things that interest you that others dont care about probably thread

[veritas]

Originally Posted by Destroyer

I am not one of those guys who says god can’t be real
I’m one who says, I see no reason to believe he is and if you want to take it one step further, I’m one of those guys who says nobody can claim to have any real knowledge on the subject.

So what do you believe in?

[Destroyer]

Originally Posted by veritas

So what do you believe in?

In regards to what?

[Larkin]

Originally Posted by veritas

I don’t get it?

Is that a question or an admission?

Either way you need to do a better job of proving God exists... pics or it didnt happen.

[Amen]

If you believe something, what ever it is - you have faith.

[WRATH]

Jesus death was the catalyst which led the disciples to aggressively push for christianity. Why it got accepted was the bible, a book so well written and emotionally engaging we read it 2000 years later and relate to on a deep level

So

Jesus and disciples were working on the bible collectively, and preparing to unleash the greatest book of all time. Couple heads get jealous at the leadership role of jesus and snitch. They kill him, only to make him a dead artist, which as we all know is much more potent then a live one. The movement has a martyr and now easily gains traction. It evolved into what we have today

[WRATH]

Jesus was real the magic wasn't. He had physical followers because existed Judaism recognizes him as real but not the savior.

[veritas]

In some first point of principle we can agree to start upon instead of you just conveniently changing your stance when called upon.

You may not remember all of our conversations but I do. Years ago you thought I was an idiot for believing in God and Christianity.

I am glad to see you are becoming less of an extremist.

Help me help us Jude.

[veritas]

Uh oh...can we agree that the apostles spread Christianity in its pure form l?

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by veritas

Uh oh...can we agree that the apostles spread Christianity in its pure form l?

sure, but to me that doesn't prove jesus' existence as an actual person of history. which is what this discussion was about.

Originally Posted by veritas

Let’s be real for a second ok? Is there not enough in the Bible to learn study and practice?

i don't understand this question. a simple answer would be yes, but i wouldn't study and learn it in a religious sense as much as taking it in as a historical document, which you could cross reference with other works of antiquity. so you could glean extra viewpoints on different cultures of the period, but like with any document understand the bias of the men who wrote it.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

sure, but to me that doesn't prove jesus' existence as an actual person of history. which is what this discussion was about.



i don't understand this question. a simple answer would be yes, but i wouldn't study and learn it in a religious sense as much as taking it in as a historical document, which you could cross reference with other works of antiquity. so you could glean extra viewpoints on different cultures of the period, but like with any document understand the bias of the men who wrote it.

You being a history buff should see my point about the apostles sir. They all died horrible deaths. Horrible deaths. Horrible.

A man will not die for a lie. He will for the truth. The point is that they believed that Jesus was who he said he was. And that means that he proved it to them with miracles and reincarnating after death.

Think it through. Fair?

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by veritas

You being a history buff should see my point about the apostles sir. They all died horrible deaths. Horrible deaths. Horrible.

A man will not die for a lie. He will for the truth. The point is that they believed that Jesus was who he said he was. And that means that he proved it to them with miracles and reincarnating after death.

Think it through. Fair?

thought it through. it doesn't convince me.

also i misled you with my ignorance. in reference to apostles i meant early missionaries and people spreading christianity. my own ignorance thought the term meant in a broad sense, as in the early people spreading the message, i didn't realize it meant the 12 mentioned specifically in the bible.

i only mention that because there isn't really evidence they existed either. in the same way jesus could be a figure representative of early jews resisting the jewish roman regimes, the apostles could represent the early christians who were persecuted in spreading that message.

being a student of history my ignorance of the apostles is expected as they aren't mentioned in actual history. apologies.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

thought it through. it doesn't convince me.

also i misled you with my ignorance. in reference to apostles i meant early missionaries and people spreading christianity. my own ignorance thought the term meant in a broad sense, as in the early people spreading the message, i didn't realize it meant the 12 mentioned specifically in the bible.

i only mention that because there isn't really evidence they existed either. in the same way jesus could be a figure representative of early jews resisting the jewish roman regimes, the apostles could represent the early christians who were persecuted in spreading that message.

being a student of history my ignorance of the apostles is expected as they aren't mentioned in actual history. apologies.

Bruh......you can deny the Bible as evidence. But there are plenty of historical books documenting the apostles especially their martyrdom

https://ibb.co/kZrMqJ

[sral]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

sure, but to me that doesn't prove jesus' existence as an actual person of history. which is what this discussion was about.

Certainly the non-Christians who wrote about him in the years following his putative death did not doubt he had once lived. The Roman historian Tacitus, writing in his Annals around 110 AD, mentions one “Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” The Jewish historian Josephus remarks on the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” The Talmud, a collection of Jewish writings, also refers to Christ, although it says he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panther. Doubts about the historicity of Christ did not surface until the 18th century. In short, whether or not JC was truly the Son of God, he was probably the son of somebody.

The scenario where Jesus is 100% myth is less plausible than the scenario where mythic and legendary ideas are attached to a historical figure. Ergo, there is little reason to assume there is no historical Jesus, and rather a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that there was one.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by sraL

Certainly the non-Christians who wrote about him in the years following his putative death did not doubt he had once lived. The Roman historian Tacitus, writing in his Annals around 110 AD, mentions one “Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” The Jewish historian Josephus remarks on the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” The Talmud, a collection of Jewish writings, also refers to Christ, although it says he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panther. Doubts about the historicity of Christ did not surface until the 18th century. In short, whether or not JC was truly the Son of God, he was probably the son of somebody.

