc.), giving them direct guidance as to how to run their parish according to God's will (read all his letters in the New Testament, following the gospel of John.) Just a sampler, there's a whole lot more than what I know.
well, right now i am rushed and brain dead, but i will try my best to say what i know about it.
for one, i haven't heard much proof about peter being the first pope and starting the roman catholic church...
yea, that's pretty much all correct....
but its not that the roman ceasar was afraid of Christians because of rebellious followers against the ceasar, it was because a lot of the people feared that Christ would be crowned as king, because he was very popular--in his own crowd. but anyway, Christ was obviously unpopular to a lot of other people.... high up religious or political people. anyway, they got their way and eventually had him crucified. with him out of the way, though, i don't really know why they needed to kill off the followers, but it seems that persecution followed for whatever reason.. i think a lot of the popularity came from the martyrdom... i think there was some ancient dead guy that said the blood of the saints was what watered the church or something.
but yea, eventually constantine came along and had a vision of a cross and words that said "in this sign conquer." then he got baptized and had christianity legalized *cough, politics, cough*. then it got popular and the church got watered down and got turned back into a bunch of rules and traditions (which is exactly what Christ came to see people free from). anyway. it got popular like that.
this is a little off topic, but it is interesting to note how when the crusades came along it was really a great thing....
the muslims and catholics really balanced each other out and prevented each other from world domination pretty well, lawlz.
Paul, Peter, many of the other early Christians, but most of all the power of the Holy Ghost moving. The same way through history that created mass revival, people coming to Jesus by the thousands or hundreds of thousands. Not by the power of man, but by the power of God working through men. The Holy Ghost. Read in the book of Acts a bit and see what it says about the Spirit/Holy Ghost/etc. When we just speak without God intervening, it does nothing, but when God gets in and starts intervening, it's crazy. In Acts ch. 2 God spoke through Peter after the Holy Ghost had fallen upon them and they began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave the utterance, and had such power in his words that 3000 people came to Jesus! Not Peter's words though, but the words given to Peter by God through the Holy Ghost. When people start to get up and walk after being crippled for life after healing was prayed for in the name of Jesus; when demon spirits are cast out of people in the name of Jesus and they flee; when people who legally are considered deaf or blind begin to see and hear after the name of Jesus was spoken over their need. It's when people start to seek God, as in 2 Chronicles 7:14, and become hungry to win a lost world, that God will use them to do thing to spread his name and prove to the world that Jesus is Lord! It's still happening around the world today. Trust me. Look into miracles after the name of Jesus was invoked. I promise you you'll be surprised (and many provide even medical records to back it up!)

First things first, I'm gonna use this link razz provided, not intending to in my original argument, but I figure it'll work for this quite nicely.

http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/Religion.swf

Now first off, looking at the spread of christianity through the first couple hundred years or so, I don't see anything pop up in Asia ShredTheGnar. If John trekked through Asia, he did very little. What we do see is Christianity spread from the middle east, to Europe and northern parts of Africa. On top of that, it was hardly popular, especially around the time of Christ. Heck, I don't think (though I'd have to check my sources) Christianity was a religion while Christ was alive. He was Jewish. In his 33 years of life, he's supposed to have made christianity popular? On top of that, I think someone said that he was baptized at 30, and he was just a carpenter for most of the time, so really it's the second half of his life that he's supposed to have made christianity popular, which, well, I don't see anything on the map before he dies, and it's improbable for him to have spread the word to very many people in under two decades.

One thing I note about these answers, they're no where near as specific as the ones I got for the story of Jesus, and there are more contradictions between each other in these ones.

And Izzy starts going on about the life of christ again, not the time after he was alive. He's focused on what he knows, the time of christ.

Now what I was expecting was a bunch of vague answers saying "Through word of mouth" or "Through the power of the Holy Ghost." But what I got was people who decided only to talk about what they knew, which is the time period a fair bit after Christ dies. Other than that they just say/assume the apostles and gospel writers did their part, and everyone travelled around spreading christianity, which, is correct from what I know.

So what am I getting at?

Now, what got me so into this at first, is that I noticed something in the Gospel of Mark, and that it doesn't work very well with the whole story. Mark wrote his gospel with St. Peter, and died in 68 AD. Now, the Gospel of Mark is believed to be the first gospel written, among christians and scholars alike, and it is clear the other gospels are derived from Mark, though it is the second gospel of the bible. Now here's what struck me, the gospel mentions the destruction of the second Jewish Temple in the year 70 AD. So that means that the Gospel can't have been completed until after that. Mark was writing the Gospel with St. Peter, who died in the year 64 AD by crucifixion. There's two years in between the gospel writers having died, and one of the major events the gospel mentions, having occured. So that means that someone other than Mark or Peter must have finished the gospel. But furthermore, this means the first gospel written must have occured a minimum of 37 years after the supposed death of Jesus Christ. This is older times, 37 years is a couple generations. The first written counts of Jesus' life were written what was probably over 40 years after his death, and it was probably much later, seeing as someone else must have finished the first gospel besides Mark and Peter. Point is there is a minimum 37 year gap between Christ dying, and the first Gospel being written.

So now comes the dissection of what happened in the midst of these 37 years. The apostle Paul, or Sol of Tarsus, travelled in a caravan with other apostles, and spread the word of christianity. Paul wrote pretty much everything we know of these 37 years between Christ dying and the first gospel being written. Paul found out about Jesus christ in a vision, he is reported to have seen a vision of Jesus, who told him to spread the word of Christ so others may be saved.

Now here's the most important note of all, if Jesus Christ was someone who had recently lived, and done all these great things, nobody told Paul. Paul didn't even have a clue about the idea of his god Jesus Christ (Christ meaning "Messiah" in greek) having lived a life on earth. What we would know of the story of Jesus, which everyone here seemed to have a good idea of, Paul never mentions once, except for the last three events I listed above, the Crucifixion, ressurection, and ascension.



Unfortunately, just like the other Pagan gods of the time, the god Paul called Christ Jesus, performed these last three acts in a mythical realm, not on Earth like we would say.

If Jesus had been on earth, he would not even have been a priest.

And he's the link, he's the link of everything we know of those 37 years between Christ's death and the publication of the first gospel.

In essence, the first hundred years of the new era, 0 AD - 100 AD go something like this.

0-33 AD: Jesus christ's time
34-70 AD: Paul travels around spreading word of his Pagan god, "Jesus Christ" who never even existed on earth.
70 AD - Present: The gospels come out and people read them.
2nd major examination

Now, thinking about the timeframe, it gets even more ridiculous than that. Allegorical literature was commonplace, using biblical referances etc... to simply write stories. These were always intended to be works of fiction, perhaps to help teach youth morals and values. Now, who here can think of something where it started out as a work of fiction, and gained a life of it's own and became a "this really happened" story. I don't think anyone would have too much trouble looking back and finding at least one example. Kids are impressionable, they love to lie about things like that, or maybe it's simply their imaginations that are willing to accept things as reality. I know adults who believe in Santa, his story started out as a work of fiction didn't it? If you tell people these sort of things early in their life, and never say afterward "Just kidding" they'll go on believing it the rest of their lives. Heck I think that happened to me in a debate on this forum, where I was saying man had one less rib than woman, because god took a rib from Adam to make Eve. Now, I didn't believe that, but I thought it was Religions way of explaining why man had one less rib than woman, and I never checked a bio textbook to examine our skeletal structure and found out that it was equal. So I spent my life believing that, it started out fiction, was told as fiction (well maybe they meant it to be fact but I wasn't buying it) and an element of it I believed as fact.

