Copyrighted Logo

css menu by Css3Menu.com


 

Bruce's 5th book, a Home Study Course, is now available.
Books & Tapes by Bruce Moen
    Bruce's Blog now at http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/blog....

  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 7
Send Topic Print
Was Jesus real ? (Read 42922 times)
hiorta
Full Member
***
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 102
Scotland
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #15 - May 7th, 2005 at 12:51pm
 
Jesus (Greek for Jesuah) was reckoned to be a very minor Jewish local, not even mentioned by Jewish historians of that time, who were interested in the religious field.
As to him being the exclusive 'son' of God - utter baloney.
This scam was cooked up much later.

[url=www. jesusneverexisted.com]www. jesusneverexisted.com[/url]

As to the 'christ' myth, the new testament states Jesus was the son of Joseph - both descending from the house of David.

'Christ' was a hybrid as a result of a supernatural impregnation of a virgin -  impossible! A complete invention by manipulative, unscrupulous  and devious theologians.

The alleged resulting 'god', therefore was not and could not be any relation to Joseph or his son.

www.cfpf.org.uk/

Back to top
« Last Edit: May 7th, 2005 at 11:33pm by hiorta »  
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 979
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #16 - May 8th, 2005 at 5:26pm
 
[hiorta:] "As to the "Christ" myth, the New Testament states Jesus was the son of Joseph, both descending from the house of David."
________________________________________
I'm afraid not.  In Jesus' day, Palestinian Jews did not have names like Moshe Finkelstein.  Male names took the form of A the son of B.  B could be the stepfather or the presumed father from the standpoint of the casual outside observer.   In the Gospels, Jesus is thrice designated the son of Joseph, once by a disciple who has just met Jesus (John 1:45) and twice by hostile outsiders (John 6:42; Luke 4:22).  One cannot expect skeptical outsiders to embrace Christ's virgin birth.  They knew that Jesus was raised by Joseph and Mary; so it was natural for them to assume that he was Joseph's son.  Even with a virgin birth, Jesus would legally be Joseph's son.  In the Gospels, this identification is always made at a distance, and so, is irrelevant to the question of the virgin birth.

All the New Testament admits is, in Luke's words, "Jesus was presumed to be the son of Joseph (Luke 3:22).' That's how he introduces Jesus' or rather Joseph's genealogy.  All genealogies were patriarchal; so the female lineage could not be traced. 

More relevant is the slanderous perspective of skeptical Jews who were closer to Jesus' family situation.  Resentful skeptics in Jesus' hometown dismiss him as "the son of Mary (Mark 6:3)," a slur that implies His illegitimacy.  In an angry exchange with Jesus, His Jewish opponents snap: "At least WE were not born out of wedlock (John 8:41)!"   Again, the emphatic "we" implies that Jesus is illegitimate.   Eventually, this charge gets more specific.  Rabbi Eliezer (70 AD) transmits the slanderous legend that Jesus is the illicit son of a Roman soldier named Panthera and a spinner named Mary.  Skeptic and believer alike agree on 2 points: (1) Jesus was born too soon.   (2) Joseph is not the biological father of Jesus.   In Jesus' time, if your were deemed illegitimate, you could not marry a Jewish girl.  In my view, this explains why Jesus resists the pressures of His culture to marry.

At this point, the issue depends on how one assesses Mary's character.  I see her as a very conservative and moral girl in a sexually conservative culture that prohibits pre-marital sex.  I believe in the virgin birth.  But, of course, proof in such an area is impossible.  Or is it?  Read on.

No modern scholar takes the Panthera charge seriously.  Jewish woman wanted nothing to do with their Roman oppressors.  I have my own theory about the origin of this tradition.  In Hebrew rabbinic tradition, Greek nouns are sometimes confused as proper names.  If translated back to Greek, "Jesus the son of Panthera" could originally have meant "Jesus the son of the levir or husband's brother."  Why is this significant? 

