• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Overwhelming Historical Proof: Why do you doubt Jesus?

Tumah

Veteran Member
I don't see how anyone could.
The name we spell Jesus is the anglicized version of the Latin version of the Greek version of an Aramaic name that was very common in 1st century Judea.
Saying there was no Jesus is like saying there is no Jim in contemporary USA.
Tom
...of the Aramaic version of a Hebrew name...
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
Hello everyone. This is my first. Please don't hate. I've come not just to establish an old-fashioned debate, but to help some people establish some faith and maybe help someone through a tough time. First off, obviously, the debate is going to be centered around Jesus,
Hello! Welcome!
Please don't interpret a contentious reply as 'hatred', ok? :)

Overwhelming Historical Proof: Why do you doubt Jesus?
There was, on the balance of probabilities, a Yeshua BarYosef, a Handworker of the second order of Galilean peasants, displaced from holding land. His name was not Jesus. There probably was a Nazareth, and most of the reports within the original Gospel of Mark. And this Yeshua probably did initiate a Galilean movement for the return of the proper rules and laws which had been discarded by the upper class, which was by then copying the fashions, cultures, practices and even religions of the invaders, hellenised quislings all (?).

But after his movement had ended, the Christ that 'rose' out of Yeshua's memory is hard to prove, and Christians mostly need to have Faith before Overwhelming Evidence.

I respect faith, as long as it does not lead to heated self-righteous bigotry as can be seen in some Churches, but the Churches that are now supporting the ordination of Female priests and Bishops, same-sex love, partnership and even marriage, the furtherance of love, understanding and empathy amongst their congregations, these Churches don't need 'Overwhelming Proof' of their goodness.
:)
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
You have read revelations, I'm assuming. Then, assuming you have, I'm assuming you read the clobber passages about Jesus's return. No, Jesus did not accomplish that goal in His ministry, and He obviously never meant to. When He returns is the set date. I used the term messiah loosely, and I'd say in a Christian view, Jesus can be described as both an accepted leader and deliverer of the Jews.

The Bible book of Revelation ( with the word 'revelation' meaning a revealing. In Scripture a revealing of the future - Revelation 22:2 )

When did Jesus deliver the Jews? Didn't God abandon their religious ' house ' of worship according to Jesus at Matthew 23:38 ? ______
Who was held blood guilty culpable of community responsibility for the failure to bring Jesus to justice - Acts of the Apostles 3:13-15________
Since Pentecost the ' Israel of God ' is now ' spiritual Israel ' a ' spiritual nation ' Not found located on any map.- 1 Peter 2:9; 1 Peter 2:5
Jerusalem ' above ' is Now mother - Galatians 4:26
In other words, that seat of government is now heavenly. No borders or boundaries found on Earth - Revelation 20:6

Christ is now the leader or head of the Christian congregation - Ephesians 5:23
Modern-day fleshly natural Israel exist by the Grace of God as a national group.
Anyone, Jew or non-Jew, can become a Christian and be part of God's spiritual nation.
Jesus, at his soon coming glory time, will deliver the figurative humble ' sheep ' out of all nations - Matthew 25:31-33,37.
They can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth, right into Day One of Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth begins when Jesus, as Prince of Peace, will usher in global Peace on Earth among men of goodwill.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
@NotOfTheWorld

I was thinking. I have a question for you.

(Example) I was always a spiritualist but never took it seriously until a couple of years ago when my grandmother passed away. I never thought of myself as a Buddhist but even if I wasn't, The Law of The Buddha still exists without me. It's the nature of life even if The Buddha himself and his sutras would never be a part of my life.

My question: Is your belief and relationship with Christ based on historical evidence or, if it were proven false that he did not exist, would that change your relationship with Christ?​

I ask because I usually compare what I don't understand and/or disagree with with how I see things. It may sound kind of an ego thing; and, well, it works ;)

If The Buddha never existed, rebirth would still exist. We would still go through rebirth until we understand the true nature of life. It isn't dependent on The Buddha for this Law of life to exists. So, his disciples could have fibbed on The Buddha's teachings. That or The Buddha could have been a lier or a lunatic.

