• 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!

There is NO Historical Evidence for Jesus

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
No, I absolutely AM NOT doing that. As I have always said, I believe that the Messengers of God ARE the evidence for God.[/quopte]
But since they fail so abyssally they are not the best of evidence either.
There might only be one 'correct interpretation' but there will ALWAYS BE multiple interpretations of prophecies, since no two humans think exactly alike.
Let's say that your valid prophecy only has one clear interpretation. How do you think you could know the one clear interpretation that is valid?
Then you once again make prophecy worthless. Which means you are claiming that God is incompetent in getting his message out and that there probably are no real prophecies.

Why is God so incompetent in your world?
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
.... and where do you agree or not agree with what I posted at post # 388
God's plan/purpose for you is No one will die - Isaiah 25:8
- I do not agree that God's plan/purpose for anyone is that No one will die.
- I believe that everyone will continue to die at the end of their life span.

* Everyone can see dead loved ones again - John 5:28-29; John 6:40,44; Acts 24:15
- I believe that everyone will see their loved ones when they get to heaven but I do not believe that is part of God's plan/purpose.

God's plan/purpose for you is No one will get sick - Isaiah 33:24; 35:5-6
* Everyone will enjoy good heath and energy - Job 33:25; Rev. 22:2

- I do not agree that there will ever be a time when 'No one' will get sick but I think diseases will be greatly reduced in the future.
- I believe that people will enjoy better health in the future but I do not believe that 'everyone' will ever enjoy good heath and energy

God's plan/purpose for you is No one will experience injustice - Isaiah 32:16-17
* Everyone will have plenty of good food and houses - Isaiah 65:21-22; Psalm 72:8, 12-14

- I agree that injustices will cease and that is part of God's plan/purpose for humanity.
- I agree that everyone will have plenty of good food and houses and that is part of God's plan/purpose for humanity.

God's plan/purpose for you is No suffering because of War - Psalm 46:9
* Everyone will experience Peace on Earth - Psalm 37; Matthew 5:5

- I agree that God's plan/purpose for humanity is No more suffering because of War.
- I agree that God's plan/purpose for humanity is that everyone will experience Peace on Earth -

God's plan/purpose for you is No more bad memories - Isaiah 65:17
- I disagree that there will ever come a time when there will be no more bad memories, or that is God's plan/purpose for humanity.

* Everyone will live forever under ideal conditions - 1st Corinthians 15:24-26
- I disagree that everyone will live forever on earth under ideal conditions.
- I do not believe that anyone will live forever on earth in a physical body.
- I believe that everyone will live forever in a spiritual body in the spiritual world.
- People who attained eternal life, which is nearness to God, will live under ideal conditions in heaven.
- People who did not attain eternal life because they were distant from God will live under less than ideal conditions.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Even angels are mortal but both angelic life and human life can live forever if obedient to God.
Mortal Adam could live forever on Earth as long as he did Not break God's Law of Gen. 2:17
No mortal can live forever on earth since the physical body is subject to death and decomposition.
Mortal angels can live forever in Heaven as long as they do Not break God's heavenly laws.
Mortal humans will live forever in Heaven since the soul is immortal.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
But since they fail so abyssally they are not the best of evidence either.
The Messengers of God did not fail at all. The only ones who failed are the people who did not recognize the Messengers.
Then you once again make prophecy worthless. Which means you are claiming that God is incompetent in getting his message out and that there probably are no real prophecies.
Prophecies are not worthless. They are very valuable if you have the correct interpretation.
For example:

Daniel Chapter 12:8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. 13 But go thou thy way till the end be; for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

Misunderstanding and misinterpretation of the Bible prophesies has always been a big problem. Christians have misinterpreted the Bible prophecies because they did not have the key to unlock the meaning, and that is understandable because it was prophesied in Daniel 12 that the Book would be sealed up until the time of the end, meaning nobody would really understand it.

Note that Dan 12:13 says "at the end of the days.” This chapter is about what will happen at the time of the end, when Christ returns.

12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days.

The 2,300 years came in 1844 and the book was unsealed by Baha’u’llah. That math is explained in Some Answered Questions, 10: TRADITIONAL PROOFS EXEMPLIFIED FROM THE BOOK OF DANIEL

Unsealing the Book means we can now understand what the Bible prophecies mean by reading the Baha’i Writings.
Why is God so incompetent in your world?
God is perfectly competent, that comes with being infallible.
 
