No it isnt...but some people want to rationalize everything. You apply different methods of witnessing to different people. For example, i have two friends that i have been witnessing to. They are both smart people and want facts based on logic etc...So for those people, i might give analogies (spelt right?) that daveleau suggested. It comes to a point where you cant rationalize everything, some questions werent meant to be answered. Thats why there is faith.
Last edited by Meaning0fLifeis42; 1st June 2007 at 08:16 AM.
Were you responding to my post or the original post?
Just wondering, no big deal.
Thanks and God bless,
--Ben
__________________ "But when the Holy Spirit comes upon you, you will be filled with power, and you will be witnesses for me in Jerusalem, in all of Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth."
I know Jesus is real because I met Him and He changed my life. He has changed the lives of other people I know, as well.
One example: Even though I took a number of different martial arts, I was afraid of dying; I was always anticipating what I would do if someone were to pull a gun on me. Now, I no longer worry about that, because if I die, I know for a fact that I'll be in Heaven.
Another example: My youngest brother did all sorts of drugs, used to get in fights every day at school, used to steal things, pulled a gun on me, etc. After he got saved, he became a minister, and has even preached at churches in Cuba.
Yet another example: One time I was hiking with a group. I was last in line, and for some reason that I forget, I got so mad that I broke my walking stick against a tree. I dropped to my knees and prayed, and when I got up, I was jumping and bouncing from excitement. God had changed my attitude in an instant. I ran to catch up to the group, filled with joy.
These are only three of many instances where God has worked in my life. Other born-again believers could give many examples as well.
"Thou hast put gladness in my heart, more than in the time that their corn and their wine increased." (Psalm 4:7)
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Christ is not valued at all
unless He is valued above all." -Augustine
You're never going to be able to prove that Jesus existed by quoting things from the bible. Especially if the person you're trying to persuade doesnt believe the bible is the word of God.
We need logical arguments when witnessing to these people...cold hard facts. We have no proof that Jesus did the things he did - we take it on faith because it's written in the bible.
I've had years of problems proving Jesus' existance to my family who dont believe in Gods word.
Does anyone know of any authors that have published archeological works on this subject - I'd love to have this ready the next time I'm asked to prove my faith.
You're never going to be able to prove that Jesus existed by quoting things from the bible. Especially if the person you're trying to persuade doesnt believe the bible is the word of God.
We need logical arguments when witnessing to these people...cold hard facts. We have no proof that Jesus did the things he did - we take it on faith because it's written in the bible.
I've had years of problems proving Jesus' existance to my family who dont believe in Gods word.
Does anyone know of any authors that have published archeological works on this subject - I'd love to have this ready the next time I'm asked to prove my faith.
xxx
Regarding witnessing to Atheists/Agnostics in general, I would recommend:
- "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis (a classic!)
- "The Case for Christianity" by C.S. Lewis (regarding belief in God in general)
- "The Problem of Pain" by C.S. Lewis (which addresses the question that Atheists/Agnostics often ask, "If God is both all-powerful and a God of love, why is there so much evil in the world? If He cares about us and He is all powerful, then it logically follows that He should end all evil and pain. Because there is so much evil in the world, then God is either not loving, or not all-powerful, or both.")
- "The Resurrection Factor" by Josh McDowell (showing that Jesus really did rise from the dead)
- "Evidence That Demands A Verdict" by Josh McDowell (very deep and intellectually-based book addressing the historical accuracy and integrity of the Bible, which confronts the issues the way a lawyer would; note: not an easy read)
- "Christianity for Skeptics" by Steve Kumar (a very brief, summarized overview examining such questions as, "Does God exist," "Is Atheism rational," "Is the Bible the Word of God," "If there is a God, why is there evil," etc.)
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Christ is not valued at all
unless He is valued above all." -Augustine
Here's some helpful information to get you started, regarding the claim that Jesus was only a legend, etc.:
"To begin with, half a century ago, Roman historian A. N. Sherwin-White, an expert in first-century Greek and Roman history, has noted that the rate at which legend accumulated in Jesus' day has been fairly accurately determined (A. N. Sherwin-White, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament [Clarendon, 1963], pp. 186-93). Sherwin-White claims that even two generations is too short a time frame to allow legend to replace the hard core of historical fact.
Sherwin-White's point can be strengthened when we realize that first-century Jewish culture was an oral culture; that is, it preserved and passed on its important traditions largely through memorization and oral performance/recitation in community gatherings (see James D. G. Dunn, A New Perspective on Jesus [Baker, 2005]). In such a culture, memorization skills were well-developed, and there was both the ability and concern to pass on the unchanged words and deeds of important religious figures. Thus, the tradition about Jesus between AD 33 when He was crucified until the Gospels were written would have been passed on and preserved in an oral context that would strengthen historical preservation and make legendary development even more unlikely than it would in the general Roman and Greek culture.