What Mark wrote was a gospel, the good news, and he used parallels to other pagan religions to help spread the word, and he used Jesus Christ as the name of his parallel pagan god. Now, don't forget, Mark and Peter both died before the gospel could possibly have even been published, which means that the entire thing was open to be edited by someone, even if all that editing was, was replacing one god's name with "Jesus Christ." Peter had a dispute with Paul and he and Mark disbanded from Paul's caravan to write their gospel. It's possible they didn't even believe in Jesus Christ anymore, and were simply going off and writing their allegorical literature with parallel symbolism to pagan religions, like the religion Paul's caravan was spreading. Now, whoever finished it, was clearly a christian themselves, so it's quite possible that they edited it to become the life and times of Jesus Christ. This is only speculation, but it's important to note.

Now let's move on to looking at the stories in the bible. Jesus appears to be intricately woven into the time frame of the 3 decades he was alive, however the stories that involve politics, the ones that are the most important in relation to linking Jesus into this time frame, either remain mythical (Like the Slaughter of the innocents derived from the bok of Exodus) or contain incredible improbabilities, like the Jewish Supreme Council meeting on passover eve in order to determine Jesus' fate (Passover being the celebration of when the jews were freed from Egypt, very important holiday, and the first seder {re-telling of the story} takes place on passover eve), or Ponce' Pilate letting go a known killer of Romans, and then allowing Jesus to be thrown to the mob, after having tried to get him off the hook, it pretty much defies any sort of historical verisimilitude.

On top of that, looking back, there were other ancient jews and jewish christians who believe Jesus to have been killed in 100 BC under King Alexander Genias, or in the gospel of Peter, it says Harrid had Jesus killed. How could something like this, a recent event, something people had been around and lived through, have gone under such scrutiny as to when it even occured to the length of decades? It almost begins to look like someone took this Christ Jesus written in the gospel of Mark, and tried to insert him into a historical timeline, and the other early jews and jewish christians, as well as the gospel of Peter, tried to as well, and it's sort of like trying to insert a mythical being into a historical timeline, and taking various stabs at it.

3rd major examination

Now, What I've done so far, is examine the idea that first off, the guy who spread christianity wasn't even preaching what the gospels told, his Jesus Christ was a pagan god who lived in a mythical realm like the other pagan gods. And that the first gospel written, Mark, was written a minimum of approximately 40 years after Christ, and wasn't even finished by it's original writers, Mark and St. Peter. What I now intend to provide is statistics and information relating Jesus Christ to the other Pagan gods of the time.

Now pagan gods conform to what is known as the "Hero Pattern." It is a general life of which the god lives, which is described in the gospels of the pagan gods. This is from "The Study of Folklore" and the list here is modeled off Oedipus.

The Hero Pattern


His mother is a royal virgin
His father is a king
Often a relative of his mother
The circumstances of his conception are unusual
He's also reputed as the son of a god
At birth an attempt is made by his father to kill him
He's spirited away
Reared by foster parents in a foreign country
Told nothing of his childhood
As a man he returns and goes to his future kingdom
Claims victory over a king, giant, or dragon
Marries a princess
Becomes king
Reigns uneventfully
Prescribes laws
Later he loses favour with his subjects
Is driven from the throne of the city
Meets with a mysterious death
Often at the top of a hill
His children (if any) do not succeed him
His body is not buried
Nevertheless he has one or more following groups


Now, let's just take a look at everyone's score here, keeping in mind, these are other gods or mythical figures who were once believed to be real, or are believed to be real to this day.


Oedipus - 22/22 (well it was modeled off of him)
Thesius - 20/22
Jesus - 19/22 THIRD PLACE!!!
Romulus - 17/22
Hercules - 17/22
Perseus - 16/22
Zeus - 15/22
Jason - 15/22
Robin Hood - 13/22
Apollo - 11/22


So yeah, Jesus takes third place in the pagan god's Hero pattern. I.e. a pagan god's life generally follows this pattern, and Jesus is pretty high up there, only missing three. What less would you expect of the son of god though?

Now, there were plenty of other saviour figures at the same general time in history, Mithras, Dionysus, Adonis, Osiris, Tammuz etc... and nobody today thinks these characters are anything more than mythical and yet their stories are so very similar to Jesus. Heck, most of them involve a ressurection after 3 days, sometimes coupled with a celebration, that it really seems ridiculous to try and say "Oh well in this one case, it really happened."

When we say that Jesus Christ was produced without sexual union, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended to heaven, we propound nothing new or different from what you believe regarding those whom you call the sons of Jupiter

Next, I present a list of attributes of previous saviour figures in a similar time frame or sometimes stretching a bit further back.


Born of a virgin on December 25th
Stars appeared at their birth
Visited by Magi from the east
Turned water into wine
Healed the sick
Cast out demons
Performed miracles
Transfigured before followers
Rode donkeys into the city
Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver
Celebrated communal meal with bread and win
Which represented the saviour's flesh and blood
Descended into hell
Resurrected on the third day
Ascended into heaven
To forever sit beside father god and become divine judge


And because I know you're going to ask for a list, here we go, the saviour type figures I used to compile this:

Zoroaster, Thor, Hercules, Tammuz, Osiris, Orpheus, Mithras, Krishna, Horus, Hermes, Dionysus, Devatat, Beddru, Balder, Bacchus, Baal, Adonis, Attis and of course, everybody's favourite, Jesus.


Now the early church fathers knew this was a problem in that Jesus clearly appeared to be just another pagan god (wonder why...) and there were plenty of pagans out there saying "What you're saying about Jesus we've been saying about Osiris or Dionysus or Hercules etc... for a long time so what's the big deal." So the church fathers prepared this explanation for these other saviour figures who shared so very much in common with Jesus Christ.

For when they say that Dionysus arose again and ascended into heaven, is it not evident the devil has imitated the prophecy?

The main reason this is important:

The church doesn't even try to deny that these other Jesus like charecters occured before Jesus (and after, but the quote I used was very early on into christianity, others after hadn't occured yet).

Essentially they're saying Satan knew Jesus would arrive, so he made false profits in advance in order to try and sway potential believers. They don't try to refute that these pagan gods followed the same pattern, they don't try to say Jesus is different from them in the signs that he is a saviour, they are all saviour figures, they just say "This one is right, the others are wrong, satan did it." It get's a bit ridiculous.

And in case you're wondering, this is the explanation offered to this day. It hasn't changed, luckily, church fathers don't have to offer it very often, because really it seems quite preposterous.

What I present to you here is evidence, facts, statistics, data, that you may mull over in your mind, analyze, and come to a conclusion. I have done all I can, but in order to convince someone, they must yield and be convinced, I ask that you take in this information and think about it for a bit, consider it and the plausibility of the existence of Jesus.

Sources/bibliography:

http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/Religion.swf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_the_Apostle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_the_Evangelist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luke_the_Evangelist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelist_Matthew
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Baptist
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Apostle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Peter
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontius_Pilate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jason
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paganism
http://www.ntgateway.com/paul/
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/paul/paul.htm
http://www.thegodmovie.com/
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08374c.htm
http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn24/profilesfaithcouple.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/8740/Alexander.htm
http://ls.berkeley.edu/dept/anth/dundes.html
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3732/is_200007/ai_n8901064

What about my theory on Jesus did you ever consider it:tongue:

What about my theory on Jesus did you ever consider it:tongue:

And what would that be?