By Jewish law, if a husband dies childless, his widow is obliged to marry her husband's brother for the purpose of having a child, which would then be credited to the dead husband.  This tradition is called levirate marriage and a son in such a marriage is called the son of a levir.   John Chrysostom, a 4th century bishop of Antioch preserves a Jewish Christian tradition that Joseph died prematurely without natural children.  So Mary contracted a levirate marriage with Joseph's brother Clopas.  Five facts support this tradition:

(1) It seems unlikely that such a bizarre tradition would have been invented in an era that accepted the immaculate conception and perpetual virginity of Mary.  John Chrysostom lives just down the road from the Jewish Christian community at Aleppo, which might trace its lineage back to the original Jerusalem church and  where surviving members of Jesus' family may well have lived.  We can trace Jesus' family dynasty down to Conon in the year 400  AD. 

(2) Joseph figures in no story of the adult Jesus' life.  He seems to have died before Jesus begins His ministry.  (3) John Chrysostom's translation of John 19:25 is probably correct:

"At the cross of Jesus stood his mother and his mother's sister, namely Mary the wife of Clopas (his mother!) and Mary Magdalene (Jesus' aunt!)."  The major obstacle to this translation is its apparent implication that two sisters would both be called Mary.  But this problem is solved once it is realized that Mary Magdalene's is a compound name and that she is known by Magdalene.

(4) Early Christian tradition confronts us with the mystery that Jesus' brothers are also called His cousins.  Why?  If a widowed Mary marries Clopas, then Clopas's sons legally become Jesus' brothers as well.  (5) One of Jesus' brothers is named Joseph (Matthew 13:55).  Except for high priests, Jewish fathers almost never gave their son's their own name!  Jesus' brother Joseph is probably his original cousin.

What would follow from the tradition that the widow Mary marries Joseph's brother Clopas?  Such a marriage would be illegal, indeed incestuous, if Joseph were the natural father of Jesus or any of His 4 "brothers" listed in Matthew 13:55.  But such a marriage would be required by Pentateuchal law if Joseph died without a natural child.  CLOPAS WOULD NOT HAVE MARRIED MARY IF HE KNEW THAT JESUS WERE ILLEGITIMATELY BORN! Is this proof of the virgin birth?   Hardly. I've had to oversimplify a complex issue here.   But IMHO it's as close to proof as wer're ever going to get for such a bizarre doctrine.

Don

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 979
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #17 - May 9th, 2005 at 3:32pm
 
"[Hiorta:] Jesus (Greek for Jesuah)":  Not quite.  Try "Jesus (Greek for "Yeshua")."  To continue. . .

"[Hiorta:] Jesus [Greek for Jesuah) was reckoned to be a very minor Jewish local not even mentioned
by Jewish historians of the time in the religious field."
________________________________________
   
Evidently you have swallowed the discredited line perpetuated by New Agers like Acharya S, whom I've just critiqued on this thread.  You obviously haven't followed my dialogue with Raphael on this particular issue.  So I guess I need to repeat my earlier response to him.

Josephus was born a few years after Jesus' death.  The Greek version of his fullest allusion to Jesus seems too sympathetic for a Pharisee like Josephus and has apparently been revised by a later Christian hand.  But the Arabic version of this allusion reflects Josephus's style and lacks the pro-Christian bias of the Greek version.  It seems to preserve the original wording.  It reads:

"At that time there was a wise man who was called Jesus, 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.  And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship.  THEY REPORTED that he had appeared to them after his crucifixion and that he was alive.  Accordingly, he was PERHAPS the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders (Josephus Antiquities 18.3.3)."

Note that Josephus is positive, tentative, yet ultimately neutral about Jesus.

Modern scholarship accepts the other allusion to Jesus in Josephus as beyond dispute:

"He [the high priest Annas] assembled the sanhedrin of the judges, and brought before them JAMES, THE BROTHER OF JESUS, THE SO-CALLED CHRIST, and some of his companions, and when he had levelled an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned (Josephus, Antiquities 20.9.1)."

