The problem with Jesus as a work of fiction is the number of people who wrote on him that were not Christian. The writings of Josephus, being most notable. If Jesus was fictitious (like Superman, Batman, etc), then the idea of people dying for him becomes inexplicable. There are zero recorded cases in history where entire civilizations have dedicated their lives to and died for a fictitious character.
xenoranger79 they didnt. Its just a story for an italian invader purpose. In the story, they all abandon him at the resurrection. You didnt listen to this video. Preconceived notions aint no good anymore
Josephus didn't write about Jesus, he wrote about the religious cult his followers founded. No one who ever personally knew Jesus ever wrote anything that survives to this day-- the stories we have were written at least decades after he was supposed to have lived by anonymous authors. The earliest Gospel manuscript that we physically have dates to the 4th century.
@@luvdomus I refuse to believe you're going to use that bad of an argument. We're almost over 100 years from the Christmas Truce of 1914, yet as remarkable as it is, we believe the story. No one alive today was there. No one today knows anyone who was there. You could look, but would never find a contemporary of someone there. But, we believe. The oldest that I know of is P75, which dates to 225 at the latest. +195 (at most) years after the ministry of Jesus. This debunks your claim that we don't have documentation until +400. We also have the letter from Pliny to Tarjan, which dates 112. We're now +82 years. In this letter, Pliny writes that Christians prayed to Christ as they would a god. 82 years after Jesus, you have a document marked reliable by scholars stating that Jesus was worshiped as God. Are you asserting that 82 years after an event, no one would know enough about a cult to call them out? We still know plenty about the Moonies, the Manson Family, Jonestown, and so forth. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons (Latter Day Saints) can't hide the sorted histories of their founders. In 82 years, Rome should've had some document to put to rest that they had punished Jesus of Nazareth by crucifixion and disposed of his body. There would be some documentation that they paraded his remains to stop the Christian cult of their age. Yet, so this day, no such documents exist. Please do more research instead of relying on bad arguments.
And yeah, the evidence for a historical Jesus is overwhelming. We have Pliny, Tacitus, Thallus, Josephus, Mara bar Sarapion, Suetonius, Lucian, Celsus, Church Fathers, the New Testament, non-canonical orthodox books such as Shepherd of Hermas & Didache, then we have apocryphal texts such as the early gnostics gospels (See Thomas) and a reference to Jesus in Jewish oral traditions.
There's two mentions of Jesus by Josephus, one of them is agreed to be authentic. Complete scholarly consensus. The other one, it's argued it could've been fiddled with or added in completely altogether. But from what I understand even that is a minority view among scholars today. So in other words, every scholar that lives agrees Josephus did infact mention Jesus. Regardless, we have an overwhelming about of evidence. Thallus, Tacitus, Josephus, church fathers, canonicals, apocrypha, etc...
Ding ding ding. You just summed up the mainstream SECULAR scholarly position on Jesus, that he was a real person and that he didn't perform miracles. NO secular scholar disagrees with that position. What they disagree with is you going 500 steps further and claiming the man never existed.
Even the idiots in the jewish priest circle acused him for "making wichcraft" , or in other words : doing things that were not possible, and so were called magical wichcraft. If you didn't do wichcraft or impossible things people would simply say that you were a charlatain and a liar. But no, even the people that hated him and wanted him dead knew that he did impossible things and couldn't deny it. History is in the details, always. Take it as you will. Miracles and impossible sruff occur all the time, if the scientific.circles don't care about them is just thst "don't care".It doesn't mean that they do not occur.
why do you question if god is real or not. There is proof.. for example.) Noah's ark hmm they had found the ark. what about jesus. he did perform miracles and he was here ... god had sent him to earth 2014 years ago for a reason and the reason was to get us as people to believe and have our faith in him. and if there isnt a god why do people debate about weather hes real or not. like i dont know if you people notice but the world IS ENDING and when christ returns your screwed for not believing
The legend of Jesus doesn't have to be EITHER history or a hoax, it could have been inspired by a real person or persons' lives and elaborated on and used as a symbol of the early Evangelists ideals. Truth is easily twisted and changed in a short time, and the Jeus myth is like a snowbal that has rolled down 2000 years of history, picking up a lot of baggage as it went.