However, that is not what I believe. Regardless, the truth is the truth regardless of what I believe.

So, my belief isn't based on a source such as historical evidence. It's based on experience. It goes beyond needing a physical item to confirm the teachings (say sutras or scripture) but more of an intimate relationship with the spirits, family, and with life through The Buddha's teachings.

I wasn't raised in a Buddhist environment but a Christian one so I the heart-faith kind of sticks with the mind-faith. If it doesn't make sense in my mind, than my heart is just flying on a cloud. If it doesn't make sense in my heart, then I'm just doing repetitive motions and not rituals and worship.

So it's based on experience between the two. Yet, these things aren't dependent on an outside source.

Did historical evidence bring you to Christ? If not, if there were historical evidence that proved he didn't exist and the scripture were false, would that change your relationship with Christ?

and why?​
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
That's fine. I'll wait. I hope your response will illuminate me as to whether you think salvation is restricted to Christianity or if other religions are fine too.

Although I'm Not "Notoftheworld" as to whether ' salvation ' is restricted.......
I would like to take the liberty to reply:
First, please keep in mind the majority of the people who have lived on Earth have already died.- Romans 6:23; John 3:13
So, unless one has committed the unforgivable sin of Matthew 12:32; Hebrews 6:4-6, they can be saved by having a resurrection.
As Romans 6:7 says the one who has died is freed or acquitted from their sins. ( saved from past sins )
That does Not make the resurrected ones as now innocent, but as a governor can pardon a person so the crime charges do Not stick,
Jesus can pardon a person so the sin charges do Not stick. So, in the resurrection - Acts of the Apostles 24:15 - people of all religions will have the opportunity to know and learn about Jesus as the one who resurrected them - Revelation 1:18
They will Not be tried twice, or a second time, for the past - Romans 6:7 - for that would be double jeopardy. - Revelation 20:12

As to those of us who are still alive at the soon coming ' time of separation ' on Earth - Matthew 25:31-33 - Jesus judges who are the figurative humble ' sheep ' or haughty ' goats '. The saved living ' sheep ' have a favorable judgement and can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth, living right into the start of Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth. - Revelation 7:14
The basis for Jesus' judgement is how people treated his ' spiritual brothers ' who are alive on Earth at that time according to Matthew 25:40.
 

buddhist

Well-Known Member
Hello everyone. This is my first. Please don't hate. I've come not just to establish an old-fashioned debate, but to help some people establish some faith and maybe help someone through a tough time. First off, obviously, the debate is going to be centered around Jesus, the existence of Him (I say Him because it is my OP, and it is my personal beliefs that He is God) as God, as well as the Son of God, as well as overwhelming historical, theological, archaeological, and scientific evidence favoring the proof of God. Let's start with the simple one.

#1: The Scripture

Now, this is an obvious one. Obviously the Scriptures. I know, it's not the best start, but it's laying down the foundations. Let's start with the prophecies.