It is wrong to claim that no other ancient non-Christian historian referred to Jesus.  Two non-Christian first century historians bear independent witness to the awesome events described in Matthew 27, but interpret the bizarre phenomenon as a 3-hour solar eclipse:

"From noon on, darkness came over the whole land, until 3 in the afternoon...At that moment [Jesus' death], the curtain of the Temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.  The earth shook and the rocks were split (Matthew 27:45, 51)."

Both Thalles (52 AD) and Phlegon (also first century) were freedmen of Tiberius, the emperor at the time of Jesus' crucifixion.  Both of their histories are now lost, but are quoted by the Christian historian Julius Africanus in 220 AD.  Julius takes issue with their interpretation of the darkness as a 3-hour solar eclipse from noon till 3 PM during Jesus' crucifixion.  Others apparently dismissed this event as a mass 3-hour hallucination.  Julius Africanus feel strongly that they are underestimating the supernatural character of what actually happened that day in Jerusalem:

"On the whole world there passed a most fearful darkness, and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down.  This darkness, THALLES, IN THE THIRD BOOK OF HIS HISTORY, calls, as appears to me without reason, a solar eclipse.  For the Hebrews celebrated the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover; but a solar eclipse takes place only when the moon comes under the sun...But let opinion pass and carry the majority with it, and let the portent of the world be deemed a solar eclipse,
like others, a portent only to the eye (i.e. a hallucination).  PHLEGON RECORDS THAT, in the time of Tiberias Caesar, at full moon, there was a full solar eclipse from noon to 3 PM--manifestly that one of which we speak.  But what has an eclipse in common with an earthquake, the rending of rocks, and the resurrection of the dead, and so great a perturbation throughout the universe?  Surely no such event as this is recorded for a long time (18:1).
A Roman inscription in Greek from the time of Emperor Claudius (40 AD) has been found near Jesus' home town, Nazareth.  The inscription warns the residents against grave robbing and apparently reflects the Roman belief that Jesus' disciples stole His body and then claimed He had risen from the dead.  We know that the earliest Jewish reaction to the empty tomb was that Jesus' disciples must have stolen His corpse.  This Roman inscription proves that the Romans too had no idea what happened to His body.  So the two most likely options are that Jesus either rose bodily from the dead (my belief) or that His disciples stole His body and then sealed their testimony with their blood for the lie that God raised Jesus from the dead.

In the early 2nd century, two other Roman historians, Tacitus (115 AD) and Suetonius (120 AD) refer to Christ.  Suetonius refers to Christ as "Chrestus" and Tacitus refers to Christians as "Chrestians," but it is clear that Christ is intended.  "Chrestus" is a common name in Latin, whereas "Christus" is unprecedented.  So the spelling is altered to make it more familiar to Romans.  Tacitus refers to Jesus' execution by Pontius Pilate (Annals 15:44).  Lucian, another 2nd century pagan dismisses Jesus as 'that crucified idiot."  Such non-Christian allusions to Jesus from the first two centuries could be multiplied.

Don
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dora
Ex Member


Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #18 - May 9th, 2005 at 4:59pm
 
From: Acharya S <acharya_s@...>
Date: Sat May 7, 2005  10:32 am
Subject: Fwd: Comment and question  acharya_s
Offline
Send Email 

Hi there -

Some "Berserker" is obsessively trashing my work on the board:

http://www.afterlife-knowledge.com/cgi-afterlife-knowledge/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=a\
fterlife_knowledge;action=display;num=1114608160

If any of you kind listers would like to go there and straighten thisguy out, please do so. I don't have the time or inclination to spend on him. The first thing you could point out is that it seems he hasn't
read "Suns of God," which addresses practically all of these shallow criticisms. Another thing is that he spends a great deal of time denigrating me with ad hominems, rather than addressing the facts I
bring up, which is a sign of intellectual weakness. He also has to fall back on the "nobody believes her" argument, which is like "everyone believes Jesus was a real person." A non-argument. His
claim that the first century Palestinian Jews could not know about all these characters is ridiculously ignorant of the vast intercourse of the time between cultures. Gee, there was this HUGE library collected at Alexandria, with books from around the known world. Alexander had thoroughly opened up the lines of communication to India three centuries previously. Also, I don't address the "Palestinian" Jews so much as the Alexandrian Jews and others of the Diaspora (does this know-it-all know about the Diaspora?) Are you trying to tell me that
Jews of Alexandria--who made up about 50% of the population of that city--never went into the library there or attended the university?

