A person existing and a person existing and also being a god are two totally different things. The second one will require a hell of a lot more evidence before any rational person should believe it. Since there is no real evidence, I would conclude he is not a god.
Jesus is the WORD! Forgive, love your enemy, help the poor, being a rich jerk is no good, if your sick or have a disease you are worthy of Gods love (and everyone else).
Basically, live together in peace and love, and be strong against hypocrits and bad guys- is the message among many other.
This is the basic building blocks of civil society. This is Godly or good(for athiests), the WORD. Jesus IS because of these WORDS. Our Christian Faith STANDS on WORDS not idolizing a human.
@JGeorge1313 The important thing is that Christians don`t stand by their words. This is the biggest religion in the world but no one is really being helped by Christians at all. But it`s ok to keep buying bibles and paying tithes. This is the biggest fraud in history. It was the pope who gave the go ahead for slavery. The pope even had slaves himself. How Godly is that? That`s nothing but pure evil. I will never get caught up in this bullshit...lol
@JGeorge1313 No, i`m not a muslim. I was born a man without a false label and that`s how I will remain. Loving our enemy is why we black people are in the situation we are in now. I will never love my enemy because he will continue to crush me if I do. This is one of the most false teachings of them all. You never love your enemy. Your enemy will smite you if you do...lol The bible says that God is a God of war. The Israelites according to the bible had no mercy on the Canaanites.
@saddat1965 The only way to crush hate is with love, this is a unirversal truth. The problem is, pride get's in the way, anger unravels, and violence insues. Conquer yourself, this is the greatest victory, no one can take it away from you, not heaven not hell. As for the situation of Black people that you mention: Talk to Obama the first Black President about that one-he'll give you the answer. Last I checked- He devotly believes in Christs teachings.
@JGeorge1313 Not only that, most of the bible came from old ancient stories anyway. You can still see where most of the bible was copied from today. These religions is the reason there is no peace in the world today. I will never participate in the hatred that religions project. It was Muslims and Christians who enslaved and killed hundreds of millions of my people. So I will never side with any of them. And I would suggest to any black person to throw away these bullshit religions...
@JGeorge1313 ...as fast as they can. It teaches them to love something unseen more than their own people...lol That`s the biggest joke of the millennium...lol
You are right Christ means chosen one , so the chosen savior was crucified , there were many crucefictions at that time plus Romans would put any suspected conspirators agains the empire to death so say that the people that folowed "Jesus Christ" knew how to write they would probably not do so as to leave any evedidence of their involvment , that's probably why there aren't any concrete historical writeings or evedince
The fact that there is so much horror and violence in this world is proof enough that Jesus did not exist except perhaps as a very human preacher. He said he would return. So whats it going to take?Millions of starving and homeless people perhaps, countless wars with horrific blood shed by millions of innocent men, women and children. Whats it going to take. God works in mysterious ways i hear. Sure does. If i was Moses and God spoke to me it would be easy to have faith. So come talk to us all.
Jesus existing is not a threat to atheists. since you are fond of quoting wikipedia. you should look up th edating of the gospels in it, most scholars agree between 80-100AD for at least 3 of the gospels(according to wikipedia). Lets suppose he did exist, it doesnt matter cause he was just a man with new ideas and not a god. so it's a pointless discussion and Jesus' existence doesn't prove the existence of God.
no he didnt exist christ jesus christ is a rip off of krishna of hindu krish christ get it? and all jesus teaching is the same as that of buddhas. he got his name from krishna and his teaching from buddha. so christian religion was a stolen made up religion.
Witnessing book: John 3:7 You Must Be Born Again originalwriting. ie Find out what it really means to be Born Again. Is there really a purgatory? What about spirit mediums, where are they getting their information from? What about the End Times. Find out the answers you have been looking for in this easy to read book. With informative further reading section.
Satan shall do everything to keep one from turning to Jesus and use every one and everything to meet his hopeless objective because he already lost.he lost the moment Jesus took the cross.
lol and its not the christian religion is in vain if jesus didnt exixt... its the religion is proven to be a fraud. and ripping off people mmmoney by making them think they can buy their salvation tenpercent at a time and laundering and avoiding taxes the rest of us have to pay.. they explit the system and the poor and sick with this sick fukn scam of eternal life salvation shit....fraud is fraud...we should demand the head of these religions be crucified...
so what u have is a cult who s adopted the horas sun god story and twisted it create a fear monger mentality to control children and populations of people go into the woods and the big bad wolf will eat you.. same thing as do sinful thing and you will be punished horifficly... not ur telling this shit to two and three yrs olds and up... as an adult i cant beleive christianity isnt consisdered child abuse...keep ur child innocent exposere to shhit like the bible is not keeping them inocent
zeitgeist religion the best story ever told see all three and open ur eyes morons.... also see zeitgeist 9 11 you will be chiped...or killed.. yoor choice... free will right.. hows that diff from follow me jesus christ or burn in hell.... i say ill burn if thats ur policy ....
do a study on ZEITGEIST Refuted..you'll find most of Zeitgeist was made up or made up by enemies of christianity several decades after christianity established for 200+ years
I agree that the deities that came before Jesus did not all have every element that Jesus is recorded in the Gospels as having. However, they all shared many of these elements. That Jesus was a compilation of these myths is not an unreasonable stretch. Furthermore, that some of these other myths were embellished further after Jesus' time does nothing to discredit the idea that 1st century Jews created their own hero out of whole cloth. The borrowing of ideas works both ways apparently.
if he did exist , bet he didn't look like that pasty face bitch you keep showing. If youre gonna lie , why not start of with an believeable image that would reflect the climate.
decus69: It's interesting that people who claim their magical god-man really existed but then resort to creating fantastical representations of him and then pretend it's really him. Believers don't wan't a real Jesus. They want a Jesus of their own creation, a Jesus they create in their own image...which is a huge hint that Jesus is a mythological figure.
isn't atheists desagreeing with the majority of historians of jesus existing the same as christians desagreeing with the majority of scientist on evolution so that last statement should be out
eddies2k: The majority of biblical scholars are Christians, and as such are bias in favor of their own religion. Now, a lot of Scientists are Christians too, but Evolution is not against Christianity. So it would be hard or nearlly impossible for a biblical scholar to state that Jesus likely never existed while still being a Christian. So they are stuck like that, having to protect their religious views despite what the reality of the situation is.
the name jesus/jeshua was very very very common in those days...evidence of the name is just that and nothing more....im not saying jesus christ was never a real person but this video has not convinced me of anything.plus it is very possible that those roman historians quoted as confirming jesus' existence could have easily been modified and revised by later generations, who were, you guessed it, Christians.but i repeat im not attacking Christianity and i have no intention of offending the Lord
A wise man finds truth in all, A fool serch for the differaces. We all know the romans believed in MULTIPLE gods,and THEY DID put there twist in there,andnow we have a lot of confusion. The scripture(bible) was writiin in hebrew. Translations and translator, translated it to there political bennefit. Were not getting the real chit. Its for the indevidul to get what he can get out of it and stay in his logical realm and apply it to his life. LOGICALY. Were are living in civalised time now. Peace
The New Testament was written in Greek. -But guess what? This is actually a good thing. There's a lot of info out there that people are just not being made aware of, usually because it casts doubt on Church teachings. For example....Did you know there are huge problems with Paul? Did you know that Paul ultimately blames Jesus' death on demons and not the Romans or the Jews? Did you know Paul makes up sayings and claims Jesus said it? LOL Did you know Paul was incredibly loyal to "evil" Rome?
