can anyone please give me proof that Jesus Christ is real?

Zakath

Resident Atheist
From my understanding Hinduism is quite a bit older than Buddhism. Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, lived around the fifth and sixth centuries BCE.

Hindusim had already existed, in some forms, for more than a thousand years by then and is considered by some to be world's oldest "great" religion.

maybe Hindu copied things from Buddhism and was carried down into the Jewish religion and Christianity.:think:
Quite possibly, traders and invaders frequently bring back bits and pieces of religious philosophical lore from their travels. The common people enjoy the tales and begin to weave them into their belief systems. Eventually, some of these tales and philosophies are adopted in some form by the dominant religion to ensure the people's loyalty since it is merely re-stating what they already beleive.

That adoption is what I meant by the term "syncretic".
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
Granite, don't take things so seriously. The more defensive you are to them, the more people will go after ya.
 

c.moore

New member
Originally posted by Zakath

From my understanding Hinduism is quite a bit older than Buddhism. Siddhartha Gautama, the founder of Buddhism, lived around the fifth and sixth centuries BCE.

Hindusim had already existed, in some forms, for more than a thousand years by then and is considered by some to be world's oldest "great" religion.

Quite possibly, traders and invaders frequently bring back bits and pieces of religious philosophical lore from their travels. The common people enjoy the tales and begin to weave them into their belief systems. Eventually, some of these tales and philosophies are adopted in some form by the dominant religion to ensure the people's loyalty since it is merely re-stating what they already beleive.

That adoption is what I meant by the term "syncretic".

This is how my teacher explained how the christians have copy cat many other belief and worships in their belief system which shows the beliefs are not divine and Holy as many christian think .

I thought he was the only person seeing this , and myself.

Thanks for pointing this out here.:thumb:
 

c.moore

New member
Originally posted by gimp

Is this really what Christian's think of the Bible? If so, why would they be Christian's? It doesn't make sense to me.

It was made not to make sense or be logical.

JUST believe it!:)
 

c.moore

New member
There are some (not many) non-gospel sources which refer to Jesus, and which Christians say prove the historical existence of Jesus. These are the writings of:


Flavius Josephus - c90CE

Suetonius - c120CE

Tactitus - 110CE

Pliny - c110CE

Thallus - cited in c300CE

Talmud - 200-500CE

'Acts of Pilate'

The Josephus passage is among the most celebrated as proving that Jesus existed:


"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works; a teacher of such men as received the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (Antiquities XVIII 63f)

At first glance, this appears to be a very good source for the historical existence of Jesus. However, Josephus was a Jew, and remained a Jew. For him to say that Jesus was 'the Christ' and was resurrected from the dead, would have had him a Christian, not a Jew, and he would have been banned from the synagogues, as were all the others who said Jesus was the messiah. Futhermore, up until the 4th Century there are no mentions of Josephus having written about Jesus in this way. None of the Christian Church Fathers mentioned Josephus as having written about Jesus in this way, if he had done so, Justin Martyr and Origen among others would have been glad to use it as ammunition in their disputes with the Jews. They did not, however, no mention of it at all. Origen actually said that Josephus did not acknowledge Jesus. Most scholars do not believe Josephus wrote this passage, but that it is a later addition by Christian scribes - Bishop Warburton denounced it as "a rank forgery and a very stupid one, too."

Suetonius wrote:


"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome". Life of Claudius (XXv.4)

Again there are a number of questions raised about this passage. Firstly, Suetonius is talking about "Chrestus" - but he spelt "Christians" correctly later in his book, which makes you wonder whether he was actually talking about Jesus at all, and not some other person, especially as 'Chrestus' is the correct Latin form of an actual Greek name. He also seems to imply that there was someone called Chrestus in Rome in 49CE when the expulsion occurred. This makes him a very dubious source indeed.

Tactitus wrote that:


"Consequently ... Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations. Called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberias at the hands of the Procurator Pontius Pilatus, and a deadly superstition, thus checked for a moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but also in the City." Annals (XV.44.2-8)

in his account of the burning of Rome. Again this piece of Tactitus' writing, besides not being by an eyewitness, has a big question mark hanging over its authenticity. This particular piece is not quoted before the 15th Century, and when it was quoted, there was supposed to be only one copy of the 'Annals' in the world, made in the eighth century (600 years after Tactitus' death). Also, Tactitus could not have been using Roman records of Jesus' death (if there were any) because he prefers to Pilate as a Procurator, when in fact he was a Prefect. Again we must discount this passage.