The Messiah will be the offspring (descendant) of the woman (Eve) Genesis 3:15 Galatians 4:4
The Messiah will be a descendant of Abraham, through whom everyone on earth will be blessed Genesis 12:3; 18:18 Acts 3:25,26
The Messiah will be a descendant of Judah Genesis 49:10 Matthew 1:2 and Luke 3:33
The Messiah will be a prophet like Moses Deuteronomy 18:15-19 Acts 3:22,23
The Messiah will be the Son of God Psalm 2:7 Matthew 3:17; Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22
The Messiah will be raised from the dead (resurrected) Psalm 16:10,11 Matthew 28:5-9; Mark 16:6; Luke 24:4-7; John 20:11-16; Acts 1:3 and 2:32
The Messiah crucifixion experience Psalm 22 (contains 11 prophecies—not all listed here) Matthew 27:34-50 and John 19:17-30
The Messiah will be sneered at and mocked Psalm 22:7 Luke 23:11,35-39
The Messiah will be pierced through hands and feet Psalm 22:16 Luke 23:33 and 24:36-39;
John 19:18 and 20:19-20,24-27
The Messiah’s bones will not be broken (a person’s legs were usually broken after being crucified to speed up their death) Psalm 22:17 and 34:20 John 19:31-33,36
Men Will Gamble for the Messiah’s clothing Psalm 22:18 Matthew 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:23,24
The Messiah will accused by false witnesses Psalm 35:11 Matthew 26:59,60 and Mark 14:56,57
The Messiah will be hated without a cause Psalm 35:19 and 69:4 John 15:23-25
The Messiah will be betrayed by a friend Psalm 41:9 John 13:18,21
The Messiah will ascend to heaven (at the right hand of God) Psalm 68:18 Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9; 2:33-35; 3:20-21; 5:31,32; 7:55-56; Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20,21; Colossians 3:1; Hebrews 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Pet 3:22 . . . list goes on an on.
The Messiah will be given vinegar and gall to drink Psalm 69:21 Matthew 27:34; Mark 15:23; John 19:29,30
Great kings will pay homage and tribute to the Messiah Psalm 72:10,11 Matthew 2:1-11
The Messiah is a “stone the builders rejected” who will become the “head cornerstone” Psalm 118:22,23 and Isaiah 28:16 Matthew 21:42,43; Acts 4:11; Ephesians 2:20; 1 Peter 2:6-8
The Messiah will be a descendant of David Psalm 132:11 and Jeremiah 23:5,6; 33:15,16 Luke 1:32,33
The Messiah will be a born of a virgin Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:18-25 and Luke 1:26-35
The Messiah’s first spiritual work will be in Galilee Isaiah 9:1-7 Matthew 4:12-16
The Messiah will make the blind see, the deaf hear, etc. Isaiah 35:5-6 Many places. Also see Matthew 11:3-6 and John 11:47
The Messiah will be beaten, mocked, and spat upon Isaiah 50:6 Matthew 26:67 and 27:26-31
The “Gospel according to Isaiah” Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Matthew, Mark, Luke, John
People will hear and not believe the “arm of the LORD” (Messiah) Isaiah 53:1 John 12:37,38
The Messiah will be rejected Isaiah 53:3 Matthew 27:20-25; Mark 15:8-14; Luke 23:18-23; John 19:14,15
The Messiah will be killed Isaiah 53:5-9 Matthew 27:50; Mark 15:37-39; Luke 23:46; John 19:30
The Messiah will be silent in front of his accusers Isaiah 53:7 Matthew 26:62,63 and 27:12-14
The Messiah will be buried with the rich Isaiah 53:9 Matthew 27:59,60; Mark 15:46; Luke 23:52,53; John 19:38-42
The Messiah will be crucified with criminals Isaiah 53:12 Matthew 27:38; Mark 15:27; Luke 23:32,33
The Messiah is part of the new and everlasting covenant Isaiah 55:3-4 and Jeremiah 31:31-34 Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24; Luke 22:20; Hebrews 8:6-13
The Messiah will be our intercessor (intervene for us and plead on our behalf) Isaiah 59:16 Hebrews 9:15
The Messiah has two missions Isaiah 61:1-3 (first mission ends at “. . . year of the LORD’s favor”) First mission: Luke 4:16-21; Second mission: to be fulfilled at the end of the world
The Messiah will come at a specific time Daniel 9:25-26 Galatians 4:4 and Ephesians 1:10
The Messiah will be born in Bethlehem Micah 5:2 Matthew 2:1 and Luke 2:4-7
The Messiah will enter Jerusalem riding a donkey Zechariah 9:9 Matthew 21:1-11
The Messiah will be sold for 30 pieces of silver Zechariah 11:12,13 Matthew 26:15 with Matthew 27:3-10
The Messiah will forsaken by His disciples Zechariah 13:7 Matthew 26:31,56
The Messiah will enter the Temple with authority Malachi 3:1 Matthew 21:12 and Luke 19:45

There, after e got all of those clobber passages out of the way, if you're still not convinced, let's just look for a moment at the similarities of the gospels proclaimed in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. I added in this bit because it's important to note that many people point out contradictions in the Bible. (Really, they aren't contradictions, but just aren't specific quoting, noted by the punctuation in early Scripture, but that's not important) The gospels are similar in a huge variety of ways, but just different enough to tell they had different witnesses.

