For those who think Jesus is a myth...

[M30USA]

I feel pretty convinced that the man coined as "Jesus" probably existed and was a severely delusional/mentally ill individual who happened to have great charisma and public speaking skills.

 

You need to be educated on the fact that there are only 3 explanations for the identity of Jesus (as laid out by C.S. Lewis):

 

1) He was a severely delusional man (as you've said) who mistakenly thought he was the one and only Son of God. The problem with this is that all accounts, both inside the Bible and outside the Bible, suggest that his character was directly opposite from a typical delusional person. He exhibited great compassion, self sacrifice, consistency, and no person (even while on trial) was able to find any fault with him for breaking any law.

 

2) He was intentionally deceptive, or knew he wasn't the Son of God yet tried to trick people into following him anyway. Again, this is inconsistent with all records of his personage as in #1.

 

3) He really was the Son of God. This, admittedly, is a huge assertion and is kind of hard to believe. Yet, it's the only rational choice.

[Gulf-Delta]

1) Jesus was crucified under the order of Ponchus Pilate in ~33 AD, 2) He was buried in a tomb, the owner of which we have record of, 3) The tomb was empty three days later.

 

All of these things have happened to many other deities in many cultures pre-dating Jesus. That is execution, burial, resurrection.

[M30USA]

All of these things have happened to many other deities in many cultures pre-dating Jesus. That is execution, burial, resurrection.

 

Names of "deities" and historical references, please.

 

And I'm not just referring to execution and resurrection. (Even the Bible says that Lazarus was raised from the dead by Jesus and that, in the end times, two witnesses of God will be killed and resurrected.) Jesus didn't just do these things. He also made the claim to be the only begotten Son of God. And his life illustrated it. I think there's a reason why 2000 years later our entire calendar is based on his birth.

Edited June 1, 2012 by M30USA

[Gulf-Delta]

Names of "deities" and historical references, please.

 

And I'm not just referring to execution and resurrection. (Even the Bible says that Lazarus was raised from the dead by Jesus and that, in the end times, two witnesses of God will be killed and resurrected.) Jesus didn't just do these things. He also made the claim to be the only begotten Son of God. And his life illustrated it. I think there's a reason why 2000 years later our entire calendar is based on his birth.

 

Krishna, Horus*, and Attis of Phrigia. There are other similarities such as virgin births (almost everyone), starting minstires at age 30 (Zoroaster), giving sight to the blind (Zoroaster, Horus), proclamation as "King of Kings" and Son of God (Dionosys, and Attis who, btw were both born on Dec. 25)

 

*Horus' life actually mirrors Jesus EXACTLY. Born of a virgin human (named Isis), in a manger, in December, death threats from the king (Herut) at birth, no written history from ages 12-30, baptised at 30, baptist beheaded, claimed to be god's (Osirus in this case) only begotten son, walked on water, restored sight to blind, healed the sick, was crucified at age 33, and resurrected 3 days later.

 

As for our calendar being "based on Jesus' birth", that is inaccurate because most scholars theorize that Jesus was born in the spring, as evidenced by the location of the star, and the shepards in the fields. The Dec. 25 birthday was applied later to make Jesus easier to digest by the Pagans that Constantine was trying to convert.

[M30USA]

Krishna, Horus*, and Attis of Phrigia. There are other similarities such as virgin births (almost everyone), starting minstires at age 30 (Zoroaster), giving sight to the blind (Zoroaster, Horus), proclamation as "King of Kings" and Son of God (Dionosys, and Attis who, btw were both born on Dec. 25)

 

*Horus' life actually mirrors Jesus EXACTLY. Born of a virgin human (named Isis), in a manger, in December, death threats from the king (Herut) at birth, no written history from ages 12-30, baptised at 30, baptist beheaded, claimed to be god's (Osirus in this case) only begotten son, walked on water, restored sight to blind, healed the sick, was crucified at age 33, and resurrected 3 days later.

 

As for our calendar being "based on Jesus' birth", that is inaccurate because most scholars theorize that Jesus was born in the spring, as evidenced by the location of the star, and the shepards in the fields. The Dec. 25 birthday was applied later to make Jesus easier to digest by the Pagans that Constantine was trying to convert.