The Dating of Matthew, Mark and Luke
The late J. A. T. Robinson held to a late dating of the gospels (AD 70-100) until some of his conservative students challenged him to reconsider their dating with an open mind (cf. his Redating the New Testament [Westminster, 1976]). To his amazement, he discovered that the late dating was based largely on one scholar quoting another in one big circle. His own study of the issue led him to date all the gospels prior to AD 70. In my view, one of the most sophisticated treatments of the dating question is John Wenham's Redating Matthew, Mark, and Luke (InterVarsity, 1992). Wenham argues that the Gospels should be dated between the early forties to the late fifties.
In Acts, the city of Jerusalem and martyrdoms are clearly important, yet neither the fall of Jerusalem nor the executions of Acts' three central figures are mentioned.
We can date Acts pretty reliably at AD 60-62. In Acts, the city of Jerusalem and martyrdoms (Stephen and James the brother of John) are clearly important, yet neither the fall of Jerusalem (AD 70) nor the executions of Acts' three central figures — James the brother of Jesus, Peter and Paul (AD 62-67) — are mentioned. The best explanation is that Acts was written before these events, an explanation made more secure when one notes that the last chapter of Acts has a sense of immediacy about it and presents Paul still under arrest in Rome (AD 60-62). This means that Luke must be dated earlier than Acts, and if, as most scholars accept, Luke knew of Matthew and Mark (see Luke 1:1-4), the first three Gospels were written within thirty years after Jesus' death, well within Sherwin-White's two generations.
Typically, liberal Bible scholars reject an early dating, preferring AD 70-100. But even this date fits within the two-generation framework. Further, the two key planks in this later dating are:
It takes time for Christology to evolve from a charismatic leader to a divine figure, so the Gospels must be late.
The earliest gospel — Mark — contains predictive prophesy (in Mark 13, Jesus predicts the fall of Jerusalem); any predictive prophesy is likely to be a fiction, so Mark must be dated at or shortly after AD 70.
These two planks are question-begging — they assume a legendary view to argue for the late date that (allegedly) supports the legendary view. And they are expressions of bias. As such, they place a straight jacket on historical investigation in a way that disallows evidence for an early dating from the outset. The early dating suffers from no such bias, being established on objective historical and literary arguments (for example, the dating of the fall of Jerusalem).
Paul Letters
The epistles of the Apostle Paul were written from AD 49-65. Thus, they provide a sixteen year period to test the evolutionary, legend thesis. But when we look at his letters, his view of Jesus is the same in both his earliest letter (Galatians) and his last letters (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus). Further, his view of Jesus is uniformly high — he knows of no merely charismatic teacher; he only knows of a miracle-working, incarnate Son of God. This means that Paul had already come to accept a supernatural view of Jesus sometime before AD 49.
Paul's view of Jesus is the same in both his earliest letter (Galatians) and his last letters (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus).
Some scholars attempt to marginalize Paul by claiming that he was in serious conflict with Peter such that Paul's Christology is not representative of the early church. Unfortunately, this claim is a significant exaggeration for which there is no sufficient evidence. Their confrontation about certain issues (for example, Peter eating with Jews to the exclusion of Gentiles) hardly justifies this hasty generalization. Moreover, Paul himself checked out his gospel and Christology to make sure it was in harmony with the rest of the early church (cf. Galatians 1 and 2). This means that we have solid historical evidence that the early church had accepted a full-blown view of Jesus before AD 49, again, well within two generations.
But there's more. Paul wrote his letters in Greek and addressed them to Gentiles who did not know Hebrew or Aramaic, the language of the Jews. However, in various places in his letters (for example, Romans 1:3-4; 1 Corinthians 11:23ff, 15:3-8; Philippians 2:6-11; Colossians 1:15-18; 1 Timothy 3:16; 2 Timothy 2:8) we come across a few verses that translate easily back from Greek into Aramaic (while the rest of the epistle does not) and that exhibit traits of Hebrew poetry.
Many NT scholars take these passages to be early hymns and creeds that originated from and were used in church services in the early Jewish church in Jerusalem from AD 33 on, and which Paul translates into Greek and incorporates into his letters. Thus, these various hymns and creeds embedded in Paul's writings show that the early Jewish Christian community had a high, supernatural Christology at a very early date — between AD 35-45. Where is the time for legend to accrue here?
The materials in the New Testament that present a full-blown, supernatural Jesus originated well within the timeframe in which legend begins to prevail, and they were written while hostile and friendly eyewitnesses were in place.
Much more could be said, but one thing seems clear. The materials in the NT that present a full-blown, supernatural Jesus originated well within the timeframe in which legend begins to prevail, and they were written while hostile and friendly eyewitnesses were in place. As Peter said, "we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty" (2 Peter 1:16, NASB)." http://www.trueu.org/Academics/Lectu...A000000262.cfm
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Christ is not valued at all
unless He is valued above all." -Augustine
JebusKryst, here is some information that directly addresses the issue of Jesus' existence:
"Question: "Did Jesus really exist? Is there any historical evidence of Jesus Christ?"