The death and ressurection of Osiris is one of the most prominent and important aspect of that diety, and he is apparently one of the oldest know Gods, dating back as far as 2500 BC.
Quit splicing the truth. Osiris is one of the oldest knoiwn gods but there is no ressurection story for him untill after Jesus. In otherwords they copied
I'm sorry..... I'm quoting from wiki here: "Much of the extant information about the Passion of Osiris can be found on the Ikhernofret Stela at Abydos erected in the 12th Dynasty by Ikhernofret (also I-Kher-Nefert), possibly a priest of Osiris or other official during the reign of Senwosret III (Pharaoh Sesostris, about 1875 BC)."
Dude, man your mistake is believing you can have a rational discussion with these people. You can't. These people are hoplessly mind-controlled. They live in a starry-eyed trance with the mindframe of a child believing that there is a sky daddy up in outer space who can read their minds and watches their every action.
(Continued) Which remind me. When you happen to find yourself being trapped in a conversation with deluded religious nuts, ask them where Heaven is. They will most likely give you a sappy story about heaven being "somewhere else", but you can just respond with the facts that that is not what people in the Bible believed. To Biblical people. Heaven was "up in the sky". Ask a religious nut just how far up do they need to go to get to the throne of God, or even why Jesus didn't wear a spacesuit.
@TheMonkeyDoodler Try to understand, people who "believe" in what their parents taught them, are mostly TOO hard-headed to accept logic. If you study "religion" instead of "Christianity" you'll find every so-called "miracle" was done by "other" Gods. Jesus is SUN worship, turned into an Anthropomorphic-Being by the INVENTER'S of Christianity. I find it offensive to my intelligence to believe in a MYTH. ANY Myth. You have toi be awful insecure to believe such a ludacris thing. Grow up!
Miracles happen. There is only one God. Whatever you believe, as long as you worship God and doing right things that you think may make him happy, you are in the right path
Reading through these comments I can't help noticing how worked up the atheists are getting. If all they are trying to prove is that 'there's probably no God - stop worrying and enjoy life', why are they so passionate about trying to disprove Christianity? This video is simply outlining the facts that surround Jesus existance - nothing is said about spirituality - why then are people jumping to the offensive? Denial?
I seriously don't care what people believe, but what bothers me is when believers feel it is okay to lie in order to "prove" their beleifs true. This video is an example of such lies.
What kind of statement is that? If you don't care what people believe why are you wasting your life raving about videos made by people who believe something different from you? Christians believe in Jesus because they know him personally but this is not even what this video is talking about. Take a chill pill. Life is more enjoyable when you try to understand people rather than just slating them all the time.
But they can't possibly know him personally. Believers have turned Jesus into an imaginary friend, hence the Atheist humorus phrase, "Adults with imaginary friends are stupid."
The illusion is that modern Christianity is the same as that practiced by the first Christians. It's not.
How do we know if the new testament is really the word of god if it was assembled and ruled upon by a meeting in the 4th century? how do we know they didnt burn the ones with the actual truth and and leave the ones they liked better? What makes you think ppl didnt actually make it more godlike with some miracles and a ressurection? It actually makes sense that they would try to make it more compatible with there pagan beliefs. Many christian rituals are known to be derived of pagan ones.
Yes the church decied which books would be in. But they choose the writtings written shortly after christs resurection and by the people either who were there or who know the people who were there
@ithcus777 no dude, king james needed a new religion, you people dont get it. Religion is not only a society control tool, it also helps for acquiring more power over more people
@esticadinho3 : I like this paragraph! But you still have some stuff wrong. Christianity could be only made up by some people. If it wasn't for the report of Poncius Pilot. It was set that after Yeshua was executed an earthquake shook the land and split the earth and several temples and other things. There was a Jesus, but the only dispute we have is, did he really do everything that is said in the bible? The bible is not the word of GOD. It is the word of man! Period!!!
ok, so a man named jesus existed and he had many devout followers, that were willing to die for him.
There are many even today that go around preaching the word of god, performing miracles, with many devout followers, there are many willing to die for what they believe, whether it's eternal salvation, or america or freedom, or 72 virgins.
The Bible was written generations past that, the new testament was built and decided upon. How can I know the bible is what these guys believed in?
Well they didn't have the bible. It was written by them. All the books of the new testament were written between 15-80 years of the resurection of christ. not generations. The church that christ built and is guided by the holy spirit decied on these books.
@ithcus777 Christianity was started by PAUL. NOT Jesus. And the homosexual Paul, got paid by the Jews for his writings to make Christianity the "Military Arm" of the Jewish church. But don't try to tell "them" that. And your wrong about 15-80. Besides, that's a BIG gap don't you think? 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 62, 78, 80, come one. WHEN was it dude? The NT was unknown until late in the SECOND CENTURY! Anyone knows that. Even if it was 15, he was DEAD by then. (IF...you believe that) I do not
@ithcus777 It's decided dude. Proof read. 15-80? Where did you come up with those numbers? Did Pat Robertson give them to you? Tell me, wasn't Jesus supposed to have said, "blessed are the poor?" WHEN have you EVER seen a "poor" televangelist? All them diamonds and $1000 suits? Ever see ONE single televangelist "sell all you have and follow me?" They use the bullshit "reason" that "God" would want them to look their best?" WHERE does it say that in the Bible? Some people will believe anything!
@esticadinho3 How about that Benny Hinn? What a fake! Yet there are fools who actually believe this dude is "of God?" Come on! I love it when he blows on people and they "ALL FALL DOWN." Remember THAT fairy tale? "Ashes, ashes, all-fall-down." And people in the audience all buy-into that CRAP! Even educated people believe it! That is to say, when others are watching? I especially liked the performance of Jimmy Swaggart. What a crock! And he STILL has followers! Some people NEVER learn
"We have no claim of the resurrection of Adonis or Dionysus before the 2nd century and no claim for the resurrection of Attis before the 3rd century."
"Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north, and behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. Then he said unto me, 'Hast thou seen this, O' son of man? turn thee yet again and thou shalt see greater abominations than these." Ezekiel 8: 14-15
(Continued) Tammuz is a Sumerian 'dying-and-rising' pagan god.
According to Joseph Campbel, in 'Masks of God' p39-40 , Tammuz as 'Levantine Adonis' was the Adonis that was incorporated into Greek mythology. This means that the Adonis you are speaking of is Tammuz.
Why were the woman 'weeping for Tammuz'. Because as part of his worship, his female followers mourn his death prior to his 'rebirth'.
(Continued) The one thing I will give you on this is that we don't have written records of a resurrected Adonis/Tammuz until Roman times (2nd & 3rd Centuries), however, it's clear from the biblical source that resurrection was a part of the religion even then, as the mourning for the god was a yearly event preceading his resurrection. As a vegetation god Adonis/Tammus had to resurrect each year, it's just that we don't have written documents clearly stating this.
I think there is a possiblity that Jesus did exist. I do not believe that He was the Son of God. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you use the word 'threat' but I would rather my 'belief' be changed than to believe a falsehood. But, given the information that I have, I do not believe that this man was the Son of God.