#2 Who could He be?

So it always has come down to five possibilities of who Jesus is...

-A liar
-A delusional psychotic
-Someone who never made claims of Messiahship
-A great spiritual soul, not fully understood.
-The one true Messiah, the Christ come into the world

Well let's assess the first possibility, that he is a liar.

There's a simple answer to this one: he couldn't be a great teacher if he was liar. Yes, theoretically, he could just make up some phony bologna parables and life lessons and pretend to follow him, but there's key point that takes that out: all those around saw that He had committed no sin. That would mean he followed some moral philosophy, and it would make perfect sense if it would be what He preached.

So now that we saw that He wasn't a liar, let's go on to the next possibility- delusions.

A simple answer for this as well. In all of the times the disciples and citizens of each town saw him, there was no evidence to show that he suffered from any mental disorder. The only argument for this would be that, supposedly, the burning passion for God's house is only a symptom o his disorder. Except all that was described that in an act of burning desire to purify God's house, He trashed the area in righteous anger. He did not attack anyone, and if he did it was to get them out of the temple.

Now let's look at the third possibility-He never made claims of Messiah-ship.

To give a rebuttal to this point, we must give a quick look at Jesus dying at the cross. Just a quick fact: two atheist historians concluded that Jesus's dying on the cross is an actual certainty. Well, why did He die on the cross? Because of His claims of Messiah-ship.

Now, let's look at the fourth possibility- A spiritual soul, not understood fully.

This is a fair point. You cannot fully understand Jesus, His teachings, and His glory, and you can't really know what was going on in His head. You must rely on scripture alone, and deductive reasoning. As He was spiritual and faithful towards the Lord in heaven, showing capabilities of amazing things, if He was just a prophet or spiritual but not the Son of God, then He could not be a true prophet or spiritual being, because He would be a cold liar. God would have eventually told Him straight out that He wasn't the Christ and to stop acting like He was, and revealed to everyone that He wasn't.

That leaves only one possibility left: He is the chosen Messiah.

#3- The Tomb

Yes, it is obviously not the best piece of evidence, but it is noteworthy. The empty tomb of Christ in Israel has brought a lot of questions, and criticism. Let's look at this criticism individually.

-It is the wrong tomb.

Couldn't be. When Mary Magdalene found the tomb empty, Jesus's clothes were laid on the ground.

-The Romans Took The Body

Why would they? If they took the body, they would help give faith in the one belief they wanted people not to believe in with a burning passion.

-The disciples took the body.

How could they? The Romans were guarding the tomb. No one could have gotten in, and no one could have gotten in.

-Jesus simply fainted, and woke up a while after.

It would hardly seem plausible for a man with nails dug into his arms and legs, beaten, whipped, and stabbed in the side to be able to get up, move a hundred-pound boulder, and walk miles upon miles away and not be caught or die from pain and exhaustion.

#4- Saul's Convictions

This is a simple one, but during the time Saul had not been converted, he had been killing Christians for their beliefs. During this time, he had seen Jesus with his own eyes, and believed, which sparked his repentance. This means Jesus did indeed claim to be the Messiah. Not a legend.



I'm going to abruptly end this now. Ready for hate replies.
All of what you wrote depends on a more fundamental, foundational assumption: that the authenticity and accuracy of your scriptures cannot be questioned.

I have no personal knowledge of either. I do not personally know - for myself - that any of those events really happened. I do not personally know - for myself - if any of those alleged "prophecies" were truly written well before an alleged Jesus was allegedly alive. I do not personally know - for myself - if Jesus actually existed. Nor can I personally verify any of these things.

