# The Polycarp problem



## bulletbob (Jan 22, 2020)

Someone named Polycarp came up on another thread.Since I had never heard of him,I did some research to see what I could find out.As best I can figure out he has the same problem as  most religious figures. There is no historical evidence he ever existed.No mention in Roman,Greek or any other historical record.The only mention of Jesus by a historian is by Flavius Josephus.This mention has since been proven to be a forgery,since it was not in his original records and was added to a later copy of his work.Some people think Jesus was a composite of many itinerant preachers in Rome,since the first gospel came out 40 years or so after his death.


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 22, 2020)

There is a bunch of historical evidence Jesus existed. A lot of prophets wrote about him in the Bible. 

Never heard of Polycarp?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 22, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> There is a bunch of historical evidence Jesus existed. A lot of prophets wrote about him in the Bible.
> 
> Never heard of Polycarp?


When the first council met  in Nicea to figure out if God was a Trinity or Oneness, Polycarp's quotes were used to point to a pro-Trinity vote. Even now, most Protestant follow the votes of those councils in Nicea. So in that respect, Polycarp's quotes and letters are important if one is pro-Trinity and they believe those councils were inspired by God. They also picked those books of the Bible that showed the evidence that Jesus existed.
So maybe, in a strange sort of way, we all have to a little bit pro-Catholic even though we later left when they progressed away from what Luther felt was more than what those councils came up with.
In doing so, a modern Protestant who believes in the Trinity can be pro Polycarp for showing the council that view.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> There is a bunch of historical evidence Jesus existed. A lot of prophets wrote about him in the Bible.
> 
> Never heard of Polycarp?


Outside of the Bible, what evidence exists about Jesus? Can you name the evidence and show us why it is evidence?

I mean Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and Yosemite Sam all talk about Daffy Duck inside of their own fictional world. If you use only the one source of fictional writings to confirm the fictional writings the only evidence you are showing is that fiction resides within fiction. Outside of fiction it cannot be backed up.

What, who and where outside of the Bible can you show us the supposed Son of God existed?


----------



## j_seph (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Outside of the Bible, what evidence exists about Jesus? Can you name the evidence and show us why it is evidence?
> 
> I mean Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and Yosemite Sam all talk about Daffy Duck inside of their own fictional world. If you use only the one source of fictional writings to confirm the fictional writings the only evidence you are showing is that fiction resides within fiction. Outside of fiction it cannot be backed up.
> 
> What, who and where outside of the Bible can you show us the supposed Son of God existed?


Did Samuel Adams exist?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Did Samuel Adams exist?


Yes, if this is the man you are talking about.
https://www.geni.com/people/Samuel-Adams-II/6000000064636343830
If you discount Birth records, Death records, His DNA, his mentioning in records regarding his role as a Student of and Graduating from Harvard, The historical records of our Government, his reorganization of  the Boston Committee of Correspondence,...then I guess No he did not exist..
But
Multiple sources show he existed as a : Tax-collector; Elected to Massachusetts Assembly, 1765; Delegate to the First Continental Congress, 1774; Signed Declaration of Independence, 1776; Member of Massachusetts State constitutional convention, 1781; Appointed Lieutenant Governor of Mass., 1789; Elected Governor of Massachusetts, 1794-'97.
Sam was obviously more important, more noticed, more revered and more recorded by multiple sources which are backed up historically and scientifically than what some people believe is the son of god.

Good example J_seph


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Did Samuel Adams exist?


Are you trying to say that there is only one source of Sam's existence and only that source is used to back up the source?
And, that no other outside sources recorded his existence and that historically, physically and scientifically he cannot be proven to have existed?


----------



## j_seph (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Yes, if this is the man you are talking about.
> https://www.geni.com/people/Samuel-Adams-II/6000000064636343830
> If you discount Birth records, Death records, His DNA, his mentioning in records regarding his role as a Student of and Graduating from Harvard, The historical records of our Government, his reorganization of  the Boston Committee of Correspondence,...then I guess No he did not exist..
> But
> ...


How do you know that he did? Because someone wrote about him? Jesus birth was documented, no death records are available back then and if there were he still would not be on them. No body, so DNA cannot be there. There is mention of Jesus being taught in the bible. Someone wrote that. How many of those multiple sources began from one or two documentations of SA? Were you there to see what SA did? Have you ever met SA in anyway? Yet all you have to base your theory on is that someone wrote about what he did. No one is writing anything about him now or any reports about what he did unless they read something someone else wrote and write a new paper or book. I met Jesus at 19 no matter how dumb, foolish, crazy the "A" group thinks it is. I heard of 2 more that met him Sunday night, I saw one that met him the first week of January and know another one that met him that same week. Jesus existence is still being felt and seen today. There is still being new records of his existence everyday in peoples lives. Multiple people of varying cultures, races, different levels of education, and different levels of wealth. Have a great and blessed day


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

j_seph said:


> How do you know that he did? Because someone wrote about him? Jesus birth was documented, no death records are available back then and if there were he still would not be on them. No body, so DNA cannot be there. There is mention of Jesus being taught in the bible. Someone wrote that. How many of those multiple sources began from one or two documentations of SA? Were you there to see what SA did? Have you ever met SA in anyway? Yet all you have to base your theory on is that someone wrote about what he did. No one is writing anything about him now or any reports about what he did unless they read something someone else wrote and write a new paper or book. I met Jesus at 19 no matter how dumb, foolish, crazy the "A" group thinks it is. I heard of 2 more that met him Sunday night, I saw one that met him the first week of January and know another one that met him that same week. Jesus existence is still being felt and seen today. There is still being new records of his existence everyday in peoples lives. Multiple people of varying cultures, races, different levels of education, and different levels of wealth. Have a great and blessed day


J_seph,
I am not talking about stories about what Sam Adams did.
I gave examples of his life recorded in official records by multiple  official sources. You and I and anyone can find all these records and check their accuracy. They are not written by anonymous writers who wrote them decades if not a hundred years later. These things were recorded by officials who's existence also can be verified who worked for institutions and government agencies that are also verified. Sam Adam's descendants are alive today.

To counter all that you say that the birth of Jesus was documented. Where?
You cite some people that say they met Jesus over the weekend.
And your evidence is various people feel Jesus daily.
With that "evidence" you have placed the reality of Jesus in the same boat as Bigfoot,  Leprechauns,  Aliens, Unicorns, Ghosts, Gobblins, Hobbits, Trolls and every type of god and creature that humans have conjured up in their minds.
Not a single shred of evidence anywhere outside of a fictional book written by anonymous authors and the believers of that book.
Meanwhile Sam Adams is more provable.

Turned out to be a great day indeed.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 23, 2020)

Artfuldodger said:


> When the first council met  in Nicea to figure out if God was a Trinity or Oneness, Polycarp's quotes were used to point to a pro-Trinity vote. Even now, most Protestant follow the votes of those councils in Nicea. So in that respect, Polycarp's quotes and letters are important if one is pro-Trinity and they believe those councils were inspired by God. They also picked those books of the Bible that showed the evidence that Jesus existed.
> So maybe, in a strange sort of way, we all have to a little bit pro-Catholic even though we later left when they progressed away from what Luther felt was more than what those councils came up with.
> In doing so, a modern Protestant who believes in the Trinity can be pro Polycarp for showing the council that view.


Are you paraphrasing or did you read this somewhere about the trinity debate at the council of Nicea? The trinity was not on the table yet at this time. It had not evolved yet. It was only whether Jesus was divine or not. If you read otherwise, it's someone working backwards, trying to insert the trinity into antiquity in an effort to substantiate it. I can give 100% compelling proof that it was not, even that they opposed the idea.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 23, 2020)

Bart Erhman , being an atheist historian, tells how they make a case of whether anyone ever existed. Mythological figures do exist, and in multiple documents.... so, nothing is without question. To the point.... Multiple sources are used to increase likelihood. The more sources, the more likely that person existed. Of those sources, those expected of using a source for a source, are usually counted as 1. Such as Matthew, Mark and Luke... counts as 1. However, Erhman's argument is that the bible is not 1 source. It's many sources compiled. And... being that it came from multiple locations, builds validity exponentially. This in reference to Jesus. Polycarp, is a harder sell. However, content, also validates the validity of the source. For example, if context speaks to .... I can't think of how to convey this..... less than perfect... then we lean towards it being legit. Who would fabricate a story that had so many loose ends? Who would fabricate a story of conflict over the insignificant... who would fabricate a story with so much missing context.... Who, quite frankly would fabricate the most controversial  book in the world that is the result of such varying interpretation, etc.


----------



## j_seph (Jan 23, 2020)

Interesting read, https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/201...-how-about-god-the-father-son-and-holy-spirit

Never thought about that McFarland added, "Historians look for eyewitness accounts, multiple accounts, early accounts and even what they call hostile accounts.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> Bart Erhman , being an atheist historian, tells how they make a case of whether anyone ever existed. Mythological figures do exist, and in multiple documents.... so, nothing is without question. To the point.... Multiple sources are used to increase likelihood. The more sources, the more likely that person existed. Of those sources, those expected of using a source for a source, are usually counted as 1. Such as Matthew, Mark and Luke... counts as 1. However, Erhman's argument is that the bible is not 1 source. It's many sources compiled. And... being that it came from multiple locations, builds validity exponentially. This in reference to Jesus. Polycarp, is a harder sell. However, content, also validates the validity of the source. For example, if context speaks to .... I can't think of how to convey this..... less than perfect... then we lean towards it being legit. Who would fabricate a story that had so many loose ends? Who would fabricate a story of conflict over the insignificant... who would fabricate a story with so much missing context.... Who, quite frankly would fabricate the most controversial  book in the world that is the result of such varying interpretation, etc.


At best a Jesus type figure existed minus the Embellishments.  Truth is in Jewish history, many of those types existed. All are a far cry from the Western-ized version we have today.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

j_seph said:


> Interesting read, https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/201...-how-about-god-the-father-son-and-holy-spirit
> 
> Never thought about that McFarland added, "Historians look for eyewitness accounts, multiple accounts, early accounts and even what they call hostile accounts.


And he cites none of them

I am shocked that CBN is so pro Jesus


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 23, 2020)

When I think of Polycarp, my mind goes straight to his writings.... about how they sound exactly like our other NT writings. Not implying that they validate anything, but rather... as if he were copying them... that's not what I wish to convey... thinking.... I don't think he copied them, however, nor do I think, it was just the talk of the day, his lingo, or how you might expect him to sound. However, I do assume, possibly wrong, that the NT letters had not yet fully circulated, that his letters may even have preceded some of Paul's???? my point, I wish I could downplay this statement.... Who does he think he is... that he assumes anyone want's to receive a letter from him? I don't mean that fully, I just use it to attempt to convey the point, for a lack of words. We seem to be missing context of Polycarp's life and influence in the church. Thinking of Paul... I would have said the same thing, if it were not for Acts


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

This is from an Atheist.  Nevertheless,  the points are compelling and probably why he is an Atheist. 
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/


----------



## Artfuldodger (Jan 23, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> Are you paraphrasing or did you read this somewhere about the trinity debate at the council of Nicea? The trinity was not on the table yet at this time. It had not evolved yet. It was only whether Jesus was divine or not. If you read otherwise, it's someone working backwards, trying to insert the trinity into antiquity in an effort to substantiate it. I can give 100% compelling proof that it was not, even that they opposed the idea.



Just paraphrasing as to Trinitarians using the Councils to prove the Trinity by some quote Polycarp supposedly wrote.  Perhaps the actual councils were just to prove the divinity of Jesus more than the Trinity. Yet denominations and the Catholic Church use the writings of those early teachers and those councils as the gospel so to speak.

