on why the bible is a reliable resource

Harry Leggs

Active member
This is why I think Jesus exists in the imagination.
Most everybody believes Jesus existed and was crucified by Pilate. So what are you talking about and do you have anything stronger than opinion? Or are you just another history denying net Jesus myther?

 

bigthinker

Active member
Most everybody believes Jesus existed and was crucified by Pilate. So what are you talking about and do you have anything stronger than opinion?
Excellent question.
First, What "most everybody believes" has no bearing on whether or not a belief is true.
Second, the issue is one of tense. I said "Jesus exists in the imagination. Whether or not a man named Jesus lived 2000 years ago is irrelevant
in the same way that the historical existence of a St. Nick is irrelevant to Santa Claus delivering presents to good little girls and boys today.
I'm not sure what you are talking about regarding opinion. Do you have anything stronger than your opinion?
So far, I have the lack of evidence to the contrary supporting my position... Can you -or do you know of a way to demonstrate that Jesus doesn't exist in the imagination and in fact exists independently of belief?
 

Harry Leggs

Active member
Excellent question.
First, What "most everybody believes" has no bearing on whether or not a belief is true.
It is not a complicated question. I don't know why you guys have so much difficulty answering simple questions without hemming and hawing. So i will assume your answer is no, you do not believe Jesus existed and was crucified by Pilate which makes you a history denier in the same vein as people who do not believe humans have been to the moon and back. Probably have no falsifying evidence from history other than opinion. That is really all i wanted to know.
. Do you have anything stronger than your opinion?
Yes i do. For one we have the gospels which attest to the physical existence of Jesus who was killed by Pilate. There are also an abundance of historians who attest to the existence of Jesus who was crucified by Pilate. That is the common ground. It appears all you have to offer here is ignorance and opinion as it relates to the historicity of Jesus. I vould cite the sources like Bart Ehrmann and on and on but it would do no good. Usually, history deniers like yourself are immune to positive evidence and too lazy or ill-equipped to do their own research on the subject.
So far, I have the lack of evidence to the contrary supporting my position.
No you have ignorance which is different from a lack of evidence for the existence of Jesus who was crucified by Pilate. You also do not present any falsifying evidence from history for your belief in Jesus myth.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
your "facts" apply only to yourself. This is a difference between beliefs and real facts.
Well, atheists are definitely the crew who believes this to be true.


So even by your definition you are arrogant - relying on your own views.
If I did, you'd be right.
By definition of being a follower of the biblical Jesus, you're wrong.
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths.​
7 Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.​
8 It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.​

So, no in fact. I do not depend on my own views. It'd be easy for you to assume that. But you'd be doing that because of your own arrogance.


And yet here you are, relying on yourself.
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths.​
7 Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.​
8 It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.​


There's nothing wrong with thinking for yourself. The difference between you and me is that I don't require the fantasy part and am comfortable thinking for myself.

You obviously think there is. Otherwise you wouldn't have said what you did above.
I think the problem here isn't a matter of thinking for one's self. Rather, it's that you don't want anyone to think differently than you, so you can feel in control, and powerful.

That's why I'm reaching out to people in your situation, shackled by their own fantasies.
Yet you've offered nothing with which I can believe a single word you've stated.
 

SteveB

Well-known member
Which one are you opting for? The man of god in Mark or the alien and self-obsessed figure presented to us in John?
🤣
You're far too myopic.

Jesus is the
Son of Man
Son of God
Son of David
YHVH the Son
The Logos of God
The Good Shepherd of Ezekiel 34
The Prince of Peace of Isaiah 9
The Root of David
The Branch
The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
And the King of kings, and Lord of lords in Revelation 19.
Defense attorney of 1 John 2.
And several other titles assigned to him.
 

bigthinker

Active member
Well, atheists are definitely the crew who believes this to be true.
Its not something I believe.
If I did, you'd be right.
By definition of being a follower of the biblical Jesus, you're wrong.
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths.​
7 Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.​
8 It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.​

So, no in fact. I do not depend on my own views. It'd be easy for you to assume that. But you'd be doing that because of your own arrogance.
Ha ha, yes all of that is YOUR view. YOUR interpretation, YOUR acceptance. YOU are the one who thinks it applies to YOU. Of course its YOUR view. Who else is interpreting it for you?
5 Trust in the LORD with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; 6 In all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths.​
7 Do not be wise in your own eyes; Fear the LORD and depart from evil.​
8 It will be health to your flesh, And strength to your bones.​
You obviously think there is. Otherwise you wouldn't have said what you did above.
I think the problem here isn't a matter of thinking for one's self. Rather, it's that you don't want anyone to think differently than you, so you can feel in control, and powerful.
No, you can think what you want. But lets not pretend that your beliefs about your God apply to anyone else -or that what you believe is true outside of your imagination.
Yet you've offered nothing with which I can believe a single word you've stated.
Try this, demonstrate that your beliefs are true, demonstrate that your God exists outside of your imagination.
Keep in mind that failure or refusal (doesn't matter to me) only supports my position that you will or cannot demonstrate that your God exists outside of your imagination.
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
🤣
You're far too myopic.

Jesus is the
Son of Man
Son of God
Son of David
YHVH the Son
The Logos of God
The Good Shepherd of Ezekiel 34
The Prince of Peace of Isaiah 9
The Root of David
The Branch
The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
And the King of kings, and Lord of lords in Revelation 19.
Defense attorney of 1 John 2.
And several other titles assigned to him.
I asked you which Jesus you were opting for. The figure we are presented with in John's gospel bears no relation to an itinerant Jewish holy man warning his people to repent as the End Times approaches.
 

bigthinker

Active member
🤣
You're far too myopic.

