What the heck new evidence for Christ?

[Shantanu]

Well - a lot of individuals who publicly oppose the powerful and the rich - have gone that way

Jesus is one example - There is Guru Arjan and Guru Tegh Bahadur -

But as some hold the view - He (Jesus) died to pay the blood ransom for the sins of humanity - that is another explanation that is offered as well

One thing is certain: life is not worth risking the wrath of the rich and powerful, and neither is it appropriate to die for the sins of humanity because there are no sins. So the story of Jesus just does not stand up to scrutiny.

 

[Shantanu]

He died for our sins.. although Muslims ask the same question.. How could the purest of the prophets who was without sin die such a cruel and humiliating death?

In the story of Jesus Christ, he opposed the existing status quo and was killed in the most violent manner possible: who decided that He should die for the sins of humanity. Perhaps it was a way of God to bring humanity into a new phase of civilisation by conducting ones self dharmically.

 

[Faithofchristian]

HAHAHA. A page was sent to my email saying Billy Grahams son has ideas on new evidence for Christian having existed! I get o the page its a picture of him preaching not a video LOL! And its has nothing about any new evidence on Christ! LMFAO! All it is is a long page description of the Graham books and their family!Must have been a trick.

The fact that Christians fill the need to bring new evidence in for Christ just means they are feeling weakened by historians scientists and Atheists who are bringing the real truth to people. maybe the Christian faith is just a bit threatened. Why tell a lie to sell the Grahams books?

When you say ( Christians) could you explain exactly which Christians that your talking about.
As you show that you haven't a clue or idea which Christians is which.
So could you show or give in what Christians your referring to.
Seeing there are two groups of Christians.

So which is which.

As I am Christian, that doesn't need no evidence to support the existence of Jesus

All I need is the Bible/scriptures that gives the evidence of Christ Jesus.

 

[loganonekenobi]

The vast majority of historians agree Jesus did exist and was crucified
That includes the radical skeptic Bart Erhman "But as a historian I think evidence matters. And the past matters. And for anyone to whom both evidence and the past matter, a dispassionate consideration of the case makes it quite plain: Jesus did exist."

He not only existed but the consensus of historians would go on and say his tomb was empty
and his disciples came to believe Jesus rose from the dead

I love Bart Ehrman but he is not a radical skeptic by any stretch. Now Richard Carrier on the other hand.....
That jesus existed is generally accepted but that there was a tomb is not. there is no evidence other than the bible that tells that jesus was in a tomb. It was most certainly not the way a roman criminal was burried.
The bible has a lot of places that are historical but zero evidence that anything God related happened.
While it is probably true that Jesus's disiples believed they saw him after his death it is also a well documented fact that people see dead loved ones and religious figures all the time. If Mr. Graham had REAL evidence then he would be the most famous christian since the pharasee formerly known as Saul. The empty tomb idea does not stand up as evidence once you step out side of the bible.
So to answer the OP question.... this is why the christians are looking for evidence for their bible claims. With out it they have nothing but faith in something that likely did not happen.

 

[lukethethird]

Whether it is a fictional story or based on reality are the lessons not worth considering further?

There's nothing noteworthy, in fact some of the character of Jesus is questionable. People single out the golden rule but that does not originate with the story of Jesus.

 

[Shantanu]

There's nothing noteworthy, in fact some of the character of Jesus is questionable. People single out the golden rule but that does not originate with the story of Jesus.

The reality also is one must not tolerate injustice and ones persecutors have got to be exposed one way or the other.

 

[lukethethird]

George Carlin liked to poke fun at the "invisible man in the sky" of Christian belief,
the man who made the universe.
I am not sure his own idea of no-one making the universe - not even the universe,
is in fact funnier and more of a miracle than an outside entity.

So, the universe is man made?

 

[Riders]

When you say ( Christians) could you explain exactly which Christians that your talking about.
As you show that you haven't a clue or idea which Christians is which.
So could you show or give in what Christians your referring to.
Seeing there are two groups of Christians.

So which is which.

As I am Christian, that doesn't need no evidence to support the existence of Jesus

All I need is the Bible/scriptures that gives the evidence of Christ Jesus.

We all know what the Christian religion is, although I maybe wrong maybe it wasnt a Christian who wrote the article Billy Grahams son was partially responsible and agreed to the interview. So I always though of the Grahams as being Christian yes, are you saying you disagree with that?

So Billy Grahams son is not a Christian eh?

 

[GoodbyeDave]

WHy is it that I keep hearing vast majority of Historian claim Jesus existed and when I keep reading websights from Historians who say the exact opposite. Ive read lots of Historic material that says he does not exist.

Because professional historians don't deny that Jesus existed. In a later post you quote the atheist Frank Zindler. He taught science in a community college. He quoted Gordon Rylands. He taught science in an English school. You need to read someone who was a trained historian. I could name a string of people in history (like Pythagoras or Confucius) whole existence is less well documented than that of Jesus. But admitting that Jesus of Nazareth was born, preached, and was executed obviously doesn't imply the truth of the Christian claims about him.