The way I see it is, at some point a bunch of men supposedly smarter than all of us, sat down and wrote what the Bible was and what it said. And that all of this was inspired by God.
I can't say that I'm buying all of that nor that we should just blindly follow those men's decisions. Men are men and I'm sure it was all very political. Probably even a bit of hey, if you vote yes for my Jesus divinity, I'll vote yes for your water baptism requirement.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 23, 2020)

The council of Nicea addressed several things. Mostly and most note worthy was the Arian view verses the Oneness [Not the same oneness as we know today, but just my name applied to those whom believed Jesus as "Fully God"] Fully God, gives indication to the Arian view, that he did believe Jesus to be God, just that his opposition believed he did not go far enough . Arius held on to verses like, "the Father is greater than I". His view... Not just him, but likely 50% of the field, him just being the main voice, thus his view was credited to him. Constantine sought to once in for all try to overcome the EXTREME division and argument among his people. An effort to be a stronger economy. No intentions regarding religion. It was terribly a trying time, almost exactly as it is now with Rep and Dems. Imagine if Trump would step in and say, I'm tired of this, we will have a council, call in all the big guns, and put this to rest. After we decide "orthodox", we will formulate a creed to define those outside the circle, ban them and all their writings, making any unapproved literature a capital punishment. We will have huge book burnings out in the street.... and be done with it. This is what they did. And it worked... in the sense that Christianity went from a sect to the denomination of the Roman Catholic church. Opposition continued to seep in over time, Constantine even getting saved supposedly from the influence of his believing sister, even later taking the belief of the Arian side of the specrum. Interesting was that Arius's views were not in strong opposition to the Fully God crowd in terms of the division we now would call splitting hair. Also, they addressed the conflict or battle over "inspired" books. Some put much stock in writings that others saw as man's writings. Constantine commissioned Eusibius to copy 50 bibles, those books decided upon to be the standard. He wanted all them exactly the same, so no interpretation variance could arise. Speaking of Creeds... A creed is a well thought out, assumed, once in for all, line in the sand, as to what is defined as the parameters of right belief. We have the apostles creed, long and short version, the long version of creeds usually reversed placed in antiquity, and the socalled short version, likely the original. The Nicene Creed having a short and long. At the time of the creed formulation, the Holy Spirit is mentioned, but no where close to defining it as a coequal, 3rd person, of a triune godhead. A belief/creed coming that states this was in the 400's as it evolved along. My opinion, after and only after, the NT was well circulated, this belief coming not from oral but rather from those whom took the intent of the NT writers and interpreted what they said differently than what they intended. Now for the most interesting tid bit about the Nicene council. Think of how the democrats try to discredit a republican by means of association.... Imagine the fuel... if, Trump had as much connection with Jeffrey Epstine as Clinton did. There was a man named Valentinous, labeled a knostic by the now claiming "orthodox". In the arguments over scripture about Jesus as Fully God, or not, one opponent, I don't know his name, but we do have good records, to this day, of all that was said, as court room secretary's record the words today, he, in an effort to discredit Arius, stated that Arius was know to have spoken with Valentinous, giving the reason why this Valentinous was so appalling, stating that this vile man, actually has taught that Jesus was , I can't recall the exacts, it can be found googling, but is the exact wording of the trinity, as we know it today. IF, If, the trinity had of been on the table at this time period, this association would have been an endorsement, not a slap in the face. The reading of the internal council arguments are tedious, yet interesting. It has been likely 15 years since I went through it. It's more words than the sum of the bible.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 23, 2020)

I will conceded though, a tid bit, that Esebius, up to the time of the council, In all his writings as "early Church Fathers" argued scripture, and we have tons of writings in the debates of that time period, similar to current day "op eds", used the so called, short version of the Matthew ending, "in Jesus name". We even have early church fathers writing about this specific point about Eusibius, in addition to his own writings. Up until the commision of the standard bible of Constantine, or shortly after, Eusibius then made a switch from "in Jesus name" to, "in the name of the Father, Son and HS. Why did he make this change? Scholars have proposed that he used his original short version based on what he believed to be so, likely having oldest manuscripts available o him, but changed under the direction of the council's terms.I find it interesting but don't  read into it so much as to say it was a trinitarian conclusion. It looks "tri" but no allusion yet to 3rd person, co equal godhead. However, apart from the record of Valentinous, it would seem to be the seeds of later interpretation that evolved into the full blown trinity


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Outside of the Bible, what evidence exists about Jesus? Can you name the evidence and show us why it is evidence?
> 
> I mean Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and Yosemite Sam all talk about Daffy Duck inside of their own fictional world. If you use only the one source of fictional writings to confirm the fictional writings the only evidence you are showing is that fiction resides within fiction. Outside of fiction it cannot be backed up.
> 
> What, who and where outside of the Bible can you show us the supposed Son of God existed?


Why does the starting point have to be “outside of the Bible”? That would be like me saying outside of this forum I don’t know that you exist even though this forum is evidence that you do. 

The Bible isn’t one book in the same sense as most books. There are multiple writers from different places that all speak of Jesus. That’s evidence. You might want more evidence or different evidence but like I already stated there is plenty of evidence Jesus existed.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Why does the starting point have to be “outside of the Bible”? That would be like me saying outside of this forum I don’t know that you exist even though this forum is evidence that you do.
> 
> The Bible isn’t one book in the same sense as most books. There are multiple writers from different places that all speak of Jesus. That’s evidence. You might want more evidence or different evidence but like I already stated there is plenty of evidence Jesus existed.


String, if the guy you worship was truly a God he would be the most simple thing to show evidence of OUTSIDE of a holy book.
You and I can meet outside of here.
I can show you my records.
I can tell you stories and back them up with evidence.
I can give you names of people who love and hate me and they can back up my existence.
What you cannot do is show me anything but beliefs and every religious person has them for their gods also.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Why does the starting point have to be “outside of the Bible”? That would be like me saying outside of this forum I don’t know that you exist even though this forum is evidence that you do.
> 
> The Bible isn’t one book in the same sense as most books. There are multiple writers from different places that all speak of Jesus. That’s evidence. You might want more evidence or different evidence but like I already stated there is plenty of evidence Jesus existed.


Honest question, and although it sounds like I am belittling or downplaying I am not..
How do you differentiate between what is written in books and is on screen from being fictional or real?
Like you asked why outside of the bible...and I am trying to show you that many things in the bible happened no where else. Inspired and Embellished is not factual.


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> String, if the guy you worship was truly a God he would be the most simple thing to show evidence of OUTSIDE of a holy book.
> You and I can meet outside of here.
> I can show you my records.
> I can tell you stories and back them up with evidence.
> ...


Read the last sentence of my post again.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Read the last sentence of my post again.


You can say whatever you want but backing it up validates it.
You sound like Schiff and Nadler.
Overwhelming! Indisputable! Except we dont have any facts or evidence to back it up so just take my word for it.


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Honest question, and although it sounds like I am belittling or downplaying I am not..
> How do you differentiate between what is written in books and is on screen from being fictional or real?
> Like you asked why outside of the bible...and I am trying to show you that many things in the bible happened no where else. Inspired and Embellished is not factual.


I differentiate what is real and what is not by logic and reason mostly.

To your point about some things happening and only written about in the Bible does not make them untrue.


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> You can say whatever you want but backing it up validates it.
> You sound like Schiff and Nadler.
> Overwhelming! Indisputable! Except we dont have any facts or evidence to back it up so just take my word for it.


Did you go back and actually read the last sentence?

Again, you may want different evidence or you may want more evidence but that doesn’t mean the Bible isn’t evidence Jesus existed.

And you didn’t ask me to back up anything.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I differentiate what is real and what is not by logic and reason mostly.
> 
> To your point about some things happening and only written about in the Bible does not make them untrue.


Yes it does when it supposedly happened while other people were there and it went totally unnoticed,  like, earthquakes, graves opening, saints flying about, darkness, world floods etc etc etc x1000


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Did you go back and actually read the last sentence?
> 
> Again, you may want different evidence or you may want more evidence but that doesn’t mean the Bible isn’t evidence Jesus existed.
> 
> And you didn’t ask me to back up anything.


Yeah, you are right, I didn't ask..this is the first time we have ever talked,  how could you possibly know what is expected down here?


----------



## bulletbob (Jan 23, 2020)

Mr Ehrman is a religious scholar,historian and researcher.He is not an atheist.He is an agnostic.He teaches religious history at a university in N.C.When he entered the Seminary as a young man he was devoutly religious.After several years of study,he realized it all  made no sense.He says he thinks there may have been someone named Jesus in Rome,but there is no evidence of his divinity.There were so many thingsthat an illiterate people didn't understand 2000 years ago,they were afraid of many things.Fearing things they didn't understand ,they devised many gods,demons and spirits.Thanks to the Emperor Constantine's effort to  consolidate his people with a state religion,Christianity was chosen as the official religion.If he had chosen another religion,we would never have heard of Christianity.


----------



## bulletbob (Jan 23, 2020)

Religion was invented to control people,mostly women,through fear and ignorance.Modern science has corrected many ancient views about the world and will continue to do so.Who knows how far mankind would have advanced without bronze age myths and superstitions holding holding us back.


----------



## bulletbob (Jan 23, 2020)

I think the most telling comparison between religion and science is the answers given after the debate between Ken Ham and Richard Dawkins.They were each asked what it would take to change their mind.Mr Ham replied"Nothing will change my mind".Mr Dawkins relied "Evidence".


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Yes it does when it supposedly happened while other people were there and it went totally unnoticed,  like, earthquakes, graves opening, saints flying about, darkness, world floods etc etc etc x1000


Again, you want more/different evidence. That doesn’t remove the fact that there is evidence.


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Yeah, you are right, I didn't ask..this is the first time we have ever talked,  how could you possibly know what is expected down here?


I haven’t been in this forum in a couple of years. I didn’t know we now answer questions that weren’t asked.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Again, you want more/different evidence. That doesn’t remove the fact that there is evidence.


Like...


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Again, you want more/different evidence. That doesn’t remove the fact that there is evidence.



I guess he is want corroborating evidence.

even though, as you said, the Bible is a complilation of more books


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I haven’t been in this forum in a couple of years. I didn’t know we now answer questions that weren’t asked.


String we are talking about evidence.
What do you think would be a good thing to show that backs up your claim?
You are well aware at how things work here. Make a claim, back it up.
It is simple to include it if it is available. 
Impossible to include it if it doesn't exist.
There is a reason why guys forget to include it.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I guess he is want corroborating evidence.
> 
> even though, as you said, the Bible is a complilation of more books


Many of the events within the bible supposedly happened when dozens, hundreds, thousands and even millions of other witness would have experienced them at the same time.
Those monumental events would be recorded outside of bible also.
Why weren't they?
And if they were can anyone find and give corroborating evidence ?


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 23, 2020)

bulletbob said:


> I think the most telling comparison between religion and science is the answers given after the debate between Ken Ham and Richard Dawkins.They were each asked what it would take to change their mind.Mr Ham replied"Nothing will change my mind".Mr Dawkins relied "Evidence".


Might be nit-picking but -
I don't think that's a comparison between religion and science ^.
I think that's a comparison between the differing human psychology, emotions etc.
One psychology is happy with the "answers" they have.
The other psychology will never be satisfied with the "answers" they have and will continue to question/search etc.
We all (humans) do it to a varying degree on various subjects.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 23, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> I guess he is want corroborating evidence.
> 
> even though, as you said, the Bible is a complilation of more books


The Harry Potter trylogy is comprised of (I think) 7 books.
Each book corroborates the existence of Harry Potter and the other 6 books.
Does Harry Potter actually exist?

By the way, I buy that "Jesus" actually existed as a man/preacher.
For me to buy that he was the son of God, first you are going to have to prove that God exists.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

One thing that always bothered me is that Jesus is a Translation of Yeshua which is Joshua.
The translators chose to differentiate him by using a different translation rather than Joshua. Yet, they mention other Joshua's by calling them Joshua.
When did that take place?
I would think that in the earliest writings Yeshua was Yeshua was Yeshua. Then at some point in the copying or printing, Yeshua became Joshua for some and Jesus for one. That would be a willful and purposeful difference which seems designed to make one stand out from the rest. 
Were they afraid people would ask which Yeshua or which Joshua?


----------



## Dub (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Outside of the Bible, what evidence exists about Jesus? Can you name the evidence and show us why it is evidence?
> 
> I mean Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, and Yosemite Sam all talk about Daffy Duck inside of their own fictional world. If you use only the one source of fictional writings to confirm the fictional writings the only evidence you are showing is that fiction resides within fiction. Outside of fiction it cannot be backed up.
> 
> What, who and where outside of the Bible can you show us the supposed Son of God existed?




It’s called Faith.

I guess one has it or one doesn’t.




bulletbob said:


> Religion was invented to control people,mostly women,through fear and ignorance.Modern science has corrected many ancient views about the world and will continue to do so.Who knows how far mankind would have advanced without bronze age myths and superstitions holding holding us back.



Well.....you sure seemed to rise to great intellectual heights by not being restricted by such.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

Dub said:


> It’s called Faith.
> 
> I guess one has it or one doesn’t.



I understand that but the reality is that Faith and $1.00 + tax will get you any size soft drink at Micky Ds.
Faith is not proof nor evidence of anything, and especially anything I am asking for here.
Why is the Ultimate Truth so hard to prove?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

I mean if I were a believer making claims about evidence and proof I would bombard the thread witj everything I could find outside of the bible that corroborates what is claimed within the bible, especially if I claim it exists outside of the bible. 

But in here we constantly get claims and then literally nobody can provide an example to back it up.

Did the Romans see all the graves that split open and did they see the Saints flying around?
Did anyone who happened to be of another religion happen to notice a guy ascend skyward? Just ONE teacher or educated person that could write it down?
Did any other town or country or culture note that the day turned to dark and a powerful earthquake struck when Josh, err Jesus died?

This stuff isnt a card trick in a secluded hut among 3 people. These are monumental world events where had it happened would have affected and been witnessed by hundreds, thousands and millions.
Seemingly easy to provide proof for.
Sooooo....?


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I mean if I were a believer making claims about evidence and proof I would bombard the thread witj everything I could find outside of the bible that corroborates what is claimed within the bible, especially if I claim it exists outside of the bible.
> 
> But in here we constantly get claims and then literally nobody can provide an example to back it up.
> 
> ...


Why are all the prophets in the Bible lying, in your opinion?


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Like...


The Bible


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> String we are talking about evidence.
> What do you think would be a good thing to show that backs up your claim?
> You are well aware at how things work here. Make a claim, back it up.
> It is simple to include it if it is available.
> ...


I didn’t forget to include it, again, the Bible is evidence Jesus existed. I know you don’t like that, and you want more or different evidence, but if there were more prophets writing about Jesus at the time it may very have been included in the Bible and you wouldn’t accept those accounts either.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Why are all the prophets in the Bible lying, in your opinion?


The bible is a gathering of various stories that were put together to fit. Many were left out that did not fit.
If you are talking about OT Prophets they did not mention Jesus. The huge majority of Jews that followed the Torah didnt believe Jesus was anything special. They still do not.
Which specific Prophets are you talking about?
What did they say?
How did it come true?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> The Bible


Hey, if you cannot find a single thing outside of the bible it is no surprise to me.
Stan Lee is equally as good as any prophet or author in the Bible.  Pages confirm other pages, editions back up previous and future editions. If you dont believe just look at what is written in those Marvel Books, pay no attention that the contents do not hold true anywhere else.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I didn’t forget to include it, again, the Bible is evidence Jesus existed. I know you don’t like that, and you want more or different evidence, but if there were more prophets writing about Jesus at the time it may very have been included in the Bible and you wouldn’t accept those accounts either.


