What is the historical evidence that Jesus Christ lived and died?

studentofthemeercats said:
I'm sure you'll try to find a way to dismiss this passage from being evidence, because you don't want to face up to the implications it's truth will have on your life.
More...

I'm someone who believes Jesus was a historical figure, as real, or unreal, as any other human being. As an excellent teacher, i believe he volunteered to be arrested by Pontius Pilate, and used as a tool for terrorism through execution by crucifixion at the gates of Jerusalem during high traffic of a holy day. I believe Jesus' own purpose was to demonstrate, to his group of followers, fearlessness in the face of potential pain, because, by following his way, they too had nothing to fear, because pain is surmountable through healthy psychology, particularly the psychology of authentic identity. Good does not feel pain, period.

So i'm admitting he was crucified, but am on your ignore list because of my interpretation of the events. You say he felt pain. I say he did not. You say a Jewish prophet predicted a crucifixion with past tense language. I say that it did not predict the crucifixion of Jesus, and that it's vagueness was abused by Jews who were trying to make Jesus out to be the legendary liturgical messiah, which he was not. You make excuses for, or otherwise dismiss, the fact that most every other prediction associated with some sort of piercing, which could also be interpreted as an insult (blasphemy), has not come to pass. Nor has Jesus' "return" come to pass as you wish.

Implications of what truth?

If he felt pain, that has implications.

If he did not feel pain, that too has implications.

One of these is "true", so to speak. They cannot both be true. By ignoring me, you are dismissing the implications associated with the fact that he did not feel any pain.

Why?

It's because you are interested in using Jesus' teachings about overcoming things like pain and death (if you can overcome death you can sure as hell overcome pain) for similar purposes to Pontius Pilate: to use the occasion to terrorize the populace, to make people more governable under your brand of priest craft.

I, on the other hand, am freeing minds to think outside that box, and follow his teachings for completely different purposes than yours.

You are always trying to make Good out to be a man. By doing so, you wish to elevate your own position as a man, preserve it, sanctify it, and ultimately save it for perpetual existence. So you conveniently dismiss the fact that you cannot pierce Good with any weaponized object. It's arrogant, even blasphasmic, to think that you, a man, can actually harm what is Good.

It's an insult to conflate Good and man, especially a man that can be harmed. But this is not your own unique sin, but is the sin of all men, who do indeed conflate themselves with Good. You simply want to maintain that status quo.

You are refusing to cooperate with Jesus' example of making clear distinctions between Good, and the human experience. For example, "Why do you call me Good?" . And yet, seen as who/what he truly was, he was Good. But no human eyeballs will ever see that. And as long as you continue to invest in the sacred existence (eyeballs are not really sacred) of two-legged animals and their eyeballs, you will not see Good by any means, under any name, let alone Christ.
 
Getting back on topic, how would you, or could you, prove the historicity of anyone in that day and age? How can anyone prove the historicity of Siddhārtha Gautama? 99.9% of all mankind that may have been historical in those days, cannot be proven to have been historical.

It could be that Jesus' own historicity is not any more important than 99.99% of everyone else. It could also be that no persons historicity can be proven, or that even historicity itself is not ultimately provable to have existed, relative to the existence of Christ.

I feel the best historical evidence is that there was a dispute about what he said, and meant, versus whether or not he existed. If his persona was posited by instigators attempting to forward a story, you would likely not have so many disputes about various aspects of the story, disputing everything except his historicity. The disputes then were as thick as they are now. He was controversial, even amongst his followers. This is corroborated by the relative existence of a the subsequently buried Gospel of Thomas.

Also, the historicity might be tenacious because of ongoing personal experiences as a result of calling on the name of Jesus. For example, when i was 20, after calling on the name for help, i had an experience of knowing that this was not my home. It was not the experience of knowing that Jesus was a historical figure, rather, it was the same kind of experience Jesus would have had, which told him that his home was not of this world. I felt i could relate to where he was coming from, as if he and i came from the same place, and whose proverbial home was also the same place/condition. I conclude that Jesus was historical because as a historical figure myself, i too had a taste of the same kind of revelations he must have tasted, in order to have become such an influential force down through history. I have only had a small taste. With a little more knowledge, anyone can become as notable as was Jesus, as the mental strength of knowledge has influence on weaker minds filled with faith. I associate the name of Jesus with such mental strength (knowledge), and so, conclude he was as historical as anyone else, with the caveat that not one human being actually exists any more than a unicorn or elf. These are experiences due to faith, which is originally a "sin".
 