It's ridiculous. The other of this smart aleck's arguments can be as easily refuted.

Regardless of the anal nitpicking, the fact will remain that Jesus Christ appears nowhere in the contemporary historical record, despite the repeated claim in the New Testament that he was widely famed. The fact will also remain that much of the gospel story was already in existence long before the Christian era, in bits and pieces, before it was amalgamated into the Christ myth. Also, the sayings that supposedly distinguish a "real guy" were in existence--and can be found in pre-Christian texts--long before Jesus supposedly lived. There is nothing new under this sun (god). Jesus Christ is a mythical character. You can rail against me until the veins pop out of your neck, but nothing will change that fact.......

From my previous BCC to you, perhaps you can tell that I can readily demolish this persons  "arguments," which are shallow indeed. Talk about sloppy research! He seems to have gone nowhere further than encyclopedias for his "expertise!"

Do feel free to join my discussion groups, as in the "to" line of the message I bcc'ed to you. In any event, I would heartily recommend that you read "Suns of God," which handily deals with and refutes all of these infantile criticisms. Naturally, I haven't heard from the likes of Price and Licona--perhaps they have eggs on their faces, but I doubt
it, because their egos and arrogance are too big.

My pen name is not "pretentious." I took it mainly because WESTERN WOMEN could never be called "Acharya," as that is a spiritual title reserved for the pious Hindu priests. This angry, ranting berserker cannot understand humor, obviously. Nor does he realize that his reaction to my pseudonym is precisely when I took it.

Again, Suns of God shows that this fool's hostile ranting is completely erroneous

http://www.truthbeknown.com/sunsofgod.htm ; Not only is there an outstanding quote by a REAL SCHOLAR, Barbara Walker, who makes Robert Price look like a peon, but there are some pertinent excerpts.

One of the world's leading mythologists, a bestselling author, Barbara Walker, had the following to say about Suns of God:


I received your Suns of God… What a magnificent work! I do wish you had a major publisher who would promote it as The Da Vinci Code was promoted, to convince the world about the true fishiness of Christian mythology. But of course Dan Brown threw in some action-suspense-murder stuff, which is apparently what sells books these days, and his scholarship was nowhere near the quality of yours.
You deserve to be recognized as a leading researcher and an expert in the field of comparative mythology, on a par with James Frazer or Robert Graves--indeed, superior to those forerunners in the frankness of your conclusions and the volume of your evidence.

Seldom have I read a book that so delighted me, and had me nodding in agreement on every page. It is truly wonderful. It gives me hope that some day, maybe, the civilized world may grow out of its superstitious adolescence.

Heartfelt wishes and hopes for your success.

Barbara Walker
Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets, Women's Dictionary of Symbols and Sacred Objects
The Crone: Woman of Age, Wisdom, and Power, Restoring the Goddess: Equal Rites for Modern Women


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 979
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #19 - May 9th, 2005 at 6:03pm
 
Dora,

No, I'm not angry at D. Murdoch, but yes, it is pompous for anyone pretending ty be a scholar to nickname herself (himself) "Acharya" [= Guru).  I was critiquing "The Christ Conspiracy" and holding her responsibile for what she says there.  As for her endorsement by Barbara Walker, I'd be embarrassed by that.  When I was reactivating the women's studies program at the college where I taught for 12 years, I promptly bought Walker's Encyclopedia, thinking it might be helpful.  It was absolutely worthless, its scholarship being even more appalling than Acharya's.  Fortunately, I had a host of competent feminist historians to fill that void.

There is no evidence that "much of the Gospel story was already in existence long before the Christian era," only Acharya's highly forced and usually bogus parallels from other traditions.  Indeed, as I have shown, Gospel tradition can be linked in various ways with eyewitness testimony.
And I just refuted in detail Acharya's claim that "Jesus Christ appears nowhere in the contemporary historical record." 

