Faith. Not fact.
Yes thats what I'm saying, it takes faith to believe in Jesus the Son of God.
How do we know this. We find no claims to Joshua ben Joseph's alleged divinity until well after his death. How do we know Jesus Christ is any more representative of Joshua ben Joseph than Spider-man is of Peter Parker?
Jesus was known during His ministry mostly during the 3 years from 30 to 33 years of age. There is some info on His earlier life. But the name He was given was just the Jewish name as He was known as in the traditional sense. He was known as the Messiah when His ministry started and He was claiming to be the Son of God. But He became greater when He was crucified and resurrected. This caused many to rise up themselves and they had greater courage and conviction.
Luke 3:23
Now Jesus himself was about thirty years old when he began his ministry. He was the son, so it was thought, of Joseph, the son of Heli,
Sure you have: In the comic books. In the same way the claim of divinity is from the Bible. Do you disagree? Or is there a claim that doesn't stem from the Bible?
Speaking of confusing the two. Spider man in the comic is all fictional. The bible is not a comic. It has real people writing real things about real events. Apart from the supernatural most historians say that these are real places and events and people. They even use the bible as a map and reference for digging up the stories in the bible. And they actually find them where the bible says they were and then they find the bible they mention ect. But you cant dig up any evidence for the supernatural that is another thing.
Only the same lengths to deny Spider-man.
No its not and its getting ridiculous. Ive gone over this with a few people and it always end s up the same. But really I am not to bothered. As I said before It gets to a point where its a waste of time and effort. I only do this because I thought you had another point.
Are you saying that the people that claim to have known the man who was crucified on the cross by the Romans was Joshua ben Joseph or a different man or there was no person who claimed to be the son of God who was crucified on the cross by the Romans.
To be honest I havnt heard to many mention Joshua ben Joseph. I think some Jewish people have deducted this. Jesus was known as Joshua because the name is derived from that. It is also related to the divine meaning as the Jews had a lot of meaning to their names. The same for the names of God. But Jesus as known as the man who walked this earth, the one credited with the preaching and miracles and the one who was sentenced to death by Pilot he is a real person.
What source are you using to confirm that Joshua ben Joseph claimed to be the Son of God?
None because its a man made name from Jewish tradition.
Tons of people in the comics claim to have witnessed Peter Parker as Spider-man. Who are your witnesses to Joshua ben Joseph being the Son of God?
Those tons of people are also fictitious just like the comic. There are people who knew Jesus the man and the bible is full of them. As I have said before the bible is not a fictitious comic. There are also people throughout history that mention Jesus. But the bible is the greatest book. There are more words written about Jesus than any other person in history. Pretty good for a fictitious person. The encyclopedia Britannia dedicates over 20,000 words to hin and not once do they say He wasn't real.
Sure: Jay Leno, David Letterman and Oprah said so in the comics. Which real people claim Jesus is the Son of God?
Jay Leno was in the comic. Can you see to what lengths you are going now. Even if they were in the comic dont you think they would know the difference between a fictitious role play and real life. There are no real people in the spider man comic and story because it is not a real story. Its like the incredible hulk or Godzilla.
The disciples such as Peter, The Apostle Paul, John the Baptist,
Annas,
Caiaphas,
Herod Antipas,
James the brother of Jesus,
Pontius Pilate.
List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There are more but I will have to dig them up. There are writings of people who knew people who knew those who knew Jesus. In the Jewish tradition the stories were passed down verbally. It was a practiced thing. Also a person would become a disciple of someone and then they would have another person become a disciple of them and this kept the tradition going.
You have to also remember that some of these people who say they knew Jesus also mention things in the bible that have been verified. So they must have been real people who saw these things to know about them. An example is the pool called Bethesda mentioned by John in his gospel. He describes it in detail with five covered colonnades. Until the 19th century, there was no evidence outside of John for the existence of this pool and John’s unusual description
“caused bible scholars to doubt the reliability of John’s account, but the pool was duly uncovered in the 1930s – with four colonnades around its edges and one across its middle.
So it gives credence that those people were real because they could know and describe real things that have been verified by outside bible sources.
http://www.bethinking.org/is-the-bible-reliable/archaeology-and-the-historical-reliability-of-the-new-testament
What happened to the twelve (12) disciples of Jesus ?
As I said there are plenty of people who know Peter Parker. He even has his name in the newspaper regularly.
The one that spins webs out of his hands. So what if they know some bloke who is a journo of no great importance.