Pretty sure he's typing up a third point.. I'll delete my post if that needs to be, but unless he says otherwise then people should probably refrain from posting

And what would that be?
Jesus was some hippie that apparently did miracles. But do you guys wanna know what I think? Back then everyone was a hippie and they all did drugs so their life was a blur. And some dudes that were really high wrote the bible. That's why it doesn't make sens. Jesus was an illusion...

Don't be mad at me but I think this is what happened.

You simply wrote a lot of your own speculations, and opinions.

Now first off, looking at the spread of christianity through the first couple hundred years or so, I don't see anything pop up in Asia ShredTheGnar. If John trekked through Asia, he did very little. What we do see is Christianity spread from the middle east, to Europe and northern parts of Africa. On top of that, it was hardly popular, especially around the time of Christ. Heck, I don't think (though I'd have to check my sources) Christianity was a religion while Christ was alive. He was Jewish. In his 33 years of life, he's supposed to have made christianity popular? On top of that, I think someone said that he was baptized at 30, and he was just a carpenter for most of the time, so really it's the second half of his life that he's supposed to have made christianity popular, which, well, I don't see anything on the map before he dies, and it's improbable for him to have spread the word to very many people in under two decades.

You would be correct here. Judaism is the religion you're thinking about. After Christ came and died in flesh, and rose again, he fulfilled the prophecies. I think Jewish (religion wise ) people don't think Jesus was the messiah, deny his life/what he did, thus deny the new testament and stick purely to the OT.

Gotta say, I'm impressed with the time you've spent reading, thinking, and writing about this topic. I'd advise you to stop wasting time though, because if people who dedicate their lives to the scripture cannot pin point specific dates (altho they speculate) then you can't realistically expect to. All in all, the only thing your speculations are doing are trying to ease your mind that there is no God. That you will not be accountable for yourself. There is, and you will be, as I will be.

Philippians 2:10 & 11


At the name of
JESUS
every
knee must bow,
in Heaven
and
on the earth
and
under the earth,
and
every tongue confess that
JESUS CHRIST
is
LORD...

True story.

John 3:16

Jesus was some hippie that apparently did miracles. But do you guys wanna know what I think? Back then everyone was a hippie and they all did drugs so their life was a blur. And some dudes that were really high wrote the bible. That's why it doesn't make sens. Jesus was an illusion...

Don't be mad at me but I think this is what happened.
You realize Jesus isn't from the 70's right?

You realize Jesus isn't from the 70's right?
They had long beards and flip flops back then and wore robe things. It makes sens to me;)

Why bother writing so much when we all know religion = fantasy and every religious nut will defend it with their life because it would be a complete embarrassment to be proven wrong. They have everything to lose, their life will shatter if there aren't any all loving deity. We on the other hand have nothing to lose!

It's like Johnny Rotten said "I don't think anybody is really religious. I don't deep down inside believe it. They are more likely desperate and lonely. Clinging on to some vague hope that there's a meaning to all of this. There is but it's get out the bloody house!"

There are actual records of Jesus's existance.

You = Fail.

Oh man... I cannot believe it, I just spent so long writing up my third point, and I get the message "Forum rules specify that you may only edit your post within 20 minutes after posting, other than that you must contact an administrator."

-.-"

That 3rd examination was the icing on the cake...

Oh for fricks sake it's the longest, goes over Jesus as a pagan god, and similarities to other pagan gods...

bleh. I'll be writing that up again shortly I guess... -.-" Along with re-citing my sources.
Merging doublepost
There are actual records of Jesus's existance.

You = Fail.

Right, ignore everything I just said and say that. Give me examples of these records, and where they're from, then say that all you want.

how about...... WRITE IT IN WORD/NOTEPAD OR SOMETHING FIRST THEN COPY PASTE IT IN!

You simply wrote a lot of your own speculations, and opinions.

You would be correct here. Judaism is the religion you're thinking about. After Christ came and died in flesh, and rose again, he fulfilled the prophecies. I think Jewish (religion wise ) people don't think Jesus was the messiah, deny his life/what he did, thus deny the new testament and stick purely to the OT.

Gotta say, I'm impressed with the time you've spent reading, thinking, and writing about this topic. I'd advise you to stop wasting time though, because if people who dedicate their lives to the scripture cannot pin point specific dates (altho they speculate) then you can't realistically expect to. All in all, the only thing your speculations are doing are trying to ease your mind that there is no God. That you will not be accountable for yourself. There is, and you will be, as I will be.

Philippians 2:10 & 11

At the name of
JESUS
every
knee must bow,
in Heaven
and
on the earth
and
under the earth,
and
every tongue confess that
JESUS CHRIST
is
LORD...

True story.

John 3:16

You just said I was wrong because of one speculation, which I acknowledge as a speculation in the bolded text you provided, and then provide your own opinion and say it's proof, a true story.

Don't. Just don't. I have nothing to say to you. You won't respond to any of the provided material to look through, you're just going to say "nope Jesus is real, lookie, it says in the bible." When I used the bible, and passages from the bible, to prove he wasn't.

You sicken me right now, get out of my sight. I'm sorry if that's harsh, but you have no place in this forum =Z28=.

And Mccrank, I'm re-writing out the third examination in word as we speak.

After Christ came and died in flesh, and rose again, he fulfilled the prophecies.

Excuse me???

He did not fulfill all the prophecies that were expected (ie: Third Temple). I don't know where you're getting this from...and most of the prophecies that were 'reportedly' fulfilled were just written accounts in the NT written several years after the OT.

And don't even try telling me that Jesus will fulfill them in the 2nd coming because

1) That would mean you lied when you said he's already fulfilled the prophecies
&
2) You don't even have a reasonable expectation on to which we expect the 2nd coming to occur, how long has it been and how long does he expect us to wait?


If you're going to pick a fairy tale to believe, the most logical one to believe right now is Judaism. Not only does Christianity & Islam build...whoops, I mean steal off of them, it's also the 'safest' fairy tale to believe considering the prophecies haven't ALL been fulfilled.

Okay I don't believe in Christ anymore, I'll tell my friends too

You guys gobble down news from the TV and newspapers. I don't. I'll take my info from something a little more reputable... like something that has never been proven false. The Bible.

We on the other hand have nothing to lose!



Right. Just eternity.

Skateyasha, Luckily for you I care more about your salvation then your easily swayed emotions.

You guys gobble down news from the TV and newspapers. I don't. I'll take my info from something a little more reputable... like something that has never been proven false. The Bible.



Right. Just eternity.

Skateyasha, Luckily for you I care more about your salvation then your easily swayed emotions.

I got all my information for this from the bible. WHat I've done is not opinion, is not speculation, I used scientific theory, I gathered data, statistics, presented it, analyzed it, and came to conclusions.

And my easily swayed emotions? Have you ever spent days researching something, and then spent hours writing it out, to have the most significant part deleted due to a stupid error, and then come on to find some idiot who says you're wrong because you used personal opinion and speculation, and then uses personal opinion and speculation to say he's right, after not commenting on any of the evidence provided.

You'd be EXTREMELY frustrated as well. And I maintain that if you aren't here to debate, then get out.

And ryusuke, are you serious? Your answer seems a little sarcastic, haha.

^ The difference between =Z28= and other humans with an IQ above 80 is he doesn't understand the other side of a debate.