There is a document putting Jesus Christ here on earth. It's the document of Poncius Pilot, the report of the earthquake after his death. That makes Jesus real. And that is the proof that everyone is looking for. And it's there.
Your very first point fails. Jesus was not a DIRECT copy but a synthesis of many ideas that were floating around in the Greco-Roman world (of which, Israel was a part being under direct Roman rule). It matters not whether Isis was ever resurrected, etc. SOME aspects of the story were borrowed from pre-existing tales (last supper, etc). Paul claims he learned of Jesus through the OT and he gives almost no details of Jesus - no teachings, miracles etc. Tons more reasons but... typing it all?
simplicity i think is the key. maybe these facts are hidden on purpose, how else would one prove they have faith? if the facts were there for everyone to see then everyone would be a beleiver. i know with all the invo out there, it is harder than ever to beleive that god exists or even jesus, but with the prophecys coming to light it seems something is at least controling things so that alone is evidence for me
You must not have paid attention. The majority of Scholars and Historians say he existed, was crucified, and his followers said he was raised from the dead. look it up. you might as well be saying I havent proved Julius Ceasar existed. Its simple. you have to go way out of your way to say he didn't exist.
The burden of proof is on you to prove that he didn't exist, since the majority of historians say he did.
the majority of scholars say he existed for fear of being fired, most of the times many will appeal to the bible for proof,and we all know that's nonsense,in some cases scholars were even fired for admitting jesus was never real,your "reasoning" is called "appeal to authority" which is actually a fallacy,you haven't any proof,nice try
O.K. lets apply that to Evolution. Haven't scientists been fired for questioning the evolutionary theory.
We have writtings of Josephus, tacitus, and others outside of the bible that proves Jesus existed.
for evolution we have found no transitional features. we are stuck witht the same superficial observation of variation among species as the only evidence.
Yet, universities, and research sicieties insist its real, and will destroy the reputation of anyone who disagrees.
dude,don't talk about something you don't understand,you seem very *#$%@^&.....,Josephus is a fraud and the Annals was written about the year 1600 by members of the Vatican,I could send you some links that expose Josephus,Tacitus etc. as frauds,if you ask nicely
"I could send you some links that expose Josephus,Tacitus etc. as frauds,if you ask nicely"
The vast majority of Historians and scholars say they are authentic( as far as Josephus, the important parts). So NO I am not interested in your Atheist propaganda claiming Josephus and Tacitus are frauds.
But you still haven't answered may charge about holding evolution to the same standard?
The vast majority of Biblical scholars are Christians (ie, biased since they worship the story's main character) and besides, 99.9% of the world believed the sun revolved around the earth at one time.
Tacitus does not mention Jesus by name. Only 1 mention in all the 1st century and that by Josephus IF he wrote it but he didn't. There are MANY strong reasons why it is a forgery (by Eusebius most likely).
Also, disrespect, profanity(even implied), and insults will not be tolorated. I am more then willing to debate the issues. Profanity and insults only show you can't back up your points, and I will not waist my time with such things.
This is your warning. Next time you will be blocked
I wasn't insulting you,I was describing you,if you can't take it I understand,however the majority of scholars do not agree with you,and I'm NO ATHEIST,I'm a Christian
Good video, though I'm not sure there's evidence for the mass destruction of non-canonical texts in the 4th century (that's a popular misconception promoted by the likes of Dan Brown). Surely this events did occur at times in history, but they've been greatly exaggerated in this period. What typically happened is that people would just stop copying texts, which meant they wouldn't be distributed, and eventually would cease to exist.
Enough strawmen there to feed africa! only 5% think that the earlier myths were the inspiration of jesus is a completely different question to the idea that the myth of jesus was embellished by other mythologies.
No. I am sorry that your reasoning is so poor, but allow me to explain. I'll suppose that there was a man called Jesus who preached and inspired some people. Perhaps he is executed for his insurrection or heresy even. In subsequent years his tale is told. People add to the tale thier own embellishments, some suiting their own pagan beliefs. Finally we get 'the gospels', most of which are voted out ny the Nicean council.
We know full well that people tell tall tales. Just look at mormonism and other religions. We know that Jesus's fantastical life is not known in any contemporary reporting. Rev. Tom Harpur lists 180 similarities to the myths of Horus. We also know that literacy was extremely low in the 1st millenium, leaving communication in the vastly unreliable domain of tale telling. Therefore there is every reason to think that these tales are mostly fancilful thinking and amalgamation with other myths.
"The lengths atheists will go to is amazing". What is amazing is that Christians are so willing to believe a proposition as true that is so obiously the result of fanciful thinking, unsupported by written or forensic evidence and in direct contradiction with scientific knowledge. But Christians are just right, right? Yep, that's pretty amazing.
I think you misunderstand my atheism. I am not anti-god, just anti-stupid.
There is one little flaw in you reasoning. (Again I have to repeat myself) Jesus did exist, was Crucified, Historians say so. Hence my video. But you have reluctantly admited it could be possible. But the stories evolving over time is not valid. The earliest christians, just years after the resurection believe what we believe. There is more to the bible then the gospels. See my video titled " what did the early christians believe?" 7 letters written by Paul are considered authentic
"you have reluctantly admited it could be possible". Nothing reluctant about it. I see no problem with there being someone called jesus, just the riddiculous claims made in his name.
1st off, no one actually knows when he was born or died! People could easily have been telling the tale 'he died just a few years ago' for a thousand years!! regardless of the time, there isn't any reason whatsoever to believe that the claims are in anyway true, including his existence let alone magic powers.
To believe the fantastical claims of the bible you ultimately have to believe Iron Age mythology over 21st century science. There is nothing more to say on the matter.
But I tell you what, let's put the plausibility of jesus' mgic powers to the test. What do you think would be the judges'response would be if you replied in court that you 'have a friend with magic powers' to whatever the question might be, as part of your defense?
not in my country! Which is by the way far better than the US on all reasonable measures of morality; violent crime, divorce rates, STDs, educational standards, gender equality, teenage pregnancy and so on. Even within the US your most religious cities are amongst the worst! Additionally the UK is not even the best in these measures, Japan is. And guess what, Japan is the most secular nation in the developed world. You can take your iron age bullshit and shove it where the sun don't shine!
You know a simple thank you for bailing your sorry socialist country out financialy, and defending your sorry butts in wwII would be better. Don't you think? . the only reason europe is safe is because all the bad guyes know if the mess with your wennie behinds, we are going to come and kick their tails.
Don't give me that nonsense about the US 'saving our butts'. No country does anything unless there is something in it for themselves. Besides, what exactly did you do to save my butt? I guess I shouldn't expect better morality from a christian than for him to claim credit for something he didn't do. It amazes how little of the surface of christians you have to scratch to find that christianity is a thin veneer on a mass of arrogance and stupidity.
I also must warn you. I will not allow profantity on my video. I am more then willing to discuss the issue, and realize it may get heated at times. But profanity is unneccesary. I will be forced to block you and remove your comments if you persist.
I shall reiterate. You are no better than the creationists. Your propsition is no different to theirs. They take a literal interpretation of the Bible over the far superior understanding of the world obtained by science. You are doing exactly the same. You compared me to a creationist as an instrument of riddicule. Now take a hard look at what it is you are proposing in the face of scientific knowledge. It is absurdity of the most profound kind.
