Just checking, there aren't people who take the Bible literally are there?
Options
Comments
-
kingblaze84 wrote: »And for the record, I believe Jesus in all likelihood did exist, but not as the savior as many in the world have made him out to be. There are some historical records of a man named Yeshua made by non-Christians, and this figure was known as someone with some followers.
Do I believe Jesus was a con man? Not sure, but he had con-man qualities, like exaggerating his gifts and "powers". The Bible over and over again shows Jesus to be a man who gave himself ? -like abilities, but who knows, maybe his followers just put that info in there. I consider Jesus to be a moral version of Charles Manson. He had lots of groupie followers, but he was not as heroic a figure as some make him out to be. Jesus was ahead of his time though, but I truly feel the Buddha had more honorable messages. Jesus never mentions slavery as being an evil act, while the Buddha says it is. Not trying to compare philosophers, just saying.
Exactly have you read quotes from some of Manson's followers? They also claimed that he had special powers but you have never once seen Manson himself claim this. And the only interview I remember him being asked about it he said he didn't have any magic. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »Tacitus wrote his book 14 years after Jesus' death. He was the official record keeper at the time Jesus was crucified and kept record of it. He wouldn't record something that did not happen for sure. A influential man named Yeshua was crucified this is fact.
The only story I trust is Tacitus'. Because the ? he recorded was official records. So it's not second hand knowledge on his part. The others yes and I've already said that.
Huh? I already did separate the man from the myth. I could care less if the Yeshua in the bible lived or not, I just said I believe a regular man named Yeshua in that time was very influential and died because of it and this is likely to be the man that the mythical bible Jesus is based on.
More like 100 years and counting.
Ticitus.
He probably lived and wrote into Hadrian's reign (117-38) and may have died in A.D. 120.
http://ancienthistory.about.com/od/historianstacitus/a/Tacitus.htmThe Annals do not prove that Jesus Christ existed but merely that Christians existed in the First Century A.D.,
It is no secret that after the fire that consumed Rome in 64 A.D. the emperor Nero scapegoated Christians because he had to blame the fire on someone.
http://www.suite101.com/content/pliny-tacitus-josephus-and-jesus-a28707
Separate the man from the myth as in who wrote about the man and is any second hand knowledge of the man not based off of the myth.
Writing about historical events does not preclude that you do not include the ramblings of Christians as observed threw out Rome. -
So if everything else it Ticitus' Annals were right why wouldn't this be? If all other thing he wrote of are accepted as really happening why is a man named Yeshua being crucified and having a following far fetched? Riddle me that
-
ThaChozenWun wrote: »So if everything else it Ticitus' Annals were right why wouldn't this be? If all other thing he wrote of are accepted as really happening why is a man named Yeshua being crucified and having a following far fetched? Riddle me that
it's not about it being far fetched. It's about it being written as second hand knowledge based on the words of Christians. Tacitus made the same claims based off of the same evidence as the others that you said you don't trust. Christians weren't a secret during the time of Nero. What did Tacitus write about the Jews who contested such assertions?
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=905&letter=C -
FuriousOne wrote: »it's not about it being far fetched. It's about it being written as second hand knowledge based on the words of Christians. Tacitus made the same claims based off of the same evidence as the others that you said you don't trust. Christians weren't a secret during the time of Nero. What did Tacitus write about the Jews who contested such assertions?
http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=905&letter=C
No, he didn't write off the second hand accounts of Christians. I believe had he done so there would be some mention of some BS miracle in his writings that involve Jesus. Nearly all of the Annals is second hand accounts of some sort. So you still didn't answer the question. If the Romans didn't crucify someone it wouldn't have been included in his annals. It's Roman history, not Christian history. He got his accounts from the Romans not the Christians. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »No, he didn't write off the second hand accounts of Christians. I believe had he done so there would be some mention of some BS miracle in his writings that involve Jesus. Nearly all of the Annals is second hand accounts of some sort. So you still didn't answer the question. If the Romans didn't crucify someone it wouldn't have been included in his annals. It's Roman history, not Christian history. He got his accounts from the Romans not the Christians.
He got his accounts from Romans concerning Christians and their tales and their influence during a dark time. Nero burned down Rome and blamed the Christians. Why wouldn't your write about them. They were a rising occult that was a threat to pagan ways during the time."Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace.
Admitted that Christians were persecuted.Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators , Pontius Pilatus,
Is there any evidence that this wasn't from the Christian account of their faith? They were named CHRISTians so why wouldn't you note their assumed origins. he also noted in a passing way because Christians were already claiming during that time that Pontus Pilatus did the dead even though they weren't there either (this was the time of Nero). Is there any knowledge dating back from that time that proves this occurred other then the words of Christians who were in abundance spreading their gospel during Nero's time? Did he specifically quote Romans that he got the information from or records showing the execution?and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome..."