I understand the corner you've painted yourself into.
The contents of the Qur'an are as truthful as your Bible. If you dont believe me, look it up in the Qur'an.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

The Dems are trying to use one biased source as evidence too. It isn't working for them either.


----------



## bulletbob (Jan 23, 2020)

bulletbob here.First,I have to say "thank You Dub"for the kind words.Now can anyone explain to me why all the apostles,born in the middle East have English names?Why do people worship a blonde haired,blue eyed  Jesus.Middle eastern people were and still are  olive skinned and black curly haired.A blonde Jesus would have certainly been noticed.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 23, 2020)

How many believers in the bible use the bible to fact check itself?
Do you also believe what is written on Tshirts, Coffee Mugs and Bug Deflectors as being reliable sources?
IE: Is the wearer of the Tshirt actually the Worlds Greatest Pop Pop because it says so on the shirt?
Is the bearer of the coffee mug actually the Best Boss ever because it says so on the mug?
Is the person behind the Wheel really the Great White Deer Hunter because it says so right there in hardware store bought stick on Address Letters?

I mean they all say so right?
What happens when someone else is wearing a shirt that says the same thing? Or has a mug with the same claim? Or a bug Deflector with different letters but the same boast?


----------



## Dub (Jan 23, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I understand that but the reality is that Faith and $1.00 + tax will get you any size soft drink at Micky Ds.
> Faith is not proof nor evidence of anything, and especially anything I am asking for here.
> Why is the Ultimate Truth so hard to prove?




Faith is enough for me.

I have a relationship with God and I know he’s there and I am eternally grateful for it.

Good luck on finding what it is you are searching for.  God will be there waiting if you ever are ready.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Dub said:


> Faith is enough for me.
> 
> I have a relationship with God and I know he’s there and I am eternally grateful for it.
> 
> Good luck on finding what it is you are searching for.  God will be there waiting if you ever are ready.


Sounds like you don't believe in Predestined.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

bulletbob said:


> bulletbob here.First,I have to say "thank You Dub"for the kind words.Now can anyone explain to me why all the apostles,born in the middle East have English names?Why do people worship a blonde haired,blue eyed  Jesus.Middle eastern people were and still are  olive skinned and black curly haired.A blonde Jesus would have certainly been noticed.


Their names were eventually translated into English. Whoever controlled the Church got dibs on how the marketing went.
For example:
Shim'on = Simon (Hebrew origin).
Y'hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).
Mattithyahu _=_ Matthew (Hebrew origin).
Ya'aqov = James (Hebrew origin meaning Jacob)
Bar-Tôlmay = Bartholomew (Aramaic, which is related to Hebrew).
Judah = Jude / Saint Jude (not to be confused with Judas Iscariot, Hebrew origin).
Yehuda = Judas Iscariot (Hebrew origin
Cephas / Kephas = Peter (Hebrew / Aramaic origin meaning "Rock").
Tau'ma = Thomas (Aramaic origin).
Andrew = Andrew (Greek origin. Is the brother of Cephas / Kephas)
Phillip = Phillip (Greek origin)

The authories of the bible in the cultures it made it way into all put their own spin on Jesus's look. Quite frankly they figured White Europeans would be more likely to believe in a "white" looking Jesus rather than a middle eastern looking Jesus. So in early paintings Jesus grew another 12", suddenly had blue eyes and his hair went from short and knappy to flowing light brown/blonde locks. Lets not forget the custom tailored flowing robes of fine linen too.
Basically, Like many Gods, Jesus was made/morphed into our Image.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Jan 24, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> The Harry Potter trylogy is comprised of (I think) 7 books.
> Each book corroborates the existence of Harry Potter and the other 6 books.
> Does Harry Potter actually exist?
> 
> ...



all the Harry Potter books are by the same author.  The Bible is written by somewhere around 40 people.  You argument is not valid


----------



## j_seph (Jan 24, 2020)

*Thallus (52AD)* 
*Tacitus (56-120AD)* 
*Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)* 
*Phlegon (80-140AD)* 
*Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)* 
*Suetonius (69-140AD)* 
*Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)* 
*Celsus (175AD)* 
*Josephus (37-101AD)* 
*Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)* 
*The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)* 




bullethead said:


> Many of the events within the bible supposedly happened when dozens, hundreds, thousands and even millions of other witness would have experienced them at the same time.
> Those monumental events would be recorded outside of bible also.
> Why weren't they?
> And if they were can anyone find and give corroborating evidence ?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

j_seph said:


> *Thallus (52AD)
> Tacitus (56-120AD)
> Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
> Phlegon (80-140AD)
> ...


Psssst, None of them were alive when Jesus was alive. Maybe Thallus was? is 52AD supposed to be when he wrote what you are claiming he wrote? Which would be 22 years AFTER it supposedly happened. Was it not impressive enough to jot down as it happened?
They heard about it like you heard about it.
None, literally NONE witnessed any of it.
And as has been shown numerous times over and over and over in here , some of your examples are flat out forged later additions that were never in the original writings. (See Josephus)
Post a cartoon drawing from your usual Pro Jesus source that shows non Jesus followers who wrote about the graves opening and the saints flying about. Shows us recordings of Darkness during daylight the day Jesus died. Wow us with the recorded history of the Earthquakes that happened when Jesus died.
Or did only the people who wrote about those things decades later see and feel those things DECADES LATER while the rest of the region went on as nothing happened???

You have to think before you post "facts". If you truly researched any of this or actually knew your own religions history, you would be embarrassed to pass this stuff off as facts.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> all the Harry Potter books are by the same author.  The Bible is written by somewhere around 40 people.  You argument is not valid


The various writings that eventually became the bible did not miraculously assemble themselves nor were they the only writings written over 1500 years.
Every culture on the planet has various and mostly anonymous authors who wrote stories of how their people came to be, how their culture and race started, the trying and enduring times that challenged them and owe it to some higher form of themselves who chose them to be the receivers of such perils and fortunes. 
It was done long before the Hebrews and is done long after.
History shows that.

It is not hard to gather the like minded stories and piece them together to make it flow and it is not hard to not include the stories that told a different tale. Nor is it hard to write new stories that go along with old stories to make a continuation. 
I would have never dreamed up a Harry Potter, a Spiderman, a Star Wars or any of those sorts, but knowing some background I can use that info to continue a new story to be told.
Hollywood does it all the time.
They take an original idea and expound upon it with new writers, new directors,  new actors and new producers. 
The methods change in 5000 years but the premise stays the same.
Tell a story. Repeat the story. Another person hears the story and adds their own to it or creates another story to coincide with the first story. Wash, Rinse, Repeat.


----------



## hummerpoo (Jan 24, 2020)

Same Old Stuff
https://ccel.org/ccel/origen/against_celsus/anf04.vi.ix.i.i.html
https://www.jstor.org/stable/27900311?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Old and irrefutable stuff.


----------



## hummerpoo (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Old and irrefutable stuff.


And yet, refutation has spanned recorded history —amazing.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

hummerpoo said:


> And yet, refutation has spanned recorded history —amazing.


Beliefs have spanned that time.
Content has been refuted and continues to be refuted as the modern methods advanced. It wasnt until the 1800s when research and methods became available to make strong cases of refutation. Today even the Jews admit to many things never happening at all. Which if they never happened there is nothing to base off of and expound upon for the later stories.
Believers tow the line despite the evidence against and like you make claims that have long been debunked.


----------



## hummerpoo (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Beliefs have spanned that time.
> Content has been refuted and continues to be refuted as the modern methods advanced. It wasnt until the 1800s when research and methods became available to make strong cases of refutation. Today even the Jews admit to many things never happening at all. Which if they never happened there is nothing to base off of and expound upon for the later stories.
> Believers tow the line despite the evidence against and like you make claims that have long been debunked.


Could any part of your statement not be characterized as highly selective; I think not.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

hummerpoo said:


> Could any part of your statement not be characterized as highly selective; I think not.


It sure is selective. Selective to specific points that believers want to ignore.
Think what you may. There is fact and there is what you think and all along in all of these discussions when it comes time for a believer to back up their biblical claims they absolutely cannot except using scripture to back up scripture which is a version of logical fallacy. When trying to back it up outside of scripture the same disproven examples are regurgitated by the same guys who have been shown why those examples are incorrect, but that doesn't stop a good believer! Faith trumps Fact in that world. Faith trumps History. Faith trumps Science.
Hummerpoo, who else outside of the bible recorded graves bursting open and seeing Saints( which, may have been local but surely there were many people out and about)? Who else felt the Earthquake(which again may have been localized but again surely there were people who would have felt it)?Who else recorded the Sun being blotted out by Darkness (which could not have been local)?
I get that you believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories. Very few here are honest enough to admit that they know the stories are nonsense and untrue but it is the religion that makes them happy and they follow it anyway.
Anything more, like making claims and statements that say something in the bible is true or proof or evidence that the person cannot back up with actual evidence when asked to provide it, is a see through sham.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

J_seph and String must really be searching hard to find what I have asked or else they gave up knowing they cannot find it and instead will lay low until they can jump in on a different thread and use their same unprovable claims yet again.
Dub was honest and said he trusts his Faith over fact. But he has avoided my Predestination question.
So now I have asked you Hummerpoo what you can provide since you took the time to jump in here. Maybe I wrongly assumed you read everything up to your posting and I then jumped ahead wondering why you, like the others, have been unable to address my concerns about outside contemporary sources who recorded certain biblical events.
If you did have answers for me because you not read it all up until then can you answer  what I asked you above now that you are caught up?


----------



## Spotlite (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> How many believers in the bible use the bible to fact check itself?
> Do you also believe what is written on Tshirts, Coffee Mugs and Bug Deflectors as being reliable sources?
> IE: Is the wearer of the Tshirt actually the Worlds Greatest Pop Pop because it says so on the shirt?
> Is the bearer of the coffee mug actually the Best Boss ever because it says so on the mug?
> ...


Believers are not THAT shallow. We don’t believe anything, in any format just because it’s written.
That’s NOT how faith / belief works.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Believers are not THAT shallow. We don’t believe anything, in any format just because it’s written.
> That’s NOT how faith / belief works.


I have found that to be true mostly.
In fact in every other aspect of life I have found even the most extremely religious people I know are among the sharpest regarding not falling for just anything.
And then....


----------



## Spotlite (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I have found that to be true mostly.
> In fact in every other aspect of life I have found even the most extremely religious people I know are among the sharpest regarding not falling for just anything.
> And then....


It’s neutral. Believers view believers as sharp, but falling for the “lie”. 

I guess that’s the human nature in us all. We believe / dis-believe what we do based on our own findings, experience, etc., and we assume everyone should see it our way because it seems “so simple”.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> It’s neutral. Believers view believers as sharp, but falling for the “lie”.
> 
> I guess that’s the human nature in us all. We believe / dis-believe what we do based on our own findings, experience, etc., and we assume everyone should see it our way because it seems “so simple”.


If there were no other information available that only leaves a feeling, faith, or tradition passed down through upbringing I can totally see it.

When something that is written that is also sold as being 100% truthful and it is found to be proven untrue in many instances and people want to still believe it...That is on them. Go for whatever floats their boat. When they want to have a discussion where they make claims that it is truthful and cannot back it up. Then all I ask for is proof of what they claim. When they can't provide that and STILL continue on as if they have...then I get testy.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 24, 2020)

NE GA Pappy said:


> all the Harry Potter books are by the same author.  The Bible is written by somewhere around 40 people.  You argument is not valid


My argument is perfectly valid.
Regardless if there is 1 author, somewhere around 40 authors or somewhere around 4,000 authors.... using a set off books to corroborate the same set of books is just going around in a big circle.
If we weren't talking about the Bible, I have to guess you would be in agreement.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 24, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> Believers are not THAT shallow. We don’t believe anything, in any format just because it’s written.
> That’s NOT how faith / belief works.


That's one of the main things I find so interesting about religion and the power that religion has on the way people think.
Lots of folks will accept stories etc that they NEVER would accept if it wasnt "religious".


----------



## hummerpoo (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> …...
> I get that you believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories.
> ……..


Even knowing what your response will be; the above redacted quote is sufficient for me at this time.  I see no way that you have any basis whatsoever for that statement, and for that reason I'm bowing out as I know I am not insightful enough, or wise enough, to show you that there is a whole world of thought out there which you could enjoy (that being the volition behind my first post in this thread).

So, with my best wishes for you in your endeavors, I leave you with these thoughts in my mind:

I would probably "get testy" and regret it.
I just don't know how to productively continue.
Socrates made a practice of proving that folks didn't know what they thought they knew and it got him a cup of hemlock.

and apologize for interrupting when I should have known better.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

hummerpoo said:


> Even knowing what your response will be; the above redacted quote is sufficient for me at this time.  I see no way that you have any basis whatsoever for that statement, and for that reason I'm bowing out as I know I am not insightful enough, or wise enough, to show you that there is a whole world of thought out there which you could enjoy (that being the volition behind my first post in this thread).
> 
> So, with my best wishes for you in your endeavors, I leave you with these thoughts in my mind:
> 
> ...


Once again, another thread, another avoidance of providing anything asked, another bow out, another bye-bye.


----------



## Spotlite (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> If there were no other information available that only leaves a feeling, faith, or tradition passed down through upbringing I can totally see it.
> 
> When something that is written that is also sold as being 100% truthful and it is found to be proven untrue in many instances and people want to still believe it...That is on them. Go for whatever floats their boat. When they want to have a discussion where they make claims that it is truthful and cannot back it up. Then all I ask for is proof of what they claim. When they can't provide that and STILL continue on as if they have...then I get testy.