 

[lukethethird]

Because professional historians don't deny that Jesus existed. In a later post you quote the atheist Frank Zindler. He taught science in a community college. He quoted Gordon Rylands. He taught science in an English school. You need to read someone who was a trained historian. I could name a string of people in history (like Pythagoras or Confucius) whole existence is less well documented than that of Jesus. But admitting that Jesus of Nazareth was born, preached, and was executed obviously doesn't imply the truth of the Christian claims about him.

Of course there are professional historians that doubt the existence of Jesus. The fact is that most historians won't touch the subject. For the most part it's Christian theologians, not historians, that keep telling us that Jesus existed. I would venture to say that most people that believe Jesus existed never read a gospel.

 

[Faithofchristian]

We all know what the Christian religion is, although I maybe wrong maybe it wasnt a Christian who wrote the article Billy Grahams son was partially responsible and agreed to the interview. So I always though of the Grahams as being Christian yes, are you saying you disagree with that?

So Billy Grahams son is not a Christian eh?

What I'm saying is.
That there's two types of Christians.

One who follows the teachings of man's
And the other who follows the teachings of Christ Jesus.
Now the question is, can you tell the difference between them?

 

[Riders]

What I'm saying is.
That there's two types of Christians.

One who follows the teachings of man's
And the other who follows the teachings of Christ Jesus.
Now the question is, can you tell the difference between them?

I am not answering that because i believe its not a part of the original topic. Thanks.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Of course there are professional historians that doubt the existence of Jesus.

Names? Citations? What's wrong with the people around here who make assertions without evidence?

 

[lukethethird]

Names? Citations? What's wrong with the people around here who make assertions without evidence?

You made an assertion without doing your homework, wasn't it written somewhere that one should take out the log in their own eye before accusing others? Anyways Richard Carrier, B.A. (History), M.A. (Ancient history), M.Phil. (Ancient history), Ph.D. (Ancient history) is probably the most bona fide credentialed historian to weigh in on the matter. There are numerous scholars with all the recognized credentials such as Robert Price, two Ph.D's in New Testament studies, Thomas L. Thompson, Danish Biblical scholar and theologian, Thomas L. Brodie, Irish Roman Catholic priest, just to name a few, there are many more that doubt an historical Jesus that you would know of if you were at all familiar with the topic, however it appears that you are not.

 

[lukethethird]

What I'm saying is.
That there's two types of Christians.

One who follows the teachings of man's
And the other who follows the teachings of Christ Jesus.
Now the question is, can you tell the difference between them?

I can tell the difference between them, the ones that don't follow the teachings of Christ Jesus will be tossed into the lake of fire.

 

[THE HOOD APOLOGIST]

Your on the wrong post, I did not say the words the real truth. So theres nothing to say about that.

Umm, yes you did.

Quote,"The fact that Christians fill the need to bring new evidence in for Christ just means they are feeling weakened by historians scientists and Atheists who are bringing the REAL TRUTH to people."

 

[whirlingmerc]

Are we talking about Franklin Graham or the Bible?

Ad homonyms about Graham do not make the Bible untrue.
They are a distraction

Of course there is an enormous amount of evidence by virtue of silence

The gospels claims the veil of the temple was torn top to bottom when Jesus died and no living Jews or Priests of the temple came forward and refuted that

The gospel claims the sun became darkened (and it is full moon in the passover hence not an eclipse) and no witnesses and no living Jews or Priests of the temple came forward and refuted that

The gospels claimed the tomb was empty and shortly after the Romans made grave robbery a capital offense... which would be totally consistent with the gospel claims raising a stir

The book of Acts claims the Apostle Paul when from an Al Queda like rampage against Christians dragging them to prison and because of a vision of Jesus changed his whole view.... that claim also stands in the absence of countervailing witness or evidence to the contrary

 

[Riders]

Umm, yes you did.

Quote,"The fact that Christians fill the need to bring new evidence in for Christ just means they are feeling weakened by historians scientists and Atheists who are bringing the REAL TRUTH to people."

Well I may have over stepped on that. It would be better to say that scientists bring doubt to the story of Jesus and weather its real. Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[THE HOOD APOLOGIST]

Well I may have over stepped on that. It would be better to say that scientists bring doubt to the story of Jesus and weather its real. Thanks for clearing that up!

No problem. Also, how are scientists bringing doubt to the story of Jesus? They're not historians.

 

[Riders]

No problem. Also, how are scientists bringing doubt to the story of Jesus? They're not historians.

Ill be more specific. Scientists who study evolution and come with theories how the world is made and how Adam and Eve are the not the first 2 beings, archaeologists and historians, and theres a huge bunch of them who claim there is no evidence for Jesus.