Last edited:
Good1 said: "So i'm admitting he was crucified, but am on your ignore list because of my interpretation of the events."

No. You are on my ignore list primarily because I felt you were rude to keep posting your stuff onto my threads after I clearly asked you to stop. When the behavior continued, I made it clear that I would open a new thread for a discussion, in the hope that you would stay off of my other threads. You did not. You posted again on one of my threads (the one for Christian songs) with the intent of pushing your beliefs onto that thread.

The second reason you are on my ignore list is because I don't feel like we have much to discuss. I strictly believe what the Bible says, and have solid reasons to back up why I believe the Bible to be truthful. As I pointed out at the end of the Discussion thread, 2 Peter 2:1 says,

Now there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies...​

Your belief system is not in agreement with the teachings of the Bible. It contradicts the Bible. I do not wish to discuss your beliefs with you.
​
 
studentofthemarkets said:
Good1 said: "So i'm admitting he was crucified, but am on your ignore list because of my interpretation of the events."

No. You are on my ignore list primarily because I felt you were rude to keep posting your stuff onto my threads after I clearly asked you to stop. When the behavior continued, I made it clear that I would open a new thread for a discussion, in the hope that you would stay off of my other threads. You did not. You posted again on one of my threads (the one for Christian songs) with the intent of pushing your beliefs onto that thread.

The second reason you are on my ignore list is because I don't feel like we have much to discuss. I strictly believe what the Bible says, and have solid reasons to back up why I believe the Bible to be truthful. As I pointed out at the end of the Discussion thread, 2 Peter 2:1 says,

Now there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies...​

Your belief system is not in agreement with the teachings of the Bible. It contradicts the Bible. I do not wish to discuss your beliefs with you.
​
More...

Be honest. I'm on your ignore list because of my interpretation of the events. You just wish to dismiss the interpretations, so much so, that you cannot bear to see them broadcast within threads that you consider to be belonging to you. Not just "your" threads, but within any other thread. My broadcasts, within your threads, respected the headlines as much as possible, tailoring my broadcasts as best as possible to contain something pertinent to the title. I respect headlines, not so much because of thread ownership, but to cooperate with making information relevant, and easier to find.

In your song thread, for example, which was a sneaky way of evangelizing for your interpretations, i posted music that i liked, that was related to the title, and offered an interpretation of the lyrics. In one case, "The Messiah Will Come Again", had no lyrics, mainly electric guitar, so i supplied the meaning the musician was probably trying to convey. This really upset you, that is, my interpretation.

As was covered in feedback, you can't expect to own a thread, and especially in this subject matter, cannot expect not to get any push back.

Regarding discussions, i would be happy to discuss my interpretations of the main events, for $60 an hour, so that you don't forget that my interpretations represent psycho-therapy, which is what Jesus offered.

The main historical events were: teaching (mainly with parables) , crucifixion (parable of man's existence, and what it does, in theory, to the True Self/Christ, and demonstration of mastery over pain), walking out of a tomb (parable of destiny of a dead Christ), appearing and disappearing (demonstrating the cartoonish, unreal nature of the human body), final disappearance (parable of destiny of mankind).

You ignore the right interpretations because they don't give you the kind of salvation you are wishing for. The idea that it is "rude" to educate you otherwise is somewhat arrogant, and won't pass for your primary motive: to shut me down while expanding your influence here.
 
Last edited:
studentofthemarkets said:
But there is such a thing as "Prophetic Perfect Tense"

According to Wikipedia:
More...

According to Wikipedia,
“Users should be aware that not all articles are of encyclopedic quality from the start: they may contain false or debatable information.”