The people who actually wrote down the bible in its original form weren't the same Aramaic peasants who had passed on the stories in oral form. It was written down in Greek by far more intelligent writers who knew a good story when they heard one. If Christianity works for you Colin, all well and good. I have too many unanswered questions to believe it myself.
A simple aid in understanding the true, original gospel is simply removing the superstitious myth of Hell. The followers of Christ believed that God simply cut off the wicked from the living and that one day he would raise them and judge them and they would be sentenced to penance or destroyed. Those who heard and believed in Jesus teachings do not die and cannot die so they are transformed from the moment of death to a new living soul outside the body and go to God. We know this from NDE's.
If you are honest you will agree that Jesus is not like batman to begin with do you know of anyone willing to die for Batman.The fact that people died for the Christian faith,the fact of the persecution of non christians is attested by nonchristians like Tacitus and Pliny
I think the questioner is confusing historical interpretation and narrative. Because there are lot of factors it's hard to pinpoint causes of things in history (great depression, collapse of the ussr, etc) but the narrative could corroborated with a great certainly from primary accounts. I know beyond the shadow of doubt that Xerxes or Tiberius existed, because of multiple independent sources verify that he did exist.
Garegin Asatryan You end up with historical facts from the sources. Everything else is a logical outgrowth from the Historian. This is true in antiquity & today. As long as you view any history as such, you should not be fooled. It is still facts & knowledge. God Bless
NDE's start with a release of DMT in the brain, unless a soul is clinically dead, he may be experiencing a hallucination. All visions of Hell are hallucinations and are the work of the mind. Those who have fully died see God as glorious light and love, they meet relatives. They are guided to their family and Jesus gathers us all, as many as possible to restore us. He leaves the 99 for the one and we see his power and love him forever. Even his mercy by simply destroying the wicked is remarkable.
Yes, but wasn't Jesus referring to his followers who were around him at the time, I don't believe he was talking about future generations. He said something to that effect in his sermon on the mount. With regards NDE's, people from all different faiths and cultures experience a similar thing, yet they are not Christians.
"I will pour my spirit on ALL flesh" - Jesus has given us all the opportunity to go to him at death as well as while we are alive. Paul said "we shall not all sleep but will be changed in a twinkling of an eye" Jesus, when he said "there will be some standing here that will not taste death" he was referring to the effect of his teaching "if you believe in me you will never die" and they didn't. We don't wait to see God at the last trump - we go to him immediately! What can separate us?? cont...
For all the doubters/skeptics here in the comment section read the following. Let's face it folks, we'll never be able to figure everything out and especially when it comes to the historicity of many things. This is largely due to the overwhelming arguments and debates that have been generated all throughout history from both truth and lies. We are way to often left at the mercy of our own understanding which can often sell us short. We will believe one side or the other or often we just want to throw our hands up and ask, who knows to believe as indecisiveness can dominate. Personally, I wish that there was more verifiable proof outside of the bible that would put all the arguments to rest. I do know however that if anyone is willing to put God to the test, He will always confirm Himself to that individual as it is His will that all would come to repentance and know Him. As life is full of choices, God will grant us undeniable confirmation of Himself and to His interest in whosoever will ask Him to do so. We will then be left with a clear choice. What we do with that confirmation will be up to us but either way, we will know beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a redeemer (God) and that He has confirmed Himself and His salvation to whomever will ask Him to do so. On the basis of it being accepted, although we will always have questions, the historicity will not so much be an issue as He Himself will make Himself a present tense reality, verifying that His word is true. Oh yes, you will know! The only debate then will be with oneself as we will have to decide which way we want to go.
