Do you believe Jesus?

[kjw47]

Back in Jesus day--they filled their hearts with hatred for the truths Jesus brought, enough to murder--Jesus, apostles then the followers. Jesus taught if one was to be his follower, they were to be no part of this world, as well they would be hated for it--so they are obviously much different. And even their own family members would become their enemies( spiritually)

A single teaching from Jesus proves who is who, and who Jesus is with.

He taught--- Blessed are the meek, for they( great multitude) will inherit the EARTH.

If one is being taught--heaven or hell as ones end--these religions are throwing Jesus truth away to teach that--that is 99% claiming to be Christian religions---Jesus only started 1. Its easy to see who believes Jesus--the ones who are hated as Jesus said they would be. The ones who are different.

 

[JoeB131]

Jesus is a myth.

 

[gtopa1]

Jesus is a myth.

You are mything the point!!

Greg

 

[AmericanFirst]

Jesus is a myth.

Wrong, as usual.

 

[Mr. H.]

I don't think Jesus is a myth, but he was probably tripping his ass off to come up with half a bible worth of ramblings.

 

[JoeB131]

Jesus is a myth.

Wrong, as usual.

So tell me, when was Jesus born?

Was he born before the death of Herod the Great, or during the governorship of Cyrenneus?

Because there's a ten year gap in those events.

How is it that we are sure that King Arthur and Robin Hood were myths, but we are damned certain Jesus was real?

 

[Meriweather]

Jesus is a myth.

Wrong, as usual.

So tell me, when was Jesus born?

Was he born before the death of Herod the Great, or during the governorship of Cyrenneus?

Because there's a ten year gap in those events.

In those times calendars were hit and miss. Instead of identifying a month, day, and year as we do today, time was referenced by events people were familiar with--such as, "Back in the times of Herod and Cyrenneus..."

That does not seem a very precise way to gauge time to us, but it provided the people of the day a time frame they understood.

 

[irosie91]

Jesus is a myth.

Wrong, as usual.

So tell me, when was Jesus born?

Was he born before the death of Herod the Great, or during the governorship of Cyrenneus?

Because there's a ten year gap in those events.

In those times calendars were hit and miss. Instead of identifying a month, day, and year as we do today, time was referenced by events people were familiar with--such as, "Back in the times of Herod and Cyrenneus..."

That does not seem a very precise way to gauge time to us, but it provided the people of the day a time frame they understood.

In what times and where was there no calendar? You are
correct in saying that people -----the general population ---
was not heavy into dates and tended to refer to events---
especially if they were illiterates

 

[Meriweather]

In what times and where was there no calendar? You are
correct in saying that people -----the general population ---
was not heavy into dates and tended to refer to events---
especially if they were illiterates

Note, I didn't say there were no calendars, but rather calendars were hit and miss. The world didn't operate on just one calendar; calendars for various cultures tended to vary, and the illiterate may not have had access to them. It just made sense during a time various people followed more than one calendar--or no calendar at all--to describe a time setting by saying, "In the days of Herod and Cyrenneus..."

Herod was a name all Jews would be familiar with; Cyrenneus, a name familiar to Romans.

 

[irosie91]

In what times and where was there no calendar? You are
correct in saying that people -----the general population ---
was not heavy into dates and tended to refer to events---
especially if they were illiterates

Note, I didn't say there were no calendars, but rather calendars were hit and miss. The world didn't operate on just one calendar; calendars for various cultures tended to vary, and the illiterate may not have had access to them. It just made sense during a time various people followed more than one calendar--or no calendar at all--to describe a time setting by saying, "In the days of Herod and Cyrenneus..."

Herod was a name all Jews would be familiar with; Cyrenneus, a name familiar to Romans.

oh----ok true

 

[JoeB131]

In those times calendars were hit and miss. Instead of identifying a month, day, and year as we do today, time was referenced by events people were familiar with--such as, "Back in the times of Herod and Cyrenneus..."

That does not seem a very precise way to gauge time to us, but it provided the people of the day a time frame they understood.

That's a lame excuse. People were VERY Exact when recording dates back then. We know that Julius Caesar was born in July 100 BCE and we know he died in 44 BCE on March 15. Because we know Caesar really existed.

Here's the real problem. Because Jesus was a made up character (there were probably a lot of would-be messiahs who went around named Jesus) what you had was someone trying to reconstruct a character after the fact, perhaps centuries after the fact.

The Gospels of Matthew and Luke cribbed off of the Gospel of Mark (About 90% of Mark is repeated in one or both) but then they had to get creative in filling in the backstory Mark couldn't be bothered with. So they just made shit up.

