Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
And you would think that someone rising from the dead and speaking to hundreds of people, not to mention ascending into the sky right in front of them, would produce extrabiblical records.
So says Luke...They did produce extrabiblical records; which were submitted to Luke for collation.
[bible]Luke 1:1-2[/bible]
My personal hypothesis is that St. Paul saw the Jewish Messiah during one of his epileptic fits, and wrote about him. Subsequent authors retroactively wrote the testimonies of the other disciples at various times. This explains:The idea that Jesus of Nazareth never existed is becoming a pet peeve of mine. Just what was Christianity based on if Jesus never existed? Did a bunch of Jews get together and decide to make up a savior so they could start their own religion? Where did the gospels come from? Were they all made up from scratch? If so, why were there so many conflicting gospels, the majority of which were discarded? Shouldn't there be only a few and shouldn't they all match up better than they do?
A distinct possibility. But I reject the authenticity of the New TestamentI find it hard to believe that Jesus never existed. I no longer believe he is God, nor do I believe he ever claimed to be (even in the gospels it is never claimed that he said he was God). I think that Jesus' influence on his followers was so profound, that he was deified after his death. That is why the accepted gospels have him rising from the dead, etc.
Yet our record of Roman documentation is rather complete: we even have divorce papers.Why the lack of contemporary written history? Jesus was likely illiterate, so wrote nothing himself (a terrible shame, that). The Romans likely saw him as nothing more than a trouble-maker who was dealt with like so many others.
Yes it would have Gone unnoticed. The romans mainly let the Jews handle their own affairs. It was the Jewish Temple the Romans would not give a rip. Even Pilate was afraid of starting trouble. There was an account of Jesus Trial (it was lost) but it has been quoted from by historians and apologists.Yet our record of Roman documentation is rather complete: we even have divorce papers.
The sentence to death by crucifixion of the King of the Jews, who caused all that ruckuss at the Temple, would not have gone unnoticed.
1 There probably wasWhy there are no contemporary documentation attesting to Jesus and/or his actions,
Why the gospels, when placed in order of writing, show an increase in Pagan-derived mythology (starting with scant references in Paul, to the full works: water to wine, raising the dead, crown of thorns, etc).
Why the gospels are internally inconsistent (they were written to appease potential converts, to record the legends that had grown up around Jesus, etc).
Etc.
did you even read my link!?...
That is the answer to the "problem of evil".
I find it hard to believe that Jesus never existed. I no longer believe he is God, nor do I believe he ever claimed to be (even in the gospels it is never claimed that he said he was God). I think that Jesus' influence on his followers was so profound, that he was deified after his death. That is why the accepted gospels have him rising from the dead, etc.
There were, I believe, plenty of loonies around at the time, and they still pop from time to time. It's not implausible that one might get so popular he ends up being raised to the position of Godhood.Why the lack of contemporary written history? Jesus was likely illiterate, so wrote nothing himself (a terrible shame, that). The Romans likely saw him as nothing more than a trouble-maker who was dealt with like so many others. As far as the miracles not being written of, I doubt they actually happened. That does not mean Jesus did not exist, and did not preach his view of the Hebrew God.
I'm sorry, where are the contemporary documents? The earliest one is only dated at 30-50CE because Gerd Theissen (the scholar who dated them) assumed the NT narrative to be at least approximately true. That is, if Jesus didn't exist, such a dating method wouldn't work.
You asked for accounts of Jesus. Not contemporary documents. Check what quote I was responding to. There is far more evidence for Jesus than there is for the wealth of ancient historical figures individually. Why is Jesus so special that you have to make conspiracy theories about him? Also, the '70's and hundreds' line you gave is not at all true one can easily reason out their ages to fall well within the given dates.I'm sorry, where are the contemporary documents? The earliest one is only dated at 30-50CE because Gerd Theissen (the scholar who dated them) assumed the NT narrative to be at least approximately true. That is, if Jesus didn't exist, such a dating method wouldn't work.
After that, the texts either have to be copies of copies, or written when the disciples were in their 70s-100s
Isa 14:12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! Isa 14:13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: Isa 14:14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
So...
How many accounts of Jesus's life or even existence aside from that in the Bible are there?
PS, saying Adam made evil come doesn't solve the problem of evil. You still have an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God who created a species with the capability to sin, do evil and ruin something that is supposedly 'perfect' and is continually not solving these problems he is ultimately responsible for, supposedly being without flaw or err.
"As for other accounts from Jesus life outside the four Gospels, there are a number. Or at least a number dealing very heavily with his life. There is not any sort of 'lack' of evidence despite what the pseudo-intellectual pop culture will tell you."You asked for accounts of Jesus. Not contemporary documents. Check what quote I was responding to.
Yet you have given me no contemporary documents. I believe the Egyptians existed because there are bloоdy great pyramids in Egypt, not to mention contemporary documents. I believe in Homer because there are contemporary documents attesting to his existance.There is far more evidence for Jesus than there is for the wealth of ancient historical figures individually.
Because we are discussing the historicity of Jesus. Beyond this forum, I don't give an air-borne faeces whether he existed or not.Why is Jesus so special that you have to make conspiracy theories about him?
Do elaborate.Also, the '70's and hundreds' line you gave is not at all true one can easily reason out their ages to fall well within the given dates.
I'm a scientist. If the evidence suggested that pigs fly, I'd open an patent wingchopsI think you are trying to hard. Why not let history speak for itself? Must you try to form fit the evidence into your little schemas that lack it?
[/i][/font][/b]
Is that about an angel or is it in reference to the king of Babylon? In the context of the quote it appears that earlier, in Isaiah 14:4 that this is directed at the king of Babylon.
"That thou shalt take up this proverb against the king of Babylon, and say, How hath the oppressor ceased! the golden city ceased!"
Is there any other indication in the Bible concerning "Lucifer"? Also, where is the story of Lucifer as an angel and not in a commentary that can likely be directed at a person, outlined?
The whole story people have built up around Lucifer, satan and the devil would be interesting to better understand.
There is certainly a lot of "certainty" about who is doing what and why in discussions like this.
Not really. Why did God create a world in which there were (or there were going to be if, for some unsupportable reason, you believe there were none at creation) earthquakes, plagues, droughts, floods, volcanic eruptions and so on?
Answers to above:[/color]This is not what is meant by the problem of evil:
- Evil (suffering, etc) exists.
- An omnipotent being gets what it wants.
- An omnibenevolent being wants only good to exist / wants no evil to exist.
- From (2) and (3), an omnibenevolent omnipotence will not allow evil to exist.
- Therefore, an omnibenevolent omnipotence does not exist in our universe, since if it did, evil would not exist (see (4)), but it does (see (1)).
Therefore, any deity that does exist cannot be both all-powerful and all-loving. Why worship a being that is not all-loving? Why worship a being that is not all-powerful?
Why did God do nothing about it? If he is powerful, he could do it. If he is good, he would want it. What, then, is holding him back?
Note that the 'free will' argument belies a good god.
He doesn't really need to try.You really try to stir up contention around here, don't you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?