 

I understand your point. There are also equivalent stories of an ancient flood in all world civilizations. This doesn't prove or disprove anything. If anything, it lends support to the fact that SOMETHING must have happened along those lines. Discovering which account is the real one, and which accounts are distorted images of the original, is the important thing.

 

What are the supporting historical documents of these other professed Sons of God, etc, and who are the historical witnesses to these? The New Testament books which document Jesus' life not only are written by 4 different authors, but also have more corroberating identical manuscipts than any ancient text. For example, the Republic by Plato has about 8 existing identical texts; the documents describing the life of Napolen have about the same amount...but the New Testament has over 2,500 identical manuscripts. There are also texts from outside the Bible supporting the life and events of Jesus' life.

 

Another interesting concept, though highly controversial, is that of virgin births. Most Christians would be shocked to know that Christ was not the only virgin birth. In Genesis 6 we even read that fallen, demonic angels descended from heaven and had offspring through human women. These were called the Nephilim. (I know some will argue this and say that the Nephilim were not the offspring of fallen angels, but I have spend hundreds of hours researching current and ancient texts and this IS the correct interpretation of Genesis 6.) Anyway, it's not the virgin birth that distinguishes Jesus. Even Islam acknowledges his virgin birth. But Jesus was the only begotten of the FATHER, or the MOST HIGH. All these others, while I admit they might have existed, are not sons of the FATHER but rather fallen angels or demons. See? At least I acknowledge it. The Bible tells us these things and doesn't deny them. It's interesting, too, that just like the flood story, every ancient civilization has a similar story of a hybrid race from celestial/divine/angelic beings and human women. Again, which one is the original, and which ones are the distorted myths?

[Gulf-Delta]

I understand your point. There are also equivalent stories of an ancient flood in all world civilizations. This doesn't prove or disprove anything. If anything, it lends support to the fact that SOMETHING must have happened along those lines. Discovering which account is the real one, and which accounts are distorted images of the original, is the important thing.

 

What are the supporting historical documents of these other professed Sons of God, etc, and who are the historical witnesses to these? The New Testament books which document Jesus' life not only are written by 4 different authors, but also have more corroberating identical manuscipts than any ancient text. For example, the Republic by Plato has about 8 existing identical texts; the documents describing the life of Napolen have about the same amount...but the New Testament has over 2,500 identical manuscripts. There are also texts from outside the Bible supporting the life and events of Jesus' life.

 

Another interesting concept, though highly controversial, is that of virgin births. Most Christians would be shocked to know that Christ was not the only virgin birth. In Genesis 6 we even read that fallen, demonic angels descended from heaven and had offspring through human women. These were called the Nephilim. (I know some will argue this and say that the Nephilim were not the offspring of fallen angels, but I have spend hundreds of hours researching current and ancient texts and this IS the correct interpretation of Genesis 6.) Anyway, it's not the virgin birth that distinguishes Jesus. Even Islam acknowledges his virgin birth. But Jesus was the only begotten of the FATHER, or the MOST HIGH. All these others, while I admit they might have existed, are not sons of the FATHER but rather fallen angels or demons. See? At least I acknowledge it. The Bible tells us these things and doesn't deny them. It's interesting, too, that just like the flood story, every ancient civilization has a similar story of a hybrid race from celestial/divine/angelic beings and human women. Again, which one is the original, and which ones are the distorted myths?

 

The ones that came first are the original, of course.

[M30USA]

The ones that came first are the original, of course.

 

And you're saying that in reference to what: virgin birth or the flood?

 

If you're talking about virgin births, then yes, virgin births took place BEFORE Christ in the form of demonic angels siring children through human women. Wasn't exactly a good thing. These were the "seed of Satan" according to the Bible. These probably explain the partial truth behind myths such as Hercules, the Titans, etc.