Apart from that, Old Testament (so called) prophets could not use a prophetic perfect tense. No one can. That's because there's no such thing. It's fake and like most things to do with religion, an absurdity.

Prophetic
A foretelling of events

Perfect Tense
Class for events that have already happened or been completed

"Prophetic Perfect Tense "
The impossibility of foretelling events that have already happened or been completed. Makes no sense. No one is foretelling or prophesying events that have already happened.​

Wiki-not all articles are of encyclopedic quality-pedia...
"[Prophetic perfect tense ] To speak of something which will happen in the future in the language of the past"
Translation: To pull the wool over the eyes of those credulous enough to think that actually means anything.

It's like the Old Testament foretold that imaginary God said to imaginary Isaiah on Monday that Friday was coming. Then a long time later, some Christian writers turn up, latch onto the Isaiah prophesy that Friday is coming, and use it to spin a different tale to claim the prophesied Friday must be the New Testament's Friday.
Isaiah should file suit.

Maybe take another look at your link . According to Wikipedia, prophetic perfect tense is in Categories: Figures of speech and Biblical exegesis
Figures of speech as in, the non-literal use of words that don't mean what they mean.
Biblical exegesis, as in Biblical explanations, which invariably include extraordinary high proportions of hogwash.

In religious circles the preposterous is readily accepted as believable. Religious apologetics like yourself are forever looking for ways to understand and present things in ways other than what they truly are.
Prophetic perfect tense is, I should say, a perfect example of that.


ps dude seriously... elephant in the room time here... Good1 on ignore now as well as myself , who you take off ignore to read our posts to put us back on ignore again.o_O How is that not you being more than not a bit weird

Here's a tip. Leave the ignore button on and step away from the computer. That way your thinking can stay in the dark ages undisturbed.
Hope that helps.
 
Last edited:
Stu said: Old Testament (so called) prophets could not use a prophetic perfect tense. No one can. That's because there's no such thing.​

I provided you with evidence that proves the Bible did foretell events.
Your argument boils down to this (my rewording of what you believe):

God does not exist. Therefore, there is no evidence that God exists.​

However, I have shown you evidence that God does exist. The Scriptures, written hundreds of years before Jesus came, described Jeus. This is evidence.

The Old Testament portrays the Messiah as both One who would suffer to make atonement for sins, as well as to rule for eternity. The Jews that believe their Messiah is yet to come, as a King, have that in common with Christians...Christians (at least the ones that hold to a literal interpretation of the Bible) also believe that their Messiah will come and physically reign on this earth, until the end of the earth, and then His kingdom will continue for an eternity in heaven.

Here are Old Testament verses describing the expected Messiah:


"So the Lord God said to the serpent....'He shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise His heel." Genesis 3:15​

Moses said, "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren." Deuteronomy 18:15. Compare this verse to one just a few chapters later:​

But since then there has not arisen in Israel a prophet like Moses, whom the Lord knew face to face." Deuteronomy 34:10
​
Jesus does fulfill this prophecy, because Jesus is the "Word" spoken of here, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John 1:1

And: "No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known." John 1:18


Your house and kingdom will endure forever before Me, and your throne will be established forever. 2 Samuel 7:16 BSB
"The LORD has said to ME, You are My Son, Today I have begotten You." Psalm 2:7 (Note: this word can mean "bringing forth" and a New Testament verse links this to Jesus being "brought forth" at His resurrection from the dead:
The Hebrew for “begotten” is yalad and the lexical meaning is “to bear, beget, or bring forth.” The three New Testament passages help us understand how it should be understood in Psalm 2. For example, in Acts 13:30-34 we read,

But God raised Him from the dead; and for many days He appeared to those who came up with Him from Galilee to Jerusalem, the very ones who are now His witnesses to the people. And we preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is also written in the second Psalm, “YOU ARE MY SON; TODAY I HAVE BEGOTTEN YOU”” As for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no longer to return to decay, He has spoken in this way: “I WILL GIVE YOU THE HOLY and SURE blessings OF DAVID.”