What it all boils down to is that you have a story that you want to be true, so you are willing to suspend superior scientific understanding to gratify that desire. This is not scholarship, it is infantile stupidity.
I have no opinion on the theories surrounding abiogenesis, since I know virtually nothing about them. Even if did it would be irrelevant to this discussion, so stop trying to change the subject.
Still trying to change the subject eh! We talk about the necessity of gods when you have grown out of this naiive mentality of accepting the absurd on the basis of an iron age man's say so.
O.K. you attack christianity. I have asked you how everything got here if no God. You won't commit to atheisism. And you have the audacity to judge me?
"and atheists don't become scientists for the same reason?" er no. Lack of belief is not something you need to ratify. I don't believe that mars is made of fudge. Do I need to ratify that? No! If you make an extraordinary claim of this order, such as the NT does, then you need to show me there is good reason to believe it. So far nothing! All you have is a fiction story, and obviously so.
Still you prefer to believe that this story trumps scientific understanding. And you call that 'scholarly'.
I have no problem with the existence of someone called Jesus. There of plenty of reason to accept this. It is not an extraordinary claim. What is extraordinary is believing the claims made surrounding this existence. Christians believe these stories to be true, not for any scholarly or scientific reasons but because they want to. Believing the extraordinary on the basis of obvious tall tales is not clearly not very clever. So why do you do it?
We are going in circles. No schalorly reason? we just ahd adiscussion about how you Think the scholars are biased. My video " What the early christians believed" shows that scholars say 7 letters of Paul are authentic and we can draw every christian belief from them. but we've already been here.
'Authentic' in this contect just means that someone called paul is directly responsible for these words.
I don't care whether paul said these things or not. The simple fact is that someone said it, and you believe it, and why? because you want to. That is the sum total of your position.
It is an extraordinary proposition that you are willing to accept on no evidence other than someones' say so. And you think this is smart? In my world that is called being gullible!
As I said 7 letters written by Paul are considered authentic. Meaning He wrote them. They were writen around 50 ad. just 30 years after the resurection. And we can pull out just about every beleif thats around today from those letters.
Watch the video and you'll see our beleifs did not evolve over decades or centurys.
Also there is no evidence of a dying and rising God before Christ. They believed in the gods themselves, but the death and resurection aspect was added to compete with us
What evidence is there that it was in fact written anywhere near 30 years after his supposed existence and death? Nothing!
I don't see any point in responding further. You are in a bubble! You obviously like what you believe and are determined to stick with it no matter how flakey. I'm bored. Adios.
The evidence is that the majority of historians say so. These are the experts. To diagree with it is to do so in spite of what the experts in the field say. And is no different then creationists saying the earth isn't 4 billion years old in spite of what the experts say.
Do you doubt the earth is 4 billion years old? No. why? because the experts say so.
Now that is funny. You giving me a lecture about bowing to the authority of clerical scholars because 'they are the experts'. Fine if that's how you want to play it let's see where this goes. All of the 'miracles' performed according the bible defy the laws of nature. NO ONE HAS EVER BROKEN THEM! But you think its 'scholarly' to accept biblical nonsense because someone wrote it 1900 years ago! You are no better than the young earth creationists!
Of course they break the laws of nature thats why they are called MIRACLES
I've got one for you how does it not break the laws of nature for nonliving matter to become living without a parent? in otherwords abiogenesis. This is the only option without God. You don't believe in God. So you must accept this. Explain how it is "natural". Because its never happened since it supposedly happened 4 Billion years ago.
We can talk about the necessity of gods when you have grown out of this childish notion that iron age mythology is a good basis for believing that science is wrong.
Uhm yep your right. Experts (even atheist/agnostic biblical scholars) say 7 of Paul's letters are authentic. In one authentic letter Galations it says Paul meets Jesus's brother. It's obvious james knew Jesus because James didn't beleive in him at first. This alludes to Jesus being historical. It's attested all throughout Paul's letters that Jesus was crucified. Paul's letter's were indisputably made in 50 -55 AD. Don't listen to anyone that twists these words to THERE agenda. Good work.
I'll send you a link, to watch 'Zeitgiest'. It is a conspiracist film and they draw some rather paranoid conclusions through the entire film, but listen to the facts (which there are citations for on their website). There can be no doubt that the Jesus myths are recycled myths from over 2000 years earlier!
Again my video titled "What did the early christians believe" is in part a response to Zeitgeist and the God who wasn't there.
Funny how one of the sources in zeitgeist has a video defending the movie. In it she admits none of the claims can be substatiated through the general reliable sources like encyclepedias. Her excuse is that scholars don't make the conevtions. But she does.
Dying and rising from the dead as well as virgin birth and being the son of god are all ubiquitous in Egyptian mythology so much of this is ill-researched.The fact is that if Christianity shed its legacy of superstition and became the social philosophy that many believe was its origional form before being hijacked and used as a political tool by the holy Roman empire, it would have far greater credibility in today's society. A step toward this would be the acceptance of myths as just that.
Sorry, but according to wikipedia. The majority of scholars and historians say Jesus was a real person, was a jew, was crucified, and his followers claimed he rose from the dead. 7 of Pauls letters in the bible, written 20 yrs after the resurection, are considered "authentic" by scholars(meaning he wrote them)they confirm the belief in The HUMAN/GOD Jesus on earth(he wasn't gnostic) the curcifiction, and resurection and physical appearences of Jesus. What you are saying is just wrong
If you can show proof that a god was believed to have died and rose from the dead before Jesus there are orginizations that will pay you money. I'm not saying belief in that god before Jesus. But belief in the death and resurection of that god b4 Jesus.
Uhm actually the dying and rising god myth's have been debunked. Almost all historians know that the Jesus story isn't copied from the God stories. Dying and rising God's were considered very alien to Judaism at that time so it's very unlikely Judaism would invent something like that. It is true maybe there were few dying and rising god's but they weren't really resurrection, another god brought the other back to life so that's reanimation maybe not resurrection. Jesus was said to rise himself.
Can you quote your sources regarding the fact that no resurrection story existed outside the Christian faith until the third century? Also you mentioned that a minority of scholars believe that the Christian myth was created from existing religions. Can you provide a list of non-apologists that support this? Thanks.
yes indeed, but Ehrman's work does indeed back up the fact that the resurrection is not a common theme of the era. So, when this guy is saying that resurrection was not a common theme, he is correct, what he is not correct in is saying that Jesus was an exception. From everything we know the resurrection story is a late addition to the biblical text.
The writtings of Paul which were written between 42-65 ad talk extensively about the death and resurection of christ. so no it wasn't a late addition. I didn't say Jesus was the exception, I said the others had the resurection story added to them after jesus.
Using the writings of Paul is not normally a good method when dealing with textual criticism, since most of the works of Paul are high controversial as their authenticity and dating in general. The references to the resurrection found at the end of the gospels is a known addition in the 3rd century and this lends very little credibility to the resurrection concept.
According to wiki. 7 of his letters are deemed 'Authentic" by scholars, meaning he wrote them. Among them is Romans which talks explicitly of the resurection. Written at the time the jews and christians were expelled from Rome 54 ad.