Even if you debate against God, you can at least see why people believe in one (ie: afraid of death, lack of understanding of the Universe, indoctrination, etc). Z28 is absolutely sure that God exists, and he believes we're dumb enough to see as simply, and his posts imply that it's not him that's crazy...it's us.

Quite hysterical in a way.

What's hysterical is that we live in the age of science and people still hold on to their teddy bears.

ok, anyone wasting this much time to prove a thought needs to really do some thinking on the important things in life.

listen, skateyasha, i love you man.

but you take this whole religious debates a wee bit far.

at this point, it just seems like your trying to make some christians cry or something hahahaha

ok, anyone wasting this much time to prove a thought needs to really do some thinking on the important things in life.

listen, skateyasha, i love you man.

but you take this whole religious debates a wee bit far.

at this point, it just seems like your trying to make some christians cry or something hahahaha

They started it! =P

I'm not wasting time just to prove a thought, I was aksed repeatedly by christians to look over the bible, and so I did, well... looked over the basics at first, just outlines online of what happened in which gospel etc... when I came across the whole gospel of Mark thing containing an event from 70 AD when both it's writers had died before that. Which then led me towards Sol's caravan, and then I found out that Sol didn't even worship the same Jesus Christ described in the gospel, and he was the one spreading christianity, and that coupled with my early discovery that the gospel was published after it's original writers had died, led me to believe that a christian who worked with Sol (of sorts, not neccesarily direct correlation) took over Mark and Peter's work and could very likely have edited the gospel to become the story of Sol's Christ Jesus, and in fact, Mark and Peter had written a gospel about another god, say, Hankswill Josiah, who did all that stuff, and then the late editor just edited out Hankswill Josiah and in it's place put Jesus Christ. From the the info just snowballed and there was no way I could ignore this.

Edited everything in for ya. ;)

You guys gobble down news from the TV and newspapers. I don't. I'll take my info from something a little more reputable... like something that has never been proven false. The Bible.
Are you kidding me? The bible is more fiction than Star Wars and you say it has never been proven false? I mean even most common believers know that a lot of stuff in there is baloney but you think it's true? Ok do whatever you want but I'm going to Tatoine for my Jedi training...

That's actually very very very very very very very convincing evidence skateyasha..

I think you may have 'done it'. haha

Because I don't see any one such as z28 or Izzy pointing out anything wrong with this..

"Heck, it's proof Jesus never even existed.

1st Major Examination

I kicked this off by asking the christians of this forum, to describe the life of Jesus to me, and the results I found are exactly as I had expected, and planned. First off, I asked people to relay the story of Jesus' life to me to the best of their knowledge. Now, this being on the internet, I got a good fewanswers where people would just divert me to some website that says everything, but some people took the time to type it out themselves, andthey had a pretty good idea of what happened. But even so, we come across some small contradictions, of which I'm going to make full use of.




That was epic...


Now, there's no real contradictions there, everyone had a good idea, and I'm sure if I were talking to them in person, they'd be able to tell me more about the life of Jesus, for instance:

Virgin Mary, Joseph, His time in Bethlehem, Harrid, John The Baptist, His miracles, healing the sick, raising the dead, walking on water, his ministry entering Jerusalem, The Last Supper, Ponce Pilate, The Jewish Mob, crowning of thorns, Jesus on the cross, the ressurection and the ascension.

I'd say what I said above is a pretty good review of Jesus' supposed life on earth, I can obviously go into more detail on the above, but as just bullet points, it's a good outline of what happened. And I'm confident that the christians here could relay a lot of it to me, and there would be very little contradiction amongst each other, because they've all been told the story. They can go into good detail on it all, it's been relayed to them countless times, they know it.

So what about after Christ ascends to heaven?







First things first, I'm gonna use this link razz provided, not intending to in my original argument, but I figure it'll work for this quite nicely.

http://www.mapsofwar.com/images/Religion.swf

Now first off, looking at the spread of christianity through the first couple hundred years or so, I don't see anything pop up in Asia ShredTheGnar. If John trekked through Asia, he did very little. What we do see is Christianity spread from the middle east, to Europe and northern parts of Africa. On top of that, it was hardly popular, especially around the time of Christ. Heck, I don't think (though I'd have to check my sources) Christianity was a religion while Christ was alive. He was Jewish. In his 33 years of life, he's supposed to have made christianity popular? On top of that, I think someone said that he was baptized at 30, and he was just a carpenter for most of the time, so really it's the second half of his life that he's supposed to have made christianity popular, which, well, I don't see anything on the map before he dies, and it's improbable for him to have spread the word to very many people in under two decades.

One thing I note about these answers, they're no where near as specific as the ones I got for the story of Jesus, and there are more contradictions between each other in these ones.

And Izzy starts going on about the life of christ again, not the time after he was alive. He's focused on what he knows, the time of christ.

Now what I was expecting was a bunch of vague answers saying "Through word of mouth" or "Through the power of the Holy Ghost." But what I got was people who decided only to talk about what they knew, which is the time period a fair bit after Christ dies. Other than that they just say/assume the apostles and gospel writers did their part, and everyone travelled around spreading christianity, which, is correct from what I know.

So what am I getting at?

Now, what got me so into this at first, is that I noticed something in the Gospel of Mark, and that it doesn't work very well with the whole story. Mark wrote his gospel with St. Peter, and died in 68 AD. Now, the Gospel of Mark is believed to be the first gospel written, among christians and scholars alike, and it is clear the other gospels are derived from Mark, though it is the second gospel of the bible. Now here's what struck me, the gospel mentions the destruction of the second Jewish Temple in the year 70 AD. So that means that the Gospel can't have been completed until after that. Mark was writing the Gospel with St. Peter, who died in the year 64 AD by crucifixion. There's two years in between the gospel writers having died, and one of the major events the gospel mentions, having occured. So that means that someone other than Mark or Peter must have finished the gospel. But furthermore, this means the first gospel written must have occured a minimum of 37 years after the supposed death of Jesus Christ. This is older times, 37 years is a couple generations. The first written counts of Jesus' life were written what was probably over 40 years after his death, and it was probably much later, seeing as someone else must have finished the first gospel besides Mark and Peter. Point is there is a minimum 37 year gap between Christ dying, and the first Gospel being written.

So now comes the dissection of what happened in the midst of these 37 years. The apostle Paul, or Sol of Tarsus, travelled in a caravan with other apostles, and spread the word of christianity. Paul wrote pretty much everything we know of these 37 years between Christ dying and the first gospel being written. Paul found out about Jesus christ in a vision, he is reported to have seen a vision of Jesus, who told him to spread the word of Christ so others may be saved.

Now here's the most important note of all, if Jesus Christ was someone who had recently lived, and done all these great things, nobody told Paul. Paul didn't even have a clue about the idea of his god Jesus Christ (Christ meaning "Messiah" in greek) having lived a life on earth. What we would know of the story of Jesus, which everyone here seemed to have a good idea of, Paul never mentions once, except for the last three events I listed above, the Crucifixion, ressurection, and ascension.



Unfortunately, just like the other Pagan gods of the time, the god Paul called Christ Jesus, performed these last three acts in a mythical realm, not on Earth like we would say.



And he's the link, he's the link of everything we know of those 37 years between Christ's death and the publication of the first gospel.

In essence, the first hundred years of the new era, 0 AD - 100 AD go something like this.