It’s been proven that neither of us can prove the other wrong. We believe / dis-believe and that’s it. If we had more for the other, this forum wouldn’t exist.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 24, 2020)

hummerpoo said:


> Even knowing what your response will be; the above redacted quote is sufficient for me at this time.  I see no way that you have any basis whatsoever for that statement, and for that reason I'm bowing out as I know I am not insightful enough, or wise enough, to show you that there is a whole world of thought out there which you could enjoy (that being the volition behind my first post in this thread).
> 
> So, with my best wishes for you in your endeavors, I leave you with these thoughts in my mind:
> 
> ...


Why the drama? 


> I get that you believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories.


Many believers believe a donkey talked despite solid evidence a donkey cant talk, or a wooden staff turning into a snake, or a human into a pile of salt or...….
So they in fact believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories.
Not sure why that would be a mind blower/offensive.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> It’s been proven that neither of us can prove the other wrong. We believe / dis-believe and that’s it. If we had more for the other, this forum wouldn’t exist.


I can prove some things in bible is false, incorrect and flat out untrue. I can point it out. I can't make you admit it even though you might believe it.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Many believers believe a donkey talked despite solid evidence a donkey cant talk, or a wooden staff turning into a snake, or a human into a pile of salt or...….
> So they in fact believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories.
> Not sure why that would be a mind blower/offensive.


I am not convinced all of them really believe those things, but they are reluctant to admit it.


----------



## Spotlite (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I can prove some things in bible is false, incorrect and flat out untrue. I can point it out. I can't make you admit it even though you might believe it.


YOU can? Based on?? You’re a daisy if you do ?


----------



## stringmusic (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> J_seph and String must really be searching hard to find what I have asked or else they gave up knowing they cannot find it and instead will lay low until they can jump in on a different thread and use their same unprovable claims yet again.
> Dub was honest and said he trusts his Faith over fact. But he has avoided my Predestination question.
> So now I have asked you Hummerpoo what you can provide since you took the time to jump in here. Maybe I wrongly assumed you read everything up to your posting and I then jumped ahead wondering why you, like the others, have been unable to address my concerns about outside contemporary sources who recorded certain biblical events.
> If you did have answers for me because you not read it all up until then can you answer  what I asked you above now that you are caught up?


I’m not searching for anything you asked for. We’ve argued for years and both of us still believe the things we always have. 

I jumped in this thread simply to state the Bible was evidence of Jesus’ existence, which it is. Wasn’t planning on taking it any further with you because we’ve been there, done that. 

At this point I don’t think there is a single piece of evidence that you’re willing to accept because anything presented to you will find you going down the wormhole of the internet to find some link that you’ll agree with. That’s the main reason why I don’t come in this forum anymore. 

Maybe in a few years I’ll come back in here to find you defending Jesus after you’ve submitted your life to Him. He’s the only One that can change you anyway. I can only hope.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 24, 2020)




----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 24, 2020)

https://en.shalomfromg-d.net/2019/0...tEygi0ETjzESRqrowuoaHhYZrjGiV04oaAr8gEALw_wcB


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Their names were eventually translated into English. Whoever controlled the Church got dibs on how the marketing went.
> For example:
> Shim'on = Simon (Hebrew origin).
> Y'hochanan = John (Hebrew origin).
> ...



There are good academic answers for all of Bulletbobs questions on Google. I suggest to ask each independently and to have a bit of patience. In some cases the people who "controlled the Church" had noting to say about how things went.  Also a study of translation and linguistics can be beneficial...if one can infer from these the directions their wheels turn in history.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

Spotlite said:


> YOU can? Based on?? You’re a daisy if you do ?


Spotlite,  we have done this.
Even the Jewish authorities admit the Exodus never happened.  That Egypt never had Hebrew slaves anywhere near the amount mentioned in the Bible. Maybe, possibly dozens over many years, not Millions as told in Exodus. No 40 years wandering the desert. None of places they supposedly camped. If they had, given the clues in the bible,  they never actually left Egypt in 40 years!!!! No archeological evidence.  No huge camp at the base of Mt Sinai, Zero evidence of privies, pottery, no anything. No 10 Commandments.
Moses existence is even highly suspect and he definitely did not hold the rank in Egypt as told nor lead anyone anywhere.

Please dont take my word for it.


Mow around me.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> I’m not searching for anything you asked for. We’ve argued for years and both of us still believe the things we always have.
> 
> I jumped in this thread simply to state the Bible was evidence of Jesus’ existence, which it is. Wasn’t planning on taking it any further with you because we’ve been there, done that.
> 
> ...


All you have proved is that Jesus exists within the pages of the Bible and you don't come in here because I can find and post information that goes against what you post....
Ok

Take care.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> https://en.shalomfromg-d.net/2019/0...tEygi0ETjzESRqrowuoaHhYZrjGiV04oaAr8gEALw_wcB


http://www.jewfaq.org/m/mashiach.htm
The link explains these:

The idea of mashiach (messiah) is an ancient one in Judaism
The Jewish idea of mashiach is a great human leader like King David, not a savior
There is much speculation about when the mashiach will come
The Bible identifies several tasks that the mashiach will accomplish
Jews do not believe in Jesus because he did not accomplish these tasks


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 24, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Why the drama?
> 
> Many believers believe a donkey talked despite solid evidence a donkey cant talk, or a wooden staff turning into a snake, or a human into a pile of salt or...….
> So they in fact believe the stories despite solid evidence against the stories.
> Not sure why that would be a mind blower/offensive.




Many people ( Christians included) can't internalize that there are several poetry books in scripture and differing poetic styles from different periods in history and that these say more to a human being about subjects than a strictly factual, prosaic narrative.

It is possible to pack a whole lot of meaning in just a few poetic expressions or even one , which  would otherwise take  exhaustive efforts to achieve. Example: Nuts! The word nuts relates to the raw materials, agricultural commodities, used in a nut factory. But used poetically it has an significant history regards meanings that can date from the 1944-45 and beyond and possibly prior. Nuts!

Man has used poetry in stories for ever.. to communicate values and survival. Some aspects of poetic stories or myths are know to be factual just as some aspects of factual narratives are poetic, especially when they relate to what people say in discourse.

When relating to peoples and nations in description for example... one can be poetic in order to be brief or quickly understood. For example:  Americans have been called  "Sons of Liberty" by loyalists and America the white whale in Moby Dick. These are poetic expressions or interpretations to give meanings that would take much more effort to elaborate otherwise. But for many people the white whale in Moby Dick is just a white whale etc.

Some people just can't swim in poetic waters.  And some people will tell you as fact that  a thousand yrs is just as a day for God and that everything was created in seven days... no more no less. And some people will say that the bible is just one big conspiracy... without factual validity... as to history and therefore of no validity to  the human condition .


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 24, 2020)

bullethead said:


> http://www.jewfaq.org/m/mashiach.htm
> The link explains these:
> 
> The idea of mashiach (messiah) is an ancient one in Judaism
> ...


Yes but is also shows how words change in translations from one language to an other... remember Joshua, Jesus, Yahuah


----------



## bullethead (Jan 24, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Yes but is also shows how words change in translations from one language to an other... remember Joshua, Jesus, Yahuah


Yes, it does show that, but word changes do not have anything to do with why Jesus didn't meet the requirements for Messiah.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 24, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


>


I cant help but notice that he uses Jesus and Christianity interchangeably.
As though confirming the existence of Jesus would also somehow confirm the story that Christianity is selling.
It does not.
Confirming the existence of Jesus only confirms that Jesus existed.


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jan 24, 2020)

I'm wondering why the OP came to the atheist and agnostic forum to ask questions about Christian history. 
We figured him out pretty quickly over in the PF.


----------



## bulletbob (Jan 25, 2020)

Maybe because people on the atheist forum are more open minded and rely on evidence instead of wishes.Besides,why would I go on the believers forum to contradict their beliefs.I don't think that would be right.By the way,what did you figure out about me,besides the fact that I'm a young handsome and as someone once said 'A very stable genius'.A reporter asked Donald J Trump what the J stood for."Genius," he replied.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 25, 2020)

1eyefishing said:


> I'm wondering why the OP came to the atheist and agnostic forum to ask questions about Christian history.
> We figured him out pretty quickly over in the PF.


Because the third "A" is Apologetics and we've got some pretty knowledgeable Christians that contribute here so its a good place to ask questions?
Even the A/As know a little sumthin sumthin about Christian history.....


----------



## 1eyefishing (Jan 25, 2020)

bulletbob said:


> Maybe because people on the atheist forum are more open minded and rely on evidence instead of wishes.Besides,why would I go on the believers forum to contradict their beliefs.I don't think that would be right.By the way,what did you figure out about me,besides the fact that I'm a young handsome and as someone once said 'A very stable genius'.A reporter asked Donald J Trump what the J stood for."Genius," he replied.


 I'll go with that, especially the 1st sentence. It just seems like you start a lot of threads that start a big conversation that you don't participate in.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 25, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Yes, it does show that, but word changes do not have anything to do with why Jesus didn't meet the requirements for Messiah.




A Christian would say that some cannot see that Jesus meets the requirements for the Messiah because they simply cannot see it. They are incapable. " My people Israel is ripe for the end". Amos 8-2. and " numerous are the corps" 8:3.

Much of what you seem to have issues with in the truth of " graves bursting open and seeing Saints resurrect, and earthquakes, the sun blotted out" as referred to in Matthew are items related to the oracles of God in Amos on the Day of the Lord. Amos is mostly a poetic work where even Yahve, Amos' God, expresses himself poetically.

Briefly in Amos the God of the Jews says that Israel will see its end and basically they will never again know forgiveness* ( code word for being out  favored nation status) and that Israel will be sifted  and only a few will be sifted out as if the dust of the sifting was those few. Israel is dead and those that cling to her are as good a dead. In Amos Yahve gives the reasons why.

So when the day of the Lord happens on the day of Christ's crucifixion for the gospel writer the Jewish world ends( according to Matthew), her people are  being sifted ( judged), the rocks ( the floor itself)  of the promised land split as the earth quakes in the sifting, the temple veil is torn open ( rendered useless), the sun sets on Israel as if a sun set in mid day,  yet some of her saints manage to raise from this death, Israel's death and become Christians after the resurrection of Jesus...

Regardless of if an earthquake happened that day, or that an eclipse happened at the same time, Matthew could of said what he said and it would have been plain to someone who knew Amos. I suspect that the audience Matthew was addressing knew.

Now this is not plain to the Jews who are still in their graves, being to an Israel that is dead, nor to someone ( some Christians included) who can't relate that the poetry in Amos as relevant to a reality that Matthew is trying to convey in the Christian New Testament. Yet for the Christian audience today it is still very possible to read between the lines, even if Amos is way far way on the other side of Jordan and with no or little fact checking  required.

For the Christian the Christian life is sufficient to prove the Gospel narrative true-- as proof is in the pudding and it is understandable to them that where there is no pudding there cannot be such proof.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 25, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> A Christian would say that some cannot see that Jesus meets the requirements for the Messiah because they simply cannot see it. They are incapable. " My people Israel is ripe for the end". Amos 8-2. and " numerous are the corps" 8:3.
> 
> Much of what you seem to have issues with in the truth of " graves bursting open and seeing Saints resurrect, and earthquakes, the sun blotted out" as referred to in Matthew are items related to the oracles of God in Amos on the Day of the Lord. Amos is mostly a poetic work where even Yahve, Amos' God, expresses himself poetically.
> 
> ...


A Christian has no control over what was in the Torah and cannot piece together why Jesus fulfills the Messianic Prophecy in the Torah.

*Scriptural References*
In order to understand anything in the Torah one must look at the original Hebrew. You will see that the Christians distorted, changed and misinterpreted many of the Hebrew words in order to fit things into their beliefs. The two places that you mentioned are good examples. In Psalm 22:17 the Hebrew states*"hikifuni ca'ari yaday veraglay"* which means "*they bound me* (_hikifuni_) *like a lion* (_ca_-like _ari_-lion), *my hands* (_yaday_) *and my feet* (_ve_-and _raglay_-my feet). The Christians translate this as "_they pierced my hands and feet_". Nowhere in the entire Torah, Prophets and Writings do the words *ca'ari* or *hikifuny* mean anything remotely resembling "_pierce_".
In Isaiah 7:14 the Hebrew states *"hinei ha'almah harah veyoledet ben"* "*behold* _(hineih)_*the young woman* _(ha - the almah- young woman)_ *is pregnant* _(harah)_ *and shall give birth* (_ve_-and _yoledet_-shall give birth) *to a son*_(ben)_". The Christians translate this as "_behold a virgin shall give birth._" They have made two mistakes (probably deliberate) in the one verse. They mistranslate *"ha"* as "_a_" instead of "*the*". They mistranslate *"almah"* as "_virgin_", when in fact the Hebrew word for virgin is *"betulah"*. Aside from the fact that if you read the context of that prediction you will see clearly that it is predicting an event that was supposed to happen and be seen by king Achaz who lived 700 years before Jesus!
*Genealogy*
He was not descended from the House of David. According to Jewish law, tribal identification comes from the father's side, being Jewish, from the mother's side. According to Matthew 1, Joseph was descended from David (Although there are many contradictions between his genealogy there and that listed in Luke, however according to the same text, Joseph did not have sexual relations with Mary, therefore Jesus was not related to Joseph, and not a descendant of King David.
Three answers to this problem are given in classic Christian sources:

The genealogy is that of Mary - This is inadequate, since if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, and according to Jewish tradition he must be descended on his father's side, Mary's genealogy is irrelevant.