So, based on that question regarding that fundamental assumption, I could add to your five possibilities; one would be:

- Completely fabricated book(s) with both prophecies and fulfillments written by one or more like-minded authors with a malicious agenda.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Although I'm Not "Notoftheworld" as to whether ' salvation ' is restricted.......
I would like to take the liberty to reply:
First, please keep in mind the majority of the people who have lived on Earth have already died.- Romans 6:23; John 3:13
So, unless one has committed the unforgivable sin of Matthew 12:32; Hebrews 6:4-6, they can be saved by having a resurrection.
As Romans 6:7 says the one who has died is freed or acquitted from their sins. ( saved from past sins )
That does Not make the resurrected ones as now innocent, but as a governor can pardon a person so the crime charges do Not stick,
Jesus can pardon a person so the sin charges do Not stick. So, in the resurrection - Acts of the Apostles 24:15 - people of all religions will have the opportunity to know and learn about Jesus as the one who resurrected them - Revelation 1:18
They will Not be tried twice, or a second time, for the past - Romans 6:7 - for that would be double jeopardy. - Revelation 20:12

As to those of us who are still alive at the soon coming ' time of separation ' on Earth - Matthew 25:31-33 - Jesus judges who are the figurative humble ' sheep ' or haughty ' goats '. The saved living ' sheep ' have a favorable judgement and can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth, living right into the start of Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rulership over Earth. - Revelation 7:14
The basis for Jesus' judgement is how people treated his ' spiritual brothers ' who are alive on Earth at that time according to Matthew 25:40.
So your answer would be 'no, other religions are not fine too'. I disagree as it defies common sense in a lot of ways and I doubt the understandings of the Bible writers and your interpretations of them. I do like Jesus and think He taught us the correct way (but not in an exclusive sense).
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
The secular writings of historian Josephus mentions the Jesus of the Bible as an historical person.
While many historians accept the short references in Josephus to John the Baptist and Jesus the brother of James, I think there are reasons to doubt they were in the original works. I've also heard it argued that it is very likely that the passage about Jesus was inserted by a Christian copyist or commentator much later (as it is in a different style, and is inserted awkwardly in the narrative). Apparently, the earliest reference to the passage was by Eusebius, writing in the early 300s CE.

As it was, Josephus's Antiquities (where the longest passage appears) was published in 94 CE, or about 60 years after Jesus' reputed death, and he was trying to satisfy his Roman patron. What's more, if the passage was inserted by someone in the Church in the 200s or 300s, then it's clear that it is not a support of a historical Jesus at all.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
While many historians accept the short references in Josephus to John the Baptist and Jesus the brother of James, I think there are reasons to doubt they were in the original works.
You get to think whatever you wish. The fact remains that the James reference is authentic and, unless and until you show otherwise, the scholars that hold this opinion are more credible than you.
 

meghanwaterlillies

Well-Known Member
I don't understand. Can you rephrase that?
mark
Some place mark early and some place mark later:
I think the open ended-ness like as if it leaves to much question in mark and places were taken from the point of view that they wouldn't believe (now the other scriptures are said to be dated later actually take more a believer view) and the various writings in mark I'm truly not a fan of but it was taken like if they wouldn't believe and even the Qumran may point to that also maybe a push not a fan to much yet either.
23 Because of the miraculous signs Jesus did in Jerusalem at the Passover celebration, many began to trust in him. Literally call Him the Messiah
24 But Jesus didn’t trust them, because he knew all about people.
25 No one needed to tell him about human nature, for he knew what was in each person’s heart.
He knew already they were going to change their mind about him.
Then many who believed lost their lives and the temple burned.
I'll some historical writtings.. please take the writings with some check.
Those who favor an earlier date argue that Mark's language indicates that the author knew that there would be serious trouble in the future but, unlike Luke, didn't know exactly what that trouble would entail. Of course, it wouldn’t have taken divinely inspired prophecy to guess that the Romans and Jews were on yet another collision course. Supporters of early dating also need to make sufficient room between Mark and the writing of Matthew and Luke, both of which they also date early — as early as 80 or 85 CE.