0-33 AD: Jesus christ's time
34-70 AD: Paul travels around spreading word of his Pagan god, "Jesus Christ" who never even existed on earth.
70 AD - Present: The gospels come out and people read them.

1st part over, second part to be entered in the post below. This is a lot of writing, I'm just taking a break."



I will take some time right now to answer your first examination. I'll come back later or your second and third.
Christianity was started after the coming of Jesus. Here are some things found in the bible that could have showed you that.
Matthew 16:17-19 (King James Version)
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

History of Christianity-
Acts 11:25-27 (King James Version)
25Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
27And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.


I think this little information I found somewhere kind of shows how 'Mark' could have written the bible in 70 AD:
"Then, in about the year 70, the evangelist known as Mark wrote the first "gospel" -- the words mean "good news" about Jesus. We will never know the writer's real identity, or even if his name was Mark, since it was common practice in the ancient world to attribute written works to famous people."

Ahh, so what if it wasn't Mark who wrote the first gospel, but someone else? If it wasn't Mark it still could be true and could not have been tampered with, someone just could have used someone else's name. This does not affect the story in any way at all, and still could have been completely plausible. Could this make other names in the bible fake also, yes, it could.

If such is true, as it was that many writers in that time used different names, then that throws the St. Peter/ Mark theory straight out the window, or at least helps to prove that it completely possible it was written by the same person.

Please help me see your evidence of Paul not knowing of any Jesus Christ. This is what I have read in many stories about Paul and it might clear things up.

"The apostle Paul was, at first, a great enemy to the followers of Jesus; he was present at the stoning of Stephen (the executioners laid their cloaks at his feet.) After the death of Stephen, however, while Paul was on his way to Damascus, the glory of the Lord shone suddenly upon him and he was struck
to the earth and made blind for three days. After his recovery, he was converted and became an apostle and, lastly, suffered as a martyr for the religion which he had formerly persecuted."

Paul thought that Jesus's teachings were all untrue, and had never seen Jesus perform any miracle until he was blinded by God's glory and realized he was wrong in persecuting the followers of Jesus and our God.

Yes, I'm probably going to get completely bashed by Razz and Berishman, but eh, this is what I believe.

Not even going to bother reading this because:
A) it's false.
B) the context (skateboarding forum... wtf?)
C) the author (lets see your theology degree)

holy hell is that too long to read... maybe ill get around to it later on when im bored as hell. for the time being, no stupid comments by yours truly.

I dont even like to go to church, it just doesnt make any sense to me.

Not even going to bother reading this because:
A) it's false.
B) the context (skateboarding forum... wtf?)
C) the author (lets see your theology degree)

A) How so?
B) I'm sure he'll be posting it up on Mindusion.com as well.
C) But when you post something in favor of religion it's completely legitimate? Perhaps you shouldn't even call yourself a Catholic unless you have a theology degree? No. You and I both know that's ridiculous.
*refers to disclaimer*

Not even going to bother reading this because:
A) it's false.
B) the context (skateboarding forum... wtf?)
C) the author (lets see your theology degree)

A) You haven't read it yet you know it's false?
B) You do realize this is the Religion and Politics section?
C) Where is your theology degree to say it isn't valid?


I think this little information I found somewhere kind of shows how 'Mark' could have written the bible in 70 AD:
"Then, in about the year 70, the evangelist known as Mark wrote the first "gospel" -- the words mean "good news" about Jesus. We will never know the writer's real identity, or even if his name was Mark, since it was common practice in the ancient world to attribute written works to famous people."
That seems like it could even go to Skateyasha's argument about people presenting fiction as fact and people never learning otherwise. They attribute the story to a famous person and people are more likely to believe it because it has a famous author.

Ahh, so what if it wasn't Mark who wrote the first gospel, but someone else? If it wasn't Mark it still could be true and could not have been tampered with, someone just could have used someone else's name. This does not affect the story in any way at all, and still could have been completely plausible. Could this make other names in the bible fake also, yes, it could.
Sure, someone could have wrote it in complete honesty but your forgetting that this was written decades after Jesus. Do you really believe not one thing would have gotten changed in the story after being passed on by word of mouth for decades?

If such is true, as it was that many writers in that time used different names, then that throws the St. Peter/ Mark theory straight out the window, or at least helps to prove that it completely possible it was written by the same person.
I wouldn't think so, it doesn't solve the problem about how the first written account of Jesus was written decades after his life and also gives the gospel no credibility as no one knows who the author is.

Here is another thing I thought would be interesting to add into Skateyasha's argument. Life expectancy. Obviously it was much lower during that time and I would assume that those who had personal experience with Jesus and were going to spread his story would have at least been in adulthood for a few years so how long would they be expected to live and actually physically be able spread Jesus' word before they met their death? Take into account physically able too, disease could also make them physically unable to do so, I wouldn't think they would have had much time, and how fast would they be able to spread the word during the little time they might have had? I mean transportation was exactly at it's fastest then.

Bbengyak to answer your first debate type thing.. uh..

1. Right, I know it could. But saying that they chose the name of famous people so others might believe is all speculation and many other authors of that time did it also. So, you are saying that great works are now losing their credibility because some of their authors chose not to be known? One thing, the bible to some places was heresy and could get you killed, would you want to be known as the person who wrote something in it? It could cause your death.

2. True something could have changed, I can give you that. In all actuality something probably was changed, but does that disprove the existence of Jesus? No. The fact that the story was passed down is enough to say that someone out there thought there was a God.

The gospels came out in 70 AD, but couldn't some of the gospels have been written by many people and then comprised together in one? Certainly. People could have written these gospels 2 years after Jesus's death, or maybe while he was still alive. Who really knows? One Gospel could be many different books about Jesus's life that all had to do with the same thing over a long period of time that had just been pressed together. Could they not?

3. Why couldn't people like Paul have taught people to be a some sort of preacher before they died so the people could carry on the word of God?

As I said, its mostly speculation because no one really knows what went on in that time.
Merging doublepost
Bbengyak to answer your first debate type thing.. uh..

1. Right, I know it could. But saying that they chose the name of famous people so others might believe is all speculation and many other authors of that time did it also. So, you are saying that great works are now losing their credibility because some of their authors chose not to be known? One thing, the bible to some places was heresy and could get you killed, would you want to be known as the person who wrote something in it? It could cause your death.

2. True something could have changed, I can give you that. In all actuality something probably was changed, but does that disprove the existence of God? No. The fact that the story was passed down is enough to say that someone out there thought there was a Jesus.

The gospels came out in 70 AD, but couldn't some of the gospels have been written by many people and then comprised together in one? Certainly. People could have written these gospels 2 years after Jesus's death, or maybe while he was still alive. Who really knows? One Gospel could be many different books about Jesus's life that all had to do with the same thing over a long period of time that had just been pressed together. Could they not?

3. Why couldn't people like Paul have taught people to be a some sort of preacher before they died so the people could carry on the word of Jesus and the Glory of God?

As I said, its mostly speculation because no one really knows what went on in that time.

1. Right, I know it could. But saying that they chose the name of famous people so others might believe is all speculation and many other authors of that time did it also. So, you are saying that great works are now losing their credibility because some of their authors chose not to be known? One thing, the bible to some places was heresy and could get you killed, would you want to be known as the person who wrote something in it? It could cause your death.
I'm not specifically saying they chose a famous author so people would believe the story as fact, really I think your explanation is better but that the fact it was attributed to a famous author could have caused people to believe the story as fact but you're right, it is all speculation and I never intended it to be anymore than that. You're right though, I guess it doesn't lose complete credibility because of an unknown author but it still makes it questionable.