He was adopted by Joseph -According to Jewish law, adoption does not change the status of the child. If an Israelite is adopted by a Cohen, (A descendant of Aaron the High Priest), the child does not become a Cohen, likewise if a descendant of David, adopts someone who is not, he does not become of the tribe of Judah and a descendant of David.


It doesn't matter, he was a spiritual inheritor of King David - If it doesn't matter, why do Christian scriptures spend time establishing his genealogical pedigree? And if he is claimed to be the Jewish messiah, then according to Jewish tradition it does matter!

*Messianic Predictions*
The main predictions concerning the Messiah are that he will bring peace to the world, gather the Jewish people from their exile to the land of Israel and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. After Jesus' appearance, the Temple was destroyed, the Jews were exiled all over the world and we have not even had one day of peace in the past 2,000 years. (Many of the wars in fact were started and fought by followers of Jesus) These events are enough to show that he was not the messiah.
The main Christian responses to these objections are:

The Second Coming - First of all, we find this to be a contrived answer, since there is no mention of a second coming in the Jewish Bible. Second, why couldn't G-d accomplish His goals the first time round. Most importantly, the second coming idea is just an attempt at answering an obvious question but it certainly does not constitute proof of messianic claims.


There is peace within his followers hearts - That is wonderful for them, but does that help the victims of the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Hundred Years War, the First World War, the Second World War etc. In each of the events that I mentioned most if not all the combatants, the violent oppressors and torturers where people who claimed to be followers of Jesus. And is peace in the heart a fulfillment of "swords into plowshares etc."

*Messiah's Qualifications*
Messiah is a prophet, a scholar and a pious king. Jesus made a prediction that "The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God is at hand." (Mark 1:15) That was 2000 years ago, has the kingdom of God come? Do you call the holocaust, Pol Pot and Stalin a world in which the kingdom of God has come? Jesus was not a great scholar - one of the requirements of the Messiah. Was Jesus a king? He was not anointed as king by a prophet (as was the rule in Jewish kings), he was not appointed by any judicial body as a leader and he did not rule over the Jewish people nor was he accepted by them. He was arrested, tortured and killed by the Romans like a common criminal. He had no army or government. The answer to my question is an obvious, "no."
*The Trinity*
The Christian idea of a trinity contradicts the most basic tenet of Judaism - that G-d is One. Jews have declared their belief in a single unified G-d twice daily ever since the giving of the Torah at Sinai - almost two thousand years before Christianity.
The trinity suggests a three part deity: _The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost (Matthew 28:19)._
In Jewish law, worship of a three-part god is considered idolatry; one of the three cardinal sins for which a person should rather give up his life than transgress. The idea of the trinity is absolutely incompatible with Judaism.
*Physical Manifestation*
Christianity believes that G-d came down to earth in human form, as Jesus said: _"I and the Father are one" (John 10:30)_.
The Torah states that G-d cannot not take any form.:
*"You will not be able to see My face, for no human can see my face and live" (Exodus 33:18-20)
"You did not see any form on the day G-d spoke to you at Horeb from the midst of fire" (Deuteronomy 4:15)*
As little as we may know about G-d's nature, Judaism has always believed that G-d is Incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. G-d is Eternal, He is Infinite; above time and beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die.


Christianity denies the eternal relevance of Torah Law, basing the concept of the New Testament on a mistranslation of a verse in Jeremia.
In Jeremia 31:30 the Hebrew states:*"Henei yamim baim Neum Hashem VeCharati Brit Chadash"* They translate:_"Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new Testament with the house of Israel "
"Brit"_ does not mean Testament. Throughout Scripture _"Brit"_ means covenant. See for example Genesis 17:2, 15:18 Exodus 24:8, Leviticus 26:42, Numbers 25:12.
It is a fundamental principle of Judaism that the Torah received at Sinai will never be changed nor become obsolete. This concept is mentioned in the Torah no less than 24 times, with the words:
*"This is an eternal law for all generations"*
(Exodus 12:14, 12:17, 12:43, 27:21, 28:43, Leviticus 3:17, 7:36, 10:9, 16:29, 16:31, 16:34, 17:7, 23:14, 23:21, 23:31, 23:41, 24:3, Numbers 10:8, 15:15, 19:10, 19:21, 18:23, 35:29, Deuteronomy29:28)
It is absurd to accept the Divine origin of the Torah yet deny it's eternal relevance. Judaism is a religion of action; it has always taught that through performance of the commandments one declares the belief of the heart. To dispense with the legal body of the Torah and reduce it to a book of morals would cut it down to less than half it's size. Can this really be the meaning of those words an eternal law for all generations?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 25, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> A Christian would say that some cannot see that Jesus meets the requirements for the Messiah because they simply cannot see it. They are incapable. " My people Israel is ripe for the end". Amos 8-2. and " numerous are the corps" 8:3.
> 
> Much of what you seem to have issues with in the truth of " graves bursting open and seeing Saints resurrect, and earthquakes, the sun blotted out" as referred to in Matthew are items related to the oracles of God in Amos on the Day of the Lord. Amos is mostly a poetic work where even Yahve, Amos' God, expresses himself poetically.
> 
> ...


So now Poetic Pudding is the excuse as to why only Christians can understand the Gospels.
Famous Amos's Poetic Pudding! Got it!
The Poetic Pudding Pass is a first for me.
Inspired Poetry does not have to be infallible or true just believed.

Edited to add:
And believe it or not I believe you and agree with you about these happenings being figurative poetry and not actually happening.
If they actually happened others would have recorded them.
Things along those magnitudes would have happened if the actual Son of God died. But the reality is that they didnt happen because he was merely mortal,  did not qualify as The Messiah, was not The Savior and those poetic embellishments were written long after his death because while Jesus was alive he was a practicing Jew with no intent on having a religion about him.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 25, 2020)

bullethead said:


> A Christian has no control over what was in the Torah and cannot piece together why Jesus fulfills the Messianic Prophecy in the Torah.
> 
> *Scriptural References*
> In order to understand anything in the Torah one must look at the original Hebrew. You will see that the Christians distorted, changed and misinterpreted many of the Hebrew words in order to fit things into their beliefs. The two places that you mentioned are good examples. In Psalm 22:17 the Hebrew states*"hikifuni ca'ari yaday veraglay"* which means "*they bound me* (_hikifuni_) *like a lion* (_ca_-like _ari_-lion), *my hands* (_yaday_) *and my feet* (_ve_-and _raglay_-my feet). The Christians translate this as "_they pierced my hands and feet_". Nowhere in the entire Torah, Prophets and Writings do the words *ca'ari* or *hikifuny* mean anything remotely resembling "_pierce_".
> ...





Well your a practicing fact checker. You have it at least half right.  Just kidding.

Ok... I don't know enough bout translations to comment on biblical word misuse. I do notice that you have some of the Jewish objections to Christian tenants.

I'm working right now  so I will be short.   Jesus is said to have said that there would be wars and rumors of war. So the kingdom that Christians are into is not the kingdom you or the Jews would accept. I paraphrase but the peace of Christians is not of this world last I checked.  So I guess like you say the Christians are not reading scripture the way the Jews do---or is it that they don't read scripture with any intellectual or spiritual integrity? In any case the peace and the kingdom the Jews hope for is the same that the Christians expect to come... at the "last Trumpet"...

Bound, nailed, peg, dowel, hum... Virgin, young girl,... hum...

Teacher, Jesus was a revolutionary teacher for his time, and now really. I can't agree with you that he was not a great teacher. Scripture reports him a youth studying scripture with grownup.... and he definitely thought how to get out of the "our empire our laws for us game".


That Christians have committed evil towards other in history and today is without debate. It is true. I would suggest that when they do commit this evil some  political ism or race ism is the culprit. Politics and racist are keen to spin into Christianity so that folk are fevered to  murder, torture,  genocides, ethnic cleanings etc.. ( I know you will come back that the God of the Hebrews was a sociopath... but there are times when war is legit.)


I'm working right now... got to get going... we might talk latter. I do like your points ... they are well listed and are good summary.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 25, 2020)

bullethead said:


> So now Poetic Pudding is the excuse as to why only Christians can understand the Gospels.
> Famous Amos's Poetic Pudding! Got it!
> The Poetic Pudding Pass is a first for me.
> Inspired Poetry does not have to be infallible or true just believed.
> ...



Nope... the excuse is that Christians understand they are born again spiritually and it makes a lot of difference how they cook deserts. Jesus is all about a spiritual change of heart from what had been before his ministry. Christian buy into it... and read fine print differently for it.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 25, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Well your a practicing fact checker. You have it at least half right.  Just kidding.
> 
> Ok... I don't know enough bout translations to comment on biblical word misuse. I do notice that you have some of the Jewish objections to Christian tenants.
> 
> ...


The only Scripture that existed when Jesus was alive was the Torah. The Torah didnt say "will happen later" or anything about a second coming, or anything about having God as the Father and not a mortal man as a Father, nothing about tracing lineage through the Mother, nothing about being Sacrificed. 
If Jesus was the Messiah all those things wouldn't be and everything that was supposed to have happened would have happened already.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 25, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Nope... the excuse is that Christians understand they are born again spiritually and it makes a lot of difference how they cook deserts. Jesus is all about a spiritual change of heart from what had been before his ministry. Christian buy into it... and read fine print differently for it.


They have to. 
But they should realize that they are worshipping a guy who taught those changes and not a god.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 25, 2020)

bullethead said:


> They have to.
> But they should realize that they are worshipping a guy who taught those changes and not a god.




 I'm a bit puzzled. Are you saying Jesus existed?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 26, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> I'm a bit puzzled. Are you saying Jesus existed?


I have zero doubt a person like Jesus existed. And history shows during those times many Jesus type figures existed. I believe that the main man these stories were built around was born a man, lived like a man and died a man. Only after his death did he become the Jesus of the bible.


----------



## WaltL1 (Jan 26, 2020)

bullethead said:


> I have zero doubt a person like Jesus existed. And history shows during those times many Jesus type figures existed. I believe that the main man these stories were built around was born a man, lived like a man and died a man. Only after his death did he become the Jesus of the bible.


That's pretty much exactly my current belief about "Jesus".
I also dont really doubt how he is described - preacher to the dregs of society etc.
Remove all the self serving Christianity added nonsense and you probably had a real dude with a positive message, a bit of a radical for the times, very charismatic and was gaining the ear of the people. And paid the price for it in the same way that many paid the price for being a "problem child" back then.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 26, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> That's pretty much exactly my current belief about "Jesus".
> I also dont really doubt how he is described - preacher to the dregs of society etc.
> Remove all the self serving Christianity added nonsense and you probably had a real dude with a positive message, a bit of a radical for the times, very charismatic and was gaining the ear of the people. And paid the price for it in the same way that many paid the price for being a "problem child" back then.


I could not agree more.
He was an Apocalyptic Preacher that tried to teach of the bad things that will happen if the religion continued to get farther and farther away from the core Judaism/Torah even though he went to extremes for and against by including his own personal relationship to God ( no different than we see by some in here) . He ticked off the religious authorities and he paid for it with his life. But he was like many others before him and after him.
I have zero reason to believe that Jesus wanted or would have been happy to have a totally new religion based off of him AFTER he was dead since he fought so hard to warn others about the consequences of getting away from the religion he studied, taught, preached for and died for.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 26, 2020)

bullethead said:


> The only Scripture that existed when Jesus was alive was the Torah. The Torah didnt say "will happen later" or anything about a second coming, or anything about having God as the Father and not a mortal man as a Father, nothing about tracing lineage through the Mother, nothing about being Sacrificed.
> If Jesus was the Messiah all those things wouldn't be and everything that was supposed to have happened would have happened already.






Well for Christians atonement for sin implies a first coming ( a Day of the Lord) before a second.

"Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. ... "

The Jews, I understand, say this is Israel, Christians say it is Christ. They say it is Christ no only  because of the atonement promise, but because God takes on  "no beauty that "we" should desire him...and even despised and rejected or as a man!.

"I will also sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean. I will cleanse you from all your impurities and all your idols. 26I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will remove your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27And I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes and to carefully observe My ordinances. "


12But I will leave within you a meek and humble people, and they will trust in the name of the LORD. 13The remnant of Israel will no longer do wrong or speak lies, nor will a deceitful tongue be found in their mouths. But they will feed and lie down, with no one to make them tremble.”

Now this last bit is what Christians say God was about in a savoir son, that for spiritual reasons, not material reasons, Christians will be at peace not choosing the spins of despoliation as a fact of living. 

Christians say this is scripture on the savoir Jesus and yet that since it is God in the Torah who is saying that he will remove the heart of stone and so "the savior" who will also be crushed for our iniquities must also be the same God.

All this from Torah. Now many disagree, being sighted or headed differently.  Nevertheless Christians agree with Jews to a body resurrection where the soul is given a material body incorruptible but add the incarnation before it and that it is indeed stated as such in Torah.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 26, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Well for Christians atonement for sin implies a first coming ( a Day of the Lord) before a second.
> 
> "Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed? For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty that we should desire him. He was despised and rejected by men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions; he was crushed for our iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that brought us peace, and with his stripes we are healed. ... "
> 
> ...