@@bonnie43uk Sorry, right now I am doing some plumbing but I will certainly get back with you here shortly my friend. We sprang a leak here at the house.
I would also like to add that there is a debate concerning the historicity of the supernatural events of Christ. William Lane Craig makes the argument that the Resurrection is historical: /watch?v=oAxPHWF8aec
Is not an argument, is in fact historical. Even atheist scholars agree that people and the apostles really saw him, just don't agree that it was true but atribute that to " mass alucination" ( something that is not possible) or , like other, that it was a twin that came to Judea at the same time ( yes, seriously ) , among other atempts to explain it. the fac that even unbias historical acounts from people in the roman empire atrubute to Christ the fact that he did " sorcery and raised confusion" should not contribute to the evidence, right ? lol Keep it real and undestand what you read . The facts are facts: Jesus was born, grew up, eat, breed, drank, preached, was persecuted, suffered, died in a cross, his tomb was empty after ( with roman soldiers in front of the stone that needed more that 2 men to move it at all ) and after that apeared to the apostles and other people. Period.
Paul said "Those who are in Christ rise first to meet him" - misunderstood to be at the end of time or at the final trumpet, even Paul may not have known how this all worked, after all it was a mystery. The mystery is over! Blessed is God for his mercy on both the just and the wicked. If a soul draws to him, he will be received. As revelation says "If anyone thirsts, let him come and drink". There is no escaping judgement and he will not torture souls in Hell as the myth says. Death is the end.
if we had eternal souls we would be gods, that's not at all in the book. We are mortal without the spirit of God driving us. We don't receive eternal life in Hell, that's not rational, we are destroyed and life is removed - we no longer deserve life.
The moderator/questioner doesn't seem so well-grounded in reality as Peter Williams. His idea that real contradictions are not a problem is utterly silly. He's a victim of his own bluster.
I totally agree. He was a bad choice in moderator and a poor counter-point to Peter Williams. A gospel hypothetically stating that Jesus was born in Egypt would be a major problem for any thinking person. Not just because it throws doubt on the accurateness of everything else in the gospel but if Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem then the prophesy about his birth in Micah 5:2 would be false. God would have made a prophesy that was a lie.
An analytical look at scripture will clear things up pretty quick. Here's an example... The demons "Legion" asked "do not send us into the wilderness" -no mention of Hell. Also, almost every other demon acknowledged that jesus was the Messiah and added "have you come to destroy us?" That pretty clear, he means a final destruction and again, no mention of Hell, but someone could say "That's because he's in Hell already" but he wasn't, he was in a man's flesh. Then Jesus clarifies... continued...
...Jesus says "when a demon leaves you he goes and gets 7 more demons and returns finding the house clean..." - again, where's Hell. Then you have the famous tale of Lazarus and the beggar, which does not match the style of the other parables Jesus told. Here's the best one and you know it so well, or do you? John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that he gave his son, that whoever believes will not PERISH, but have eternal life". Plain as day, clear as a bell, the entire gospel in one verse.
All roads lead to Rome , we know what they choose , life is energy , good is good , when one dies that energy , your spark is released into the universe to think man knows what where ect is silly . The bible is just a good guide to living well and full ... just stories . Just a book ..
Josephus mentions Jesus as a person and lists him as his messiah. Tacitus, Thallus, Pliny, the church fathers, the four gospels, Paul's letters, "Peter's" letters, non-canonical material such as Thomas, and Jewish oral tradition (recorded in talmud) all mention Jesus as a person. Mythicists raise the historical criteria to such an absurd level that you mine as well assume your g-grandparents were mythical inventions.
Actually read his work. Joe was a Jew who believed that the current emperor was that coming "Son of Man." Not Jesus @ all. You speak of your g-grandparents. I am a direct descendant of one the Bible calls St. Anne! She was purportedly Jesus' grandmother, Virgin Mary's mom. You really think I believe my own family tree?
