ziffel

I think if you actually studied this subject, instead of just parroting a priest/preacher/Josh McDowell, you'd be surprised to find just how little historical support there is for Jesus, apart from his cult followers.

Christianity and the calendar dating system exist because of the Roman Empire, not because any of the mythical stories in the pages are true.

Overkill

Yeah, but Moses invests. Old Muhammed is into junk bonds, selling naked puts on margin, microcaps, and HYIPS. He's always been a little, how do you say it, financially suicidal.

OldYgg

You know, I once a woman when I was in the South Carolina Air Reserves. She was so adamant about the existence of god based on the calendar. She said 'why do you think there is only one calendar?'

Do you think, that even to your own biblical Christian scholars, that they think this calendar starts on the correct year?

You aren't as bad as that woman, correct? You do know there are other calendars that have existed throughout time. You know that the Christian calendar has had to have many adjustments for it to be in its current form, right?

And you know, that there are many calendars in use througout the world - even in the present?

And you do know... That the days of the week on your glorious calendar are mostly references to previous religion gods, and have nothing to do with Christianity (for the most part), right?

Does the existence of the days of the week referencing previous gods have anything to do with their actual existence? No. Nor does the purported basing of our calendar to when Jesus was alive, when he was born or when he died.

You, who try to teach us, need to learn a little bit, I think. And I really don't mean that in an insulting manner (although I'm sure it sounds it). I mean it as a simple fact. To make a statement that a calendar proves the existence of Jesus is just plain silly, and I'm pretty sure many theists probably feel the same way. After all, if the current calendar in use was proof of anything, then in the time of Jesus the Roman calendars prevalent use would be proof that Romulus and Remus existed! In fact, the creation of the Roman calendar went through a similar process as the current calendar. Basically, in the end you have some guy making it up.

The determination of which calendar we use is based on the primary religion of our society, not the calendar proving the truth of the primary religion of our society.

Using which calendar is in use at present as proof of Jesus is just another variation of circular reasoning.

Old Ygg

gracebkr

I guess arguing recorded history is the new technique. I guess in your world no one could have possibly existed with out seeing them for our own eyes. I guess my grandfather is possibly not real or never existed and is just a fable my family speaks about and I am not really here either. You are right, recorded history is just a bunch of Mumbo Jumbo. Nothing ever happened before us and all those records are fabricated. They are absolutely not proof of existence. So, what in recorded history do you accept as history? Is Julius Caesar one you don't recognize? What about John the Baptist? What about Herod, is he real? King Tut? Who else is false? Or could it possibly be just Jesus Christ?

ziffel

Little less song & dance, a little more evidence please.

For the nth time, if this such an obvious case of historical evidence, PRESENT SOME. Seriously, I dare you. Try to establish the historicity of Christ without using the bible. And moreover, try to establish the miracles and rising from the dead, and all, without using the bible.

Caesar is corroborated immensely by secular historians. Tut's tomb was found. etc.

You are just taking the Jesus story for granted. I admit it's a bit humorous watching your puzzlement that people don't just automatically swallow it.

NeverByte

The likelyhood of any historical figure's existence in inversely proportional to the number of miracles attributed to said historical figure.

sensiblesue

The planets in our solar system are named after gods that never existed? Yeah, right.

OldYgg

Dude, you are making me laugh!!!!

ehhehehehehehe

We are arguing for a historical look at the Jesus figure. There are many documents out there about history, but not all of them are true. We have 1 document purporting the existence of Jesus. How many for the existence of the leaders of Rome at the time? Hundreds.

If Jesus was so important, why exactly is so little documentation available about him compared to the day to day business of Rome?

You start on about recorded history - but the bible doesn't qualify as recorded history. It is a single resource. It does contain some factual information. It contains a lot of mythical information. On the basis of a single document, you cannot prove the existence of Jesus.

Your grandfather is probably well documented:
1) Birth Certificate
2) Possibly or eventually death certificate
3) Social Security records, social security card
4) Records and bills at various establishments
5) Name on deeds of properties (assuming he owned any, which is likely)
6) Voter Registration

Not having these things doesn't mean you don't exist, but what it does mean is that it is hard to say that a person existed for sure.

In jesus' time, there were a lot fewer paper trails and etc. But let me ask you one question.

Jesus, the son of god, was he literate or illiterate?

If illiterate, he isn't exactly the vision of perfection you shine on him.

If literate and he is this caring person, why didn't he write thousands of pages that would be prized by everyone about life, the universe and everything? This possible creature, jesus, would have had far better things to do than die for humanity. Dying the way he did, with the alleged capabilities he had, is just irresponsible.

But, nothing in the bible is actually written by this potentially god-like being. Don't you find that odd?

No one's ever found a Jesus codex with the things he says should be done, signed Jesus, son of god.*

So, have you ever written any documents? Do you have children and care enough for them to have a will stating what you want to have happen in the future? If we are like Jesus' children, isn't it uncaring and callous not to have left a will of what he wanted in the future?

*Of course this is problematic, since he wouldn't have signed it Jesus as this is unlikely to be his real name. More likely Joshua or Jehoshua - one who is god-like. Jesus is simply a greek word for Joshua, since they don't have certain capabilities in their alphabet.

Old Ygg

gracebkr

http://www.issuesetc.org/resource/archives/maier3.htm

This person here lists different archealogical finds, of course I have never touched them, so I guess they might not really exist.

Next to answer your questions, first, I don't think the Romans regarded Jesus as anything but a blasphemer. I don't think they thought he was the Messiah.

Next, Jesus was perfect no matter what, but why wouldn't Jesus write it down, he gave orders to his Disciples to spread the Word. Jesus said, "Blessed are those who believe without seeing, the Kingdom of Heaven is theirs".

I don't find it odd, I think it is a test. Jesus said he would return, there would be another coming. I wouldn't get my will out for my kids if I was going to the store, I would only do it if I knew I would not return.

si1verdrake

From the article, the only evidence for the existence of Jesus himself is in Josephus. Everything else is evidence of other Biblical personages and places. The only conclusion I would draw from that link is that the authors of the New Testament were familiar with the area, and knew of people who would have been involved. Possibly, that there existed a "Jesus" who was tried by Pilate and crucified. Certainly there isn't any evidence for his miracles or divinity.

It would be as if you decided that Scientology was entirely true because you can prove that L Ron Hubbard existed, and some of the things he mentions are true.