Last edited:

It Aint Necessarily So

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Belief by faith coupled with evidence is the only kind of justified belief, since there is no proof that God exists.
As I said, you bring private definitions and private "reasoning" to the discussion. My definitions are those of academia, not of my own invention. A belief is justified when it is the product of valid reasoning applied to true premises. No other kind of belief can be called justified by this technical definition of the word. When you say it's enough to justify belief for you anyway, you're saying that you hold unjustified beliefs, which can only be believed by faith.
My evidentiary support is anything but private since it is all publically available in the Baha'i Reference Library.
Private means personal rather than secret in this context.
My point was that they might 'have' the skills but not use them.
Who does that? For starters, one doesn't become facile with those methods without confidence in them, and once that happens, the closest you'll see to what you describe is the suspension of disbelief I described for myself while road testing Christianity. If you see a competent critical thinker suddenly abandon his ways, he's suffered a crisis of some sort. Antony Flew, a renowned atheist philosopher who was said to have become a deist in his dotage, may have been such a person.
Some are vague but some are very specific
No biblical prophecies are specific. I defined the word for you in this context already. When an event is described specifically and comes to pass, the event is recognized unambiguously as the fulfillment. Think of the example of the specific game ("game 5") of the1969 World Series being prophesied right before it occurred, with specific players accomplishing specific feats in a specified order. No other baseball game could be mistaken for the one meant. This is unlike biblical prophecy, where one is free to call whatever he likes its fulfillment, as with calling Christ the fulfillment of Old Testament messianic prophecy. Who doesn't also fulfill that prophecy if Jesus does?
and those could have only been fulfilled by one person.
Disagree. Anybody can call themselves a messenger of God, and most will develop a following if they have the gift of gab as well. Jim Jones and David Koresh did
In order for a prophecy to be considered fulfilled by the claimant it would not be improbable.
It would have to have been improbable as human beings judge such things before its fulfillment. Consider the baseball game again. The outcome was only history to the son reporting it from the future. The whole point of the exercise is that the infinitesimal probability of the game unfolding as predicted is what makes it fulfillment convincing that its prophet had transhuman foreknowledge.
First, we have to agree to a set of ground rules. Biblical prophecies are revealed by prophets who are telling of God’s foreknowledge.
Are you expecting atheists to agree with that? As best I can tell, biblical prophecies are made by people with no special knowledge.
ambiguous prophecies can be interpreted in more than one way, as can all biblical scriptures
And you still don't see the problem with that undermining the purpose of prophecy.
but those prophecies are still valid if they were revealed by a prophet of God.
We have no bona fide prophets of gods to reveal anything - just people making the claim and others believing them.
The assumption is that the Bible prophecies were revealed by true prophets of God. If not, there is no point even taking any of them seriously, and we can all take our toys and go home!
That assumption, while acceptable to you according to your private definition of justified, is considered unjustified by the academic community.
This thread is actually turning out to be a lot of fun, and it is a lot more fun for me because finally, it is not the Baha'is who are targeted, it is the Christians.
Finally I can sit on the sidelines and watch the game instead of playing it!
Do you think that the Christians are being treated unfairly here by the critics of their religion? You're one of them. They make claims many of which you reject. They say that their scriptures confirm their beliefs, and you disagree with them. It's exactly what happens in the Baha'i threads, but with you on the apologist's side in that one. You explain your beliefs and offer your evidence, which are rejected by others.
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I define "God" in terms of how the scientific community defines "God". They are the ones doing the studies and tests. They are the ones who have concluded that a there is no supernatural being having any discernible effect on earth.
Are you being serious? Science has nothing whatsoever to say about the question of God, as it is not a scientific question! Science examines nature, not the transcendent. That is the domain of philosophers and mystics, not scientists! :)
Much of what you say doesn't sound Christian, it sounds New Age.
Of course you would say that, as a former fundamentalist. I predicted you would say something akin to not a "true Christian" comment, when presented with views that are not fundamentalist, mythic-literal ideas about God. That's what they do, so you're just following suit.

No, my views are not New Age at all. That's a ridiculous bucket term that lazy people toss anything they don't understand into rather than trying to understand something outside what they've been brainwashed with. The views I express are in fact found within Christianity itself, particularly within the mystic traditions, as well as those shared by the Dharmic religions. We are after all gazing at the same single bright moon.
I personally don't think God exists. If he did, I believe he'd try to make himself known in some way.
So you define what God is by your own mind, and then say that can't be possible, and conclude it cannot exist? Have you tried rethinking your ideas about what God is instead?
A God who hides himself from human view is a God who might as well not even exist far as I'm concerned.
In my experience, the only thing hiding God is our own minds simply not seeing what is directly before us. That's a problem with us, not the Divine.
I mean we get into all this esoteric nonsense about, "God's presence on earth is made known in your heart and in your perceptions of how or what a supreme being who doesn't wish to be observed nevertheless interacts with spirits in tune with his spirit..yada yada" I don't deal in that stuff, walker. It only leads to confusion and gets us miles away from the topic of the thread.
Well, yes, what you just said there is confusing, even to me. :) "A supreme being who doesn't wish to be observed"? Again, I don't see God as a human being, which is what you describe "who doesn't wish"?