Josephus mentioned the Jesus cult, but did not write about Jesus as a person. Many people have written about Batman and Superman as well, because they are cultural phenomena, but they are not real persons. Jesus, Batman and Superman are brand names and cultural icons who represent aspects of humanity without being actual people, though all three were inspired in part by the lives of real people as well as other fictional characters. All three have grown beyond personal status.
Josephus has more to say about James the Just (the brother of Jesus) than he does about Jesus that hasn't been tampered with by a well-meaning apologist. Then again, if James died a martyr, that's a sure sign that he believed that his brother, Jesus, was the Messiah.
@@EvelynElaineSmith Eusebius attributes the following quote to Josephus: "These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man." However, this statement does not appear in the extant manuscripts of Josephus.
Bruce doesnt seem to know the bible at all. Or he reads it with no perception. If hes saved then the holy spirit has not enlightened him yet. If hes not then he should not be speaking to students about the bible because every word he speaks sound foolish in this presentation. Peter otoh sounds very knowledgeable and holy spirit enlightened.
If I had never met my grandparents, and no one alive had either, and they were said to have walked on water, risen from the dead and ascended bodily to heaven, we could safely assume that all those claims were myths. There may have been a "real" person (or more likely many persons)who inspired the legends of Jesus, but the myths have long ago eclipsed anybody who might once have lived.
Again mythicists, which position is more plausible: A) There was a man called Jesus, who preached a lot and attracted a following. He died and followers wrote about him decades later and added in supernatural events. B) There were a group of unknown, unnamed scribes that get together and create a literary character called Jesus who is suppose to be the personification of OT stories. Somehow, there was also a mass hallucination in Israel and Paul, Mary, James, all suddenly think hes real.
Peter just fucked it here talking about corroboration between people (32:02), the main difference was that in the book we don't know if it was REAL and the modern example he was using real people as example, that is a FALLACY.
This lecturer is claiming that the four canonical gospels are historical. However, the evidence is extremely weak. Nowhere in the text of the four gospels do the authors claim to be eyewitnesses. In addition, the authors do not source their information. Nowhere do they tell us how they came by this information. Moreover, simply claiming that there is evidence that Jesus was an historical character does not prove the content of the gospels (miracles, resurrection) is historical.
I'm not saying there was not a man named jesus that lived around the that time period. I am saying that the character that the bible talks about never existed. Meaning the acts of the man from the bible like coming back to life and the other miracles or stories of him like when he said "let he without sin cast the first stone" has been proven to be a late add on. So the jesus character of the bible did not exist the way the bible describes him. Sure its possible there was a dooms day preacher named jesus that the bible wrote about then over time the myth which then became a non existent man but a character in a story.
Taylor Bryant have you read Paul's letter? What do you think? Also 1John? Jesus and the adultery woman was added on later, but was not a fabricated story.
The problem with Jesus as a work of fiction is the number of people who wrote on him that were not Christian. The writings of Josephus, being most notable. If Jesus was fictitious (like Superman, Batman, etc), then the idea of people dying for him becomes inexplicable. There are zero recorded cases in history where entire civilizations have dedicated their lives to and died for a fictitious character.
xenoranger79 they didnt. Its just a story for an italian invader purpose. In the story, they all abandon him at the resurrection. You didnt listen to this video.
Preconceived notions aint no good anymore
Eddie a Absolutely no evidence for your statement. Zero!
Funny how Josephus is credible except when he spoke about Jesus.
Josephus didn't write about Jesus, he wrote about the religious cult his followers founded. No one who ever personally knew Jesus ever wrote anything that survives to this day-- the stories we have were written at least decades after he was supposed to have lived by anonymous authors. The earliest Gospel manuscript that we physically have dates to the 4th century.
@@luvdomus I refuse to believe you're going to use that bad of an argument.
We're almost over 100 years from the Christmas Truce of 1914, yet as remarkable as it is, we believe the story. No one alive today was there. No one today knows anyone who was there. You could look, but would never find a contemporary of someone there. But, we believe.
