If the people had spiritual eyes they would never have been fooled in the first place as the spiritual senses are acutely tuned by God to recognise truth only and acknowledge it.
The spiritual senses never acknowledge falsehood.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No overwhelming historical proof: Why I doubt Jesus
- Thread starter columbus
- Start date
If the people had spiritual eyes they would never have been fooled in the first place as the spiritual senses are acutely tuned by God to recognise truth only and acknowledge it.
The spiritual senses never acknowledge falsehood.
ukok102nak
Active Member
~;> even us dont believe in prophets
during this present time of ours
coz as they say
He that speaks of himself seeks his own glory: but he that seeks his glory that sent him, the same is true, and no unrighteousness is in him.
Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
that is why we dont believe
as the written words of what is good and
cannot lie help those good people before
to write something which is what we considered now
a overwhelmin written facts
:read:
I have not written unto you because all of you know not the truth, but because all of you know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
Who is a liar but he that denies that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denies the Father and the Son.
Whosoever denies the Son, the same has not the Father: he that acknowledges the Son has the Father also.
Let that therefore abide in you, which all of you have heard from the beginning. If that which all of you have heard from the beginning shall remain in you, all of you also shall continue in the Son, and in the Father.
And this is the promise that he has promised us, even eternal life.
:ty:
godbless
unto all always
I don't think that means none of them have been able to see something others have not or are not of upright character but you make a very valid point. The behaviour must go hand in hand with the name.
But we should always look at the Prophets and Their lives and their Books not the followers.
If we ponder and contemplate their Words we may also find or discover other truths and things we were unaware of previously.
But we need to do so with a humble posture of learning not in a prideful way. See how the mountain stands tall above everything and the river is placed lower? Where does the water run? It runs to the river which places itself lower. The same with truth. Truth flows to the humble but deserts the proud.
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
Would he be recognizable? He was thrashed so good he should look a lot like hamburger meat. People can be unrecognizable just by a weight change, a change in clothes, and a new hairstyle.
This is why there are lots of Jesus "fanfics". They didn't have details so they made it up.
I agree that it if Jesus existed, he was just some preacher and everything else was embellished later. For people who think it's unlikely, remember celebrity worship or any kind of fandom where a serious fan nearly cries and faints because they touched a kleenex some celebrity used to blow their nose. It's not that far of a jump into worship.
Even the writers of Captain America, someone who isn't even pretending to be real, had to deal with death threats when some sort of "he was with the bad guys all along" plot came round recently. If that doesn't show how irrational devotion can be, I don't know what would.
Noting a fandom does not prove the subject of the fandom exists in reality.g2perk said:
I asked God about that very thing. He said humans wrote the bible and most of that stuff He didn't even say or do. Now what?
What gets even more amusing is when Christians say that only abstinence is effective at preventing pregnancies and yet believe Jesus was born of a VIRGIN ...
I am spiritually minded. I also know better than to make a book anything more than a collection of ink and paper.
He's average from the standpoint of ancient literary tropes.
Dude, people put "Jedi" on censuses. Apparently it doesn't take much time at all.
When I ramp up my spiritual sight, I notice that any "messengers" don't even matter, but the Way itself.
None of God's Messengers ever wanted to be Messengers. They certainly never wanted to be worshipped. They came to educate and transform our characters.
Yet many just now worship the Teacher and ignore the Teachings and Way.