The scenario where Jesus is 100% myth is less plausible than the scenario where mythic and legendary ideas are attached to a historical figure. Ergo, there is little reason to assume there is no historical Jesus, and rather a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that there was one.

So gone at Lars quoting things I was saying 8 years ago. Props

[uh-oh]

Originally Posted by sraL

Certainly the non-Christians who wrote about him in the years following his putative death did not doubt he had once lived. The Roman historian Tacitus, writing in his Annals around 110 AD, mentions one “Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” The Jewish historian Josephus remarks on the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” The Talmud, a collection of Jewish writings, also refers to Christ, although it says he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panther. Doubts about the historicity of Christ did not surface until the 18th century. In short, whether or not JC was truly the Son of God, he was probably the son of somebody.

The scenario where Jesus is 100% myth is less plausible than the scenario where mythic and legendary ideas are attached to a historical figure. Ergo, there is little reason to assume there is no historical Jesus, and rather a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that there was one.

josephus was a jew, who literally wrote the history of JUDEA during the 1st century, and made one passing mention of a guy people called christus. christus=messiah. so he makes reference to a man named jesus people called the messiah.

that doesn't mean the man existed. it means people referred to a man they call jesus the messiah. the greeks referred to a man called the son of god, hercules. did he exist? maybe. where is the proof?

jesus was allegedly crucified in 29ish AD. josephus wasn't born until 37 AD. in 64 BC nero was blaming fires on and executing christians, IN ROME. christians were in rome 35 years after the death of the alleged jesus. in a big enough number to be mentioned by the emperor. meanwhile josephus is still jewing it up in judea, getting ready to fight in the jewish rebellions against rome. before losing and defecting to rome, and then writing the history of judea during the time of jesus

you would think such a giant historical figure would get more than a passing mention

tacitus is the same deal, only less credible because he is from the south of france (or belgium or northern italy) and is speaking from even further from the events

the point being that when these men are writing the history of a region they need sources, sources are people. if christians already proliferated the myth of jesus, those sources would speak of him as if he existed because people talked as if he did

[sral]

Originally Posted by uh-oh

josephus was a jew, who literally wrote the history of JUDEA during the 1st century, and made one passing mention of a guy people called christus. christus=messiah. so he makes reference to a man named jesus people called the messiah.

that doesn't mean the man existed. it means people referred to a man they call jesus the messiah. the greeks referred to a man called the son of god, hercules. did he exist? maybe. where is the proof?

jesus was allegedly crucified in 29ish AD. josephus wasn't born until 37 AD. in 64 BC nero was blaming fires on and executing christians, IN ROME. christians were in rome 35 years after the death of the alleged jesus. in a big enough number to be mentioned by the emperor. meanwhile josephus is still jewing it up in judea, getting ready to fight in the jewish rebellions against rome. before losing and defecting to rome, and then writing the history of judea during the time of jesus

you would think such a giant historical figure would get more than a passing mention

tacitus is the same deal, only less credible because he is from the south of france (or belgium or northern italy) and is speaking from even further from the events

the point being that when these men are writing the history of a region they need sources, sources are people. if christians already proliferated the myth of jesus, those sources would speak of him as if he existed because people talked as if he did

First of all, we will need to establish what you/we mean by "proof he existed".

In the ancient world, historical records were rather thin on the ground, and were often written several generations or centuries after the fact. As a few examples:

Much of what we know about the foundation of Athens, the early history of the Persian Empire, and the war between Greece and Persia comes from a single source, namely Herodotus. Herodotus wrote around 430 B.C. and covered events from well over a century earlier, up to events fifty years prior.

Josephus, the only Jewish historian of the first century, wrote in 90 A.D., covering events in Jewish history ranging from Old Testament times up to the first century. Most of the people and events he covered, we know about only from him.

For most of the pre-Socratic philosophers, and many from later times as well, all we know comes from biographies or fragments written anywhere from 200 to 1,000 years later.

In comparison to that, with Jesus we have the first biography, Mark's Gospel, probably written about 35 years after the fact, and three further biographies, the gospels of Matthew, Luke, and John, written probably 40-60 years after the fact. By the standards of ancient world history, this is a phenomenally large amount of evidence, not even including mentions of the life of Jesus in the epistles.

[Witty]

I do not think anyone is an idiot for believing in Christianity or any religion. I know for a fact neither bags or Veritas are idiots. I believed for a long time, and I am sure I am not an idiot.

I stopped believing because I realised one thing...anything else I 'believe' in, I do so because I have seen empirical evidence of its existence. I realised I had no such experience with God, so I looked for it and I found none. Nobody I asked could show me any, and nowhere I looked was any to be found.

So I stopped believing. I do not believe God exists. I do not believe in the supernatural. I believe in people and I believe in love.

Fin.

[veritas]

[QUOTE=Witty;674444]I do not think anyone is an idiot for believing in Christianity or any religion. I know for a fact neither bags or Veritas are idiots. I believed for a long time, and I am sure I am not an idiot.

I stopped believing because I realised one thing...anything else I 'believe' in, I do so because I have seen empirical evidence of its existence. I realised I had no such experience with God, so I looked for it and I found none. Nobody I asked could show me any, and nowhere I looked was any to be found.

So I stopped believing. I do not believe God exists. I do not believe in the supernatural. I believe in people and I believe in love.

Fin.[/QUOTE*]

So God did not create us?

[Witty]

I do not believe so.

[veritas]

Originally Posted by Witty

I do not believe so.

So you believe in evolution yes?