Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

10 Christ-like Figures Who Pre-Date Jesus


  • Please log in to reply
59 replies to this topic

#16 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 01:28 PM

You should probably stop claiming there are more historical facts about Jesus than other gods if you can't provide any.

#17 Matthias

Matthias

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,147 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 01:42 PM

You should probably stop claiming there are more historical facts about Jesus than other gods if you can't provide any.


I just provided the evidence of guys like Pilate and Caiaphas. If those guys were real, chances are the stories concerning them, at least Jesus' preaching, were real as well. Plus we have evidence there was a conjunction of planets and one star around the birth date of Jesus, which could very well be the star mentioned in Matthew's Gospel. There's way more facts dealing with Jesus than I would say, the guys in the list of the OP.

#18 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,374 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 16 December 2012 - 01:50 PM

But the other parts of the Christ birth story is based in pagan folklore. I believe Jesus lived.. It was the adoption of the pagan hero story and miracles that helped develop a hero for the Bible.

There are a lot of old testament books that are not in the King James version bc there were considered way too unrealistic and clearly pagan folklore.

The first book of the bible is Genesis where God curses man for seeking knowledge(blames a woman)

The first book of the bible tells you,as its first major lesson, do not seek knowledge, do not question because you will discover your naked in the forest and you only did so because of an evil goat man tempting you...


So the devil is a goat man...why? Bc these cave stories were told by farmers and shepards... A goat man is just creepy to farmers in pre bi-cameral brain evolution.... But i guess satan is typing this through me.

#19 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 01:52 PM

I just provided the evidence of guys like Pilate and Caiaphas. If those guys were real, chances are the stories concerning them, at least Jesus' preaching, were real as well. Plus we have evidence there was a conjunction of planets and one star around the birth date of Jesus, which could very well be the star mentioned in Matthew's Gospel. There's way more facts dealing with Jesus than I would say, the guys in the list of the OP.


You didn't provide evidence of guys like Pilate and Caiaphas. You said there is evidence, but you didn't provide evidence.

That's irrelevant anyways, because we're talking about evidence of Jesus, not evidence of Pilate. Evidence of Pilate is not evidence of Jesus. Jesus requires his own evidence.

I could say Ben Franklin trained as a ninja with a black samurai named Pretzelbreath, then say "Well there's evidence for Ben Franklin, so for sure Pretzelbreath is real."

Present some of these historical facts or stfu with pretending he's more real than any of the other gods mentioned in the thread.

#20 CatofWar

CatofWar

    Join, or Die

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,477 posts
  • LocationGitmo

Posted 16 December 2012 - 02:00 PM

Jesus is real. Just bought a tamale from him.

#21 Matthias

Matthias

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,147 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 02:05 PM

But the other parts of the Christ birth story is based in pagan folklore. I believe Jesus lived.. It was the adoption of the pagan hero story and miracles that helped develop a hero for the Bible.

There are a lot of old testament books that are not in the King James version bc there were considered way too unrealistic and clearly pagan folklore.

The first book of the bible is Genesis where God curses man for seeking knowledge(blames a woman)

The first book of the bible tells you,as its first major lesson, do not seek knowledge, do not question because you will discover your naked in the forest and you only did so because of an evil goat man tempting you...


So the devil is a goat man...why? Bc these cave stories were told by farmers and shepards... A goat man is just creepy to farmers in pre bi-cameral brain evolution.... But i guess satan is typing this through me.


The OT and the NT mention books that are not in the KJV. I'm sure if the guys who were putting together the Bible found those books, they would be in the KJV as well. You're wrong about Genesis, God did not curse man for seeking knowledge. Satan tricked Adam and Eve into thinking they would be like God if they ate the fruit, but the truth is they were already like God. (They just didn't know evil) Yet all in all, there's a lot more to talk about there, I don't think you want to hear this conversation.


You didn't provide evidence of guys like Pilate and Caiaphas. You said there is evidence, but you didn't provide evidence.

That's irrelevant anyways, because we're talking about evidence of Jesus, not evidence of Pilate. Evidence of Pilate is not evidence of Jesus. Jesus requires his own evidence.

I could say Ben Franklin trained as a ninja with a black samurai named Pretzelbreath, then say "Well there's evidence for Ben Franklin, so for sure Pretzelbreath is real."

Present some of these historical facts or stfu with pretending he's more real than any of the other gods mentioned in the thread.