So a stumped out cult made a comeback. This cult being from Judea. What exactly does this prove? -
thedesolateone wrote: »well did it? its not that it didnt it that there is no evidence and no reasonable person should believe it plus it sounds outlandish
Non believers make your same baseless claims about everything pertaining to ? . You say: "no evidence" ..... wrong. There is evidence.
The NT account of Jesus rising from the dead is the only rational explanation for the subsequent history recorded events. -
There are only 2 types of people in the world.
Type 1 person: Those who believe the true and living ? 100%
tpye 2 person: Those who don't believe ? .
The last day will make everybody believers though. Hallelujah!
"Surely your wrath against men brings you praise, and the survivors of your wrath are restrained." Psalm 76:10
PRAISE ? ! -
DoUwant2go2Heaven? wrote: »There are only 2 types of people in the world.
Type 1 person: Those who believe the true and living ? 100%
tpye 2 person: Those who don't believe ? .
The last day will make everybody believers though. Hallelujah!
"Surely your wrath against men brings you praise, and the survivors of your wrath are restrained." Psalm 76:10
PRAISE ? !
You and John got a betting pool going on? John has JFK 100:1 -
John Prewett wrote: »Non believers make your same baseless claims about everything pertaining to ? . You say: "no evidence" ..... wrong. There is evidence.
The NT account of Jesus rising from the dead is the only rational explanation for the subsequent history recorded events.
i dont think you yourself believe this.if you do i pity you . -
alissowack wrote: »Just because you don't base your life on Steven King novels doesn't make novels any less than they are. Novels are meant to be what they are and in respect to the craft, it should be read as such. Someone might think that Christine is still out there or there is a cemetary where dead pets can come to life, but it doesn't change what novels are. Well, what is to be said of the Bible you might say? The Bible is...what the Bible says it is and any approval or disagreements doesn't change it.
lol im saying because something is said or written doesnt make it the truth thats all -
thedesolateone wrote: »[/B]
lol im saying because something is said or written doesnt make it the truth thats all
And just because something is true doesn't mean that it will be respected as such. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »Exactly have you read quotes from some of Manson's followers? They also claimed that he had special powers but you have never once seen Manson himself claim this. And the only interview I remember him being asked about it he said he didn't have any magic.
Yeah I've seen several programs on Manson and Mansons' followers seemed to put all kinds of qualities in Manson that most others didn't really see. I believe Jesus had the same kind of followers. He was a charismatic man who likely did great works. Only someone who does great works and gives people something to believe in can build such a devoted following. Say what you will about Manson, but he gave his followers a lot to live for. Jesus did the same.
By the way, congratulations to your Steelers. They beat my Jets, but your team is gonna lose against the Packers. -
How can you be a devout Christian if you don't take it literal? There are millions of humans that take it literal.
-
they crucified manson real talk
-
alissowack wrote: »Maybe I need to work on how I word stuff...I don't know. But I was not suggesting that the miracles wouldn't be amazing. I'm saying that if that is all that I'm looking for in Jesus is the miracles, then it's possible that I am only interested in what I can gain from it...not whether these miracles serve a different purpose.[/QUOTE]
What's up with you man? It seems that you just type with no regard to rather your statements make sense or not. Do you really think Jesus would be referred to as ? incarnated and have a religion named after him without all of these miracles and great deeds he supposedly performed? Do you think he would have all these followers without these miracles? Finally, do you think anyone would be interested in him at all if he did not offer the dream of being saved? Let me answer that for you, his followers follow him because they are interested in what they can gain from him, his deeds are what made it feasible to there needy minds that he could really offer this. -
thedesolateone wrote: »i dont think you yourself believe this.if you do i pity you .
Roman Empire made an amazing "about face" regarding Jesus.
For a couple of hundred years, the Roman Empire persecuted people who proclaimed faith in Jesus.
Seemed like the more Rome killed'em, the more they flourished. Eternal life is what Jesus is all about.
One who really believes in Jesus therefore believes being faithful to Jesus is much more important
than extending natural life a few years.
One who believes in Jesus therefore believes his fellow human CANNOT really ? him.
Rather, can only ? the body. That is what Jesus is all about.
People who really believe in Jesus see that life in this world is a mere "drop in the bucket" compared to eternity.
The Roman Empire "about face" came when Roman king Constantine decided "if you can't beat them, join them "
and
commenced to create the imitation "christian" Trinitarian cult that evolved into modern organized "christian" religion.
That the Roman Empire, mightiest empire of the day, would proclaim "? " to be a Jew
crucified 300 years earlier by a Roman governor
is an amazing evidence that Jesus rose from the dead. -
John Prewett wrote: »Roman Empire made an amazing "about face" regarding Jesus.