I find no objective source to support your claim of the resurection being a 3rd century add on. Do you have a non atheistic, unbias source(wiki, britanic, world book) that shows this is a majority scholarly view?
I'm not sure you understand what I'm asking. Gary Habermas is a Christian apologist. That kinda takes away his objectivity on the matter. I would just like to see you quote more objective sources.
Indeed he is. I guess I was impressed when I saw him debate the guy from skeptic magazine on this subject. He challenged him to name 1 historian that would say there is a claim of a dying and rising deity other then Jesus b4 the 2nd century. The guy from skeptic couldn't.
Again go to wiki, type in Jesus, click mythical view and it says most historians deem this view to be refuted. Its there. Sorry.
I wouldn't call Hector "rabid". His is atheist (or maybe agnositic). Of course his views are quite different from yours. So I understand why you'd be threatened.
You'll notice that I referred to your champion-0'-knowledge as a "Christian Apologist" - not a "Herpes carrying Christian Apologist". That's because I feel no need to demonize people with views that are different than mine.
Your right, I shouldn't have demonized him. However, my point still stands. You criticize me for citing a christian source, then you refer me to an atheist source?
It is also a bit of a kneejerk reaction. i have found most atheists to be very rude and obnoxiuos. I most say you and the other guy have not been. I apologize for stereotyping you.
Thanks, I really wasn't trying to be rude. The question that you are addressing in your video is something that I've been interested in for a long time. I've read both sides of the argument extensively and am always curious as to others perspectives. My experience has been that many apologists make broad sweeping statements regarding biblical evidence and rarely can back them up. You, being on the other side of this argument might make the same statement about us rabid atheists jk.
Well some yes. I've watched many documentaries about Jesus on discovery and PBS. They always have scholars who admit they do not believe in the resurection yet they admit Jesus existed, was crucified, and his followers claimed his resurection. Its hard for me to site that as evidence so I depend on wiki mainly.
The real question is did Jesus rise from the dead? If he didn't then whether he existed or not is irrelevent.
I've always felt atheists would be better off sticking to that.
I agree completely with you except for wiki references. My own bias there is that the theological articles in wiki have an "apologistic" (I think I just made this word up) feel to them.
Never the less, I have a real interest in all of this. Not because I wish to prove Christians wrong, but because I find the epistemology of Christian belief to be fascinating. For me it is a rich cultural history.
thats funny I, as a christian, feel secular sources like wiki have an anti-christian slant. I am always refered to wiki when debating evolution.we are both guilty of cafeterianism(now I made up a word)when it comes to wiki.
If you genuinly have an interest in learning, not converting, about christianity, I suggest the Catholic church as a source of info. The protestants have rejected the history of the church. The Catholic church has been there from the beginning, and not so pushy.
The arguments of this presenter do not meet the standard for proof, even at a basic level.
Steveraxx 1 month ago
@Gawdof thunder you're an idiot.
phatcrayonz 5 months ago
A person existing and a person existing and also being a god are two totally different things. The second one will require a hell of a lot more evidence before any rational person should believe it. Since there is no real evidence, I would conclude he is not a god.
GawdOfThunder 5 months ago
He is a fucking shit smeared liar. Why are people so stupid to not be able to see what these liars do.
azzy314159 8 months ago
Yes more proof, take that atheist!
116gaara 1 year ago
✟ EXCELLENT WORK ✟
CrusaderLuis 1 year ago
Jesus is the WORD! Forgive, love your enemy, help the poor, being a rich jerk is no good, if your sick or have a disease you are worthy of Gods love (and everyone else).
Basically, live together in peace and love, and be strong against hypocrits and bad guys- is the message among many other.
This is the basic building blocks of civil society. This is Godly or good(for athiests), the WORD. Jesus IS because of these WORDS. Our Christian Faith STANDS on WORDS not idolizing a human.
JGeorge1313 1 year ago
@JGeorge1313 The important thing is that Christians don`t stand by their words. This is the biggest religion in the world but no one is really being helped by Christians at all. But it`s ok to keep buying bibles and paying tithes. This is the biggest fraud in history. It was the pope who gave the go ahead for slavery. The pope even had slaves himself. How Godly is that? That`s nothing but pure evil. I will never get caught up in this bullshit...lol
saddat1965 7 months ago
Comment removed
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
@saddat1965
are you muslem?
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
@JGeorge1313 No, i`m not a muslim. I was born a man without a false label and that`s how I will remain. Loving our enemy is why we black people are in the situation we are in now. I will never love my enemy because he will continue to crush me if I do. This is one of the most false teachings of them all. You never love your enemy. Your enemy will smite you if you do...lol The bible says that God is a God of war. The Israelites according to the bible had no mercy on the Canaanites.
saddat1965 4 months ago
@saddat1965 The only way to crush hate is with love, this is a unirversal truth. The problem is, pride get's in the way, anger unravels, and violence insues. Conquer yourself, this is the greatest victory, no one can take it away from you, not heaven not hell. As for the situation of Black people that you mention: Talk to Obama the first Black President about that one-he'll give you the answer. Last I checked- He devotly believes in Christs teachings.
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
@JGeorge1313 Not only that, most of the bible came from old ancient stories anyway. You can still see where most of the bible was copied from today. These religions is the reason there is no peace in the world today. I will never participate in the hatred that religions project. It was Muslims and Christians who enslaved and killed hundreds of millions of my people. So I will never side with any of them. And I would suggest to any black person to throw away these bullshit religions...
saddat1965 4 months ago
@JGeorge1313 ...as fast as they can. It teaches them to love something unseen more than their own people...lol That`s the biggest joke of the millennium...lol
saddat1965 4 months ago
Respond to this video... Have faith in yourself. Not a word or something you can`t even see. It`s pimping at it`s greatest level...lol
saddat1965 4 months ago
Comment removed
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
Comment removed
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
Comment removed
JGeorge1313 4 months ago
You are right Christ means chosen one , so the chosen savior was crucified , there were many crucefictions at that time plus Romans would put any suspected conspirators agains the empire to death so say that the people that folowed "Jesus Christ" knew how to write they would probably not do so as to leave any evedidence of their involvment , that's probably why there aren't any concrete historical writeings or evedince
danieljuvera 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
God does exist !!!
1. Living God-bread of life like Jesus promised in Bible
Eucharistic miracles of Naju !
2. Manopello veil of Veronica and Jesus face and blood like on shroud of Turin, Fatima 1917, Zeitoun 1968-70, etc
3.Eucharistic Miracle Lanciano, Italy 8th Century A.D. till now alive, real blood AB!
4. Uncorrupted bodies of catholic’s saints
5.Calanda, Spain in 1640, a young farmer’s leg was restored to him after having been amputated two and a half years earlier
JezusSlave 1 year ago
The fact that there is so much horror and violence in this world is proof enough that Jesus did not exist except perhaps as a very human preacher. He said he would return. So whats it going to take?Millions of starving and homeless people perhaps, countless wars with horrific blood shed by millions of innocent men, women and children. Whats it going to take. God works in mysterious ways i hear. Sure does. If i was Moses and God spoke to me it would be easy to have faith. So come talk to us all.