Stan Lee in collaboration with several artists, most notably
Jack Kirby and
Steve Ditko, he co-created
Spider-Man, the
Hulk, the
Fantastic Four,
Iron Man,
Thor, the
X-Men,
and many other fictional characters.
No. We don't know any of that is true. It could all be fabricated or exaggerated.
No we have evidence that at least some of the people are real. The reason we dont have it for all of them isn't because it never happen or they are not real. Its because we just dont have the evidence either way. But for those we do there is no denying. I will say it once again. Most historians and scholars say that there was a man named Jesus who walked the earth. As for His claim to fame of doing miracles and actually being the Son of God and rising from the dead well thats another thing. But He did claim to be the Son of God because thats what He was crucified for and Historians agree He was crucified by Pilot. The claims of Him doing miracles and rising from the dead are sworn by those who seen it. You have to decide whether they are all telling the truth or lying or they are deluded or crazy.
Firstly, a radical is someone who takes an extreme position, far from the traditional norm. Make no mistake, early Christians were radicals.
What makes you say that. From what I gather most were normal people like the poor average fisherman that were the disciples. But the many who lived as citizens of the roman empire there is nothing radical about them. It was the Romans who were doing the killing and destroyed Jerusalem and the temple. They even burnt their own city down and blamed the Christians.
Secondly, your argument is essentially that non-Christians are not genuine in their faith, and that only Christians can be martyrs. That's pretty biased and pretty offensive.
Well I am not the only one, have you heard of the war on terror. It has got to do with the radical Muslims that are blowing themselves and innocents up when they do their so called martyr acts like 9/11. There is no act of faith here but a brutal murders. But lets be clear there are people who die for a cause besides Christians and I am not knocking them I am merely stating that the Christians died for a just cause and were persecuted for their faith and didn't persecute others on their way to death.
Lastly, not only is it not direct evidence, it isn't evidence at all. It's irrelevent.
Thats fair enough.
I will forgo the clever answer and go right with: So what? Have you never heard someone claim Muhammad to be a prophet of Allah? You've never heard the claim that Joseph Smith is a prophet. There are living people who knew L. Ron Hubbard saved humanity. There is a man in Mexico who claims to be the Second Coming. Are you suggesting that all claims are true, or all truths have been claimed?
Not necessarily. I am saying that they cant be discounted either as much as people want to say they are false. I think there is a distinction between what a bloke claims at being the 2nd coming and having no one believe or follow him and Jesus who has influenced billions and changed history dont you. Either something was going on or He has pulled off the greatest hoax in history that has fooled presidents, intellects, poor, rich and many different people no just for a few years but for over 2000 years and still going.
Well that's pretty irrelevant. The planets are named for Roman Gods. The days of the week are named for Roman and Norse deities. Heck, Thursday is named for Thor. He who develops the system gets to set the parameters. If we find that Joshua ben Joseph or Jesus were not born in year 1, but in year 3 (which is far more probable) we would not change the year to 2011
Yeah fair enough. They say that His actual birth is not the 25th of DEC anyway. But its more about His influence over mankind. I dont think anyone is die for Thursday apart from waiting for it to come at the end of the week to get closer to finishing work. But yes these evidences are not great on their own but put all together with the rest it all adds up to some pretty good stuff IMO.
Where am I lacking? What kind of relevant evidence have you presented that I have not met with the same evidence?
Well the peter Parker thing is not very good. Its nothing like the evidence for Jesus and I think Ive showed that. But I know you will say it is still so.
I'm saying I don't believe the Bible and trust it as a historical resource as much as comic books.
Well you will have to check out the archeology discoveries that are proving the bible all the time.
archaeology can demonstrate that the places mentioned in the Gospels really existed and that customs, living conditions, topography, household and workplace furniture and tools, roads, coins, buildings and numerous other ‘stage props’ correspond to how the Gospels describe them. It can show that the names of certain characters in the Gospels are accurate, when we find inscriptional references to them elsewhere. Events and teachings ascribed to Jesus become intelligible and therefore plausible when read against everything we know about life in Palestine in the first third of the first century.[7]
Archaeology and the Historical Reliability of the New Testament - bethinking.org
Thomas was the doubter and wanted to touch the wounds of Jesus to see if it really was Him back from the dead. Jesus said OK now you have seen and you now believe but greater are those who believe and dont see. Jesus was thinking of all us in the future as well.
Its getting longer and longer.
as a "deal with it" emoticon. It makes me giggle.