The oldest that I know of is P75, which dates to 225 at the latest. +195 (at most) years after the ministry of Jesus. This debunks your claim that we don't have documentation until +400.
We also have the letter from Pliny to Tarjan, which dates 112. We're now +82 years. In this letter, Pliny writes that Christians prayed to Christ as they would a god. 82 years after Jesus, you have a document marked reliable by scholars stating that Jesus was worshiped as God. Are you asserting that 82 years after an event, no one would know enough about a cult to call them out? We still know plenty about the Moonies, the Manson Family, Jonestown, and so forth. Even the Jehovah's Witnesses and Mormons (Latter Day Saints) can't hide the sorted histories of their founders.
In 82 years, Rome should've had some document to put to rest that they had punished Jesus of Nazareth by crucifixion and disposed of his body. There would be some documentation that they paraded his remains to stop the Christian cult of their age. Yet, so this day, no such documents exist.
Please do more research instead of relying on bad arguments.
And yeah, the evidence for a historical Jesus is overwhelming. We have Pliny, Tacitus, Thallus, Josephus, Mara bar Sarapion, Suetonius, Lucian, Celsus, Church Fathers, the New Testament, non-canonical orthodox books such as Shepherd of Hermas & Didache, then we have apocryphal texts such as the early gnostics gospels (See Thomas) and a reference to Jesus in Jewish oral traditions.
take the red pill. There is no evidence...none.
"And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins." 1Corinthians 15:17
There's two mentions of Jesus by Josephus, one of them is agreed to be authentic. Complete scholarly consensus. The other one, it's argued it could've been fiddled with or added in completely altogether. But from what I understand even that is a minority view among scholars today. So in other words, every scholar that lives agrees Josephus did infact mention Jesus. Regardless, we have an overwhelming about of evidence. Thallus, Tacitus, Josephus, church fathers, canonicals, apocrypha, etc...
Ding ding ding. You just summed up the mainstream SECULAR scholarly position on Jesus, that he was a real person and that he didn't perform miracles. NO secular scholar disagrees with that position. What they disagree with is you going 500 steps further and claiming the man never existed.
Even the idiots in the jewish priest circle acused him for "making wichcraft" , or in other words : doing things that were not possible, and so were called magical wichcraft.
If you didn't do wichcraft or impossible things people would simply say that you were a charlatain and a liar. But no, even the people that hated him and wanted him dead knew that he did impossible things and couldn't deny it.
History is in the details, always.
Take it as you will. Miracles and impossible sruff occur all the time, if the scientific.circles don't care about them is just thst "don't care".It doesn't mean that they do not occur.
I have read the New Testament about four times and I see the truth. The differences is not an issue since the similarities complement each other.
why do you question if god is real or not. There is proof.. for example.) Noah's ark hmm they had found the ark. what about jesus. he did perform miracles and he was here ... god had sent him to earth 2014 years ago for a reason and the reason was to get us as people to believe and have our faith in him. and if there isnt a god why do people debate about weather hes real or not. like i dont know if you people notice but the world IS ENDING and when christ returns your screwed for not believing
Once again, another exquisite Veritas Forum is ambushed by 17th century audio.
not to mention, I cannot understand his accent.
The legend of Jesus doesn't have to be EITHER history or a hoax, it could have been inspired by a real person or persons' lives and elaborated on and used as a symbol of the early Evangelists ideals. Truth is easily twisted and changed in a short time, and the Jeus myth is like a snowbal that has rolled down 2000 years of history, picking up a lot of baggage as it went.
You're still not getting it - Hell is mythology, demons are not in Hell suffering. They will at some point be destroyed.
I'm less inclined to say hoax now. Interesting talk.
The gospels ARE history!
The people who actually wrote down the bible in its original form weren't the same Aramaic peasants who had passed on the stories in oral form. It was written down in Greek by far more intelligent writers who knew a good story when they heard one. If Christianity works for you Colin, all well and good. I have too many unanswered questions to believe it myself.