There was no "vast intercourse at the time between cultures," no evidence that Palestinian Jews studied at Alexandria's library, and no evidence that this library contained books on Krishna and the Buddha.  I'm familiar with all the Palestinian literature from Jesus' day and the literature from Diaspora Judaism.  If Acharya disagrees, let her provide documentation from Palestine.  She will not be able to do this.

And Dora, you could have issued me a challenge to confront Acharya directly and all these distortions of my positions developed over many threads would not have been necessary.  All this started when you couldn't respond to my historical critiques of Seth and Elias.  So you spammed my "Channeling Agendas" thread with irrelevant reams of pasted material from Acharya.  I haven't read "Sun of God" but now may well do and post on Acharya's site just to save more unwary New Age seekers from being duped.  First, I'd have to examine my true motives to see if I were responding for egotistic reasons.   

Don
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dora
Ex Member


Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #20 - May 9th, 2005 at 7:46pm
 
Quote:
No, I'm not angry at D. Murdoch, but yes, it is pompous for anyone pretending ty be a scholar to nickname herself (himself) "Acharya" [= Guru). 


I'm sure that Acharya spent sleepless nights worry if the pompous battle-frenzied Norse warrior mad or not... Cheesy

And regarding who holding responsible who, I'm sure that if she want too she can stand up in any
"court" about her  historical data, so as her  education, character and any defaming allegations..


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 979
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #21 - May 9th, 2005 at 9:26pm
 
Dora,

There's a big difference between submitting your name as an author and creating a silly User Name like mine on a medium (a website) that invites such nicknames.  Besides, there is nothing pretentious about "Berserk".  It makes me sound like an idiot.  But "Acharya" [= "Guru] is pompous.  Perhaps you would have liked me better when I posted as "Deadworm."  I picked "Deadworm" for a chess site after trying several other User Names and finding them all taken. Then lo and hehold, I noticed that "Deadworm" was available!  But after a few months I began to realize why and changed it to "Berserk."  Actually, come to think of it, not much of an improvement.  Oh well!  Sigh!   Undecided

Don
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
jordon
Ex Member


Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #22 - May 9th, 2005 at 10:03pm
 
OK All...Go to www.exchristian.net...Why? Because this site with all its Forums, Articles, and other Info by those who have left the Christian Tradition(and have the same or more theological college education, including ex-clergy, evangelical preachers, etc, wrote  their concerns and points)and.....So to you and I , reading these  posts (here on Bruce's Forum) and feeling somewhat awed ...because of our lack of knowledge of the Christian Tradition...will now know a lot more of the arguement from others as knowledgeable as those who write on this site(Bruce's) in their Christian bent.....Love Jordon...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Berserk
Super Member
*****
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 979
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #23 - May 9th, 2005 at 10:15pm
 
Jordon,

Not only have I visited and read extensively from that site.  I've even performed a retrieval of sorts from it. Undecided  It's not a site composed by agnostic academic experts in the field of biblical studies.  It's mainly a site for bitterly disillusioned ex-Christians.  As such, it has a decidedly negative tone.  If you're determined to attack Christianity read agnostic or atheistic scholars who are respected in this field.  Read something like "Jesus the Magician" by Morton Smith.  At least he's a recognized scholar.

Don
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
jordon
Ex Member


Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #24 - May 9th, 2005 at 11:37pm
 
Don..So you have performed retrievals from that site??!!..Your words(What do you mean?) ...Now, who is on the defensive??  All I ask is those to read all the site including archives, forums, articles...It's a huge site..and you have there...Wait for it!!!....University or/and College educated past students and clergy, professors, priests etc....So it's a sounding board for 'whoever do not agree with your doctrines' you may say ..a short reply you wrote me....Email the webmaster and see all the constant attacks he has to put up with..and guess who from??I dunno!!...This site is a college of knowledge..not of attack..but of love and tolerance...Now we here on our  Bruce's forum have(information) somewhere to present a case from those who have studied, been there, etc...and presented their research for all to see and read...A pathetic reply to me from you ....short and biased....seeing them as you see them(read your reply to me) ....OK Guys It will take you a very long time to read all in this site...But as Bruce has implied in his books....'It's the perceiver, who determins the result of his perceptions(my words..But he/ you knows what  I mean).....Love Jordon..ps..what happened to you on this website.?? to justify such a egoistic response.....Met you match there?? OH..You said that retreivals you did were not real in the past?? Am I correct?....Again, Love and tolerance..Jordon
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Chris
New Member
*
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 44
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #25 - May 10th, 2005 at 8:27am
 