2. True something could have changed, I can give you that. In all actuality something probably was changed, but does that disprove the existence of God? No. The fact that the story was passed down is enough to say that someone out there thought there was a Jesus.
Or it could have been just another pagan god but was changed to Jesus Christ to help Christianity gain popularity but again this is only speculating so it doesn't really matter.

3. Why couldn't people like Paul have taught people to be a some sort of preacher before they died so the people could carry on the word of God?
Sure, but I could come up with many "Why not this or that?" kind of questions.

I think both our speculations could be, and could not be. I also think we could both make as many questions also. I don't mean to be offending or anything either, I'm just having a fun debate. Just so you know. Its hard to say whats true and whats not, we may all find out someday though. We may not too. All in all though, it does make a fun debate doesn't it?

Also, I'll try and debate the 2nd examination tomorrow too.

I think I have asked this before but don't remember if anyone answered.

Basically Christianity started in the middle east and spread over the world over thousands of years.

So my question is what happened to all the people who worshiped other gods due to the fact they hadn't been exposed to Christianity at all? Did they all go to hell? Or did they get spared since they didn't know better?

I mean those middle America civilizations with all the human sacrifice and sh*t. They are in hell?

Pretty mean IMO

^ Ya know, I really could not tell you, seeing as how I am not God. I feel that if you were never exposed to Christianity or my God and did not know about him, than you might be spared. Of course, I am not God, and could not tell you any different though.

You guys gobble down news from the TV and newspapers. I don't. I'll take my info from something a little more reputable... like something that has never been proven false. The Bible.




{rf)




does that explain my feelings well enough?

Not even going to bother reading this because:
A) it's false.
B) the context (skateboarding forum... wtf?)
C) the author (lets see your theology degree)

hmmm...so you didn't read but assume it's false -- just because. It's a skateboarding forum so it doesn't make sense to you. And the author needs a theology degree...just like you need a degree in the Third Reich to say Hitler was an evil man, right?

Is there 1 intelligent Theist on these forums? It's like the more religious they are the dumber they appear to be...

hmmm...so you didn't read but assume it's false -- just because. It's a skateboarding forum so it doesn't make sense to you. And the author needs a theology degree...just like you need a degree in the Third Reich to say Hitler was an evil man, right?

Is there 1 intelligent Theist on these forums? It's like the more religious they are the dumber they appear to be...
Yup, Tyler Self.

Yup, Tyler Self.

hmm...


I don't think HIV/AIDS is a punishment or judgement from God, but most of these people are NOT doing what God wants. If we all waited until marriage to have sex, or didn't have homosexual sex, there wouldn't be HIV at all.

But it just wont happen.

Yup, Tyler Self.

Agreed.
At least, unlike =z28= and Izzy here, he will admit that the Bible has it's share of flaws, and he keeps an open mind about things.. which, according to Izzy and =z28= here, that probably means he's going to hell..
:icon_roll


Actually.. didn't the pope say that "Curiosity should be considered a sin, and that people should stay away from people that say religion might not be true"
or something like that?
I'd have to search for the quote... so.. don't quote me on that.
haha

Agreed.
At least, unlike =z28= and Izzy here, he will admit that the Bible has it's share of flaws, and he keeps an open mind about things..

He actually admit it? I doubt it...

hmmm...so you didn't read but assume it's false -- just because. It's a skateboarding forum so it doesn't make sense to you. And the author needs a theology degree...just like you need a degree in the Third Reich to say Hitler was an evil man, right?

Is there 1 intelligent Theist on these forums? It's like the more religious they are the dumber they appear to be...

I could care less about him questioning whether Jesus was the son of God or not, but to say that he never existed is ignorant.

He actually admit it? I doubt it...

Perhaps "admit" was a bad choice of words.. :p, more like... "acknowledge that it isn't perfect"

I could care less about him questioning whether Jesus was the son of God or not, but to say that he never existed is ignorant.

Where is the overwhelming evidence that he did existed? The only reason Atheists don't bring it up is because it's irrelevant, it's whether or not he committed all those miracles - that's what we question

Perhaps "admit" was a bad choice of words.. :p, more like... "acknowledge that it isn't perfect"

lol, sadly I doubt that's true...

Where is the overwhelming evidence that he did existed? The only reason Atheists don't bring it up is because it's irrelevant, it's whether or not he committed all those miracles - that's what we question



lol, sadly I doubt that's true...

Haha, maybe it was that zeroskater kid I was thinking of.
lol

Where is the overwhelming evidence that he did existed? The only reason Atheists don't bring it up is because it's irrelevant, it's whether or not he committed all those miracles - that's what we question
One for example, The Annals, by Tacitus. One of the first known publications detailing on Jesus' existence. Also the writings of Josephus, a Jewish historian living during the first century.

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.

Grumpy atheists.

Razz, I feel you are forgetting about someone who is a somewhat intelligent theist and at least tries to make good points? Haha, just kidding.

I think both our speculations could be, and could not be. I also think we could both make as many questions also. I don't mean to be offending or anything either, I'm just having a fun debate. Just so you know. Its hard to say whats true and whats not, we may all find out someday though. We may not too. All in all though, it does make a fun debate doesn't it?
Oh, don't this is all in the good spirit of debate, it's not like your doing what =Z28= did and going here's a verse from the Bible so I'm right.

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.
Wait, what?

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.

Wait, what?

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.
Since the two people above me did it I'll do it too.

Wait, what?

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.

What the hell.

Wait, what?

Hahaha! I just posted this same comment in another thread without seeing all this, so here it goes again!

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.

Wait... what?

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.
TWAT!:icon_bs: Are you ****ing kidding me?

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.



excuse me?

please provide some insight here, i think we'd all appreciate that.

The Old Testament, with the exception of Genesis and the prophetics, is all a big history book...

EDIT:
No he didn't. Ever heard of the book of Maccabees? The book of Numbers? Judges? Exodus? It's all a history book detailing on the lives of pre-Jesus Jews, written by fellow Jews. The majority of the Old Testament is history, the rest of it is mostly prophetic writings which were influenced by God and written about God, but not handed down by God. Come on, at least know your subject matter before you try to make a point about it.

I named off just a few of the many books in the Old Testament that are all mostly historical.

TWAT! Are you ****ing kidding me?
Awww! You broke the chain of "Wait, what?"

linkz foar teh proofzorz?

dun fink so.

EDIT: to ShredTheGnar
*and remember, i love j00*

^linkz foar teh proofzorz?

dun fink so.

I thought you have read the bible so many times. Certainly, if you have done as you have said, you should know this.

I thought you have read the bible so many times. Certainly, if you have done as you have said, you should know this.
Sure, plenty of it CORRELATES with other records of actual events, but there are plenty of fiction books based off of real stories, so that really means nothing.
If that's what you were going for then I'm rather disappointed.

Sure, plenty of it CORRELATES with other records of actual events, but there are plenty of fiction books based off of real stories, so that really means nothing.
If that's what you were going for then I'm rather disappointed.
Not what I was going for. Keep in mind that it doesn't just correlate, it parallels.