A simple aid in understanding the true, original gospel is simply removing the superstitious myth of Hell. The followers of Christ believed that God simply cut off the wicked from the living and that one day he would raise them and judge them and they would be sentenced to penance or destroyed. Those who heard and believed in Jesus teachings do not die and cannot die so they are transformed from the moment of death to a new living soul outside the body and go to God. We know this from NDE's.
Peter J.W looked
fidgety, nervous, ... what a terrible act on the stage.
Compare it with ancient historians.😊
What would Nero gain by starting the fire?
The belief is he wanted to rebuild it
@@ptk8451 sounds like the Democrats
If you are honest you will agree that Jesus is not like batman to begin with do you know of anyone willing to die for Batman.The fact that people died for the Christian faith,the fact of the persecution of non christians is attested by nonchristians like Tacitus and Pliny
I think the questioner is confusing historical interpretation and narrative. Because there are lot of factors it's hard to pinpoint causes of things in history (great depression, collapse of the ussr, etc) but the narrative could corroborated with a great certainly from primary accounts. I know beyond the shadow of doubt that Xerxes or Tiberius existed, because of multiple independent sources verify that he did exist.
Garegin Asatryan
You end up with historical facts from the sources. Everything else is a logical outgrowth from the Historian. This is true in antiquity & today.
As long as you view any history as such, you should not be fooled. It is still facts & knowledge. God Bless
NDE's start with a release of DMT in the brain, unless a soul is clinically dead, he may be experiencing a hallucination. All visions of Hell are hallucinations and are the work of the mind. Those who have fully died see God as glorious light and love, they meet relatives. They are guided to their family and Jesus gathers us all, as many as possible to restore us. He leaves the 99 for the one and we see his power and love him forever. Even his mercy by simply destroying the wicked is remarkable.
Yes, but wasn't Jesus referring to his followers who were around him at the time, I don't believe he was talking about future generations. He said something to that effect in his sermon on the mount. With regards NDE's, people from all different faiths and cultures experience a similar thing, yet they are not Christians.
Dont forget that they were taking risks by believing in him
"I will pour my spirit on ALL flesh" - Jesus has given us all the opportunity to go to him at death as well as while we are alive. Paul said "we shall not all sleep but will be changed in a twinkling of an eye"
Jesus, when he said "there will be some standing here that will not taste death" he was referring to the effect of his teaching "if you believe in me you will never die" and they didn't. We don't wait to see God at the last trump - we go to him immediately! What can separate us?? cont...
For all the doubters/skeptics here in the comment section read the following.
Let's face it folks, we'll never be able to figure everything out and especially when it comes to the historicity of many things. This is largely due to the overwhelming arguments and debates that have been generated all throughout history from both truth and lies. We are way to often left at the mercy of our own understanding which can often sell us short. We will believe one side or the other or often we just want to throw our hands up and ask, who knows to believe as indecisiveness can dominate.
Personally, I wish that there was more verifiable proof outside of the bible that would put all the arguments to rest. I do know however that if anyone is willing to put God to the test, He will always confirm Himself to that individual as it is His will that all would come to repentance and know Him. As life is full of choices, God will grant us undeniable confirmation of Himself and to His interest in whosoever will ask Him to do so. We will then be left with a clear choice. What we do with that confirmation will be up to us but either way, we will know beyond a reasonable doubt that there is a redeemer (God) and that He has confirmed Himself and His salvation to whomever will ask Him to do so.
On the basis of it being accepted, although we will always have questions, the historicity will not so much be an issue as He Himself will make Himself a present tense reality, verifying that His word is true. Oh yes, you will know! The only debate then will be with oneself as we will have to decide which way we want to go.
good comment Tabasco, i am an atheist ( non believer), but i am also willing to have my mind changed by clear evidence, i am not a closed book.
@@bonnie43uk Sorry, right now I am doing some plumbing but I will certainly get back with you here shortly my friend. We sprang a leak here at the house.