Conservative scholars who favor an early date often rely heavily upon a fragment of papyrus from Qumran. In a cave sealed in 68 CE was a piece of a text which is claimed to be an early version of Mark, thus allowing Mark to be dated before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
Now in all kindness if Jesus came to the gentiles to the pagans first would they have believed him. Or would he just become another one of their "gods"? This why you get angel references to the angel that stands in the sun. This is why he may have came to the jews first. The angel thing has reference in revelation and has had views their in mark at the end of what happened in the temple at the end of mark..

He came to them the "jews" at the time they also didn't trust or they changed their minds acknowledgement and then denial almost I do love them anyways.
7If only you had known the meaning of ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. 8For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.” So its not a redundant (time) sacrifice and also even that he was the only.
He told him who he was that he and his father are one unless you believe this you die in your sins.. Then he also went sat under the tree by the Jordan river where John baptized him. Where God spoke this is my son listen to him.. That's where Jesus finally brings in the river. So depending on were you are standing they accuse differently which is why the cause of unbelief.
 

meghanwaterlillies

Well-Known Member
mark
Some place mark early and some place mark later:
I think the open ended-ness like as if it leaves to much question in mark and places were taken from the point of view that they wouldn't believe (now the other scriptures are said to be dated later actually take more a believer view) and the various writings in mark I'm truly not a fan of but it was taken like if they wouldn't believe and even the Qumran may point to that also maybe a push not a fan to much yet either.
23 Because of the miraculous signs Jesus did in Jerusalem at the Passover celebration, many began to trust in him. Literally call Him the Messiah
24 But Jesus didn’t trust them, because he knew all about people.
25 No one needed to tell him about human nature, for he knew what was in each person’s heart.
He knew already they were going to change their mind about him.
Then many who believed lost their lives and the temple burned.
I'll some historical writtings.. please take the writings with some check.
Those who favor an earlier date argue that Mark's language indicates that the author knew that there would be serious trouble in the future but, unlike Luke, didn't know exactly what that trouble would entail. Of course, it wouldn’t have taken divinely inspired prophecy to guess that the Romans and Jews were on yet another collision course. Supporters of early dating also need to make sufficient room between Mark and the writing of Matthew and Luke, both of which they also date early — as early as 80 or 85 CE.

Conservative scholars who favor an early date often rely heavily upon a fragment of papyrus from Qumran. In a cave sealed in 68 CE was a piece of a text which is claimed to be an early version of Mark, thus allowing Mark to be dated before the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem.
Now in all kindness if Jesus came to the gentiles to the pagans first would they have believed him. Or would he just become another one of their "gods"? This why you get angel references to the angel that stands in the sun. This is why he may have came to the jews first. The angel thing has reference in revelation and has had views their in mark at the end of what happened in the temple at the end of mark..

He came to them the "jews" at the time they also didn't trust or they changed their minds acknowledgement and then denial almost I do love them anyways.
7If only you had known the meaning of ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice,’ you would not have condemned the innocent. 8For the Son of Man is Lord of the Sabbath.” So its not a redundant (time) sacrifice and also even that he was the only.
He told him who he was that he and his father are one unless you believe this you die in your sins.. Then he also went sat under the tree by the Jordan river where John baptized him. Where God spoke this is my son listen to him.. That's where Jesus finally brings in the river. So depending on were you are standing they accuse differently which is why the cause of unbelief.
Anyways many actually maybe believing him more it could go the opposite the way in the past. Which goes straight to the angel in the son/sun (I DO NOT WORSHIP ANGELS)( it doesn't say this angel is bad) But the word fought before this. (new paragraph) Also there are scribes, and a redundant time worshiping of sacrifice... is out of time I mean not the time worship like saturnalia and zuvranism other ones from around the world. I do not agree with that philosophy. Its wrong. Its man pushing his own apocalypse on people to cut them out. Doesn't mean you can have a revelation understanding or seek to know it or not even.
 