When Jesus was born was important to both stories. In Matthew, who was appealing to a Jewish Audience, it was important to put Herod in the story along with the Wise Men. The Slaughter of the Innocents (which appears in no other gospel nor in any recorded history) is meant to echo the slaughter of the innocents in Exodus that happened when Moses was born. In short, the story was meant to shoehorn the character.

Conversely, the story in Luke which has Cyrenneus order a census is meant to come up with an explanation of how Jesus- a resident of Nazareth - could have been born in Bethelhem. So he comes up with this plot device that you had to go back to the home of your ancestor to be counted. This is NOT the way Romans actually did censuses. They did them the way we do them today, they counted people where they were.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

There is no 'Jesus' as perceived by theists, consequently there's nothing to 'believe.'

As is the case with religion and the bible, the Jesus myth was created by men.

 

[Meriweather]

That's a lame excuse. People were VERY Exact when recording dates back then. We know that Julius Caesar was born in July 100 BCE and we know he died in 44 BCE on March 15. Because we know Caesar really existed.

Can you give me a list of the exact days and times each peasant who lived back in those days were born and when they died? It would be especially nice if you could provide synchronized lists of these working class births in Jewish, Egyptian, Mayan, and Roman calendars.

I think you might find it more convenient to remark, "Peasants who were born around the time of Caesar--or King Tut--or, Attila the Hun..."

 

[hjmick]

How is it that we are sure that King Arthur and Robin Hood were myths, but we are damned certain Jesus was real?

Actually, the existence of Both King Arthur and Robin Hood is open for debate. Most scholars say that both existed in some form, though not necessarily as the myths we know today...

 

[kjw47]

Jesus is a myth.

hardly.

 

[indiajo]

Can you give me a list of the exact days and times each peasant who lived back in those days were born and when they died? It would be especially nice if you could provide synchronized lists of these working class births in Jewish, Egyptian, Mayan, and Roman calendars.

Jesus, if he would have existed, would not have been some peasant.
Actually he was blown up by the story tellers to be important enough to threaten the Roman rule in their protectorate Palestine. With the whole eternal kingdom shit, I assume I don't have to repeat that for you.
The Romans were pretty alert about such thngs, I am closely familiar to it because I grew up a few hundred meters noth from the Limes where we have countless documentations about how Romans reacted to insurgents or threats by us Barbarians.
And the hint of an overthrow of Roman rule by a new kingdom as they would hav understood it would have been somethng like the Russian missiles on Cuba for the US.
Actually the threat came about 70 years later with the Jewish uproar and we all know pretty well what happened, and we also know the exact dates when.
There is not one Roman document even mentionng Jesus at all. Ok, a few faked ones including Tacitus.
The short notice of Flavius Josephus from 93 AD is also just hearsay and was deliberately altered by Christians to prove Jesus.
Not even the Jews themselves mention Jesus, although they had a pretty good history sripting at this time. There are even court protocols related to a jewish blashphemy trial against Paulus, where not even he mentiones Jesus. Pretty unlikely for an an apostle.

In short, you don't know more abour Jesus than you know about Winnetou. Who was invented by the German Karl May, who never left his hometown.

 

[JoeB131]

Can you give me a list of the exact days and times each peasant who lived back in those days were born and when they died? It would be especially nice if you could provide synchronized lists of these working class births in Jewish, Egyptian, Mayan, and Roman calendars.

I think you might find it more convenient to remark, "Peasants who were born around the time of Caesar--or King Tut--or, Attila the Hun..."

I might. Or I might look at these books in the order they were written and pretty clearly see that the authors were backfilling details they didn't have.

You see, the Epistles were written first. no mention of a virgin birth, or any of the other stories in the gospels.

Then you have Mark.

Then you have LUke and Matthew heavily plagarizing Mark and just outright making shit up. Except their stories contradict each other. While there is an unlikely possibility ONE of them might be right, the fact is they both can't be right. Jesus was either born in 4 BCE or 6 AD.

Or perhaps he wasn't born at all.

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes I believe Jesus. That's why I'm Mormon.

 

[September]

Yes I believe Jesus. That's why I'm Mormon.

You are a Mormon who likes to talk trash about Islam and Muhammad. I find that soooo ironic.

Why?

Joseph Smith lol

​

 

[Avatar4321]

Yes I believe Jesus. That's why I'm Mormon.

You are a Mormon who likes to talk trash about Islam and Muhammad. I find that soooo ironic.

Why?

Joseph Smith lol

​

I probably talk the least trash about islam in this forum. What exactly do you think I've said that is trash?

And if you read anything Joseph taught, you would be surprised.