You don't understand. At one point everything in the NT was considered myth. Yet with years of digging and research, more and more things began to line up with what the NT said all along. You can look up the evidence of Pilate and Caiaphas, you can look up some of the places where Jesus preached, they all existed. If all these things existed, what are the chances that the only thing that didn't exist was Jesus?

Now what you want is evidence of His miracles, that I don't have. Yet there is more than enough reason to say He preached a special message concerning who He was, and was crucified for it.

#22 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,670 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 16 December 2012 - 03:07 PM

there's a shitload of stuff to attack about christianity as a whole, but the authenticity of jesus the historical figure is a tough one to take on. matthias (for once) is right about correlating lines of evidence.

but as usual the devil is in the details (pun intended) and the critical question is not whether jesus existed and was a major figure at the time, but whether or not he was a major figure because he performed actual miracles. if you want to get to the heart of the matter, that's it.

#23 TANTRIC-NINJA

TANTRIC-NINJA

    The holy ghost of Mr. Miyagi

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,374 posts
  • LocationColumbia, South Kacky

Posted 16 December 2012 - 03:27 PM

The OT and the NT mention books that are not in the KJV. I'm sure if the guys who were putting together the Bible found those books, they would be in the KJV as well.

You're wrong about Genesis, God did not curse man for seeking knowledge. Satan tricked Adam and Eve into thinking they would be like God if they ate the fruit, but the truth is they were already like God. (They just didn't know evil) Yet all in all, there's a lot more to talk about there, I don't think you want to hear this conversation.


Wrong about Genesis...but when they ate from the tree they were aware, conscious...It was called the tree of KNOWLEDGE of good and evil.

Evil existed so why is God the one decieving his creations? So if Satan's mango(the fruit) IS knowledge Capital G forbid Adam and Eve(not Steve) to eat it...this is the the seed of Faith. To believe without evidence.. IMO, A major lesson to not steer to far from an authority figure to prevent questioning, seeking knowledge bc it will be "EVIL"

In the King James Version the Apocrypha books were ommited: there are a lot of stories based in folklore which help contridict other parts.. So yes they did omit it. Why? Why would a King want to omit something and edit a Divine book? The dead sea scrolls prove the Hebrew manuscripts of a few of these books. I know .. Satan put them there.

1 Esdras
2 Esdras
Tobit
Judith
Additions to Esther
Wisdom of Solomon
Ecclesiasticus
Baruch
Letter of Jeremiah
Prayer of Azariah
Susanna
Bel and the Dragon
Prayer of Manasseh
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees


#24 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 04:22 PM

there's a shitload of stuff to attack about christianity as a whole, but the authenticity of jesus the historical figure is a tough one to take on. matthias (for once) is right about correlating lines of evidence.

but as usual the devil is in the details (pun intended) and the critical question is not whether jesus existed and was a major figure at the time, but whether or not he was a major figure because he performed actual miracles. if you want to get to the heart of the matter, that's it.

I always hear people say this. Know what I don't hear? Evidence that Jesus existed.

I asked the self professed biblical scholar for some, and all he can say is that there is evidence that Pilate existed.

I didn't ask about Pilate.

It's absolutely absurd to claim it's a tough claim to take on when there are literally 0 eyewitness or otherwise written accounts about these events until everyone supposedly involved was long dead.

#25 PhillyB

PhillyB

    hari kari for amari

  • ALL-PRO
  • 21,670 posts
  • Locationthird spur east of the sun

Posted 16 December 2012 - 05:53 PM

I always hear people say this. Know what I don't hear? Evidence that Jesus existed.

I asked the self professed biblical scholar for some, and all he can say is that there is evidence that Pilate existed.

I didn't ask about Pilate.

It's absolutely absurd to claim it's a tough claim to take on when there are literally 0 eyewitness or otherwise written accounts about these events until everyone supposedly involved was long dead.


i can't remember any of the sources off the top of my head by name so i'm not gonna claim absolute knowledge or infallibility... but there have been a number of historical texts besides the bible that mention his existence. i don't think many people attempt to dispute that.

but i'm not appealing to mass opinion, so i'll come back with the sources when they're available to me.

also at least two of the synoptics are dated to within the lifetime of the writers having seen jesus and interacted with him in their lifetimes. keep in mind also the historical context of information dissemination back then, with oral tradition playing a major part, one way or another, in how we examine the accuracy of claims

#26 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 06:38 PM

Again... For non-believers, the question should not be whether Jesus existed, the question for you is whether he did the works that are attributed to him.