RealityofThings 1 year ago
Jesus existing is not a threat to atheists. since you are fond of quoting wikipedia. you should look up th edating of the gospels in it, most scholars agree between 80-100AD for at least 3 of the gospels(according to wikipedia). Lets suppose he did exist, it doesnt matter cause he was just a man with new ideas and not a god. so it's a pointless discussion and Jesus' existence doesn't prove the existence of God.
regime123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well if wikipedia says it, it must be true.
regime123 1 year ago
no he didnt exist christ jesus christ is a rip off of krishna of hindu krish christ get it? and all jesus teaching is the same as that of buddhas. he got his name from krishna and his teaching from buddha. so christian religion was a stolen made up religion.
Taywarit13 1 year ago
Witnessing book: John 3:7 You Must Be Born Again originalwriting. ie Find out what it really means to be Born Again. Is there really a purgatory? What about spirit mediums, where are they getting their information from? What about the End Times. Find out the answers you have been looking for in this easy to read book. With informative further reading section.
YouMustBeBornAgain1 1 year ago
amon octave if im right didnt jesus tell mary mag that he had not asended but go tell them he did so was their a ressurection john21:17
SuperKing252 1 year ago
I glad that a christian has the brain to actually wonder about this.
wachnathan 1 year ago
Thank you
lallope 2 years ago
Satan shall do everything to keep one from turning to Jesus and use every one and everything to meet his hopeless objective because he already lost.he lost the moment Jesus took the cross.
lallope 2 years ago
lol and its not the christian religion is in vain if jesus didnt exixt... its the religion is proven to be a fraud. and ripping off people mmmoney by making them think they can buy their salvation tenpercent at a time and laundering and avoiding taxes the rest of us have to pay.. they explit the system and the poor and sick with this sick fukn scam of eternal life salvation shit....fraud is fraud...we should demand the head of these religions be crucified...
tinman842 2 years ago
so what u have is a cult who s adopted the horas sun god story and twisted it create a fear monger mentality to control children and populations of people go into the woods and the big bad wolf will eat you.. same thing as do sinful thing and you will be punished horifficly... not ur telling this shit to two and three yrs olds and up... as an adult i cant beleive christianity isnt consisdered child abuse...keep ur child innocent exposere to shhit like the bible is not keeping them inocent
tinman842 2 years ago
zeitgeist religion the best story ever told see all three and open ur eyes morons.... also see zeitgeist 9 11 you will be chiped...or killed.. yoor choice... free will right.. hows that diff from follow me jesus christ or burn in hell.... i say ill burn if thats ur policy ....
tinman842 2 years ago
do a study on ZEITGEIST Refuted..you'll find most of Zeitgeist was made up or made up by enemies of christianity several decades after christianity established for 200+ years
propheticman 2 years ago
he was a great man and we should follow his words
karenmylove01 2 years ago
I agree that the deities that came before Jesus did not all have every element that Jesus is recorded in the Gospels as having. However, they all shared many of these elements. That Jesus was a compilation of these myths is not an unreasonable stretch. Furthermore, that some of these other myths were embellished further after Jesus' time does nothing to discredit the idea that 1st century Jews created their own hero out of whole cloth. The borrowing of ideas works both ways apparently.
MrHappyHumanist 2 years ago
if he did exist , bet he didn't look like that pasty face bitch you keep showing. If youre gonna lie , why not start of with an believeable image that would reflect the climate.
decus69 2 years ago
decus69: It's interesting that people who claim their magical god-man really existed but then resort to creating fantastical representations of him and then pretend it's really him. Believers don't wan't a real Jesus. They want a Jesus of their own creation, a Jesus they create in their own image...which is a huge hint that Jesus is a mythological figure.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
isn't atheists desagreeing with the majority of historians of jesus existing the same as christians desagreeing with the majority of scientist on evolution so that last statement should be out
eddies2k 2 years ago
eddies2k: The majority of biblical scholars are Christians, and as such are bias in favor of their own religion. Now, a lot of Scientists are Christians too, but Evolution is not against Christianity. So it would be hard or nearlly impossible for a biblical scholar to state that Jesus likely never existed while still being a Christian. So they are stuck like that, having to protect their religious views despite what the reality of the situation is.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
the name jesus/jeshua was very very very common in those days...evidence of the name is just that and nothing more....im not saying jesus christ was never a real person but this video has not convinced me of anything.plus it is very possible that those roman historians quoted as confirming jesus' existence could have easily been modified and revised by later generations, who were, you guessed it, Christians.but i repeat im not attacking Christianity and i have no intention of offending the Lord
taskmasterlax 2 years ago
A wise man finds truth in all, A fool serch for the differaces. We all know the romans believed in MULTIPLE gods,and THEY DID put there twist in there,andnow we have a lot of confusion. The scripture(bible) was writiin in hebrew. Translations and translator, translated it to there political bennefit. Were not getting the real chit. Its for the indevidul to get what he can get out of it and stay in his logical realm and apply it to his life. LOGICALY. Were are living in civalised time now. Peace
MRDINIRO 2 years ago
The New Testament was written in Greek. -But guess what? This is actually a good thing. There's a lot of info out there that people are just not being made aware of, usually because it casts doubt on Church teachings. For example....Did you know there are huge problems with Paul? Did you know that Paul ultimately blames Jesus' death on demons and not the Romans or the Jews? Did you know Paul makes up sayings and claims Jesus said it? LOL Did you know Paul was incredibly loyal to "evil" Rome?
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
"Isis and Osiris have no ressurection story"?????
The death and ressurection of Osiris is one of the most prominent and important aspect of that diety, and he is apparently one of the oldest know Gods, dating back as far as 2500 BC.
TheMonkeyDoodler 2 years ago 3
Quit splicing the truth. Osiris is one of the oldest knoiwn gods but there is no ressurection story for him untill after Jesus. In otherwords they copied
ithcus777 2 years ago
I'm sorry..... I'm quoting from wiki here: "Much of the extant information about the Passion of Osiris can be found on the Ikhernofret Stela at Abydos erected in the 12th Dynasty by Ikhernofret (also I-Kher-Nefert), possibly a priest of Osiris or other official during the reign of Senwosret III (Pharaoh Sesostris, about 1875 BC)."
1875 BC!!!
Copying 1900 years ahead of the original.....
That's clever.
TheMonkeyDoodler 2 years ago
@ithcus777
kkristiekevin 1 year ago
Dude, man your mistake is believing you can have a rational discussion with these people. You can't. These people are hoplessly mind-controlled. They live in a starry-eyed trance with the mindframe of a child believing that there is a sky daddy up in outer space who can read their minds and watches their every action.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
(Continued) Which remind me. When you happen to find yourself being trapped in a conversation with deluded religious nuts, ask them where Heaven is. They will most likely give you a sappy story about heaven being "somewhere else", but you can just respond with the facts that that is not what people in the Bible believed. To Biblical people. Heaven was "up in the sky". Ask a religious nut just how far up do they need to go to get to the throne of God, or even why Jesus didn't wear a spacesuit.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
@TheMonkeyDoodler Try to understand, people who "believe" in what their parents taught them, are mostly TOO hard-headed to accept logic. If you study "religion" instead of "Christianity" you'll find every so-called "miracle" was done by "other" Gods. Jesus is SUN worship, turned into an Anthropomorphic-Being by the INVENTER'S of Christianity. I find it offensive to my intelligence to believe in a MYTH. ANY Myth. You have toi be awful insecure to believe such a ludacris thing. Grow up!
hddragracer1 1 year ago
Miracles happen. There is only one God. Whatever you believe, as long as you worship God and doing right things that you think may make him happy, you are in the right path
fairyfantastic 2 years ago
Reading through these comments I can't help noticing how worked up the atheists are getting. If all they are trying to prove is that 'there's probably no God - stop worrying and enjoy life', why are they so passionate about trying to disprove Christianity? This video is simply outlining the facts that surround Jesus existance - nothing is said about spirituality - why then are people jumping to the offensive? Denial?