Think about it, when your beliefs are based around the New Testament you kind of have to go with what it says.
To go along with that,  everything written in the NT was written after Jesus was dead and it is highly possible that it was written to suit some of what was written in the OT. But for every hit there is also a miss and why the Jews cannot believe that Jesus is what the NT makes him out to be.

https://www.aish.com/jl/li/m/48944241.html?mobile=yes

https://www.aish.com/jw/s/48892792.html?mobile=yes

https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/what-do-jews-believe-about-jesus/


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 26, 2020)

Like I said before or tried to say, Christians read Jesus into the promises within scripture due promises made towards and within the spiritual order, and not especially in the material order. Therefore the kingdoms and the benefits of grace are seen differently.

For Christians Jesus came down to earth to elevate man to the heavenly and not by man's efforts is man elevated but for Divine grace.

 I understand, and maybe I'm incorrect, that the Jews believe that the return of the Davidic kingdom will eventually elevate man to the heavenly.

 Christians believe that the Jewish  kingdom was and would be a material type of the Christian kingdom ( a spiritual type) and still incapable of elevating man to the heavenly realms as Jesus the savior has done for the Christian.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 26, 2020)

gordon 2 said:


> Like I said before or tried to say, Christians read Jesus into the promises within scripture due promises made towards and within the spiritual order, and not especially in the material order. Therefore the kingdoms and the benefits of grace are seen differently.
> 
> For Christians Jesus came down to earth to elevate man to the heavenly and not by man's efforts is man elevated but for Divine grace.
> 
> ...


I know the beliefs, it is the rules we disagree on.

For the record, I am not a fan of Judaism or any religion. In order to have this conversation I am going by what the rules of the Jews went/go by and then since it is in the "religious world" apply them to Jesus/Christianity since Jesus was a Jew and Christianity morphed from Judaism and Jesus.
Going by those rules I just do not see Jesus fitting the mold from the Jewish rules so new writings were made to suit in order to please Jews and Gentiles alike.

The 40,000 Christian denominations are similar... gotta tweak a little from the next denomination to suit the way people Want to believe instead of everyone being satisfied to believe as is.


----------



## gordon 2 (Jan 26, 2020)

And it has been a good conversation. I have learned things. Thanks. I guess we have to disagree as the Jews disagreed with Christians when they booted them out.  My point being that they were happy to remain within the Jewish family.


----------



## Madman (Jan 30, 2020)

bulletbob said:


> There is no historical evidence he ever existed.No mention in Roman,Greek or any other historical record.


You may want to look again.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Jan 30, 2020)

I don't recall where I got this idea.... and I can't seem to find it in a quick google.... was it a book I read, an introduction, within his letters, or just something I drempt up??? I seem to recall that Polycarp was taken into custody, and paraded from town to town, in which, on the way, was allowed to write a letter to each town, eventually ending his forced tour at the culmination of his martyrdom. Anybody else ever heard this?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> You may want to look again.


If you count the later forged additions that did not appear in the original writings, then yes, those things can be found.


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

bullethead said:


> If you count the later forged additions that did not appear in the original writings, then yes, those things can be found.


Where are these forgeries?  I need to read them, they may change my mind.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> Where are these forgeries?  I need to read them, they may change my mind.


They have been brought up in here and every single thread that involved a believer making claims that proof of Jesus lies in Historical records of others.
You have been involved in many of those threads. 
So, If I post them are you going to stick around to comment, counter , refute and or admit that they may be right?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

https://stellarhousepublishing.com/josephus/


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

This one cites sources.
https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/12071


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

http://www.worldfuturefund.org/History/jesushistory.html


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

Compelling reasons why this information is on a site called exchristian...
https://articles.exchristian.net/2002/03/historys-troubling-silence-about-jesus.php?m=1


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

https://vridar.org/2015/01/16/fresh-evidence-the-jesus-passage-in-josephus-a-forgery/


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

What the heck,lets go with a Jewish source too.
http://judaismsanswer.com/Josephus.htm


----------



## Madman (Jan 31, 2020)

bullethead said:


> They have been brought up in here and every single thread that involved a believer making claims that proof of Jesus lies in Historical records of others.
> You have been involved in many of those threads.
> So, If I post them are you going to stick around to comment, counter , refute and or admit that they may be right?


I was interested in your remark about Polycarp not being a historical figure.  There are TONS of articles about Jesus.  that is old news.


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> I was interested in your remark about Polycarp not being a historical figure.  There are TONS of articles about Jesus.  that is old news.


Regarding the articles and information within those articles I posted:
Old truthful news?
Old news that you can refute?


----------



## bullethead (Jan 31, 2020)

Madman said:


> I was interested in your remark about Polycarp not being a historical figure.  There are TONS of articles about Jesus.  that is old news.


The snippet from bulletbob that you quoted lacked any specific information that showed exactly who you were talking about. Since Jesus was a large portion of this conversation,  I went with that.
I never mentioned Polycarp because you never specified who was the subject that you were talking about, just a vague snippet.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 3, 2020)

I think the OP has it wrong on the late dating of the Gospels. https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com.../question10-when-were-the-gospels-written.cfm

Also Josephus definitely knew who Christ was although he was born around the time of the crucifixion, he knew of and spoke of the Christians in his accounts of the Jewish revolt and eventual destruction of the Temple. AD 66-70.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> I don't recall where I got this idea.... and I can't seem to find it in a quick google.... was it a book I read, an introduction, within his letters, or just something I drempt up??? I seem to recall that Polycarp was taken into custody, and paraded from town to town, in which, on the way, was allowed to write a letter to each town, eventually ending his forced tour at the culmination of his martyrdom. Anybody else ever heard this?


Nobody? If nobody can confirm that they have ever heard this theory, then I must conclude that I must have had a vision. LOL. I have no idea where I picked that up. I can't find anything on the net.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 3, 2020)

1gr8bldr said:


> Nobody? If nobody can confirm that they have ever heard this theory, then I must conclude that I must have had a vision. LOL. I have no idea where I picked that up. I can't find anything on the net.


Have you checked Foxe's book of Martyrs? I think it's online too.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> I think the OP has it wrong on the late dating of the Gospels. https://www.blueletterbible.org/Com.../question10-when-were-the-gospels-written.cfm
> 
> Also Josephus definitely knew who Christ was although he was born around the time of the crucifixion, he knew of and spoke of the Christians in his accounts of the Jewish revolt and eventual destruction of the Temple. AD 66-70.


The earliest writings were from Paul and they were done during the 50s AD.
Mark was the first Gospel written.
https://www.learnreligions.com/gospel-according-to-mark-248660
Mark was most likely written in the mid 60s to early 70s as described above and Matthew and Luke later in the 80s, along with the last Gospel John being the latest of them all.

What I think a lot of people over look is that many followers of Jesus were waiting for his return in their lifetimes as Jesus had promised. They didnt write the stories down quickly because he was coming back...until he didn't. By that time most of the initial generation of followers were dead and why Anonymous authors like Mark told of what supposedly happened while Jesus was alive instead of recording what was actually happening (like Temple destruction) and were waiting for the Temple to be rebuilt (as promised within their lifetimes but didnt happen) and why Matthew and Luke subsequently used Mark 20+ years later because these things STILL did not happen. Don't forget,  Jesus promised to destroy a Temple and rebuild it within 3 days without using hands..
By the time the earliest Mark was being written the Romans were already at war with the Jews and the outlook most likely was not looking good for the Jews. Not hard to see the writing on the wall and how it was going to turn out.
All that fire and brimstone Revelation writings were meant for when Jesus came back to crush the Romans within the authors lifetimes which of course never happened and still has not happened 1,987 years later.

And..Josephus most likely heard about and knew of a Jesus type figure (there were many back then) But he never wrote anything about it. What is mentioned by "Josephus " supposedly about "Jesus" was never in his original writings but showed up in later copies. Only the die hard Christian sources refuse to acknowledge that and keep on pretending that Josephus mentioned Jesus.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> The earliest writings were from Paul and they were done during the 50s AD.
> Mark was the first Gospel written.
> https://www.learnreligions.com/gospel-according-to-mark-248660
> Mark was most likely written in the mid 60s to early 70s as described above and Matthew and Luke later in the 80s, along with the last Gospel John being the latest of them all.
> ...




There's no third temple being built mentioned in scripture so those first century Christians wouldn't have been waiting on an event that was never known in Christianity until it was made up in the 1800's.

Also, if those first century Christians had witnessed the temple destruction and total ahnnilation of old Covenant Judaism then they would have certainly mentioned it. Instead , as we read new testament scripture we always see it still standing. This puts all scripture Pre AD70.

Ed Stevens has done extensive work on dating the scriptures and come to a different conclusion than the late daters for obvious reasons. Namely the internal evidence.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

Josephus was a Jew of the Pharisee sect, and a dual citizen of Jerusalem and Rome. He certainly knew of Jesus as all Jews did of that time , because they were constantly troubling the Christian sect. Josephus even mentions the Christians left Jerusalem and fled to Pella as the Romans began encompassing the city. See, they recognized the signs the Lord had give them.
Matthew 24.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> There's no third temple being built mentioned in scripture so those first century Christians wouldn't have been waiting on an event that was never known in Christianity until it was made up in the 1800's.
> 
> Also, if those first century Christians had witnessed the temple destruction and total ahnnilation of old Covenant Judaism then they would have certainly mentioned it. Instead , as we read new testament scripture we always see it still standing. This puts all scripture Pre AD70.
> 
> Ed Stevens has done extensive work on dating the scriptures and come to a different conclusion than the late daters for obvious reasons. Namely the internal evidence.


More internal evidence
http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace....ion-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-rev.html


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Josephus was a Jew of the Pharisee sect, and a dual citizen of Jerusalem and Rome. He certainly knew of Jesus as all Jews did of that time , because they were constantly troubling the Christian sect. Josephus even mentions the Christians left Jerusalem and fled to Pella as the Romans began encompassing the city. See, they recognized the signs the Lord had give them.
> Matthew 24.


Well, there were Christians so yeah Josephus would mention them. But at that time the Christians were considered cannibals and thought of as extremely sub par.
But Josephus knowing of Christians does not explain why someone else had to forge his writings in order to give Jesus a contemporary historical shout out.
As it stands, Josephus never thought so much of Jesus as to write a single thing about him.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

Hobbs or anyone else, Was Jesus a Jew who grew up being taught about and believed in Moses, The Exodus, The Flood, Adam and Eve according to the Torah?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Hobbs or anyone else, Was Jesus a Jew who grew up being taught about and believed in Moses, The Exodus, The Flood, Adam and Eve according to the Torah?


Yes


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> More internal evidence
> http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace....ion-the-destruction-of-the-temple-in-rev.html



The funny thing is, Revelation is about the vindication of the Martyrs and the destruction of old Covenant Judaism. It is John's Olivet discourse.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Yes


And would you say Jesus also had Divine knowledge?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

Revelation 6: 9 When He opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain for the word of God and for the testimony which they held. 10 And they cried with a loud voice, saying, “How long, O Lord, holy and true, until You judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?” 11 Then a white robe was given to each of them; and it was said to them that they should rest a little while longer, until both _the number of_ their fellow servants and their brethren, who would be killed as they _were,_ was completed.

Interesting thing about these dead. They were to rest a little while longer until their fellow servants ( still living) met their same fate ( killed by the Jews)

We see this foretold by Jesus and in that He tells us who they are and who is guilty of their blood.

Matthew 23


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> And would you say Jesus also had Divine knowledge?


I think He had divine understanding. I don't declare to fully understand the nature of Christ, so I'm not dogmatic about that, but He understood the scriptures in a way that the Jews of his time had lost culturally, probably due to the cultural effect of the Hellenistic period upon Judah in his time.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> I think He had divine understanding. I don't declare to fully understand the nature of Christ, so I'm not dogmatic about that, but He understood the scriptures in a way that the Jews of his time had lost culturally, probably due to the cultural effect of the alexanderion period upon Judah in his time.


Does it concern you that many Jewish Religious Scholars today admit that the Exodus never happened as told in the OT? Wouldn't Jesus have known that?
http://www.extremethinking.net/exodusdidnthappen.html


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Does it concern you that many Jewish Religious Scholars today admit that the Exodus never happened as told in the OT? Wouldn't Jesus have known that?
> http://www.extremethinking.net/exodusdidnthappen.html



Not at all. Christianity is the continuation of the religion of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Etc.
The Jews of today are apostate and created their modern religion after the temple destruction.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Not at all. Christianity is the continuation of the religion of Adam, Noah, Abraham, Etc.
> The Jews of today are apostate and created their modern religion after the temple destruction.


Oh so the Christians are more Jewish than the Jews now?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Oh so the Christians are more Jewish than the Jews now?


 Well we were made children of God per new testament scripture. And the Apostate Jews were cast out.
Galatians 4


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Well we were made children of God per new testament scripture. And the Apostate Jews were cast out.
> Galatians 4


(Yeah, that is kind of the point of EVERY religions writings...to proclaim how much more a god or god likes "us" better than "them", therefore "WE" are much more special)
Quoting scripture to validate scripture doesn't work.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 4, 2020)

bullethead said:


> (Yeah, that is kind of the point of EVERY religions writings...to proclaim how much more a god or god likes "us" better than "them", therefore "WE" are much more special)
> Quoting scripture to validate scripture doesn't work.




Well, many of (us) were (them) in that scripture. The majority of the first century church was Jews and diaspora with a few Gentiles. While the majority of Jews didn't heed to the Gospel and found themselves encompassed by the Roman army and 3 1/2 years of great tribulation. It's not the first time in scripture God saved a remnant, but it was the last.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 4, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Well, many of (us) were (them) in that scripture. The majority of the first century church was Jews and diaspora with a few Gentiles. While the majority of Jews didn't heed to the Gospel and found themselves encompassed by the Roman army and 3 1/2 years of great tribulation. It's not the first time in scripture God saved a remnant, but it was the last.