Quote:
 It's mainly a site for bitterly disillusioned ex-Christians.  


This is exactly what that site is NOT. I know quite a few posters who are "exchristian" and they are neither disillusioned nor bitter. They simply, from theire years and years in christianity, can now look outside and see the myths and fallicies that that religion has attempted to program with.

And has for debating, there are many knowledgable people there who love debating various themes. Whether you agree or not, I suggest for anyone on either side to take up some of their challanges. It may be eye opening.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Touching Souls
Super Member
*****
Offline


LOVE IS ALL, SHINE YOUR
LIGHT THAT OTHERS MAY
SEE

Posts: 1966
Metaline Falls, WA
Gender: female
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #26 - May 10th, 2005 at 10:27am
 
Thank you for this Chris. I wasn't planning to visit the site but now I believe I will. It's amazing to me how everything is in the eye of the beholder. Wink

Love, Mairlyn Wink
Back to top
 

I AM THAT I AM -- WE ARE ALL ONE -- TOUCHING SOULS
Wink
WWW minniecricket2000  
IP Logged
 
Lucy
Super Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1158
C1
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #27 - May 10th, 2005 at 9:06pm
 
Was Jesus real?  Like, who cares? We have many among us who can talk the talk, from either angle! but who can walk the walk? Who has the love that fixes everything ? Seems to me like neither side does ....
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Author_JD_Howes
Ex Member


Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #28 - May 14th, 2005 at 12:32pm
 
Raphael!

Long time no talk... Very Interesting Question you got going here... I mean it.

Just a few respectful questions I would sincerely appreciate an answer to, if you wouldn't mind. You have clearly demonstrated to me that you are one of the very few people on this site I can carry on a rational discussion with and enjoy fun bantering, humor and wit without you falling apart.
And definitely take that as a compliment...

For what it's worth, you've earn my respect to this point. That's why I feel I can ask you some deeper spiritual questions to discuss. -Ready?

1) If Jesus is real... meaning, he really is God's son, everything the Bible says about him is true and he seeks your friendship & trust to spend eternity with you... would you accept his free offer?
Would you accept that you were created with a real purpose? That life has substantial meaning?
- Many would not...

2) If Jesus is not real... meaning, there's nothing in history, the bible or in nature to create a strong probability of God's existence... thus his son's existence... what then? What is there to wake up for except a life filled with no hope, no purpose or meaning?

3) Have you ever read the works of C.S. Lewis? He was a former "enthusiastic" atheist who became an even more passionate Christian after something happened in his life that changed it forever. It was his practical, refreshing, post-atheistic insights on Christianity that made me rethink religion... and get to the root of all this... and who/what God and Christ are.

I look forward to hearing your replies... you have many of CS Lewis styles and attitudes. Thought that might interest you to know. Have a great weekend!

JD Howes


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dan
New Member
*
Offline


Afterlife Knowledge Member

Posts: 36
Minnesota
Gender: male
Re: Was Jesus real ?
Reply #29 - May 14th, 2005 at 12:57pm
 
If I'm not mistaken, we're using the word "real" in the historical sense, as in did the Jesus in the Bible actually exist? For example, I have no problem with the idea that he did exist, but I don't believe he was any more divine than you or I.

We're not discussing the existence of the Christian God despite your rather transparent attempt to steer the discussion in that direction with your questions. We've already had that talk ad nauseum.
Back to top
 
josephpschmoe  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 ... 7
Send Topic Print


This is a Peer Moderated Forum. You can report Posting Guideline violations.