 

If you're talking about the flood, this is where we encounter a problem. According to biblical chronology the flood occured 1656 years after the creation of Adam. This would coincide with the secular calendar to roughly the date 2300 BC. As much as you might claim that these non-biblicial flood stories pre-dated that time, you need to realize that, while the book of Genesis (which documents the flood story) was written later than this date, it's referring to the event which happened much earlier. So you cannot equate the date a document was written and the date which the said event described in the document actually happened. The Bible says that only 1656 years elapsted from the creation of Adam to the great flood. I doubt all these other flood story equivalents could have occured during that brief time.

 

Cheers.

[Gulf-Delta]

And you're saying that in reference to what: virgin birth or the flood?

 

If you're talking about virgin births, then yes, virgin births took place BEFORE Christ in the form of demonic angels siring children through human women. Wasn't exactly a good thing. These were the "seed of Satan" according to the Bible. These probably explain the partial truth behind myths such as Hercules, the Titans, etc.

 

If you're talking about the flood, this is where we encounter a problem. According to biblical chronology the flood occured 1656 years after the creation of Adam. This would coincide with the secular calendar to roughly the date 2300 BC. As much as you might claim that these non-biblicial flood stories pre-dated that time, you need to realize that, while the book of Genesis (which documents the flood story) was written later than this date, it's referring to the event which happened much earlier. So you cannot equate the date a document was written and the date which the said event described in the document actually happened. The Bible says that only 1656 years elapsted from the creation of Adam to the great flood. I doubt all these other flood story equivalents could have occured during that brief time.

 

Cheers.

 

I'm talking about the myths. The flood for example.

 

The reason every culture on earth has a flood myth is because all of the ancient cultures formed or resided near a huge body of water, be it the mediterranian sea, the Yangtze River, the Amazon, Nile, Tigris, Euphrates. It only makes sense that cultures would have myths about floods. Of course, when these rivers flooded everything they knew, their "world", was flooded.

 

Thinking the ENTIRE world literally flooded isn't very...bright, I'll say. There isn't even enough water in the world, to cover it. If you took all of the atmosphere, ice and water from every location on earth, it still wouldn't be enough.

 

As for virgin births....that doesn't happen in mammals. It is fairly well established that an egg needs sperm to make a baby.

[M30USA]

Thinking the ENTIRE world literally flooded isn't very...bright, I'll say. There isn't even enough water in the world, to cover it. If you took all of the atmosphere, ice and water from every location on earth, it still wouldn't be enough.

 

As for virgin births....that doesn't happen in mammals. It is fairly well established that an egg needs sperm to make a baby.

 

You might want to look into the research of engineers and hydraulics experts with PhDs who have concluded that the earth does contain enough water to cover all land by a considerable depth. It would require much displacement. The argument against the flood is not whether there is enough water on the earth, but whether or not it could have been displaced in such a way. (There is a pretty famous book on this subject by one of these PhD educated engineers. I will try to find the title again.)

 

As for virgin births, are you aware of the following facts:

 

1) According to secular history the Neanderthals coexisted with humans, yet we do not know WHERE they came from nor WHY the vanished. That's just the truth. They were genetically distinct from humans, yet could interbreed with us. It's interesting to point out that Neanderthals share MANY similarites with the Nephilim of the Bible (or the half-human and half-fallen angel hybrids). The only difference is that secular history places them at a far earlier time. Just something you might want to consider because, if the Neanderthals of history WERE the Nephilim of the Bible, then part of our distant past was greatly influenced by the real event of a virgin (albeit demonic) birth. I am not the only one who has drawn this parallel. Many biblical scholars have suggested this.

 

2) Dr. John Mack, former head of Psychiatry at Harvard University, has studied the UFO abduction phenomenon and concluded that, aside from being real, the following things virtually always transpire during an abduction: a) experimentation on sexual organs of victims or sometimes even sexual intercourse between victim and alien, and b) creation of hybrid beings who are half-human, half-alien and even presented to the victims. For the record, there are many well-credentialed researchers who have determined that UFO abductions are real and that these very things DO transpire. So if that's the case, we are experiencing during modern times the equivalent of "virgin" births, at least births that are not fathered by humans as we know them.