Jesus is the
Son of Man
Son of God
Son of David
YHVH the Son
The Logos of God
The Good Shepherd of Ezekiel 34
The Prince of Peace of Isaiah 9
The Root of David
The Branch
The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.
And the King of kings, and Lord of lords in Revelation 19.
Defense attorney of 1 John 2.
And several other titles assigned to him.
The crying laughing emoji; what is that about?
Is that the spirit of Christ in you?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
My emphasis

History has documented that the ethnarch Archelaus ruled over Samaria, Judaea, and Idumea from 4 BCE after the death of his father Herod the Great. He was deposed in 6 CE by Augustus and Judaea was taken into direct Roman control. Hence the 6 CE census of Quirinius.

As pointed out to another correspondent on this thread . The Matthean account has the family fleeing Herod the Great and residing in Egypt where Joseph is later told by an angel that Herod the Great is dead. However, when Joseph learns that Archelaus is ruling over Judaea Joseph takes his family to Nazareth. That town was in Galilee and was ruled by the tetrach Herod Antipater [aka Antipas] another of Herod the Great's sons.

Hence the Matthean account has the birth of Jesus taking place before the death of Herod the Great in 4 BCE.
and?
 

SteveB

Well-known member
I asked you which Jesus you were opting for. The figure we are presented with in John's gospel bears no relation to an itinerant Jewish holy man warning his people to repent as the End Times approaches.
Just because you can't see, doesn't mean Jesus is who he's defined as in the bible.
As it's written, in both the psalms, and Hebrews--- in the volume of the book, it is written of him.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
I asked you which Jesus you were opting for. The figure we are presented with in John's gospel bears no relation to an itinerant Jewish holy man warning his people to repent as the End Times approaches.
That is your imposition on the text. As such it does not give rise to a legitimate question.
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
It is not a complicated question. I don't know why you guys have so much difficulty answering simple questions without hemming and hawing. So i will assume your answer is no, you do not believe Jesus existed and was crucified by Pilate which makes you a history denier in the same vein as people who do not believe humans have been to the moon and back.

The two events are not synonymous. There is not a single contemporary reference to this man.

I accept that such a man most likely existed, the situation in the region supports the existence such an individual and there were other Jewish Messiahs both before and after Jesus of Nazareth.

However, the fact remains that we have nothing from the first 40 years of the first century to corroborate his existence. Josephus was writing at the end of the first century and was born in 37 CE.
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
That is your imposition on the text. As such it does not give rise to a legitimate question.
The four canonical gospels are not a "text".

They are four disparate and separate texts written at different times, in different places, and for their own separate Christian communities.

Those texts also contain contradictions pertaining to certain events each text recounts and which no believer has so far been able to adequately reconcile, particularly the historical contradictions found between the two birth narratives.

Nor does the Jesus figure we are presented with in John bear any recognisable features with the holy man of God we find in Mark.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
The four canonical gospels are not a "text".

They are four disparate and separate texts written at different times, in different places, and for their own separate Christian communities.

Those texts also contain contradictions pertaining to certain events each text recounts and which no believer has so far been able to adequately reconcile, particularly the historical contradictions found between the two birth narratives.

Nor does the Jesus figure we are presented with in John bear any recognisable features with the holy man of God we find in Mark.
Of course it's a text, it's known as the bible. And your imposition on it, does not impose an obligation to accept your premise.
 

Thistle

Well-known member
The bible as we now have it is a collection of different texts written at different periods and different places in history.

I suppose insofar as the NT is concerned, one might regard it as an anthology.
If you're not aware there is something called the bible, you may be the only person in Western Civilization whose not heard.
 

Harry Leggs

Active member
The two events are not synonymous.
They are synonymous in that history deniers deny both events.
There is not a single contemporary reference to this man.
Got any falsifying evidence for the nonexistence of Jesus? Ever hear of the falsification standard?
I accept that such a man most likely existed,
Existed and crucified by Pilate. How hard can this be? Jesus could not be crucified by Pilate if Jesus did not exist. Do i need to draw a picture with a crayon?
the situation in the region supports the existence such an individual and there were other Jewish Messiahs both before and after Jesus of Nazareth.
That is a straw man. The question was existed and crucified by Pilate. So why are you dragging up messiah and other things not related to the question? Is it a comprehension deficiency? A language barrier?
However, the fact remains that we have nothing from the first 40 years of the first century to corroborate his existence.
Garbage. Straight up disinformation. Not any more valid than opinion.
Josephus was writing at the end of the first century and was born in 37 CE.
Who bought up Josephus? None of what you stipulate has anything to do with historical standards. There is no 40-year limit. This is just another hypatia mystery standard pulled out of the nether regions as if it is anything anyone with an ounce of training should follow.
 
Last edited:

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
If you're not aware there is something called the bible, you may be the only person in Western Civilization whose not heard.
As I have previously mentioned the bible as a collection of different texts from different periods and places in history, how do you arrive at the conclusion that I have not heard of it?:rolleyes:
 

Hypatia_Alexandria

Active member
They are synonymous in that history deniers deny both events.
Not precisely. We have a plethora of information about the moon landings.
Got any falsifying evidence for the nonexistence of Jesus? Ever hear of the falsification standard?
Did you not read what I wrote?
Existed and crucified by Pilate. How hard can this be? Jesus could not be cricifued by Pilate if Jesus did not exist. Do i need to draw a picture with a crayon?
Obviously you did not.
 

Harry Leggs

Active member
Top