Answer: Typically when this question is asked, the person asking qualifies the question with "outside of the Bible." We do not grant this idea that the Bible cannot be considered a source of evidence for the existence of Jesus. The New Testament contains hundreds of references to Jesus Christ. There are those who date the writing of the Gospels in the second century A.D., 100+ years after Jesus' death. Even if this were the case (which we strongly dispute), in terms of ancient evidences, writings less than 200 years after events took place are considered very reliable evidences. Further, the vast majority of scholars (Christian and non-Christian) will grant that the Epistles of Paul (at least some of them) were in fact written by Paul in the middle of the first century A.D., less than 40 years after Jesus' death. In terms of ancient manuscript evidence, this is extraordinarily strong proof of the existence of a man named Jesus in Israel in the early first century A.D.
It is also important to recognize that in 70 A.D., the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants. Entire cities were literally burned to the ground! We should not be surprised, then, if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. Many of the eye-witnesses of Jesus would have been killed. These facts likely limited the amount of surviving eyewitness testimony of Jesus.
Considering the fact that Jesus' ministry was largely confined to a relatively unimportant backwater area in a small corner of the Roman Empire, a surprising amount of information about Jesus can be drawn from secular historical sources. Some of the more important historical evidences of Jesus include the following:
The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious "Christians " ("named after Christus" which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (Annals 15.44 ).
Flavius Josephus is the most famous Jewish historian. In his Antiquities he refers to James, “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” There is a controversial verse (18:3) that says, "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats. . . . He was [the] Christ . . . he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him." One version reads, "At this time there was a wise man named Jesus. His conduct was good and [he] was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those who became his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion, and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
Julius Africanus quotes the historian Thallus in a discussion of the darkness which followed the crucifixion of Christ (Extant Writings, 18).
Pliny the Younger, in Letters 10:96, recorded early Christian worship practices including the fact that Christians worshiped Jesus as God and were very ethical, and includes a reference to the love feast and Lord’s Supper.
The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a) confirms Jesus' crucifixion on the eve of Passover, and the accusations against Christ of practicing sorcery and encouraging Jewish apostasy.
Lucian of Samosata was a second-century Greek writer who admits that Jesus was worshiped by Christians, introduced new teachings, and was crucified for them. He said that Jesus' teachings included the brotherhood of believers, the importance of conversion, and the importance of denying other gods. Christians lived according to Jesus’ laws, believed themselves immortal, and were characterized by contempt for death, voluntary self-devotion, and renunciation of material goods.
Mara Bar-Serapion confirms that Jesus was thought to be a wise and virtuous man, was considered by many to be the king of Israel, was put to death by the Jews, and lived on in the teachings of his followers.
Then we have all the Gnostic writings (The Gospel of Truth, The Apocryphon of John, The Gospel of Thomas, The Treatise on Resurrection, etc.) that all mention Jesus.
In fact, we can almost reconstruct the gospel just from early non-Christian sources: Jesus was called the Christ (Josephus), did “magic,” led Israel into new teachings, and was hanged on Passover for them (Babylonian Talmud) in Judea (Tacitus), but claimed to be God and would return (Eliezar), which his followers believed - worshipping Him as God (Pliny the Younger).
In conclusion, there is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and Biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the 12 apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie." http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Christ is not valued at all
unless He is valued above all." -Augustine
Regarding Pliny the Younger, mentioned in my previous post, here is some more info on him:
"Pliny the Younger, like Josephus, Tacitus, and others, wrote extra-biblical documents that help to confirm the Bible is authentic. He was a government official whose writings describe early Christian beliefs and practices.
Pliny the Younger was a Roman author and administrator. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.
Pliny describes the early Christian worship practices in that letter:
“They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food — but food of an ordinary and innocent kind”
(Pliny the Younger, L 10:96).
This reference provides hard evidence that Jesus Christ was worshiped as God from an early date by Christians who continued to follow the practice of breaking bread together, as reported in Acts 2:42,46.
So Pliny never wrote any of the New Testament. He wasn't even a Christian. In fact, he was an enemy of Christians.
"Along with Tacitus and Suetonius, Pliny the Younger must be allowed to take a seat among hostile Roman witnesses. In approximately A.D. 110-111, Pliny was sent by the Roman emperor Trajan to govern the affairs of the region of Bithynia. From this region, Pliny corresponded with the emperor concerning a problem he viewed as quite serious. He wrote: “I was never present at any trial of Christians; therefore I do not know the customary penalties or investigations and what limits are observed” (as quoted in Wilken, 1990, p. 4). He then went on to state:
This is the course that I have adopted in the case of those brought before me as Christians. I ask them if they are Christians. If they admit it, I repeat the question a second and a third time, threatening capital punishment; if they persist, I sentence them to death (as quoted in Wilken, p. 4).
Pliny used the term “Christian” or “Christians” seven times in his letter, thereby corroborating it as a generally accepted term that was recognized by both the Roman Empire and its emperor. Pliny also used the name “Christ” three times to refer to the originator of the “sect.” It is undeniably the case that Christians, with Christ as their founder, had multiplied in such a way as to draw the attention of the emperor and his magistrates by the time of Pliny’s letter to Trajan. In light of this evidence, it is impossible to deny the fact that Jesus Christ existed and was recognized by the highest officials within the Roman government as an actual, historical person." http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/157
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Christ is not valued at all
unless He is valued above all." -Augustine
Linear Mode
