You're all over the place here. I'll deal with the history part of âwho do I think wrote itâ.
Why, the victors of course.
PS; this was in reply to rcanfiel.
Why, the victors of course.
PS; this was in reply to rcanfiel.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
POLL: Who is Jesus to You?
- Thread starter rcanfiel
- Start date
Quote from Cache Landing:
To my knowledge we don't have any original prose from Alexander the Great. Rather we have a bunch of writings about him which paint very conflicting views of who he was, written years after the fact. To this day there aren't any firsthand accounts of him, yet his existence is said to be undeniable. OTOH, there is far more secular evidence to Jesus' existence, yet some people (although very few in the world of legitimate scholars) still choose to believe him as a mythical figure.
As the story of Jesus predates the KJ version of Jesus by some thousands of years, is it any wonder some people might believe some plagiarism had a heavy hand with the newer version?
Quote from chuck.ells:
You're all over the place here. I'll deal with the history part of âwho do I think wrote itâ.
Why, the victors of course.
It's a simple fact that a great many widely acclaimed biblical historians aren't Christian. While many seek to prove the validity of biblical texts, others try to disprove the stated occurrences. In both cases they almost unanimously agree that the man called Jesus of Nazareth did in fact exist.
Quote from chuck.ells:
As the story of Jesus predates the KJ version of Jesus by some thousands of years, is it any wonder some people might believe some plagiarism had a heavy hand with the newer version?
I don't blame anyone for being skeptical. As I've made abundantly clear here, I don't accept 100% of what others here claim about Jesus either, but that doesn't change the fact that he existed.
Christians would respond to your above statement by saying, of course the story of Jesus predates his birth by thousands of years. He was the one promised to come for many generations. But we aren't talking about the different versions of Jesus here. We are talking about the historical existence of a man named Jesus of Nazareth.
Quote from Cache Landing:
But we aren't talking about the different versions of Jesus here. We are talking about the historical existence of a man named Jesus of Nazareth.
Does that mean a man, any man born at that time with the name Jesus of Nazareth? Or a special man who was of the same name but the product of a virgin birth?
If the first, I'll concede. Most likely its true.
If the second, It can only be a plagiarized âfictionalâstory from a non jewish source.
BTW, did you see my âPSâ on one of my previous replies?
Quote from chuck.ells:
You're all over the place here. I'll deal with the history part of âwho do I think wrote itâ.
Why, the victors of course.
PS; this was in reply to rcanfiel.
The victors? Well, Rome fell, Judaism numbers less than 20 million, and surprise surprise, we see. Obviously, Jesus seemed to have had a little more impact than you did:
Christianity: 2.1 billion
Islam: 1.5 billion
Secular/Nonreligious/Agnostic/Atheist: 1.1 billion
Hinduism: 900 million
Chinese traditional religion: 394 million
Buddhism: 376 million
primal-indigenous: 300 million
African Traditional & Diasporic: 100 million
Sikhism: 23 million
Juche: 19 million
Spiritism: 15 million
Judaism: 14 million
Baha'i: 7 million
Jainism: 4.2 million
Shinto: 4 million
Quote from chuck.ells:
Does that mean a man, any man born at that time with the name Jesus of Nazareth? Or a special man who was of the same name but the product of a virgin birth?
If the first, I'll concede. Most likely its true.
If the second, It can only be a plagiarized âfictionalâstory from a non jewish source.
BTW, did you see my âPSâ on one of my previous replies?
No, I didn't see the P.S. until I'd responded already.
Anyway, I'm not referring to any man born during that time, but I'm not implying a virgin birth either. I'm saying a specific man called Jesus of Nazareth who's life resulted in what we now call Christianity. Whether he was the product of a virgin birth isn't the topic of this thread. It seems to me that this thread is focussed only on other's opinions as to who that particular man actually was. The idea of his existence is so well confirmed as to almost be undeniable.
Quote from chuck.ells:
As the story of Jesus predates the KJ version of Jesus by some thousands of years, is it any wonder some people might believe some plagiarism had a heavy hand with the newer version?
seems like there are a few thousand existing fragments and copies of the New Testament in greek from the first and second century AD.
Why do you like to look like an uneducated ape? Nothing you said so far is anything other than sheer unsupported fantasies.
Unless you would like to start naming sources.
Quote from chuck.ells:
Show me the bones
My dog ate them. jk
They disappeared as I rose up into the air on that day they call the "ascension".
I did not take them with me.
They disappeared, just as this entire universe will eventually disappear.
Why is that?
Because a body exists purely on faith. And so does this world.
Made and maintained by faith, if you withdraw faith from the body - poof!- it disappears at will.
Eventually, all faith will be withdrawn from this universe, when it is seen for the fiction that it is.
Entirely fiction, my existence in it is not more real than the fiction itself.
My role in the fiction points to the truth.
Bodies are 100% mind-generated fictions held solid by pure, USDA Grade A...faith.
I did not believe in my own supposed body. And everything I did was to release myself from it's imprisonment.
So now it is gone, and good riddance. From nothing it came, to nothing it returned.
Jesus