Pliny wrote a letter to the emperor Trajan saying:


"They also declared that the sum total of their guilt or error amounted to no more than this: that they had met regularly before dawn on a fixed day to chant verses alternately among themselves in honour of Christ as if to a god, and also to bind themselves by oath, not for any criminal purpose, but to abstain from theft, robbery, and adultery ..."

He was asking Trajan to advise him what action to take against Christians living in Asia Minor. He proves that there were Christians there, but not that Jesus ever existed.

Thallus is said to have written that Jesus' death was accompanied by earthquake and darkness. His original work has been lost and it was cited only in Julius Africanus' work in the third century. This is the only reference to unusual meterological events occuring after the death of Jesus outside the New Testament, which is strange as such things were routinely recorded. It is impossible to determine whether Thallus actually wrote this, when he wrote this or if the events actually happened as there is no other evidence.

The Talmud says Jesus was the illegitemate son of a Roman soldier called Pandera (or Pandira) who worked magic. However, most of that material derives from 200-500CE and is the Jewish reaction to the spread of Christianity. It is not a contemporary reference but a reaction to a movement.(For anti-Christian parts of the Talmud, including those referring to Jesus, refuted, please see http://crnews.pastornet.net.au/jmm/aasi/aasi0151.htm)

Many Christians also make reference to the "Acts of Pilate" whicih Justin Martyr said was Pilate's report to Rome of the crucifixion of Jesus. Several other early church writers also referred to this, including Euseubius, who said there was a forged copy of that report circulating in his day. At the present time, the apocryphal Gospel of Nicodemus claims to have this report within it, and there is also another report. The second report, called " The letter of Pontius Pilate which he wrote to the Roman Emperor, concerning our Lord Jesus Christ. is thought by most historians to have been written in the fifth century. The Gospel of Nicodemus is thought to have been written c150-200 which leaves a small possibility that it has a copy of the report of Pilate in it, but the gospel is not accepted by most Christians as being authentic, and most historians doubt that it has the report of Pilate either.

There are some other historical sources, but these are the main (and earliest) ones, so I will not cover them. There is a possibility that Jesus did exist, as vouchsafed by the historical evidence, but the practise of the Christian church in destroying records of Jesus (at one time, anyone attempting to preserve writings which were hostile to him was subject to the death penalty) and of falsifying various others (such as Josephus) has paradoxically made it unlikely we will ever be able to say with certainty that Jesus existed.
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08375a.htm http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

Actually you are wrong. Jerome, Ambrose and Chrystostimum all used Josephus' writings.

There is accounting for the mention of Christ. READ the actual article, C.Moore.:jump:

Whether the pagan sources are full of error is beside the point. It still proves they have heard of a man named Jesus and they take him out of the supernatural context.
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
C.Moore, except as my article on Buddhism explained, there is no proof that Buddhism influenced the Greek world and Palestine but there is tons of evidence to support Christianity influencing Northern India etc.
 

c.moore

New member
jjjg


Even the catholic admitt that Josephus and others writting have be forged and changed.
i had the web site and link I hope I can show it to you .

Btw the link doesn`t work can you post it again?
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
No they say that it is still in dispute but I think we have gone as far as we can with this discussion.

As I said from the beginning who cares about pagan sources. All you need is the Christian sources.
 

c.moore

New member
Originally posted by jjjg

No they say that it is still in dispute but I think we have gone as far as we can with this discussion.

As I said from the beginning who cares about pagan sources. All you need is the Christian sources.


yes my teacher say`s it is blind faith , just keep believing in santa claus and peter pan and only go to those peter pan book and fairy tale books to believe in whatever they claim.
he said remember when santa claus come by with his rain deers and presents, don`t forget to jump for joy and havbe ahappy heart and face because you are getting something free, and it sounds incredible anyways to believe.:D
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
Your teacher is being absurd. Christ is tied to history as a real person as much as people try to dismiss it.

The gospels are more closely linked to Christ as people who wrote them knew him. The same cannot be said of Ceaser. His main biographers came humdreds of years afterwards and teh Gospels and acts of the apostles are studied as historical writings.