What I hear you saying is, you are confused by having to reconsider the way you think about these things, and so therefore it is easier to just not do that and conclude its all New Age woo woo? I'm right aren't I? You recall what I said before about the "pitchforks and woo crowds"? Isn't you calling what I am saying New Age, attempting to brand it "woo woo" also? ;)

Again,

Do you know of ANY secular historian from the 1st century who says, "Jesus the Christ" in his writings? Josephus doesn't count because his writings are heavily interpolated and tampered with by corrupt churchmen. That's a fact. Simple yes or no.
Again, why do you think that is the only way to determine whether or not there was an actual human being that lived which gave rise to the stories contained in the gospels, and the Christian movement as a whole? What scholar claims that is the only criteria? I'll name one who doesn't believe what you are saying who you already referenced earlier. Bart Ehrman. Have you ever read any of his books?
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
There's historical evidence for the gospel story of Jesus.
Sure, there were many teachers in that era. But what evidence is there for the supernatural bits? That's where the stories get implausible and embellished. It's notable the Gospels are not consistent in their details. It's interesting how the myth of Jesus mirrors stories from Egypt and pagans. We can't ignore those facts with our reasoning about Jesus.

And there are many stories that have historical backgrounds but include fictional characters. There are characters in books and movies that are based on real people, and I suspect if a Jesus actually existed in some way that he is used as a basis for the Gospels.
The outrageous counter accusation is claiming Jesus is a mythical hero like Hercules and several others. It's based on a ranking system where the the criteria appears to be heavily ... ummmm ... let's say massaged so that the Jesus story matches more than it actually does.
Well that wouldn't be an accusation, but a rebuttal, and assertion. And let's note that comparing Jesus to other fictional characters is MORE likely true and plausible than to believe the Jesus myth at face value. There is no rational reason to believe Jesus was everything the Gospels say, and what is popular among Christian belief. The whole Jesus story is absurd and suggests an incompetent God at work. I have argued numerous times that it makes vastly more sense to interpret the Jesus story and myth as symbolic, not literal. I also argue that it makes more sense to think of heaven and hell as metaphors for one's state of mind in life, not some destination after death.
And yes, the claim is coming from a critic. Not a skeptic. That's why I called it the critic's creed. Bible critics are rarely actually skeptical. They're believers in youtube anti-bible preachers.
Your "critic's creed" is biased. It opened the door to criticism itself. It didn't suggest you are interested in truth, but in justifying assumptions, and proping up existing belief. That's fine, it's preferable that this is realized instead of being biased against those actually seeking true answers.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Are you being serious? Science has nothing whatsoever to say about the question of God, as it is not a scientific question! Science examines nature, not the transcendent. That is the domain of philosophers and mystics, not scientists! :)
I argue that it is scientists who are transcendent, not believers. I assert this because it is the religious who work to maintain a tradition of belief, a status quo. It is scienists working towards moving past obsolete belief and explaining what is true about the universe. Theologians and philosophers do work to keep old assumptions and beliefs alive, but with the dwindling interest in religion the "new car smell" isn't making much of an impact. Let's note that many who seek to keep traditions alive are those who find comfort in a sort of stability, but culture and life is dynamic and we as a species move towards new and different experiences and definitions. Look at how hard conservative Christians work to limit trans people, and that is largely due to their failure to limit gays, and before that their failure to limit racial equality. DeSantis is hell-bent on destroying "woke" culture, and in doing this he promotes an obsolete image of America as white and conservative. Why not accept change? What are these people afraid of, and making others suffers for their insecurities?
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
I argue that it is scientists who are transcendent, not believers. I assert this because it is the religious who work to maintain a tradition of belief, a status quo. It is scienists working towards moving past obsolete belief and explaining what is true about the universe. Theologians and philosophers do work to keep old assumptions and beliefs alive, but with the dwindling interest in religion the "new car smell" isn't making much of an impact. Let's note that many who seek to keep traditions alive are those who find comfort in a sort of stability, but culture and life is dynamic and we as a species move towards new and different experiences and definitions. Look at how hard conservative Christians work to limit trans people, and that is largely due to their failure to limit gays, and before that their failure to limit racial equality. DeSantis is hell-bent on destroying "woke" culture, and in doing this he promotes an obsolete image of America as white and conservative. Why not accept change? What are these people afraid of, and making others suffers for their insecurities?