I would also like to add that there is a debate concerning the historicity of the supernatural events of Christ. William Lane Craig makes the argument that the Resurrection is historical:
/watch?v=oAxPHWF8aec
Is not an argument, is in fact historical. Even atheist scholars agree that people and the apostles really saw him, just don't agree that it was true but atribute that to " mass alucination" ( something that is not possible) or , like other, that it was a twin that came to Judea at the same time ( yes, seriously ) , among other atempts to explain it.
the fac that even unbias historical acounts from people in the roman empire atrubute to Christ the fact that he did " sorcery and raised confusion" should not contribute to the evidence, right ? lol
Keep it real and undestand what you read .
The facts are facts: Jesus was born, grew up, eat, breed, drank, preached, was persecuted, suffered, died in a cross, his tomb was empty after ( with roman soldiers in front of the stone that needed more that 2 men to move it at all ) and after that apeared to the apostles and other people.
Period.
Paul said "Those who are in Christ rise first to meet him" - misunderstood to be at the end of time or at the final trumpet, even Paul may not have known how this all worked, after all it was a mystery. The mystery is over! Blessed is God for his mercy on both the just and the wicked. If a soul draws to him, he will be received. As revelation says "If anyone thirsts, let him come and drink". There is no escaping judgement and he will not torture souls in Hell as the myth says. Death is the end.
how do you know Paul said that? We have no original documents.
if we had eternal souls we would be gods, that's not at all in the book. We are mortal without the spirit of God driving us. We don't receive eternal life in Hell, that's not rational, we are destroyed and life is removed - we no longer deserve life.
The moderator/questioner doesn't seem so well-grounded in reality as Peter Williams. His idea that real contradictions are not a problem is utterly silly. He's a victim of his own bluster.
I totally agree. He was a bad choice in moderator and a poor counter-point to Peter Williams. A gospel hypothetically stating that Jesus was born in Egypt would be a major problem for any thinking person. Not just because it throws doubt on the accurateness of everything else in the gospel but if Jesus wasn't born in Bethlehem then the prophesy about his birth in Micah 5:2 would be false. God would have made a prophesy that was a lie.
Posted comment. May take a while to appear!
Holy Troller! "Giftedtheos", my ass. LOL
An analytical look at scripture will clear things up pretty quick. Here's an example...
The demons "Legion" asked "do not send us into the wilderness" -no mention of Hell. Also, almost every other demon acknowledged that jesus was the Messiah and added "have you come to destroy us?" That pretty clear, he means a final destruction and again, no mention of Hell, but someone could say "That's because he's in Hell already" but he wasn't, he was in a man's flesh. Then Jesus clarifies... continued...
...Jesus says "when a demon leaves you he goes and gets 7 more demons and returns finding the house clean..." - again, where's Hell. Then you have the famous tale of Lazarus and the beggar, which does not match the style of the other parables Jesus told. Here's the best one and you know it so well, or do you? John 3:16 - For God so loved the world that he gave his son, that whoever believes will not PERISH, but have eternal life". Plain as day, clear as a bell, the entire gospel in one verse.
Searchfor the answers
what aided them in building the pyramids?
p0lish Neanderthals
How? I mean...c'mon people
?
All roads lead to Rome , we know what they choose , life is energy , good is good , when one dies that energy , your spark is released into the universe to think man knows what where ect is silly . The bible is just a good guide to living well and full ... just stories . Just a book ..
Lol... Really?
Josephus mentions Jesus as a person and lists him as his messiah. Tacitus, Thallus, Pliny, the church fathers, the four gospels, Paul's letters, "Peter's" letters, non-canonical material such as Thomas, and Jewish oral tradition (recorded in talmud) all mention Jesus as a person. Mythicists raise the historical criteria to such an absurd level that you mine as well assume your g-grandparents were mythical inventions.
Actually read his work. Joe was a Jew who believed that the current emperor was that coming "Son of Man."