This isn't that hard for those of you who have refused to research this before out of fear that there is indeed something greater than our own puny human brains:

The Christian gospels were written primarily as theological documents rather than historical chronicles.[129][130][290] However, the question of the existence of Jesus as a historical figure should be distinguished from discussions about the historicity of specific episodes in the gospels, the chronology they present, or theological issues regarding his divinity.[21] A number of historical non-Christian documents, such as Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus.[288]
Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed and regard events such as his baptism and his crucifixion as historical.[8][12][14][291][292][293][294] Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince scholars of many disciplines, and that classical historians, as well as biblical scholars now regard it as effectively refuted.[15] Referring to the theories of non-existence of Jesus, Richard A. Burridge states: "I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more."[17]
Separate non-Christian sources used to establish the historical existence of Jesus include the works of 1st century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus.[288][295] Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.[289][296][297][298] Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.[299]
The historical existence of Jesus as a person is a separate issue from any religious discussions about his divinity, or the theological issues relating to his nature as man or God.[300] Leading scientific atheist Richard Dawkins specifically separates the question of the existence of Jesus from the attribution of supernatural powers to him, or the accuracy of the Christian gospels.[301] Dawkins does not deny the existence of Jesus, although he dismisses the reliability of the gospel accounts.[301] This position is also held by leading critic G. A. Wells, who used to argue that Jesus never existed, but has since changed his views and no longer rejects it.[302]
In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity and neither pagans nor Jews questioned his existence.[128][303] Although in Dialogue with Trypho, the second century Christian writer Justin Martyr wrote of a discussion about "Christ" with Trypho, most scholars agree that Trypho is a fictional character invented by Justin for his literary apologetic goals.[304][305][306] While theological differences existed among early Christians regarding the nature of Jesus (e.g. monophysitism, miaphysitism, Docetism, Nestorianism, etc.) these were debates in Christian theology, not about the historical existence of Jesus.[307][308] A very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, but that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars view theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.[21][292][309]



Wiki ftw...

#27 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 07:45 PM

i can't remember any of the sources off the top of my head by name so i'm not gonna claim absolute knowledge or infallibility... but there have been a number of historical texts besides the bible that mention his existence. i don't think many people attempt to dispute that.


they should start until evidence is provided.

but i'm not appealing to mass opinion, so i'll come back with the sources when they're available to me.

also at least two of the synoptics are dated to within the lifetime of the writers having seen jesus and interacted with him in their lifetimes. keep in mind also the historical context of information dissemination back then, with oral tradition playing a major part, one way or another, in how we examine the accuracy of claims

this would be major news to me. i've heard of no claim of anyone ever writing an eyewitness account of Jesus, from no biblical scholar or historian, ever.

#28 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 07:49 PM

Again... For non-believers, the question should not be whether Jesus existed, the question for you is whether he did the works that are attributed to him.

This isn't that hard for those of you who have refused to research this before out of fear that there is indeed something greater than our own puny human brains:

[/sup]

Wiki ftw...

If you've researched this so much more than me then surely you can provide an account of Jesus written by someone who lived at the same time as him.

The person cited in the thing you quoted, Josephus, was born after Jesus died. He wasn't an eye witness.

#29 rodeo

rodeo

    Keelah se'lai

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,259 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 07:50 PM

Don't tell me what the question "should be" or "shouldn't be" until you actually prove something. You're demanding concessions out of the gate without putting up any effort. Doesn't work that way. Prove your claims.

#30 Proudiddy

Proudiddy

    The Thread Killer (Since 2004)

  • Moderators
  • 16,183 posts

Posted 16 December 2012 - 08:01 PM

Don't tell me what the question "should be" or "shouldn't be" until you actually prove something. You're demanding concessions out of the gate without putting up any effort. Doesn't work that way. Prove your claims.

I didn't address you or anyone else directly rodeo. I was just providing evidence of his existence. I'm not demanding concessions either. I'm not in limbo on what I believe. I don't know why your issue is with Jesus?

How many of the guys on the list in the first post are backed by "eye witness accounts?" Lol. How many are backed by credible, verifiable accounts during or after death (if those figures even truly existed).

That section I quoted states scholars, you know, most of whom probably aren't Christians, concur that Jesus existed.

So you dispute what hundreds of scholars unanimously agree on?

I'm not saying I've done more research than you, but those guys have. And I'm sorry to report, they didn't find any Flip Videos of Jesus, but they agree he was a real being on this Earth.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com