They said the same thing about the Old Testament until they found the Dead Sea Scrolls.
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
I've read over the comments you made about the pagan writers and they all mention Christ with talmud etc. The fact that there might have been mistakes in their historical accounts doesn't eliminate Christ.

About Tacitus. Whoever told you Pilate was a Prelate is wrong, he was a procurator.

By the way the evidence that Pilate existed is even more scanty yet some argument that Pilate was a prelate and not a procurator is absurd in trying to eliminate Christ. Obviously Christ had a bigger influence than Pilate.

You're just not looking at the big picture of how scanty historical evidence of most things are.:shut:

Couldn't all these anti-Christian writers simply argue that Christ didn't exist if the evidence was overwhelming in their time? Yet they couldn't because it was obvious he did exist.

Same with the Jews who reject Christ as the son of God, but they still consider him a great prophet that existed.
 
Last edited:

geralduk

New member
Why go to the WORLD for evidence of the reality of christ?
EVERY true BORNagain child of God is enough evidence for dead men cannot save anybody nor make such a change in thier lives.

Let the man rest in HIS wisdom and let yourself rest in yours if you know Him for "wisdom is justyfied by her children"
The man then who does not believe and do not the truth will show on what foundation his life rests on. and the man who knoweth the truth and "doeth it" will aslo show on what foundation he rests on.

His 'faith' rests in his own underrstanding and in mans wisdom.
Why then seek answers from it seeign that by "mens wisdom they knew not God"
If you know Him who is the truth then speak of what YOU KNOW!
AND TESTYFY of the truth.

For a 'proffessor' sitting on the beach and never having been in the water no matter how 'learned' his 'arguments' still knows LESS than a "unlearned and ignorant" child who has swam in the waters!
Therefore if the SPIRIT of truth dwells in you is it not promsied that HE WIL lead YOU INTO ALL TRUTH?
and if we lack wisdom to ask God doubting not and He will give us the wisdom that we need?

Most of the apostles were ignorant and iunlearned men but they ahd been with JESUS.
Steven was able to reply to those who contended with wisdom that could not be gainsayed. or replied to.
Surely then we can have confidence in God to help us also if we are "walking in the light"?
But if we have gone into this thing rashly better to seek God FIRST before we utter another word.

You might find the book "the two babylons" (can be read on line)
which is very helpfull as to the roots of pagan 'christian' religion.

But you must use the SCRIPTURES as ther foundation of "THE faith that was once and for all delivered unto the saints"
For there is NO OTHER foundatron for it.
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
Ya, like the existence of the Roman empire proves Ceaser existed or the existence of Islam proves Mohammid existed.. Okkay!
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
I think you guys are confusing evidence with proof.

There is evidence Ceasar existed but you cannot prove it like 1+1=2.
 

the_truth_

New member
jjjg I would not say your logic is correct on the existance of chistians proving Jesus is real: Because if you use this logic then you must conceed the existance of all the hidu gods being real also; absurd.

c.moore appears to be a Satanist not a person who has honest questions about whether or not Jesus ever existed.

Almost all Jews do not question the existance of Jesus, not the miracles he produced, to this day.

Even if Josephus was a chruistian, still doesn't change the fact that he was a Roman Historian, employed by Rome: and that he wrote of the existance of Jesus.

The burden of proof as to whether or not Josephus' writings are real or not rests upon you to disprove the validity of their existance beyond a resonable doubt; which you have not: therefor they must be presumed real.

I met a egyptian muslim who told me that they have in their culture the stories of the exodus of the Jews from their land. As well, she also stated that the plagues, the hardened of their pharaoh, and the parting of the Red Sea are all a part of their culture. This all leads me to ask one question: Why would a people say, a smaller nation then theirs, who where their slaves, gave them an *** whipping if it were not true?

As well. over in Babalon are documents of King Nebuchadnezzar and his protege Danial, to deny these facts you have to say all the historical digs and Museum artifacts are all made up. Now all true historians would not deny these as fact. And if these are true accounts of history, why is it so hard to accept the documented historical facts of the rest of the accounts of history writen in the bible as facts? Is it not only because you who claim to be atheists don't want to acknowledge the existance of God because then their must be accountablity to God? But whether you want to acknowledge the existance of God or not, does not change the fact that you are and will be accountable to him.
 

jjjg

BANNED
Banned
No, the story of the Hindu Gods are not tied to history as Christ was as a human who walked the earth. Hinduism is always changing too.
 
Top