To make the story flow it had to go like that.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 5, 2020)

bullethead said:


> To make the story flow it had to go like that.



Pretty neat how they forced the story to flow by fulfilling Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, etc. In the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 5, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Pretty neat how they forced the story to flow by fulfilling Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, etc. In the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.


In the time where the destruction of cities was common for thousands of years and prophecy is so vague as to allow a reader to insert whatever fit (how many other cities were destroyed over a few thousand years also?) Not to mention that for thousands of years(including now) there were always people warning of destruction of the homeland....
Yeah I didn't see any exact dates either.
You guys have a can't lose style. What is written that seems to have been accurate is used as proof. What is written that has not come true is used as an excuse that it has not happened yet. What is written that has been absolutely positively false goes ignored. Those same prophets you mention have examples of all of the above. Lots of Nostradamus types.
Doomsday Apocalyptic Prophets over thousands of years up to and including today...whooda thunk it?


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 5, 2020)

bullethead said:


> In the time where the destruction of cities was common for thousands of years and prophecy is so vague as to allow a reader to insert whatever fit (how many other cities were destroyed over a few thousand years also?) Not to mention that for thousands of years(including now) there were always people warning of destruction of the homeland....
> Yeah I didn't see any exact dates either.
> You guys have a can't lose style. What is written that seems to have been accurate is used as proof. What is written that has not come true is used as an excuse that it has not happened yet. What is written that has been absolutely positively false goes ignored. Those same prophets you mention have examples of all of the above. Lots of Nostradamus types.
> Doomsday Apocalyptic Prophets over thousands of years up to and including today...whooda thunk it?



You can naysay all you want. Doesn't prove your point. As for dates, the angel told Daniel.
*Daniel 12:7 King James Version (KJV)*
7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished

That is 1260 days or 42 months or 3 1/2 years. Exactly how long Jerusalem was under siege. The Jews were the Holy People and their power was the law, the priesthood, the temple. Amazing accuracy, and I'm taking that out of the scriptures, not putting it into it.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 5, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> You can naysay all you want. Doesn't prove your point. As for dates, the angel told Daniel.
> *Daniel 12:7 King James Version (KJV)*
> 7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished
> 
> That is 1260 days or 42 months or 3 1/2 years. Exactly how long Jerusalem was under siege. The Jews were the Holy People and their power was the law, the priesthood, the temple. Amazing accuracy, and I'm taking that out of the scriptures, not putting it into it.


4 months, 3 weeks, 4 days was how long the siege lasted.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(70_CE)

http://turningpointsoftheancientworld.com/index.php/2018/11/15/jerusalem-under-siege/
*



			The first day
		
Click to expand...

*


> 23 April 70 CE – the Romans had surrounded Jerusalem. The _Fretensis_ and _Macedonica_ legions had approached from the east and west. But valleys encircled Jerusalem on three sides. For Titus there was only one option – a direct northern assault.
> 
> By 8 September John and Simon had surrendered and Jerusalem lay in ruins at the mercy of the Romans. According to Josephus over one million people may have perished during the siege and a hundred thousand more enslaved.


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 5, 2020)

bullethead said:


> 4 months, 3 weeks, 4 days was how long the siege lasted.
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Jerusalem_(70_CE)
> 
> http://turningpointsoftheancientworld.com/index.php/2018/11/15/jerusalem-under-siege/


Yeah I used the wrong word. The tribulations began in 66 while the temple was destroyed in 70. Still 42 months.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish–Roman_War


----------



## bullethead (Feb 5, 2020)

hobbs27 said:


> Yeah I used the wrong word. The tribulations began in 66 while the temple was destroyed in 70. Still 42 months.
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Jewish–Roman_War


https://www.simplybible.com/f38b-ldays-time-times-half-2.htm


----------



## bullethead (Feb 5, 2020)

https://creationconcept.info/Daniels_Time.html


----------



## hobbs27 (Feb 6, 2020)

Imagine that. You found some people in disagreement on bible interpretation.

I have no problem with people questioning common thought on interpretations of phrases in scripture. Let them make their case and see if it checks out. We should all be Berean in our studies.


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

bullethead said:


> The snippet from bulletbob that you quoted lacked any specific information that showed exactly who you were talking about. Since Jesus was a large portion of this conversation,  I went with that.
> I never mentioned Polycarp because you never specified who was the subject that you were talking about, just a vague snippet.


the OP used Polycarp as the example


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

bulletbob said:


> Someone named Polycarp came up on another thread.Since I had never heard of him,I did some research to see what I could find out.As best I can figure out he has the same problem as  most religious figures. There is no historical evidence he ever existed.No mention in Roman,Greek or any other historical record.The only mention of Jesus by a historian is by Flavius Josephus.This mention has since been proven to be a forgery,since it was not in his original records and was added to a later copy of his work.Some people think Jesus was a composite of many itinerant preachers in Rome,since the first gospel came out 40 years or so after his death.


There very well may have been some embellishments that were later added to Flavius Josephus Testimonium Flavianum for instance the phrase "he was the Messiah, however it does not negate the overwhelming historical evidence that Jesus was a real, historical, character.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> There very well may have been some embellishments that were later added to Flavius Josephus Testimonium Flavianum for instance the phrase "he was the Messiah, however it does not negate the overwhelming historical evidence that Jesus was a real, historical, character.


Like we await Adam Schiff's actual overwhelming evidence instead of just claims and statements of overwhelming evidence..
Is it possible for you to list the amounts of evidence in a manner where it overwhelms?


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> Why does the starting point have to be “outside of the Bible”? That would be like me saying outside of this forum I don’t know that you exist even though this forum is evidence that you do.
> 
> The Bible isn’t one book in the same sense as most books. There are multiple writers from different places that all speak of Jesus. That’s evidence. You might want more evidence or different evidence but like I already stated there is plenty of evidence Jesus existed.


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

https://www.christianbook.com/evide...fcQA-JPo1XTECMZrjtkZxgThu5DLFCIhoCL7wQAvD_BwE


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> https://www.christianbook.com/evidence-that-demands-verdict-study-guide/josh-mcdowell/9780310096726/pd/096722?en=google&event=SHOP&kw=dvd-studies-0-20|096722&p=1179710&dv=m&gclid=CjwKCAiAj-_xBRBjEiwAmRbqYs1dI_XYNRtnwcZTVK9RvDfcQA-JPo1XTECMZrjtkZxgThu5DLFCIhoCL7wQAvD_BwE


Reading the description the Authors (pl) main goal is to have to convince people who already believe.  


> In this newly revised and updated edition of the 6-session video Study Guide, _Evidence That Demands a Verdict_, Josh McDowell and Sean McDowell provide compelling evidence to help Christians know _what_ they believe, _why_ it is true, and _how_ they communicate biblical truth to a skeptical world.
> 
> Josh and his son, Sean, help believers in Christ understand how the books of the New Testament came into being, how they differ from "Gnostic" and non-biblical texts, and why they can be sure that the New Testament books are historically reliable. They also examine how believers can know that Jesus existed, why the claims he made about himself are true, how he fulfilled Old Testament prophecies about himself, and how believers can know the resurrection took place.


Right now believers believe in the Unbelievable despite evidence and facts. We have touched on many examples of the inaccurate proof many believers use in here.

If you own this book and are recommending it, can you pick out the "overwhelming" parts of the evidence and share it here?


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> stringmusic said:
> Why does the starting point have to be “outside of the Bible”? That would be like me saying outside of this forum I don’t know that you exist even though this forum is evidence that you do.
> 
> The Bible isn’t one book in the same sense as most books. There are multiple writers from different places that all speak of Jesus. That’s evidence. You might want more evidence or different evidence but like I already stated there is plenty of evidence Jesus existed.


This is why you must start outside of the Bible 
http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/moses.htm


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Some biblical scholars make the excuse that the Exodus was not recorded in Egyptian history because Pharoah and 250,000 of his men plus horses, Chariots, and all of the gear were swallowed by the Red Sea and no one was left to return to tell the story. 
Yet, the bodies of whichever Pharaoh the scholars want to argue was the Pharoah at the time are all mummified and whereabouts are known. 
There is no Egyptian record of all the first born being killed or dying mysteriously. 
The is no evidence that corroborates an Exodus of the magnitude as told in the Bible anywhere outside of of the Bible.

Why do you guys think that using the bible to prove the bible "works"  when the earliest stories all the way through to the last are at the least suspect and mostly shown to be false outside of the bible?
I am looking forward to the evidence, which has now been elevated to Overwhelming, that answers my questions.


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

bullethead said:


> This is why you must start outside of the Bible
> http://www.touregypt.net/featurestories/moses.htm


everyone has heard of Akhenaten, I am not sure what this has to do with starting outside the Bible.

Prove the earth is a sphere these guys don't believe it is.
https://www.tfes.org/


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> everyone has heard of Akhenaten, I am not sure what this has to do with starting outside the Bible.
> 
> Prove the earth is a sphere these guys don't believe it is.
> https://www.tfes.org/


Some things exist both inside and outside of the bible.  Other things exist nowhere else but inside the bible.
If you heard of Akhenaten then you will see how the authors of biblical stories have taken events and people outside of the bible and have changed them to suit.
If all you absorbed from that link that it was about Akhenaten , who was mentioned in the first few sentences and then the article went far beyond talking about him then I seriously question that you read much farther and why you are wondering as to why you think I used Akhenaten as my example of. I used the entire article had you bothered to read it.

The last paragraph of the article.


> In the final analysis, attributing Moses to a specific person, or even determining which specific Pharaoh was involved may always be a matter of speculation. To the modern reader, the biblical Moses seems to oscillate between tradition and reality, and more secure historical knowledge is probably not possible, at least at present.. And though an Exodus could have taken place, the specific details recorded in the Bible largely fall outside the sphere of probability, given the silence of any Egyptian record.




Your answer to me asking you to provide Overwhelming evidence is to ask me to prove to flat earthers that the Earth is a sphere?
To me that sounds like you are admitting that some believers do not acknowledge facts in favor of what they want to believe.


----------



## Madman (Feb 6, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Reading the description the Authors (pl) main goal is to have to convince people who already believe.


Then you need to read it. It is about his journey as an investigative reporter, from atheism to belief.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> Then you need to read it. It is about his journey as an investigative reporter, from atheism to belief.


If you can post the overwhelming evidence either from that Book or elsewhere we can save a lot of time and continue on with this discussion of evidence in the bible being corroborated outside of the bible.
Being that the evidence is stated to be overwhelming,  why isn't anyone posting it?


----------



## bullethead (Feb 6, 2020)

Madman said:


> Then you need to read it. It is about his journey as an investigative reporter, from atheism to belief.


http://islandnet.com/~luree/evidence.html

http://users.iems.northwestern.edu/~hazen/McDowellRebuttal.html

https://www.skeptical-science.com/people/challenge-skeptics-easter-message/


----------



## bullethead (Feb 7, 2020)




----------



## bullethead (Feb 14, 2020)

Providing evidence of Jesus and Biblical happenings outside of the bible of any sort let alone Overwhelming is always a thread killer.
Why is the truth so hard to provide?


----------



## Madman (Feb 15, 2020)

https://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/149462376/did-jesus-exist-a-historian-makes-his-case

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjATegQIDRAB&usg=AOvVaw1yqTk41sNCfom-S2dsvU9W

YouTube › watch
Bart Ehrman & Robert Price Debate - Did Jesus Exist - YouTube

BBVA Openmind › science › di...
Web results
Did Jesus of Nazareth actually exist? The evidence says yes | OpenMind

The Guardian › world › apr › w...
What is the historical evidence that Jesus Christ lived and died? | World news ...

Bethinking › jesus › did-jesus-exist
Did Jesus Exist? - bethinking.org


----------



## bullethead (Feb 16, 2020)

Madman said:


> https://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/149462376/did-jesus-exist-a-historian-makes-his-case
> 
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_Jesus_Exist%3F_(Ehrman_book)&ved=2ahUKEwir4N2CmtXnAhXHUt8KHVOqABAQFjATegQIDRAB&usg=AOvVaw1yqTk41sNCfom-S2dsvU9W
> 
> ...


So Ehrman uses the writings of Paul, which are IN the bible to make his case that Jesus existed.
HERE is my statement above:


> Providing evidence of Jesus and Biblical happenings outside of the bible of any sort let alone Overwhelming is always a thread killer.
> Why is the truth so hard to provide?


Madman, you and others claim Jesus to be THE SON OF GOD, ONE AND ONLY. And the link you provide says that Paul knew Jesus's brother and, AND then Bart goes on to say


> "The Messiah was supposed to overthrow the enemies – and so if you're going to make up a messiah, you'd make up a powerful messiah," he says. "You wouldn't make up somebody who was humiliated, tortured and the killed by the enemies."


Jesus did not overthrow the enemies.
Someone who was tortured, humiliated and killed by their enemies absolutely would not and could not have been The Messiah.
Madman YOU are making a strong case that Jesus was just an embellished man...which is what many of us have always said in here anyway.
According to the Jews who have followed the code/rules/prophecies since the beginning of their religion..the facts that Jesus was tortured, humiliated  and killed by the enemies DOES NOT FULFILL PROPHECY and DOES NOT ALLOW JESUS to be a "lesser and weaker" Messiah let alone THE MESSIAH.
Basically what Bart is saying is that a guy like Jesus probably (LIKELY using his own word) existed, his works were embellished,  he was tortured, humiliated and killed by his enemies, he was NOT the Messiah and again....Mentioned nowhere outside of the bible in any ways by anybody that would lend credence to Jesus being anything special let alone THE SON OF GOD.