Putting it this way Baha'u'llah summed it up:
"If the character of man be not changed, the futility of God's Messengers would be realised"
So unless we live the life, all the words in the world are meaningless.
ukok102nak
Active Member
~;> someone could determine something through their naked eye
but history tell us that it is only during the time that humans discovered the atom
is the only time they believed in its existence
its just a weak arguments just to tell something that it doesnt exist becaused
theres no object to be represented
what if there's one person told unto another person that he has known something but it never existed from the thoughts of another person
would that another person considered it as it never existed
becaused that another person has no idea on that one person have known
by the way
as they say no one could imagine anything
to imagine something atleast
theyve heard it before
theyve seen it and probably
theyve felt smell and even tasted it before
coz after only that is the proper time
that someone could use their so called imagination
:ty:
godbless
unto all always
but history tell us that it is only during the time that humans discovered the atom
is the only time they believed in its existence
its just a weak arguments just to tell something that it doesnt exist becaused
theres no object to be represented
what if there's one person told unto another person that he has known something but it never existed from the thoughts of another person
would that another person considered it as it never existed
becaused that another person has no idea on that one person have known
by the way
as they say no one could imagine anything
to imagine something atleast
theyve heard it before
theyve seen it and probably
theyve felt smell and even tasted it before
coz after only that is the proper time
that someone could use their so called imagination
:ty:
godbless
unto all always
Could be true, however so many Christians today believe in a personal Jesus. He's a lot like Krishna now. It is coincidental that 'Krishna' and 'Christ' sound kind of the same, but many believers seem to think of them in the same way, too. Many accept Jesus as their 'Personal lord and savior', yet they don't seem to realize they've become Hindus. Krishna is quite popular, and so is a personal Jesus.
Check out this list of similarities:
http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/jesus/krishna.html
Check out this list of similarities:
http://www.near-death.com/reincarnation/jesus/krishna.html
There are two references in Josephus to Jesus. Only one (the more spectacular one) is considered fake. The other one is - I believe - generally considered genuine but is much less remarkable (an offhand comment in his recount of the trial of a man named James where he describes him as "James, brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ").
Personally, I put the historicity of Jesus somewhere around that of Ragnar Lodbrok: probably real, possibly didn't exist at all, but certainly didn't do all the magical things attributed to him.
If he did, don't you think he'd be a Muslim?
ukok102nak
Active Member
~;> perhaps if my thoughts could only exist in the minds of my fellows then we could be as one thought but with diffirent emotions as they say
perhaps this could be true or there is something else meaning another option
that is existed before or will existed after
the time comes
which no mind could ever think of
for now
just for a thought
. ... probably someday (assuming)
not today i guess for we are not all knowing and not even a liar ... .
:ty:
godbless
unto all always
perhaps this could be true or there is something else meaning another option
that is existed before or will existed after
the time comes
which no mind could ever think of
for now
just for a thought
. ... probably someday (assuming)
not today i guess for we are not all knowing and not even a liar ... .
:ty:
godbless
unto all always
I think your a little confused kelly
Like someone said once. The only bible some unbelievers may see is what's inside if you.
I don't believe that. Most real Christians never measure up any Gods besides Jesus Christ.
He was both man and spirit
Brian Schuh
Well-Known Member
There is a mention of Jesus in the histories of Josephus, as a man worth something not much more than a footnote, so to speak. He said there was a man crucified under Pontius Pilate who many believe to be Messiah and that these believers still exist at the time Josephus wrote this. There is also a letter believed to be written by Pontius Pilate mentioning Jesus, which might not really be legit.
I wholeheartedly agree. If Jesus was such big news, why would Josephus make him to be not much more than a footnote?
The talmud was finished I believe by the 5th or 6th century and claims to be a compilation of oral traditions. By that time, the story of Jesus was big news. And the compilers of the Talmud wrote down the oral traditions of who the Jewish leaders saw him to be. They said Jesus studied to be a rabbi and was a very bright and precocious student, but unusually sensitive. And that Jesus quit his studies with his rabbi before he was done over a misunderstanding, and that he used his intelligence and Torah knowledge to start a new religion. But actually it was St. Paul (formerly Rabbi Saul of Tarsus) who actually created Christianity as we see much of it today. The religion of Jesus, I agree with you on this, actually got obscured very quickly.
