Writings During The Life of Jesus Prove His Existence?

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by BernardRichards, Jun 2, 2008.

  1. <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=1944479>

     
    #11     Jun 3, 2008
  2. This thread is not about religion bashing.

    This thread questions the validity of a historical Jesus based on the evidence available to us period.

    However, to some dogmatic and ignorant Christians doing so is sacrilegious, and equivalent to religion bashing.

    Hence, the immediate opposition (through ad hominem attacks) from some in this forum directed at me for putting forth this material instead of focusing on challenging the material I put forth with hard facts, and proving that it is in error to a reasonable person.

    Religion doesn't always divide and cause conflict. It does though if one is an ecumenical dogmatist since by definition every other religion or belief system is considered false, and must be eliminated from the face of the Earth.
     
    #12     Jun 4, 2008
  3. What does this reply have to do with the topic at hand ZZZzzzzzzz?

    What is with this cat and mouse game between you and Turok?

    The two of you don't even seem to have ideological differences.
     
    #13     Jun 4, 2008
  4. Well, I guess in your eyes - you are just "saving them".

    Missionaries and religious leaders have done so much vile throughout history that it sickens me to think it has not ended yet. Why can't you just let other people be - and let them think for themselves - let them come to you if they choose to ... ?

    Stop friggin preaching!
    :p
     
    #14     Jun 4, 2008

  5. Haha this thread is a joke

    It is widely accepted in academic circles by even SECULAR historians - that Jesus did in fact EXIST

    Now the $100 million dollar question is: 'Was he actually the savior?'

    This of course is up for debate


    And people say: 'Religion divides and causes conflict.'

    Yes - and this is AS IT SHOULD BE

    Jesus never came to bring peace, how can you bring peace when there is an eternal struggle between good and evil? Jesus stood for the truth and he wanted people to choose sides, you with him, or against him?
     
    #15     Jun 4, 2008
  6. Turok

    Turok

    Bernie:
    >What is with this cat and mouse game between
    >you and Turok?

    >The two of you don't even seem to have
    >ideological differences.

    LOL ... I do hope that last statement isn't a representative example of the quality of your research.

    JB
     
    #16     Jun 4, 2008
  7. Most historians would accept that Jesus existed, but they would also recognize that the historical documents on Jesus' life, death, and resurrection are problematic, since they were written long after Jesus' death and contain many contradictions.
     
    #17     Jun 4, 2008
  8. What appears most revealing of all, comes not from what people later wrote about BernardRichards but what people did not write about him. Consider that not a single historian, philosopher, scribe or follower who lived before or during the alleged time of Bernard, except for the more prominent and generally accepted ones, ever mentions him!

    Yes if we discount all of the actual records of Bernard Richards and his impact on others, there is no proof that he every existed.

    This is very similar to Jesus. If we disregard four seperate books about his life, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, and completely disregard the impact that he's had on mankind for generations from the movement he started and wars that have been fought in his name....if we discount all of that...then there isn't anything else.

    SM
     
    #18     Jun 4, 2008
  9. The term "religion" has become synonymous with "sin", the way I have defined it. It is often the unrepentant denial of reality in the name of God...full of insane notions taken way too seriously. Not all who say, "Lord, lord..." will understand the truth because they may not yet be interested in truth...may yet be afraid of love...afraid of salvation...afraid of God...afraid of oneness...afraid of joy...afraid of equality...afraid of Self...afraid of everything...and heavily invested in the unreality of this world. Such religions attempt to validate unreality by suggesting that our Father made this world. This is to value division. As such, "religion" divides, and with the concept of division comes conflict. A fear-based system won't work...won't bring peace.

    The truth brings peace. Peace is prerequisite to salvation. Salvation is for the mind that thinks itself not itSelf. There is no neutrality in this. You either think you are your Self, or you don't. Sides have already been chosen. The world is against Self. It is anti-Self, full of self-concepts...none of which are the truth. The choice is between sanity or insanity...healing or delusion...spirit or flesh. You are either for or against in this matter...there is no neutrality whether you are cognizant of this or not.

    Flesh is a self-concept which is divided, and so it wars. Flesh is an illusion. Illusions clash when they meet each other. Truth is above and beyond all of this. Illusions can have no effect on truth to change it whatsoever.

    Religion, as it ought to be, does not divide. It unites by distinguishing between the divided and the united. What is divided is an illusion...so it is false. What is united is true. It discerns between substitutes for unity, and unity Itself.

    The world, it is often said, is a unity. "Everything is connected". Some even relate to it, saying, "I am that". This is a truism, but not the truth. The world is a substitute for unity. In it, everything is given the appearance of autonomy. Here is worshipped "diversity". So it is the picture of division. As such, it is not the truth and therefore cannot exist. It is the incorrect answer to "What am I?". The truth is, I am one. I am everything that is real. The world is everything unreal. I am. The world is not. Get it?

    The world is a battleground between illusions. Religion, as it ought to be, simply redraws the lines between what is true and what is false...what is real and what is unreal...what is worthy of investment and what is not...what deserves a response, and what does not. Religion interprets a call to war as a call for help. This brings peace. The above post is a call to war. I have simply offered help.

    My truth is the same as yours. As a "man" I came to bring division. As the Son of God, I awaken to restore peace. Not as the world gives peace, but true peace of mind. Only when you have peace of mind will you remember who and what you are. In remembering is your salvation. Make peace, therefore, "in remembrance of me". If you remember "me", you will remember Self. Our Self is the Son. There is one Son. When you remember the Son, you will remember the Father.

    Jesus
     
    #19     Jun 4, 2008
  10. That is true. It is amusing when people try to assume that the most influential life in history may never have occurred, by assuming that if the rules don't follow 21st century logic, then it is suspect.

    Oral tradition, especially in Israel, was considered very reliable. Many people were illiterate. But they had powerful memories. Even in Medieval times, minstrels could memorize very lengthy verses or song in just a couple of hearings. We are incapable of this.

    People who discount things like this, were born sans intelligence, thinking ability, and historical understanding. And that is only the start.

    Ignorance and Stupidity are rampant among the historical revisionists in this thread/section of ET.

    "Gee, I iz a scientists. Duh, I emm a Skepptick. Iff I say sew, then Itt iz a moth (oops, I mena a Myth)."

    And SmilingSyncophant is one of their Depooties
     
    #20     Jun 4, 2008