There is NO Historical Evidence for Jesus

[Sgt. Pepper]

I understand your point about what I believe are misrepresentations of God in the scripture and certain Christian theology. I wasn't raised in that kind of Theology and never believed in hell and the exaggerated crap in the OT and warped Book of incoherent revelation.

So you figured it out on your own! You KNOW full well that God the Father isn't like that! Why not dedicate your life to revealing the true loving Father?

You're barking up the wrong tree with your preaching and proselytizing.

 

[YoursTrue]

Scholars outside the Christian community all concur: the gospels were not eyewitness accounts. There ARE no eyewitness accounts outside the Bible which scholars take as a testimony of faith, nothing more. Which eyewitness accounts do you refer to that are outside the Bible?

What do you mean the gospels were not eyewitness accounts? Did you think every word should be an "eyewitness" account? Obviously there are some reports not personally seen by the writers. So? Look, the choice is yours --

 

[Alien826]

You haven't learned to forgive like Jesus forgave those who tortured and murdered him! If you ever do you will finally be free!

Stay angry, bitter and stuck in endless self-pity! You aren't the center of the universe! Plenty of people have endured injustice and learned how to get free from it. But you won't! You get too much milage out of being the victim!

How condescending!

 

[YoursTrue]

"Scholars outside the Christian community all concur: the gospels were not eyewitness accounts. There ARE no eyewitness accounts outside the Bible which scholars take as a testimony of faith, nothing more. Which eyewitness accounts do you refer to that are outside the Bible?

"Scholars" have no provable records beyond what's passed on and available.

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

It certainly does go both ways, as there is nothing logical or reasonable about the commonly believed Christian doctrines!

Very true.

 

[Twilight Hue]

That's called using the Bible to disprove the Bible.

That's true. Even though I'm no longer a Christian myself, the arguments are still fascinating among ex-Christians.

 

[Thrillobyte]

Thanks, but I am not a subscriber so I could not read the whole article, but my questions still stand.

Why would God give people everything they ask for? Don't you think that an All-Knowing and All-Wise God has a better handle on what we need than we do?

God knows more than we know and God is wiser than we are and this is the crux of the issue.

The point of the article was that NO prayers get answered that scientists could discern. They tested about 1800 patients. Divided into three groups. Two groups were prayed for. One was not. Members of one of the two groups prayed for were told they were being prayed for. The second was told they might be prayed for. There was no discernible difference in results. Some members of the group told they were being prayed for actually did worse than the others, scientists think because they felt pressure to have to prove to the scientists that they were healed. Here is a thumbnial of the study:

Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer - paasp network

The question whether prayer can heal illness has for years been the subject of speculation.To once and for all obtain an...

paasp.net

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

How condescending!

Honestly, this kind of response no longer bothers me like it used to. In fact, I expect it because that's how the majority of Christians I know have treated me and because I've witnessed other Christians react the same way when someone criticizes their beliefs. That's when most Christians show their true colors.

 

[Thrillobyte]

I understand your point about what I believe are misrepresentations of God in the scripture and certain Christian theology. I wasn't raised in that kind of Theology and never believed in hell and the exaggerated crap in the OT and warped Book of incoherent revelation.

So you figured it out on your own! You KNOW full well that God the Father isn't like that! Why not dedicate your life to revealing the true loving Father?

You don't believe in hell. Fundamentalists do, others believe in universal salvation, still others believe in annihilation, some believe in purgatory, some do not. All this should tell people just exactly how scatterbrained Christian thinking is. Where is God or Jesus in all this to straighten out the chaos? Doesn't this tell you, Coulter that God has gone AWOL--that he simply doesn't give a damn about any of you?

 

[YoursTrue]

The point of the article was that NO prayers get answered that scientists could discern. They tested about 1800 patients. Divided into three groups. Two groups were prayed for. One was not. Members of one of the two groups prayed for were told they were being prayed for. The second was told they might be prayed for. There was no discernible difference in results. Some members of the group told they were being prayed for actually did worse than the others, scientists think because they felt pressure to have to prove to the scientists that they were healed. Here is a thumbnial of the study:

Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer - paasp network

The question whether prayer can heal illness has for years been the subject of speculation.To once and for all obtain an...

paasp.net

You can't test prayer like you can test for a virus.

 

[YoursTrue]

You don't believe in hell. Fundamentalists do, others believe in universal salvation, still others believe in annihilation, some believe in purgatory, some do not. All this should tell people just exactly how scatterbrained Christian thinking is. Where is God or Jesus in all this to straighten out the chaos? Doesn't this tell you, Coulter that God has gone AWOL--that he simply doesn't give a damn about any of you?

Regardless, hellFIRE and hell are really not the same in truth. God is there. He is aware. So again, there is a difference between hell and hellfire.