Here we discover that Psalm 2:7 was a prophecy that Jesus would return to life. That is, He would be resurrected. He was “begotten” or was “brought forth” (notice that is an acceptable meaning of the Hebrew word) from the grave. https://www.neverthirsty.org/bible-qa/qa-archives/question/what-does-begotten-mean-in-psalms-27/
​
(Finishing Psalm 2:7-9)
"The LORD has said to Me, You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.
Ask of Me, and I will give you
The nations for Your inheritance,
And the ends of the earth for your possession.
You shall break them with a rod of iron;
You shall dash them to pieces like a potter's vessel. Psalm 2:7-9
But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, who are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come forth for Me One to be ruler over Israel—One whose origins are of old, from the days of eternity. Micah 5:2​
Above were a few verses to describe the Everlasting King the Old Testament talks about. The physical reign of Jesus is yet to come.

Below are verses that describe the Coming One as One who would suffer. Some passages describe it as a suffering for the purpose of being a substitute for our sins, suffering in our place.


Then I will pour out on the house of David and on the people of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and prayer, and they will look on Me, the One they have pierced. They will mourn for Him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for Him as one grieves for a firstborn son. Zechariah 12:10 BSB​
Note, to look upon God, the One they have pierced, has the result in the verses following, of CLEANSING FROM SIN!!!

On that day a fountain will be opened to the house of David and the people of Jerusalem, to cleanse them from sin and impurity. Zechariah 13:1 BSB​

Other verses, from other writers also talk about being pierced:

Jesus quoted from Psalm 22 when He said, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"

A little later in this Psalm, written by King David, there is a description that fits perfectly with what happened to Jesus on the cross:

Dogs surround me,
a pack of villains encircles me;
they pierce my hands and my feet.
All my bones are on display;
people stare and gloat over me.
They divide my clothes among them
and cast lots for my garment.​

And from our favorite discussion chapter: Isaiah 53

But He was pierced for our transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon Him, and by His stripes we are healed. Isaiah 53:5​

​
Jesus didn't just fulfill prophecies, however. What Jesus was going to do, by being a Subsitute for sinners, for reconciling them to God through His shed blood, was a fulfillment of the following:

1. The need for animal sacrifices as a picture of cleansing from sin. "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you to make atonement for your souls upon the altar; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul." Leviticus 17:11 (Old Testament verse)

Hebrews 9:22 BSB (New Testament verse) says, "According to the law, in fact, nearly everything must be purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness."

"For if the blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that their bodies are clean, how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself unblemished to God, purify our consciences from works of death, so that we may serve the living God!" Hebrews 9:13,14 BSB

2. The bronze serpent being put up on a pole so that whoever would look at that serpent would be healed from the serpent's bite, was a picture to us, given over a thousand years before Jesus time, of those who would look to Jesus, having been lifted up on the cross, to be delivered from the Serpent in the Garden (Satan's) bite of sin. (HOW DOES ALL THAT FIT TOGETHER, AND COME TO PASS TO BE FULFILLED IN JESUS' UNLESS GOD HIMSELF BROUGHT IT ABOUT?????)

3. The Passover gives us the picture of God passing over and delivering from judgment, those protected by the lamb's blood in the story, and by Jesus blood in the fulfillment.

​
 
Last edited:
I know that was a lot of passages I just posted. The point was to provide evidence that the Old Testament clearly describes a Messiah who would reign forever and suffer for the sins of others, in a sacrificial manner, shedding His blood for the forgiveness of sins.

That these things were written beforehand provides solid evidence to God's existence and the reliability of the Scriptures.

God declares the end.....from the beginning.
 
studentofthemarkets said:
I know that was a lot of passages I just posted.
More...

That's all you do. Throw loads of Bible text at everything. Even stuff that has nothing to do with what's being discussed.

All you're saying is the Bible is prophesying because the Bible says it prophesying . Even now you don't seem to even understand the sheer futility of that ridiculous idea.

I'll hand it to you though. You have shown very well how little credibility religion has for reasoning. So kudos for that at least.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top