MattheTenor 2 years ago
I seriously don't care what people believe, but what bothers me is when believers feel it is okay to lie in order to "prove" their beleifs true. This video is an example of such lies.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
'I serously don't care what people believe'
What kind of statement is that? If you don't care what people believe why are you wasting your life raving about videos made by people who believe something different from you? Christians believe in Jesus because they know him personally but this is not even what this video is talking about. Take a chill pill. Life is more enjoyable when you try to understand people rather than just slating them all the time.
MattheTenor 2 years ago
But they can't possibly know him personally. Believers have turned Jesus into an imaginary friend, hence the Atheist humorus phrase, "Adults with imaginary friends are stupid."
The illusion is that modern Christianity is the same as that practiced by the first Christians. It's not.
BoyintheMachine 2 years ago
I watched this video a few months ago and favorited it. I just watched it again and it is wonderful, great job and God bless!
cbproducktions 3 years ago
How do we know if the new testament is really the word of god if it was assembled and ruled upon by a meeting in the 4th century? how do we know they didnt burn the ones with the actual truth and and leave the ones they liked better? What makes you think ppl didnt actually make it more godlike with some miracles and a ressurection? It actually makes sense that they would try to make it more compatible with there pagan beliefs. Many christian rituals are known to be derived of pagan ones.
esticadinho3 3 years ago
Yes the church decied which books would be in. But they choose the writtings written shortly after christs resurection and by the people either who were there or who know the people who were there
ithcus777 3 years ago
and if God can inspire man to write the bible can He not keep the book together no matter what?
delbert0504 2 years ago
Modern scholars refer to the Gospels being written around 140 AD.
You have no proof and if there is none than the belief is a mind disorder.
jacobscamell 2 years ago
@ithcus777 no dude, king james needed a new religion, you people dont get it. Religion is not only a society control tool, it also helps for acquiring more power over more people
xdac89 1 year ago
@esticadinho3 : I like this paragraph! But you still have some stuff wrong. Christianity could be only made up by some people. If it wasn't for the report of Poncius Pilot. It was set that after Yeshua was executed an earthquake shook the land and split the earth and several temples and other things. There was a Jesus, but the only dispute we have is, did he really do everything that is said in the bible? The bible is not the word of GOD. It is the word of man! Period!!!
lightweightking 1 year ago
ok, so a man named jesus existed and he had many devout followers, that were willing to die for him.
There are many even today that go around preaching the word of god, performing miracles, with many devout followers, there are many willing to die for what they believe, whether it's eternal salvation, or america or freedom, or 72 virgins.
The Bible was written generations past that, the new testament was built and decided upon. How can I know the bible is what these guys believed in?
esticadinho3 3 years ago
Well they didn't have the bible. It was written by them. All the books of the new testament were written between 15-80 years of the resurection of christ. not generations. The church that christ built and is guided by the holy spirit decied on these books.
ithcus777 3 years ago
@ithcus777 so king james is the church that christ built and the holy spirit you say?
xdac89 1 year ago
@ithcus777 Christianity was started by PAUL. NOT Jesus. And the homosexual Paul, got paid by the Jews for his writings to make Christianity the "Military Arm" of the Jewish church. But don't try to tell "them" that. And your wrong about 15-80. Besides, that's a BIG gap don't you think? 15, 20, 25, 30, 40, 50, 60, 62, 78, 80, come one. WHEN was it dude? The NT was unknown until late in the SECOND CENTURY! Anyone knows that. Even if it was 15, he was DEAD by then. (IF...you believe that) I do not
hddragracer1 1 year ago
@ithcus777 It's decided dude. Proof read. 15-80? Where did you come up with those numbers? Did Pat Robertson give them to you? Tell me, wasn't Jesus supposed to have said, "blessed are the poor?" WHEN have you EVER seen a "poor" televangelist? All them diamonds and $1000 suits? Ever see ONE single televangelist "sell all you have and follow me?" They use the bullshit "reason" that "God" would want them to look their best?" WHERE does it say that in the Bible? Some people will believe anything!
hddragracer1 1 year ago
@esticadinho3 How about that Benny Hinn? What a fake! Yet there are fools who actually believe this dude is "of God?" Come on! I love it when he blows on people and they "ALL FALL DOWN." Remember THAT fairy tale? "Ashes, ashes, all-fall-down." And people in the audience all buy-into that CRAP! Even educated people believe it! That is to say, when others are watching? I especially liked the performance of Jimmy Swaggart. What a crock! And he STILL has followers! Some people NEVER learn
hddragracer1 1 year ago
wikipedia is the most un-accurate source of information available!
zandamylo 3 years ago
that's right, but those specific facts he gave are very accurate. ps, screw wikipedia. lol
JoeyDeBird 2 years ago
"We have no claim of the resurrection of Adonis or Dionysus before the 2nd century and no claim for the resurrection of Attis before the 3rd century."
"Then he brought me to the door of the gate of the Lord's house which was toward the north, and behold, there sat women weeping for Tammuz. Then he said unto me, 'Hast thou seen this, O' son of man? turn thee yet again and thou shalt see greater abominations than these." Ezekiel 8: 14-15
BoyintheMachine 3 years ago
(Continued) Tammuz is a Sumerian 'dying-and-rising' pagan god.
According to Joseph Campbel, in 'Masks of God' p39-40 , Tammuz as 'Levantine Adonis' was the Adonis that was incorporated into Greek mythology. This means that the Adonis you are speaking of is Tammuz.
Why were the woman 'weeping for Tammuz'. Because as part of his worship, his female followers mourn his death prior to his 'rebirth'.
This completely debunks your claim.
BoyintheMachine 3 years ago
(Continued) The one thing I will give you on this is that we don't have written records of a resurrected Adonis/Tammuz until Roman times (2nd & 3rd Centuries), however, it's clear from the biblical source that resurrection was a part of the religion even then, as the mourning for the god was a yearly event preceading his resurrection. As a vegetation god Adonis/Tammus had to resurrect each year, it's just that we don't have written documents clearly stating this.
BoyintheMachine 3 years ago
I am an atheist and here's my view:
I think there is a possiblity that Jesus did exist. I do not believe that He was the Son of God. I'm not quite sure what you mean when you use the word 'threat' but I would rather my 'belief' be changed than to believe a falsehood. But, given the information that I have, I do not believe that this man was the Son of God.
marcluc1988 3 years ago
Fair enough. This video wasn't meant to argue his divinity, just his existence
ithcus777 3 years ago
There is a document putting Jesus Christ here on earth. It's the document of Poncius Pilot, the report of the earthquake after his death. That makes Jesus real. And that is the proof that everyone is looking for. And it's there.
lightweightking 3 years ago
excellent audio
acidque1 3 years ago
Your very first point fails. Jesus was not a DIRECT copy but a synthesis of many ideas that were floating around in the Greco-Roman world (of which, Israel was a part being under direct Roman rule). It matters not whether Isis was ever resurrected, etc. SOME aspects of the story were borrowed from pre-existing tales (last supper, etc). Paul claims he learned of Jesus through the OT and he gives almost no details of Jesus - no teachings, miracles etc. Tons more reasons but... typing it all?
