This is not about whether or not he was the son of God but whether he actually existed.Most atheists agree that he did live but there are some who don't so what are you're thoughts?
Well since everyone is just insulting another person because they don't have "reasoning" for their "opinions" or some other stuff, I'm not even going to bother with this topic anymore.
And yes you can try insulting me by turning my words around and everything, but frankly, I just don't care anymore.
Has someone listed the historical documents that reference Jesus of the Bible? All I know of is the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were written sometime between the Old and New Testament. AND we would need to read the "original" Bible to make an informed decision on this. All of these edited version just toss the validity out the window.
Side note, I've always wondered why John the Baptist had to baptize Jesus, when he is supposed to be the son of God?
While I am reading this, Cinna. Could you, or someone else tell me about the other prophesies that were supposed to be fulfilled to be the Messiah? Which is where I wanted to go with this.
I know two, I believe. He was supposed to be son of David and from Bethlehem, not Nazareth, right?
I do wonder whether any of the supposed historical documents that show Jesus existed in any capacity are actually correct - I doubt any of them were written when Jesus was supposedly alive.
No there are no contemporary documents of Jesus. There are also a number of people in power around the 3rd century who were willing to lie about historical facts in order to get more people to convert to Christianity. Interestingly enough much of the extra Biblical material on Jesus appeared around that era. That's not to say it was all falsified but it does mean we should be very critical of it.
Well since everyone is just insulting another person because they don't have "reasoning" for their "opinions" or some other stuff, I'm not even going to bother with this topic anymore.
He was putting forth his opinions as facts and expecting everyone to just accept them as such.
Has someone listed the historical documents that reference Jesus of the Bible? All I know of is the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were written sometime between the Old and New Testament.
the dead sea scrolls are a document of the old testament, So it wouldn't include Jesus. I remember coming across a site not to long ago that had a pretty good unbiased take on the extra Biblical material, I will try and find it again.
AND we would need to read the "original" Bible to make an informed decision on this.
We don't have an original copy. as far as the old testament the dead sea scrolls are the closest we have, but even they are just copies. Not sure of the oldest copy of the new testament though.
We don't have an original copy. as far as the old testament the dead sea scrolls are the closest we have, but even they are just copies
Yet, I've met and talked to several Christians that do not accept the Dead Sea Scrolls as authentic. Why didn't all of the documents from DSS make it to the Bible?
Avorne, how is it not to be said that these prophecies are still waiting to be fulfilled?
If the prophecies are yet to be fulfilled, and they must be fulfilled by the Messiah, then logically one cannot assert that ANY person has been the Messiah yet, as the informatin we've been given as to how to ascertain who is the true savior has yet to be fulfilled. It is for this same reason that the Jews reject the idea of Jesus as the messiah, although they count him among YHWH's prophets.
Yet, I've met and talked to several Christians that do not accept the Dead Sea Scrolls as authentic. Why didn't all of the documents from DSS make it to the Bible?
It doesn't surprise me that there are Christians that don't accept them as they often say things that don't match with the version we have today. There are around something like 30 gospels not included in the new testament that were written.