Sorry but I didn't think I'd have to explain the entire Old Testament (especially to someone like you who claims to have read it numerous times--compare the Old Testament's historical books to historical articles relating to the same locations during the same time periods, you will find the parallels). I don't have time to type it up right now as I made a plan to go skate at 8:30 PM, but I might do it either tomorrow or sometime this week. I won't be able to get on much because I'm in the process of redoing my room and just landed a graphic design job with a local firm, but I'd be happy to explain what I know.

Where is the overwhelming evidence that he did existed? The only reason Atheists don't bring it up is because it's irrelevant, it's whether or not he committed all those miracles - that's what we question

I have no idea where to find them, but there are actual historical documents of Jesus's existance, and him getting the death sentance and put on a cross. (I've seen them before).

But, there is no documentation of the miracles or anything else he is said to have done.

I have no idea where to find them, but there are actual historical documents of Jesus's existance, and him getting the death sentance and put on a cross. (I've seen them before).

But, there is no documentation of the miracles or anything else he is said to have done.

lol, i think that would be worth mentioning

Oh well, whether or not he existed doesn't really concern me, it's like debating whether or not Santa wore a red suit.

The contention lies in his 'supposed' miracles, which there is absolutely no proof whatsoever of...except for the written accounts of a few men, who have the same amount of evidence as the writers of Qu'ran do...

Not to mention that the Old Testament is one of the most historically accurate history books to ever exist.

Historically _accurate_? Are you seriously kidding me? Noah's Ark comes to mind?

You can't be serious

Oh well, whether or not he existed doesn't really concern me, it's like debating whether or not Santa wore a red suit.

The contention lies in his 'supposed' miracles, which there is absolutely no proof whatsoever of...except for the written accounts of a few men, who have the same amount of evidence as the writers of Qu'ran do...



Historically _accurate_? Are you seriously kidding me? Noah's Ark comes to mind?

You can't be serious

You missed the "besides Genesis." And numerous historians have hypothesized that Noah's Ark was just a vast flood covering the majority of the Tigris-Euphrates river valley, which at the time was "the world" to those people. Gotta think of the context, and that story was first told over 4000 years ago.
Merging doublepost
But, there is no documentation of the miracles or anything else he is said to have done.

...besides the authors I posted, and the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, along with all of Paul's letters.

^I'm talking about real historical documents, religious books do not count.

I will take some time right now to answer your first examination. I'll come back later or your second and third.
Christianity was started after the coming of Jesus. Here are some things found in the bible that could have showed you that.
Matthew 16:17-19 (King James Version)
17And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
18And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
19And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

History of Christianity-
Acts 11:25-27 (King James Version)
25Then departed Barnabas to Tarsus, for to seek Saul:
26And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.
27And in these days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch.


I think this little information I found somewhere kind of shows how 'Mark' could have written the bible in 70 AD:
"Then, in about the year 70, the evangelist known as Mark wrote the first "gospel" -- the words mean "good news" about Jesus. We will never know the writer's real identity, or even if his name was Mark, since it was common practice in the ancient world to attribute written works to famous people."

Ahh, so what if it wasn't Mark who wrote the first gospel, but someone else? If it wasn't Mark it still could be true and could not have been tampered with, someone just could have used someone else's name. This does not affect the story in any way at all, and still could have been completely plausible. Could this make other names in the bible fake also, yes, it could.

If such is true, as it was that many writers in that time used different names, then that throws the St. Peter/ Mark theory straight out the window, or at least helps to prove that it completely possible it was written by the same person.

Please help me see your evidence of Paul not knowing of any Jesus Christ. This is what I have read in many stories about Paul and it might clear things up.

"The apostle Paul was, at first, a great enemy to the followers of Jesus; he was present at the stoning of Stephen (the executioners laid their cloaks at his feet.) After the death of Stephen, however, while Paul was on his way to Damascus, the glory of the Lord shone suddenly upon him and he was struck
to the earth and made blind for three days. After his recovery, he was converted and became an apostle and, lastly, suffered as a martyr for the religion which he had formerly persecuted."

Paul thought that Jesus's teachings were all untrue, and had never seen Jesus perform any miracle until he was blinded by God's glory and realized he was wrong in persecuting the followers of Jesus and our God.

Yes, I'm probably going to get completely bashed by Razz and Berishman, but eh, this is what I believe.

Ah zeroskater, at least I know you can phrase a good argument, but may I point out something wrong with using Mathew as a source, Mathew is a gospel which was derived from and came after Mark. So to use Matthew is the same as using Mark, which is what we're questioning the verisimility of in the first place. If I wrote down on a piece of paper that giraffes can turn into monkeys, and you say "no they can't" and then I say "Well look, here on this sheet of paper it says they can." You really wouldn't count that as evidence would you. So as a whole I'm ignoring the Mathew comment, and I hope you can see why I won't accept anything from any gospel as a counter-argument.

And about finding out about Paul not having known anything of what we would consider Jesus' life aside from the crucifixion, resurrection and ascension, well... give me a bit, I've been super busy lately, working 15+ hour days (though I am a skate monitor for one of my jobs, so I could really care less =P) and haven't had much time in the last little while for more than just work, skate and sleep. Thankfully work and skate coincide, best job ever.

Anyways, I'll get back to you on that, but I can't say for sure it'll be any time soon, I don't have much time to be snooping around the passages written by Sol for much more than what I'd quoted before:

I'm not gonna go back to the first post and look, I'm really tired right now, lol, but I know it said in short that: Jesus never was on earth, and if he had been, he wouldn't even have been a saint."

Also @ Shortys_Kid

I have no idea where to find them, but there are actual historical documents of Jesus's existance, and him getting the death sentance and put on a cross. (I've seen them before).

That's all fine and good, I'm sure you're not lying, you probably have seen something, but if you can't provide me with anything, then it really does no one any good. Secondly, what's the publication date on these documents? It's important not only to find sources, but question those sources and their credibility. I'm not saying this happened for sure, cause you haven't shown me anything yet, but there's always a possibility that someone just made up documents that coincided with the gospels and dated the death of Jesus etc...

As for ShredTheGnar's entire argument, you're saying that he ties in intricately with the time period, and you really can't re-write history without Jesus being there, but the fact is that the major accounts of Jesus that link him into the time frame, that make it so he wasn't just some guy living out on a farm or something, but actually a person of significant influence in the shaping of the world, are all full of incredible improbabilities. And I'm not talking about his miracles, I'm talking about the stuff I put in my first post, you know, the stuff you said was false and never read. Ponce's Pilate, The supreme Jewish council meeting on passover eve instead of attending the seder etc... it's ridiculous.


That's actually very very very very very very very convincing evidence skateyasha..

I think you may have 'done it'. haha

Because I don't see any one such as z28 or Izzy pointing out anything wrong with this..

It oughta be, I spent over a week researching and preparing this, haha.

Dude there may be contradictins in the stories of Jesus but they've been told and retold for like two thousand years! It's tough to keep it exactly the same for that long right?
Merging doublepost
by the way I didn't read this whole thing lol way too long for me so if there's more evidence than just contradictions in your essay, I didn't see

Dude there may be contradictins in the stories of Jesus but they've been told and retold for like two thousand years! It's tough to keep it exactly the same for that long right?
Merging doublepost
by the way I didn't read this whole thing lol way too long for me so if there's more evidence than just contradictions in your essay, I didn't see

far more evidence than contradictions.

I fear I may have been the only one to read the entire thing.

Read it.
It's quite convincing.

far more evidence than contradictions.

I fear I may have been the only one to read the entire thing.