 

[YoursTrue]

The point of the article was that NO prayers get answered that scientists could discern. They tested about 1800 patients. Divided into three groups. Two groups were prayed for. One was not. Members of one of the two groups prayed for were told they were being prayed for. The second was told they might be prayed for. There was no discernible difference in results. Some members of the group told they were being prayed for actually did worse than the others, scientists think because they felt pressure to have to prove to the scientists that they were healed. Here is a thumbnial of the study:

Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer - paasp network

The question whether prayer can heal illness has for years been the subject of speculation.To once and for all obtain an...

paasp.net

Speaking of things scientists discern. Pertinent or not, medications are tested. Some may demonstrate they are effective in tests, still there are subjects that show no improvement and there are placebos in which some claim to feel better, etc. Meantime, doctors may prescribe meds without warning patients of the possible outcome.

 

[Twilight Hue]

You can't test prayer like you can test for a virus.

You certainly can. ;0)

 

[YoursTrue]

You certainly can. ;0)

Lol, my first laugh tonight.

 

[SDavis]

Here's what scholars think: nearly all believe there had to be an ordinary man who was a wise sage or rabbi who was crucified by the Romans for who knows what--could have been sedition against Rome ala Reza Aslan or maybe trying to convert the Roman soldiers to Jewish ,or how do we explain the presence of Christianity. There isn't a single historical entry for this man but we just assume his existence out of common sense.

There isn't a single secular scholar outside the Christian camp who even remotely believes this ordinary man was actually the divine son of God sent to earth by Yahweh to be born of a virgin who died for our sins and caused a great earthquake, a supernatural darkness over the entire earth for 3 hours, and caused zombie saints to rise from their graves and march on Jerusalem at his death. That's fairytale stuff.

That's the truth and the reality.

No it is not

 

[SDavis]

Making Paul a false apostle in Bible lore.


Matthew 24:23

"At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it".

Well would you look at that - Matthew 24:23 is a quote of the words of Jesus speaking. This was before his crucifixion and before he met Paul on the road to Damascus and Paul never claimed to be the Messiah...... but there are many who have and here is a few. Which makes it a true prophecy.

Meet Five Men Who All Think They’re the Messiah

These men say they’re the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Their disciples agree.

www.nationalgeographic.com

False Messiahs in Judaism | My Jewish Learning

Jews have long believed in the eventual coming of a Messiah — someone who will bring about a new period ...

www.myjewishlearning.com

https://owlcation.com/humanities/People-Who-Say-They-Are-Jesus

Messiahs in the Time of Jesus – TaborBlog

jamestabor.com

 

[Twilight Hue]

Well would you look at that - Matthew 24:23 is a quote of the words of Jesus speaking. This was before his crucifixion and before he met Paul on the road to Damascus and Paul never claimed to be the Messiah...... but there are many who have and here is a few. Which makes it a true prophecy.

Meet Five Men Who All Think They’re the Messiah

These men say they’re the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. Their disciples agree.

www.nationalgeographic.com

False Messiahs in Judaism | My Jewish Learning

Jews have long believed in the eventual coming of a Messiah — someone who will bring about a new period ...

www.myjewishlearning.com

https://owlcation.com/humanities/People-Who-Say-They-Are-Jesus

Messiahs in the Time of Jesus – TaborBlog

jamestabor.com

I'm pretty sure this was in reference to the destruction of the temple and end times post crucifixion. Verses 22 and 23 in particular before the warning not to believe. Also Paul claimed to be an apostle, not a Messiah. Lol.

The beginning of Matthew chapter 24 illustrates as much at the very start of the chapter itself. It's pretty clear on that point, which in turn most certainly makes Paul a false apostle since he claimed to meet Jesus, in complete contradiction to Matthew 24:23's statement to not believe such people, like Paul when he declared he met Jesus.

Sorry Charlie. Better read it in context next time. Poor Paul is a fake apostle for sure in the story.

 

[Thrillobyte]

What do you mean the gospels were not eyewitness accounts? Did you think every word should be an "eyewitness" account? Obviously there are some reports not personally seen by the writers. So? Look, the choice is yours --

What I mean is what most scholars outside the Christian community mean: the gospels are NOT eyewitness accounts to Jesus' life. There NOT written by any apostles, certainly not Matthew and John. All the names of the gospels were added circa 180 CE by Irenaeus.

"The majority of New Testament scholars agree that the Gospels do not contain eyewitness accounts; but that they present the theologies of their communities rather than the testimony of eyewitnesses."

Historical reliability of the Gospels - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Thrillobyte]

You can't test prayer like you can test for a virus.

Why not?

 

[Thrillobyte]

Regardless, hellFIRE and hell are really not the same in truth. God is there. He is aware. So again, there is a difference between hell and hellfire.

That wasn't the issue. It was a deflection from someone who can't face the truth.