beenherebeforeagain

Rogue Animist
Premium Member
You get to think whatever you wish. The fact remains that the James reference is authentic and, unless and until you show otherwise, the scholars that hold this opinion are more credible than you.
Really? I can have my own thoughts? Why THANK YOU!:rolleyes:

Yes, many scholars think it's authentic, and are much more knowledgeable about it than me.:eek: I only know I've read many of the scholars on this subject (and on many other subjects dealing with ancient texts), and I tend to take ancient texts and their modern interpretations with a large grain of salt. That's MY position, which I clearly stated as MY position, in response to a thread titled "why do you doubt Jesus?" Problems with that? I don't care.:D
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
mark
Some place mark early and some place mark later:

I think the open ended-ness like as if it leaves to much question in mark and places were taken from the point of view that they wouldn't believe (now the other scriptures are said to be dated later actually take more a believer view) and the various writings in mark

I'm truly not a fan of but it was taken like if they wouldn't believe and even the Qumran may point to that also maybe a push not a fan to much yet either.

I'm sorry, I am completely loss. Can you rephrase that without using the word "mark" and scripture verses?

It's an English grammar and content confusion rather than the topic itself.
 

meghanwaterlillies

Well-Known Member
A long long time ago in land far far away........Jesus said that you hypocrites you scribes and Pharisees you travel across land and sea to make one convert 2 times more the children of hell than yourselves.(we also should not seek that or push that on someone but understand it. Understanding not a problem, it helps, and in Christ ) This was before his death he said that which means very true today also. that means they were proselytizing. Usually a spiritual law the converts weren't Jewish either, no understanding of the messiah. Today can be the same from various faith approaches. From shiva to others the destruction. What people and cultures don't understand is various cultures have been affected by someone outside. I wish they could go back in time and find their scribe. I also don't deny them or hate them. This is why people have thrown up their fist in anger at the jews and said Christianity must be false. Find the scribe if their is a problem. Or why people try to say aliens nephilim are these sons of god that came into the daughters or other things.. endlessly but its sets the mind.. Really they weren't just that; its a warning. And Christ was aware of what it, the way they did so, had done to the one convert or few. Some of the writings, image or images, or sometimes just verbal is what molds a people or culture and Islamic writings are no different. (And sometimes its entrapment) And muslims should know this. People, they may have it in their minds that will work and dominate to kill off call themselves or others what they are not or a dictator move. Ghandi said peace no violence and then he said they should all commit mass suicide. You may have moves to spread world peace, but they may have a plan to through someone in to dominate or throw out a group. Find the scribe or Pharisee... I can say that sometimes new writings come up to fight the old. But truly find it in Jesus Christ because the more you uncover the more confusing it would be. It doesn't mean you cant find truth. Even atheism has a scribe. (I know that sounds messed up) We can still overcome these things.

Also running around playing invent a jew games have become very dangerous and I would caution that they tell people that they are the true isrealites and push them off on extremists groups or texts old talmuds to various Vedic to korans. Paul wrote something to protect people from it, it was don't chase after endless genealogy or religious stuff if your only going to miss the point in Christ. They did even try that out in ww2. Even blood tests and things the best at the texts and came up with no real concrete conclusive evidence because its in Jesus Christ. Christ said that neither in Jerusalem or in this mountain, the days will come they will worship Me in spirit and in truth. So Anywhere and can be now-where. Also judas moves and false Christ moves or multiple prophets are what Christians watch out for.

Revelation stated that the angel that stands in the sun. Which is spelled sun in my translation but can be different in other peoples ideas. I would like to look at other translations in other languages where son and sun are not the same sounded word.. (did they do that on propose) just to see if its different same with allah and moon tbut ours were mostly made from the same translators so. IDK. but it does say an angel.
 
Top