Not Jesus @ all. You speak of your g-grandparents. I am a direct descendant of one the Bible calls St. Anne!
She was purportedly Jesus' grandmother, Virgin Mary's mom. You really think I believe my own family tree?
Josephus mentioned the Jesus cult, but did not write about Jesus as a person. Many people have written about Batman and Superman as well, because they are cultural phenomena, but they are not real persons. Jesus, Batman and Superman are brand names and cultural icons who represent aspects of humanity without being actual people, though all three were inspired in part by the lives of real people as well as other fictional characters. All three have grown beyond personal status.
Josephus has more to say about James the Just (the brother of Jesus) than he does about Jesus that hasn't been tampered with by a well-meaning apologist. Then again, if James died a martyr, that's a sure sign that he believed that his brother, Jesus, was the Messiah.
@@EvelynElaineSmith Eusebius attributes the following quote to Josephus: "These things happened to the Jews to avenge James the Just, who was a brother of Jesus, that is called the Christ. For the Jews slew him, although he was a most just man." However, this statement does not appear in the extant manuscripts of Josephus.
It's amazing to me. Hearing this talk. Is just saying? All my brothers are kings and priests who are worth more than anything nor everything.
Bruce doesnt seem to know the bible at all. Or he reads it with no perception. If hes saved then the holy spirit has not enlightened him yet. If hes not then he should not be speaking to students about the bible because every word he speaks sound foolish in this presentation. Peter otoh sounds very knowledgeable and holy spirit enlightened.
If I had never met my grandparents, and no one alive had either, and they were said to have walked on water, risen from the dead and ascended bodily to heaven, we could safely assume that all those claims were myths. There may have been a "real" person (or more likely many persons)who inspired the legends of Jesus, but the myths have long ago eclipsed anybody who might once have lived.
Hoax.
Again mythicists, which position is more plausible:
A) There was a man called Jesus, who preached a lot and attracted a following. He died and followers wrote about him decades later and added in supernatural events.
B) There were a group of unknown, unnamed scribes that get together and create a literary character called Jesus who is suppose to be the personification of OT stories. Somehow, there was also a mass hallucination in Israel and Paul, Mary, James, all suddenly think hes real.
Peter just fucked it here talking about corroboration between people (32:02), the main difference was that in the book we don't know if it was REAL and the modern example he was using real people as example, that is a FALLACY.
This lecturer is claiming that the four canonical gospels are historical. However, the evidence is extremely weak. Nowhere in the text of the four gospels do the authors claim to be eyewitnesses. In addition, the authors do not source their information. Nowhere do they tell us how they came by this information. Moreover, simply claiming that there is evidence that Jesus was an historical character does not prove the content of the gospels (miracles, resurrection) is historical.
I'm going with hoax, with a tiny bit of truth thrown into the mix.
So do you still hold that position today?
@@tabasco7915 sure do Tabasco
@@bonnie43uk I just articulated a comment. Because I just did it it should be at the top. If you would, please read it.
@@bonnie43uk If for any reason you can't find it, let me know.
@@tabasco7915 yes, i found your comment and made a short reply.
The jesus of the of the bible never existed....
According to who? That's not something that virtually any historian or scholar would say
I think the proper statement is that there is no proof that Jesus ever existed. It does not mean that He did not exist.
I'm not saying there was not a man named jesus that lived around the that time period. I am saying that the character that the bible talks about never existed. Meaning the acts of the man from the bible like coming back to life and the other miracles or stories of him like when he said "let he without sin cast the first stone" has been proven to be a late add on. So the jesus character of the bible did not exist the way the bible describes him. Sure its possible there was a dooms day preacher named jesus that the bible wrote about then over time the myth which then became a non existent man but a character in a story.
Taylor Bryant have you read Paul's letter? What do you think? Also 1John? Jesus and the adultery woman was added on later, but was not a fabricated story.
Easy thing to just say, but I would love to hear your detailed alternative explanation as to the origin of Christianity.