Having spoke with a scholar familiar with the Talmud, says there were actually about a half a dozen men named Yeshua at that time in the first century. And that the Jesus myth is actually a combination of about a half a dozen different men, all amalgamated into one mythological man. That there is a historical basis for the gospels.
You forgot one detail, at the time Jesus was crucified, there was an earthquake, and many dead people came back to life and went to town and many people saw them. Unlike Jesus, who you say took a vacation his last 40 days on earth, these other dead people who came back to life were said not to be vacationing, but showed themselves to everyone in Jerusalem. Now if this really happened, don't you think Josephus would have devoted at least a long paragraph to Jesus? rather than just a blurb?
I wholeheartedly agree. If Jesus was such big news, why would Josephus make him to be not much more than a footnote?
The talmud was finished I believe by the 5th or 6th century and claims to be a compilation of oral traditions. By that time, the story of Jesus was big news. And the compilers of the Talmud wrote down the oral traditions of who the Jewish leaders saw him to be. They said Jesus studied to be a rabbi and was a very bright and precocious student, but unusually sensitive. And that Jesus quit his studies with his rabbi before he was done over a misunderstanding, and that he used his intelligence and Torah knowledge to start a new religion. But actually it was St. Paul (formerly Rabbi Saul of Tarsus) who actually created Christianity as we see much of it today. The religion of Jesus, I agree with you on this, actually got obscured very quickly.
Having spoke with a scholar familiar with the Talmud, says there were actually about a half a dozen men named Yeshua at that time in the first century. And that the Jesus myth is actually a combination of about a half a dozen different men, all amalgamated into one mythological man. That there is a historical basis for the gospels.
You forgot one detail, at the time Jesus was crucified, there was an earthquake, and many dead people came back to life and went to town and many people saw them. Unlike Jesus, who you say took a vacation his last 40 days on earth, these other dead people who came back to life were said not to be vacationing, but showed themselves to everyone in Jerusalem. Now if this really happened, don't you think Josephus would have devoted at least a long paragraph to Jesus? rather than just a blurb?
I wonder when people began to give some thought to whether Jesus ever existed as a literal person.
From what I know of Anthropology, I don't think it was a significant concern until after some centuries had passed. It may well be that it was Islam, or even Muhammad specifically. that raised the matter to the level of significant subject matter.
For the most part, religious figures tend to be considered for their messages and their inspirational value. It is almost implied that they are not expected to actually have existed.
Even Socrates in Plato's Republic is a fairly fictional character, despite having been based on the historical Socrates. I don't think all that many Hindus necessarily believe that Krishna existed and walked over Earth as Arjuna's charioteer, either. But most of all, that is not supposed to be important far as I can tell.
Christianity (and Islam)'s obsession with proclaiming to have "the truth" is very much an oddity, if not an all-out flaw.
From what I know of Anthropology, I don't think it was a significant concern until after some centuries had passed. It may well be that it was Islam, or even Muhammad specifically. that raised the matter to the level of significant subject matter.
For the most part, religious figures tend to be considered for their messages and their inspirational value. It is almost implied that they are not expected to actually have existed.
Even Socrates in Plato's Republic is a fairly fictional character, despite having been based on the historical Socrates. I don't think all that many Hindus necessarily believe that Krishna existed and walked over Earth as Arjuna's charioteer, either. But most of all, that is not supposed to be important far as I can tell.
Christianity (and Islam)'s obsession with proclaiming to have "the truth" is very much an oddity, if not an all-out flaw.
oldbadger
Skanky Old Mongrel!
Post 10
Columbus..... all the above are sentences of yours.
Ergo, it seems that you do not doubt that Jesus the Galilean handworker probably did exist, but that you do doubt the reports of the resurrected Christ, the raiser of the dead etc? Is that about right?
If so, or if nearly so, then you are just one of the people that accept the probability of an Historical Jesus, but do not believe in, say, the Pauline Christ?
Jesus probable..... Christ no ?
If so, join the club!!