Regarding your 2nd link:


> To the objection that there are no contemporary Roman records of Jesus' existence, Ehrman points out that such records exist for almost no one and there are mentions of Christ in several Roman works of history from only decades after the Crucifixion of Jesus.


"They exist for almost No One..."
I believe that. I expect that for the average every day run of the mill Joe Schmo. But Ehrman says almost no one. And he is right because records DO exist for fairly important people that provide detailed information which is backed up by many historical sources of many differentiating backgrounds of Friend and Foe alike.
Wasn't THE SON OF GOD at least equal to those others who WERE recorded?
Ehrman then goes on to say that Roman sources did write of Jesus within decades and then does not cite even ONE source!


> The author states that the authentic letters of the apostle Paul in the New Testament were likely written within a few years of Jesus' death and that Paul LIKELY personally knew James, the brother of Jesus.[2] Although the gospel accounts of Jesus' life may be BIASED  and UNRELIABLE in many respects, Ehrman writes, they and the sources behind them which scholars have discerned still contain some accurate historical information.


Above is what YOU provided!!
And then the best from your own link!!


> Many specific points by Ehrman concentrate on what may be regarded as the 'embarrassments' and 'failures' of the various depictions of Jesus Christ found in the gospels and the works of Paul which point to an account based on a real person that got embellished rather than a completely made up figure. He notes that Jews in the first century AD expected their Messiah to come from Bethlehem while Jesus is described as growing up in Nazareth, a dilemma that is simply not addressed in the Gospel of Mark (which has no nativity account) even though it is regarded as the earliest gospel. The betrayal of Jesus by Judas is another example, as critics of early Christianityfound it strange that the Messiah would display the lack of personal awareness and foresight even to keep his close followers in line. Ehrman states that such things would make sense for a historical Jesus whom multiple people believed grew up, lived, and died in a certain time and place versus a purely mythological figure with malleable personal details


So again to sum it up. A person with the qualities of an extremely human "jesus" probably existed in biblical times(shock, there were dozens if not hundreds if not more) and by the authors opinion of the link(s) you provided "jesus" was not divine and not the Messiah and went virtually unnoticed outside of the bible BECAUSE he was NOT a god nor the son of any god.

Basically you have conceded that roughly a 5'5" short haired,  bearded(maybe), brown eyed,  olive skinned Jerry Nadler type (tho I'd guess in better physical shape) likely existed roughly 1,987+ years ago, he had a brother named James that some other guy knew, he was an ordinary human that did not fit the requirements to be the Messiah nor fulfill them, he is historically unmentioned(given his claimed credentials by believers and  compared to many other recorded figures who are mere humans) outside of a biased and unreliable book(according to your source)...and you worship him.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 16, 2020)

Madman said:


> https://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/149462376/did-jesus-exist-a-historian-makes-his-case
> 
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Did_Jesus_Exist%3F_(Ehrman_book)&ved=2ahUKEwir4N2CmtXnAhXHUt8KHVOqABAQFjATegQIDRAB&usg=AOvVaw1yqTk41sNCfom-S2dsvU9W
> 
> ...



After the 1st two links, the others are just headlines. If you care to make them links I will read them.


----------



## WaltL1 (Feb 16, 2020)

bullethead said:


> After the 1st two links, the others are just headlines. If you care to make them links I will read them.


I'm guessing that Christians view "Jesus" as the son of God, miracle worker etc. and therefore proof of his existence = proof of him being the son of God, a miracle worker etc etc.
Of course proof of his existence doesnt prove anything other than he existed but Christians view it as a "package deal".
Like you, I dont doubt a "Jesus type" figure existed.
Being the son of God, performing miracles, feeding 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish etc...... is a whole different ball game.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 16, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> I'm guessing that Christians view "Jesus" as the son of God, miracle worker etc. and therefore proof of his existence = proof of him being the son of God, a miracle worker etc etc.
> Of course proof of his existence doesnt prove anything other than he existed but Christians view it as a "package deal".
> Like you, I dont doubt a "Jesus type" figure existed.
> Being the son of God, performing miracles, feeding 5000 with 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish etc...... is a whole different ball game.


Agreed and according to Madman's star source, Bart Ehrman (who I like as an author), 99.99% of the worlds population that has ever been alive go  relatively unnoticed throughout history. The .01% that get noticed is because they stood out from the rest.  Being the SON of GOD should be the top of that .01%. 
Outside of the bible there is as much proof as any one of us as there is of Jesus. And according to Ehrman, it is because Jesus existed ordinarily .


----------



## Madman (Feb 16, 2020)

bullethead said:


> So Ehrman uses the writings of Paul, which are IN the bible to make his case that Jesus existed.
> HERE is my statement above:
> 
> Madman, you and others claim Jesus to be THE SON OF GOD, ONE AND ONLY. And the link you provide says that Paul knew Jesus's brother and, AND then Bart goes on to say
> ...


You have to stick to the topic, you begin with that topic that Polycarp never existed and then that Jesus never existed and now he was not the son of God.

This game yall play gets old.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 16, 2020)

Madman said:


> You have to stick to the topic, you begin with that topic that Polycarp never existed and then that Jesus never existed and now he was not the son of God.
> 
> This game yall play gets old.


I am pretty sure that I never made a comment about Polycarp. That was the OP. Jesus came into play when Stringmusic brought him into the conversation.
The only game we play is a game of tag. A believer makes a claim and or statement and we reply asking for proof to back it up. Each tagging the other to explain more with examples.

In ALL of this you still have not backed up your claim. And now since you know you cannot you are trying to act like the bait and switch has occured. Jesus and his existence or not has been a part of this thread in the entire 9 pages. It is clear that you did not read what was said and by whom or else you could not question my answers and involvement in this discussion. I have maintained throughout, as Walt attests to above, that someone with the qualities of who we have come to know as Jesus likely existed. I have stated that many pages ago. What I have continued to say is that outside of the Bible he did not make an impact on the rest of the world to notice enough to record him in any major ways. YOU and others disagreed. I asked you to provide your proof and when you did I countered it with other examples that cast a suspect light on your particular examples. I hoped you had something more.
Now you seem to be upset that we have included and made points about the Divinity of Jesus and the accuracy of the miraculous deeds. Which...by the way...WAS included in the links (plural) that YOU provided!!!!
Either you believe that Jesus was the Son of God and therefore also all the other claims in the bible about him that go with it or you don't. Both go hand in hand do they not?
If you do and I think you do because you continually argue in favor of Him and his deeds then you should have ZERO problems providing evidence of what you state and claim.
I asked for evidence and you claimed there was not only evidence but OVERWHELMING evidence! And now that it is time for you to provide it you complain about having to do so.

I couldn't care less about Polycarp. There is enough information about him that satisfies my conclusion. I have discussed Jesus the entire time (when and after he was  brought into the discussion by a believer)along with  providing other examples within the bible that just did not happen which are to show how embellished, inaccurate and untrustworthy the bible is. You jumped in stating that there is Overwhelming evidence that backs up your claims. I am sure I did not call you out by username to join in something that you wanted no part of.
And now it seems that because you cannot refute what has been posted you want to separate Jesus the man and Jesus as told in the Bible although the people involved have already conceded that "jesus" figure already was the basis for the stories.
In your own examples that you used to prove the man called Jesus existed your examples also made a great case against that same man being anything beyond a man.
Which is it? Is Ehrman spot on or isn't he? Or is he cherry pick what you want accurate?


----------



## bullethead (Feb 17, 2020)

stringmusic said:


> There is a bunch of historical evidence Jesus existed. A lot of prophets wrote about him in the Bible.
> 
> Never heard of Polycarp?



Madman ^ is post #2 of the thread.


----------



## WaltL1 (Feb 18, 2020)

Madman said:


> You have to stick to the topic, you begin with that topic that Polycarp never existed and then that Jesus never existed and now he was not the son of God.
> 
> This game yall play gets old.


Nobody is playing any games.
You can agree or disagree with our opinions/facts/thoughts but we are giving them to you straight up.


----------



## Madman (Feb 18, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> Nobody is playing any games.
> You can agree or disagree with our opinions/facts/thoughts but we are giving them to you straight up.


No it is a game.  The topic is always changed, as I said above.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 18, 2020)

Madman said:


> No it is a game.  The topic is always changed, as I said above.


The topic has been the same since post #2.
If Jesus, Son of God, Miraculous events do not go hand in hand for a believer as a package deal then I would like to meet that believer.

Madman, reading the thread from the beginning and my post #175 would have cleared that up for you.
You are insisting upon things that have been addressed as if they have not.
That is a good game you have going on yourself


----------



## WaltL1 (Feb 19, 2020)

Madman said:


> No it is a game.  The topic is always changed, as I said above.


Our discussions/debate have ALWAYS been "fluid" here. In the course of discussion/ debate we have ALWAYS "bounced around" because one subject leads to another.
Yes, often we end up straying from the original post because somebody makes a comment/statement and we just go with it.
If you feel the conversation has strayed too far, a simple " Back to the original post, I want to say...." will bring it right back around.
If you are paying attention, and to be honest I don't think you really do, you will see we ALL (believers & non) make points that end up taking the conversation in a different, BUT RELATED, direction.
That's not playing games.
Here's an example -
"Playing games" has zero to do with Polycarp or Jesus or Christianity or......
So why did you bring up "playing games"????
Are YOU playing games?
Or in the course of conversation did you tell us what you thought and now we are discussing it?


----------



## bullethead (Feb 19, 2020)

Walt, instead of providing us with answers that would cover and solve our questions regarding these things that are all related Madman would like us to believe that it is too confusing for him to combine Jesus's existence, Jesus being the Son of God and Jesus's Divinity/capabilities of performing miracles. Despite all of those being told in bible and All referenced in the same verse at times, Madman would rather use some poor excuse that eludes to "WE" are throwing in unrelated subjects and talking points to somehow change the conversation away from his marvelous job of providing what we ask. In reality we have not seen a snippet of good evidence let alone "OVERWHELMING" evidence that he stated existed.
This is another cop out tactic instead of saying that he cannot provide what he claims he has, which if he did have would cover all of the slightly different yet fully related avenues regarding Jesus. But alas, since the OP mentioned Polycarp in post #1 and String's reply introduced Jesus in post #2,  mystical powers are now preventing him from expounding upon the posts and claims he already made that had nothing to do with Polycarp. He has reached his non OP subject reply limit and despite him having overwhelming evidence that would be the end all piece of the puzzle he just simply cannot post it. Can't. Just Can't due to my inclusion of the wildly non related subjects of Jesus/Son of God/Divinity/ Powers/Scripture.
He is right to blame me for thinking they are all related and biblical. Me inadvertently lumping them together shows my lack of biblical and scriptural knowledge. I am appalled at myself right now.


----------



## WaltL1 (Feb 19, 2020)

bullethead said:


> Walt, instead of providing us with answers that would cover and solve our questions regarding these things that are all related Madman would like us to believe that it is too confusing for him to combine Jesus's existence, Jesus being the Son of God and Jesus's Divinity/capabilities of performing miracles. Despite all of those being told in bible and All referenced in the same verse at times, Madman would rather use some poor excuse that eludes to "WE" are throwing in unrelated subjects and talking points to somehow change the conversation away from his marvelous job of providing what we ask. In reality we have not seen a snippet of good evidence let alone "OVERWHELMING" evidence that he stated existed.
> This is another cop out tactic instead of saying that he cannot provide what he claims he has, which if he did have would cover all of the slightly different yet fully related avenues regarding Jesus. But alas, since the OP mentioned Polycarp in post #1 and String's reply introduced Jesus in post #2,  mystical powers are now preventing him from expounding upon the posts and claims he already made that had nothing to do with Polycarp. He has reached his non OP subject reply limit and despite him having overwhelming evidence that would be the end all piece of the puzzle he just simply cannot post it. Can't. Just Can't due to my inclusion of the wildly non related subjects of Jesus/Son of God/Divinity/ Powers/Scripture.
> He is right to blame me for thinking they are all related and biblical. Me inadvertently lumping them together shows my lack of biblical and scriptural knowledge. I am appalled at myself right now.





> let alone "OVERWHELMING" evidence that he stated existed.


We both know there is no "overwhelming evidence". If there was, we would both be believers. I hope you arent holding your breath waiting for him to provide it 
And we know he isnt really paying attention because more than one of us, in this very thread, have acknowledged that we believe "Jesus" existed and then he claims "yall deny that Jesus existed".
I can accept all that but "yall playing games" rubs me the wrong way.
Like we have to play games to avoid all that overwhelming evidence......
that he cant or wont provide.


----------



## bullethead (Feb 19, 2020)

WaltL1 said:


> We both know there is no "overwhelming evidence". If there was, we would both be believers. I hope you arent holding your breath waiting for him to provide it
> And we know he isnt really paying attention because more than one of us, in this very thread, have acknowledged that we believe "Jesus" existed and then he claims "yall deny that Jesus existed".
> I can accept all that but "yall playing games" rubs me the wrong way.
> Like we have to play games to avoid all that overwhelming evidence......
> that he cant or wont provide.


Exactly.


WaltL1 said:


> We both know there is no "overwhelming evidence". If there was, we would both be believers. I hope you arent holding your breath waiting for him to provide it


I am just asking him to provide what he claims he has. I didn't ask him to show me something that he did not introduce into the thread on his own or against his own will.
We are being accused of drawing a line in the sand and then drawing another and another when in reality the entire conversation has been contained in one giant rectangle with the lines making up the contents.
Like hash marks on a football field. You must pass one to go onto the next one. They are all part of the same process.


----------

