Archaeological evidence of Jesus?

CoolBreeze

There is allready a thread on this subject.

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/forum/thread.aspx?id=39078&site=3

Anton

Scorpion

Thank you Anton. I was not aware that this was posted. Too many topics to keep up with.

barry

This may be a problem for the Catholics because they say Mary was allways a virgin and that Jesus had no brothers or sisters. Barry

Farkel

No sensible person will deny that Jesus existed.

Sensible people only want to know that he was who he claimed to be.

So far he ain't. I'm willing to hear evidence. I mean EVIDENCE. Stories don't count. Belly up, you true believers. You'd better have some FACTS or I will demolish your arguments.

Farkel

Trying to prove things to someone who is committed to non-belief is futile and unproductive. Christ while he was alive performed great miracles in the presence of the people but despite it by the majority they would not believe.
Don'tget me wrong I am not suggesting that people should believe everyone that performs amazing acts are from God. I saw magician David Blane the other night levitate about a foot off the ground in normal street conditions with no props.

He didn't fool anybody that it was supernatural as people were made well aware he was a magician. So the question is whether we are denying something that is beneficial for us to believe or are we believing something that is unbeneficial to believe like there is no God o that Christ is not his son.

Certainly if Christ is not the son of God there is no hope. Believe it or not.

The problem is that these are unbelievers with child abandonment and mistrust issues.

It the same thing that makes you deny God exists or that Solomon was not the wisest man, etc.

You'll work it out someday I'm convinced, once you realize whats really wrong.

Zechariah

seedy3

Farkel said:

No sensible person will deny that Jesus existed.

Umm I happen to disagree, there is no historical evidence that he did exist, so therefore that statement is not really correct. I think it should be more "Any sensible person would question if he did exist."

Seedy

P.S. I as well would love to hear any reliable evidence that he did exist and he did what he is supposed to have done.

seedy3

Zach,

Christ while he was alive performed great miracles in the presence of the people but despite it by the majority they would not believe.

If he did such GREAT works why did no first century historian mention him?? and Joshphes did not write during Christs time so don't mention him, even his records have been suspect of being rewritten by a christian idiot. tell me about Philo, Justin of Alexanderia, both lived during Jesus time and made NO mention of any GREAT miricale worker, so......... lets hear it.

Seedy

edited, cause I forgot the Quote

Edited by - seedy3 on 22 October 2002 7:40:57

Robdar

there is no historical evidence that he did exist, so therefore that statement is not really correct

Seedy3,

I like your argument but see only one flaw. There is no historical evidence that some of my ancestors existed and yet I am still here...or, I think I am here. Am I here?

Reminds me of joke I heard....A philosopher walks into a bar. The bartender says "may I help you?" The philosopher replies "I think not" and POOF! he disappeared.

Well, I thought it was funny when I heard it.

Love,

Robyn

PS: There really is no historical evidence that Will Shakespeare existed either. Only a collection of writings that could have been written by anybody using a nom de plume.

SixofNine

Robdar, you are historical evidence that your ancestors exist. And, I'm sure, there are many other historical evidences as well, perhaps letters your grandfather wrote his mom. The same is not true of Jesus. The big guru dude didn't see fit to write a damn thing.

I think seedy is right. Emotion, not reason, is the only reason anyone feels 100% sure that Jesus existed, at this point. I tend to think the weight of evidence leans strongly toward some religious figure named Jesus being factual, but that is as far as it goes. I just saw mentioned in the news story that spawned this conversation, that Jesus was a common name in Isreal at the time of our calendar change.

btw, whoever was using the nom de plume "shakespeare" was shakespear, in that example, Robdar. I don't think you are understanding the difference between Jesus and your other examples. But those differences are there, and they are large.

Archaeological evidence of Jesus?

Share this