[M30USA]

You need to be educated on the fact that the "Lord/Liar/Lunatic" dichotomy is not a serious argument. The most obvious objection is that all 3 options rely on the writings being an accurate and trustworthy account of what happened.

 

It also fails to take into account similar accounts of other religious figures. The "Lord/Liar/Lunatic" argumetn would result in quite a lot of Lords out there, yet you would only accept one of them. Ask yourself why you reject the others, and you will see the shortcomings of quoting CS Lewis in this day and age.

 

The Gospel of Mark was written at the latest in 60 AD, and most likely around 50 AD. This has been historically verified. Additionally, the New Testament has a total of 2500 manuscript witnesses. A manuscript witness is an alternate copy dated from the same time which is identical. Furthermore, when these 2500 manuscript witnesses are compared to today's copies, there are also identical. Only in a few small areas have verses been omitted, bur never added.

 

That closes the door on your argument against Lord, liar, or lunatic. Please read the research of either Josh McDowell or Paul Little for more support of biblical reliability.

[M30USA]

I had to take issue with this.

 

Anyone with a serious interest in the truth would do the exact opposite of this. Craig is a mediocre academic with a long history of dishonesty with delusions of grandeur.

 

He also justified the killing of children and babies in the genocides described in the Old Testament by saying that those children were "recipients of an infinite good".

 

He is a disgusting human being.

 

Do you know why God ordered the genocide of certain Canaanite nations in the Bible? You have probably not heard the truth. The truth is that these nations were plagued with Nephilim. The Nephilim were genetic offspring of demonic angels. Their goal was to populate the earth, destroy Israel, and therefore eliminate the possibility of Jesus, your only hope of salvation, from ever being born--since he had to be of the "seed of Eve". So the people who God ordered to be killed were not even human as you and I are. They may have appeared human but they were literally the "seed of the serpent" on earth. This may sound hard to believe, but it must be understood, otherwise God would appear as a merciless dictator.

[M30USA]

I'm really looking forward to this. In the meantime, it doesn't really matter if there was or not enough water to cover the earth because the notion of a global flood is outrageous for so many reasons.

 

I didn't see any credentials next to that authors name, therefore I cannot trust his sources and conclusions. He wouldn't be heard in an academic setting. Please give another author and I will entertain you.

[M30USA]

You're right, it is very hard to believe. The reason for this is, I suspect, because it is utter bilge. I really don't have much time for people who just make things up.

 

"Because it is sometimes so unbelievable, the truth often escapes being known."

-Heraclitus, ancient philosopher

 

People also are saying that UFOs and alien abductions are rubbish and fantasy, yet it's going on as we speak all over the world, intentionally in secret due to these aliens' deceptive motives, and only a select percentage of people are honest enough to suspend their own disbelief and investigate the evidence. Dr. John Mack of Harvard was one brave soul. God bless him.

 

One of the reasons Isaac Newton was the greatest scientist of all time is because he was willing to investiage anything, as strange as it seemed, until he got proof. People laughed at him for believing in alchemy, yet his very curiousity is what lead to all his other discoveries. Did you know he said that the Bible could not have originated in man's mind, and that it must have been revealed to men's minds from an outside source? He also believed in the prophies. In fact, he predicted that Christ would return no earlier than 2060.

 

So do you all think Newton was ignorant?

Edited June 2, 2012 by M30USA

[TaraMaiden]

That's a very good way of shifting from answering the argument by opening up another one....

Neatly side-stepped, M30USA, nicely done, I'll give you that....

[M30USA]

That's a very good way of shifting from answering the argument by opening up another one....

Neatly side-stepped, M30USA, nicely done, I'll give you that....

 

?

 

Lady, there are about 20 different arguments going on here, in case you haven't been reading.

 

Which specific one shall I address for your highness?

[TaraMaiden]

Oh no, don't mind me, I'm just watching the hog roast....this is more than enough fun without my adding to the mix.

Carry on guys, it's great to have a distraction from all this hokum 4-day bank-holiday weekend we've been forced to endure....