Yeah, but true is not universal for all of the universe as per science.
I transcend their truth and your truth, because I understand the limit of both.
As for your value system, that is not science and neither is mine.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Yeah, but true is not universal for all of the universe as per science.
Why wouldn't it be? Are you suggesting there are different physics in other galaxies? I will feel confident in saying that Yahweh is no where to be found outside of our little planet.
I transcend their truth and your truth, because I understand the limit of both.
Your understanding paralyzes tour thinking.
As for your value system, that is not science and neither is mine.
Good thing I never mentioned my values, or yours.
 

mikkel_the_dane

My own religion
Why wouldn't it be? Are you suggesting there are different physics in other galaxies? I will feel confident in saying that Yahweh is no where to be found outside of our little planet.

Your understanding paralyzes tour thinking.

Good thing I never mentioned my values, or yours.

Yeah, you never post in politics or make claim of what matters to you.
 

Thrillobyte

Active Member
No. I have no evidence. And I already said, "Don't beleive it." Hopefully you know and will acknowledge, none of what I have written is smoke and mirrors. I've just been pointing out that there's other plausible explanations, and the 20 point myth-ranking appears to be completely bogus.

Are you able to admit that those bullet points don't *actually* describe Jesus? Certainly not in the same way as they describe Hercules or the others?

If not, then deny everything and admit nothing, demand evidence and make outrageous counter allegations sounds like a pretty good description for what's going on.

It's pretty outrageous to compare Jesus to Hercules based on that list you brought. Can you defend it?

Okay, You pretty much confirm what I've already discovered but it's always possible someone out there is really up on ancient history and can show me something that is worth considering. Dyb, you're an individual (all Christians are, really) who can see past the lack of physical evidence and go with the possibility that the experts are wrong and the yeasayers are right. Perfectly fair, it's a free country. Can you appreciate that some of us skeptics see the use of random diverse scriptures from all over the Bible as a "smoke and mirrors" device even though I'm sure you are perfectly sincere when you quote 10-15 passages that on first glance have nothing to do with the legitimacy of Jesus. It's like using scripture to prove scripture, or using credit cards to pay off credit cards--ultimately it's self defeating, which is why scholars worth their salt want independent sources to prove what the Bible says is true. I'm not sure your way is a valid way of proving Jesus was real. I'm also not sure if you're aware that banks don't let you use credit cards to pay off credit cards.

You've been the first Christian in 500-some posts to actually come out and admit there's not a single historian you can name who wrote about Jesus. That took courage. I applaud you. I'll get to Hercules later.

I always go back to my key question:

If God wanted the human race to believe his son, Jesus came to earth to die for our sins and the resurrect to go back to heaven, then why wouldn't this God who claims to love us so much let Jesus leave with not so much as a single historian mentioning him?

Surely for a God who can do all thing, who didn't have a problem trampling on Pharaoh's free will to harden his heart to make it impossible for him to let the Israelites go, surely inspiring a few historians to say, "I witnessed the crucified and risen Jesus." Would that have been too difficult for an omnipotent God?
 
Last edited:

Thrillobyte

Active Member
Remember: if Adam and Eve would have never had children we simply would Not be here.
The passing of time was allowed so that all of us could be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us.
Remember God's purpose was that earth be populated ( Not over populated ) - Gen. 1:28
As Acts 24:15 uses the future tense then the future is Not broken but I find is still ahead of us.
No broken promise but a clear warning that the powers in charge will be saying, " Peace and Security....." - 1st Thess. 5:2-3
That 'saying' will just prove to be the precursor to the coming great tribulation of Rev. 7:14
In other words, this world's system is now like a run-away freight train that is on fire !
please PLEEEZE don't tell me you believe that malarkey about Adam and Eve 6000 years ago.

Do you realize that scientists have confirmed modern homo sapiens' presence on this planet since 190,000 years ago?
 

Thrillobyte

Active Member
Again, why do you think that is the only way to determine whether or not there was an actual human being that lived which gave rise to the stories contained in the gospels, and the Christian movement as a whole? What scholar claims that is the only criteria? I'll name one who doesn't believe what you are saying who you already referenced earlier. Bart Ehrman. Have you ever read any of his books?
Of course I know Ehrman. He's the one who wrote:

“In the entire first Christian century Jesus is not mentioned by a single Greek or Roman historian, religion scholar, politician, philosopher or poet. His name never occurs in a single inscription, and it is never found in a single piece of private correspondence. Zero! Zip references!”

That's hardly an endorsement for believing Jesus was real considering he caused a supernatural darkness over the entire earth for 3 hours at noon, caused a great earthquake that ordinarily would have leveled Jerusalem, and cause dead bodies to rise from their graves and walk into Jerusalem and start conversing with people. Yet not a single person mentions any of this!
 
Top