For a couple of hundred years, the Roman Empire persecuted people who proclaimed faith in Jesus.
Seemed like the more Rome killed'em, the more they flourished. Eternal life is what Jesus is all about.
One who really believes in Jesus therefore believes being faithful to Jesus is much more important
than extending natural life a few years.
One who believes in Jesus therefore believes his fellow human CANNOT really ? him.
Rather, can only ? the body. That is what Jesus is all about.
People who really believe in Jesus see that life in this world is a mere "drop in the bucket" compared to eternity.
The Roman Empire "about face" came when Roman king Constantine decided "if you can't beat them, join them "
and
commenced to create the imitation "christian" Trinitarian cult that evolved into modern organized "christian" religion.
That the Roman Empire, mightiest empire of the day, would proclaim "? " to be a Jew
crucified 300 years earlier by a Roman governor
is an amazing evidence that Jesus rose from the dead.
i think you made some grand leap of faith by saying romans converted to christianity therefore jesus rising from the dead is true.thats evidence to you but not sufficient to me
so why dont you ? yourself? -
thedesolateone wrote: »i think you made some grand leap of faith by saying romans converted to christianity
therefore jesus rising from the dead is true.
thats evidence to you but not sufficient to me
If Jesus staid dead like most dead people do, then Jesus would be as forgotten as most people are.
The people in Jerusalem knew Jesus had been crucified and entombed.
So the disciples sitting around after Jesus is tortured and crucified, and one of them says to the others :
"Don't be so gloomy. We can still prevail.
All we gotta do is tell everybody Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to us.
We'll tell everybody the leaders crucified the Messiah.
All we gotta do is stick to the lie even though we know it will greatly ? off the leaders that crucified Jesus.
No doubt these leaders will torture and crucify us like they did Jesus.
But we aren't afraid to be tortured and crucified, ...uh, .... are we ?
Hey fellows, where are you going .....? Hey, it was just an idea ......" -
John Prewett wrote: »If Jesus staid dead like most dead people do, then Jesus would be as forgotten as most people are.
The people in Jerusalem knew Jesus had been crucified and entombed.
So the disciples sitting around after Jesus is tortured and crucified, and one of them says to the others :
"Don't be so gloomy. We can still prevail.
All we gotta do is tell everybody Jesus rose from the dead and appeared to us.
We'll tell everybody the leaders crucified the Messiah.
All we gotta do is stick to the lie even though we know it will greatly ? off the leaders that crucified Jesus.
No doubt these leaders will torture and crucify us like they did Jesus.
But we aren't afraid to be tortured and crucified, ...uh, .... are we ?
Hey fellows, where are you going .....? Hey, it was just an idea ......"
now your finally getting it -
John Prewett wrote: »Roman Empire made an amazing "about face" regarding Jesus.
For a couple of hundred years, the Roman Empire persecuted people who proclaimed faith in Jesus.
Seemed like the more Rome killed'em, the more they flourished. Eternal life is what Jesus is all about.
One who really believes in Jesus therefore believes being faithful to Jesus is much more important
than extending natural life a few years.
One who believes in Jesus therefore believes his fellow human CANNOT really ? him.
Rather, can only ? the body. That is what Jesus is all about.
People who really believe in Jesus see that life in this world is a mere "drop in the bucket" compared to eternity.
The Roman Empire "about face" came when Roman king Constantine decided "if you can't beat them, join them "
and
commenced to create the imitation "christian" Trinitarian cult that evolved into modern organized "christian" religion.
That the Roman Empire, mightiest empire of the day, would proclaim "? " to be a Jew
crucified 300 years earlier by a Roman governor
is an amazing evidence that Jesus rose from the dead.
Great post. ? bless. -
What's up with you man? It seems that you just type with no regard to rather your statements make sense or not. Do you really think Jesus would be referred to as ? incarnated and have a religion named after him without all of these miracles and great deeds he supposedly performed? Do you think he would have all these followers without these miracles? Finally, do you think anyone would be interested in him at all if he did not offer the dream of being saved? Let me answer that for you, his followers follow him because they are interested in what they can gain from him, his deeds are what made it feasible to there needy minds that he could really offer this.
Oh, I'm very much aware of what I am writing, sir. I just believe you don't understand the point I'm trying to make. I'm in no way saying that the miracles that Jesus performed weren't important...just not in the way you may think. If it is only about the miracles, then the rich young ruler wouldn't have turned away, Judas wouldn't have betrayed him and Peter wouldn't have denied him three times...and this is not taking into account those others who have stopped following him. -
One who believes in Jesus therefore believes his fellow human CANNOT really ? him.
is an amazing evidence that Jesus rose from the dead.
^^^some people are just stupid