Read it.
It's quite convincing.

Nope, I did also, it was convincing and brought up very good points.

Dude there may be contradictins in the stories of Jesus but they've been told and retold for like two thousand years! It's tough to keep it exactly the same for that long right?
Merging doublepost
by the way I didn't read this whole thing lol way too long for me so if there's more evidence than just contradictions in your essay, I didn't see

Trust me this is more than contradictions, I'll do my best to sum it up in as few words as possible, and you can read the whole thing for the evidence that backs it up.


Jesus lived his life, which people know about, then died, and then a minimum 37 year gap occured (keep in mind the times, life expectancy etc...) and then the first gospel was written. The first gospel describes Jesus' early life, so it's the telling of the story of Jesus pretty much. So what happened in the 37 year gap that ties the two together? A guy who was spreading the word that Jesus never even existed on earth. He didn't know/say anything about what we would call the story of Jesus, Jesus' life except for the last 3 events being, the crucifixion, ressurection, and ascension, and all of these he places in a mythical realm, similar to the other pagan gods of the time. So the whole idea this evidence brings about is that the Apostle Paul, who was spreading word of his pagan god Christ Jesus, who never existed on earth, eventually got someone to write up a miraculous life on earth for him, or maybe not for him, but one of his followers did. However, if you look through that, it's possible someone just wrote some allegorical literature, and then it was edited to give Jesus Christ an account of having lived a life on earth.

After that I go into comparing Jesus with folkloristic charecters and pagan gods, and show incredible similarities which make it all the more likely that Paul really had no clue about Jesus having lived a life, he just made up another pagan god he had in a vision.

Then I explain the christian explanation as to why Jesus is the right god, and the other pagan gods are wrong, and show that it's really preposterous and ridiculous, and anyone with half a mind who could think for themselves would probably question it. Unfortunately, there are those like =Z28= who will never think for themselves, ignore all evidence, and give me a passage from the bible saying Jesus is our lord and saviour, despite me having used passages from the bible to help prove he wasn't.

If that caught your attention, take some time and read the first post.

jesus is historically accurate. it s the facct that he is the messiah that is questionable

jesus is historically accurate. it s the facct that he is the messiah that is questionable

Please read the first post of this topic before saying that, or at least read the post above yours, and then if you want to check the first post for the info then feel free, or you could just trust that I know what I'm talking about.

Wow, all your time typing that?

How long did that take you? Seriously. That is a LOT...

Daaaaaaang. Great point of view! Still don't believe it though

Daaaaaaang. Great point of view! Still don't believe it though

Did you read it?

3rd major examination

Now, What I've done so far, is examine the idea that first off, the guy who spread christianity wasn't even preaching what the gospels told, his Jesus Christ was a pagan god who lived in a mythical realm like the other pagan gods. And that the first gospel written, Mark, was written a minimum of approximately 40 years after Christ, and wasn't even finished by it's original writers, Mark and St. Peter. What I now intend to provide is statistics and information relating Jesus Christ to the other Pagan gods of the time.

Now pagan gods conform to what is known as the "Hero Pattern." It is a general life of which the god lives, which is described in the gospels of the pagan gods. This is from "The Study of Folklore" and the list here is modeled off Oedipus.

The Hero Pattern


His mother is a royal virgin
His father is a king
Often a relative of his mother
The circumstances of his conception are unusual
He's also reputed as the son of a god
At birth an attempt is made by his father to kill him
He's spirited away
Reared by foster parents in a foreign country
Told nothing of his childhood
As a man he returns and goes to his future kingdom
Claims victory over a king, giant, or dragon
Marries a princess
Becomes king
Reigns uneventfully
Prescribes laws
Later he loses favour with his subjects
Is driven from the throne of the city
Meets with a mysterious death
Often at the top of a hill
His children (if any) do not succeed him
His body is not buried
Nevertheless he has one or more following groups


Now, let's just take a look at everyone's score here, keeping in mind, these are other gods or mythical figures who were once believed to be real, or are believed to be real to this day.


Oedipus - 22/22 (well it was modeled off of him)
Thesius - 20/22
Jesus - 19/22 THIRD PLACE!!!
Romulus - 17/22
Hercules - 17/22
Perseus - 16/22
Zeus - 15/22
Jason - 15/22
Robin Hood - 13/22
Apollo - 11/22


So yeah, Jesus takes third place in the pagan god's Hero pattern. I.e. a pagan god's life generally follows this pattern, and Jesus is pretty high up there, only missing three. What less would you expect of the son of god though?

Now, there were plenty of other saviour figures at the same general time in history, Mithras, Dionysus, Adonis, Osiris, Tammuz etc... and nobody today thinks these characters are anything more than mythical and yet their stories are so very similar to Jesus. Heck, most of them involve a ressurection after 3 days, sometimes coupled with a celebration, that it really seems ridiculous to try and say "Oh well in this one case, it really happened."



Next, I present a list of attributes of previous saviour figures in a similar time frame or sometimes stretching a bit further back.


Born of a virgin on December 25th
Stars appeared at their birth
Visited by Magi from the east
Turned water into wine
Healed the sick
Cast out demons
Performed miracles
Transfigured before followers
Rode donkeys into the city
Betrayed for 30 pieces of silver
Celebrated communal meal with bread and win
Which represented the saviour's flesh and blood
Descended into hell
Resurrected on the third day
Ascended into heaven
To forever sit beside father god and become divine judge


And because I know you're going to ask for a list, here we go, the saviour type figures I used to compile this:

Zoroaster, Thor, Hercules, Tammuz, Osiris, Orpheus, Mithras, Krishna, Horus, Hermes, Dionysus, Devatat, Beddru, Balder, Bacchus, Baal, Adonis, Attis and of course, everybody's favourite, Jesus.


Now the early church fathers knew this was a problem in that Jesus clearly appeared to be just another pagan god (wonder why...) and there were plenty of pagans out there saying "What you're saying about Jesus we've been saying about Osiris or Dionysus or Hercules etc... for a long time so what's the big deal." So the church fathers prepared this explanation for these other saviour figures who shared so very much in common with Jesus Christ.



The main reason this is important:

The church doesn't even try to deny that these other Jesus like charecters occured before Jesus (and after, but the quote I used was very early on into christianity, others after hadn't occured yet).

Essentially they're saying Satan knew Jesus would arrive, so he made false profits in advance in order to try and sway potential believers. They don't try to refute that these pagan gods followed the same pattern, they don't try to say Jesus is different from them in the signs that he is a saviour, they are all saviour figures, they just say "This one is right, the others are wrong, satan did it." It get's a bit ridiculous.

And in case you're wondering, this is the explanation offered to this day. It hasn't changed, luckily, church fathers don't have to offer it very often, because really it seems quite preposterous.



This section is about all that needs to be said. Once I started looking at Christianity from a global historical perspective instead of a Middle-East-by-way-of-Europe-centric viewpoint it became obvious that it was no different from any religion from any region in all of human history--and that it was in fact derivative of religions which preceded it in its own region.

also there is no proof of ALMOST anything in the bible.

Daaaaaaang. Great point of view! Still don't believe it though

What's not to believe? And why not? Sure it goes against everything you've been taught, but the intellectual questions their sources as to where they get their information, especially if it's something they've been taught from the get go, when you're most impressionable and least likely to question it.

But I can only do so much...

Let's see what Penn & Teller have to say about this.
8RV46fsmx6E&NR