[Gulf-Delta]

 

1) According to secular history the Neanderthals coexisted with humans, yet we do not know WHERE they came from nor WHY the vanished. That's just the truth. They were genetically distinct from humans, yet could interbreed with us. It's interesting to point out that Neanderthals share MANY similarites with the Nephilim of the Bible (or the half-human and half-fallen angel hybrids). The only difference is that secular history places them at a far earlier time. Just something you might want to consider because, if the Neanderthals of history WERE the Nephilim of the Bible, then part of our distant past was greatly influenced by the real event of a virgin (albeit demonic) birth. I am not the only one who has drawn this parallel. Many biblical scholars have suggested this.

 

2) Dr. John Mack, former head of Psychiatry at Harvard University, has studied the UFO abduction phenomenon and concluded that, aside from being real, the following things virtually always transpire during an abduction: a) experimentation on sexual organs of victims or sometimes even sexual intercourse between victim and alien, and b) creation of hybrid beings who are half-human, half-alien and even presented to the victims. For the record, there are many well-credentialed researchers who have determined that UFO abductions are real and that these very things DO transpire. So if that's the case, we are experiencing during modern times the equivalent of "virgin" births, at least births that are not fathered by humans as we know them.

 

1) Actually they know why the Neanderthal died out. They were much larger in muscle mass and brain size. Because of the ice age, there was not enough protein (animals) to sustain this physiology. Homo Sapiens however, were small enough to get by on less food.

 

2) No, alien abductions do not happen.

[wuggle]

Oh no, don't mind me, I'm just watching the hog roast....this is more than enough fun without my adding to the mix.

Carry on guys, it's great to have a distraction from all this hokum 4-day bank-holiday weekend we've been forced to endure....

 

Ditto, this guys a hoot :lmao:

[M30USA]

1) Actually they know why the Neanderthal died out. They were much larger in muscle mass and brain size. Because of the ice age, there was not enough protein (animals) to sustain this physiology. Homo Sapiens however, were small enough to get by on less food.

 

2) No, alien abductions do not happen.

 

Buddie, this is where I make my departure. All you are doing is sitting there saying, "The sky is not blue, the sky is not blue..."

 

Firstly, secular scientists do NOT know why Neanderhals died out. There are only theories. These include environmental conditions being unsuitable for them, sudden geological disaster, and genocide by homo sapiens. Neither has been proven.

 

Secondly, regarding alien abductions: apparently you are more knowledgeable on this subject that Manhattan Institute of Technology (MIT), the leading tech university in the world, because they have conducted conferences on the subject of alien abductions since the evidence, while bizarre, has proven to be consistent and demands an explanation. Are you smarter than MIT? Additionaly, are you smarter than Dr. John Mack, head of Psychiatry at Harvard, and Pulitzer-prize winning author? Because he has said the reality of alien abduction experience cannot be argued. All you can argue, he says, is how to interpret what is, in fact, happening.

 

Cheers.

[Nohbody]

Now talk about Reptilians!

[TaraMaiden]

Firstly, secular scientists do NOT know why Neanderhals died out. There are only theories.

But isn't that also your problem?

That the bible is only theory?

there isn't one single thing mentioned in the bible that has irrevocably been shown to be fact.

It's just one long-winded supposition.....

[Nohbody]

So does anyone actually understand what a theory is, and how it is different than say... a hypothesis? Just curious.

[TaraMaiden]

that's a good point.

The two may at times be interchangeable, but strictly speaking, a theory predicts events in general terms, while a hypothesis makes a specific prediction about a specified set of circumstances.

 

A theory has been extensively tested and is generally accepted, while a hypothesis is a speculative guess that has yet to be tested.

 

So perhaps I used the wrong term.

 

 

It wouldn't be the first time....

[Nohbody]

I was directing that generally, you just reminded me. I kind of figured you knew the difference already

[TaraMaiden]

I did, but I also double-checked.

I think it's important to mention that I did in fact double check.

 

I didn't want people to have the false impression of me, but putting myself forward as infallible, when in fact the burden of proof of being 100% reliable, rested on my shoulders.

i think if I put myself forward as an erudite and knowledgeable source of information, I should prove I am...

 

Hang on, I have an odd sense of deja-vu....