TruthSurge 3 years ago 2
simplicity i think is the key. maybe these facts are hidden on purpose, how else would one prove they have faith? if the facts were there for everyone to see then everyone would be a beleiver. i know with all the invo out there, it is harder than ever to beleive that god exists or even jesus, but with the prophecys coming to light it seems something is at least controling things so that alone is evidence for me
jahstick39 3 years ago
Jesus was never real,still waiting for proof
AllahHatesMuslims 3 years ago
The Evidence for the Existence of Jesus 1 of 4
/watch?v=I93OLYzewgY
Lots of evidence there :) good hunting ;)
SHEEPinWOLFskin 3 years ago
yeah, good hunting. Like hunting for deer in the antarctic.
TruthSurge 3 years ago
you haven't presented any proof
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
You must not have paid attention. The majority of Scholars and Historians say he existed, was crucified, and his followers said he was raised from the dead. look it up. you might as well be saying I havent proved Julius Ceasar existed. Its simple. you have to go way out of your way to say he didn't exist.
The burden of proof is on you to prove that he didn't exist, since the majority of historians say he did.
Which is the whole point to my video.
ithcus777 3 years ago
that's not proof of Jesus,none at all,show me some documents or something
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
Its simple, go to any encyclopedia you can use wiki, look up Jesus and it will tell you.
ithcus777 3 years ago
I did,the gospels are the main source of information.,so I guess Jesus was never real,oh well....that's life
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
O.K. I know that admiting that most historians say jesus exsited is hard for you so I'll say it one more time.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF HISTORIANS SAY HE EXISTED
I didn't even quote the gospels. Try some intelectual hosesty.
ithcus777 3 years ago
the majority of scholars say he existed for fear of being fired, most of the times many will appeal to the bible for proof,and we all know that's nonsense,in some cases scholars were even fired for admitting jesus was never real,your "reasoning" is called "appeal to authority" which is actually a fallacy,you haven't any proof,nice try
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
O.K. lets apply that to Evolution. Haven't scientists been fired for questioning the evolutionary theory.
We have writtings of Josephus, tacitus, and others outside of the bible that proves Jesus existed.
for evolution we have found no transitional features. we are stuck witht the same superficial observation of variation among species as the only evidence.
Yet, universities, and research sicieties insist its real, and will destroy the reputation of anyone who disagrees.
ithcus777 3 years ago
dude,don't talk about something you don't understand,you seem very *#$%@^&.....,Josephus is a fraud and the Annals was written about the year 1600 by members of the Vatican,I could send you some links that expose Josephus,Tacitus etc. as frauds,if you ask nicely
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
"I could send you some links that expose Josephus,Tacitus etc. as frauds,if you ask nicely"
The vast majority of Historians and scholars say they are authentic( as far as Josephus, the important parts). So NO I am not interested in your Atheist propaganda claiming Josephus and Tacitus are frauds.
But you still haven't answered may charge about holding evolution to the same standard?
ithcus777 3 years ago
"The vast majority of Historians and scholars..."
The vast majority of Biblical scholars are Christians (ie, biased since they worship the story's main character) and besides, 99.9% of the world believed the sun revolved around the earth at one time.
Tacitus does not mention Jesus by name. Only 1 mention in all the 1st century and that by Josephus IF he wrote it but he didn't. There are MANY strong reasons why it is a forgery (by Eusebius most likely).
TruthSurge 3 years ago
Also, disrespect, profanity(even implied), and insults will not be tolorated. I am more then willing to debate the issues. Profanity and insults only show you can't back up your points, and I will not waist my time with such things.
This is your warning. Next time you will be blocked
ithcus777 3 years ago
I wasn't insulting you,I was describing you,if you can't take it I understand,however the majority of scholars do not agree with you,and I'm NO ATHEIST,I'm a Christian
BlueDesertScorpion 3 years ago
"you seem very *#$%@^&."
" wasn't insulting you,I was describing you"
This is an implied insult. I know You think your clever, but I warned you.
First you say "Jesus was never real"
now your claiming to be a Christian
I'm not waisting anymore time with you.
Goodbye
ithcus777 3 years ago
There is no difference between the two.
WHICH IS THW WHOLE POINT TO MY VIDEO.
Both require faith.
I have faith in Jesus.
You have faith in a fish sprouting legs.
I believe its more reasonable to believe Jesus(a man) existed, then to believe (with no proof) that a fish sprouted legs.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Ever see a mudskipper? May I suggest wikipedia?
TruthSurge 3 years ago
Good video, though I'm not sure there's evidence for the mass destruction of non-canonical texts in the 4th century (that's a popular misconception promoted by the likes of Dan Brown). Surely this events did occur at times in history, but they've been greatly exaggerated in this period. What typically happened is that people would just stop copying texts, which meant they wouldn't be distributed, and eventually would cease to exist.
XSC3 3 years ago
Jesus is a myth. Read" the Pagan Christ" by theologian Tom Harpur .
Philos2006 3 years ago
Enough strawmen there to feed africa! only 5% think that the earlier myths were the inspiration of jesus is a completely different question to the idea that the myth of jesus was embellished by other mythologies.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
If the christian story was embelished by other mythologies, then that is the same as saying they were inspired by those mythologies.
The lengths atheists will go to is amazing.
ithcus777 3 years ago
No. I am sorry that your reasoning is so poor, but allow me to explain. I'll suppose that there was a man called Jesus who preached and inspired some people. Perhaps he is executed for his insurrection or heresy even. In subsequent years his tale is told. People add to the tale thier own embellishments, some suiting their own pagan beliefs. Finally we get 'the gospels', most of which are voted out ny the Nicean council.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
We know full well that people tell tall tales. Just look at mormonism and other religions. We know that Jesus's fantastical life is not known in any contemporary reporting. Rev. Tom Harpur lists 180 similarities to the myths of Horus. We also know that literacy was extremely low in the 1st millenium, leaving communication in the vastly unreliable domain of tale telling. Therefore there is every reason to think that these tales are mostly fancilful thinking and amalgamation with other myths.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
"The lengths atheists will go to is amazing". What is amazing is that Christians are so willing to believe a proposition as true that is so obiously the result of fanciful thinking, unsupported by written or forensic evidence and in direct contradiction with scientific knowledge. But Christians are just right, right? Yep, that's pretty amazing.
I think you misunderstand my atheism. I am not anti-god, just anti-stupid.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
There is one little flaw in you reasoning. (Again I have to repeat myself) Jesus did exist, was Crucified, Historians say so. Hence my video. But you have reluctantly admited it could be possible. But the stories evolving over time is not valid. The earliest christians, just years after the resurection believe what we believe. There is more to the bible then the gospels. See my video titled " what did the early christians believe?" 7 letters written by Paul are considered authentic
ithcus777 3 years ago
"you have reluctantly admited it could be possible". Nothing reluctant about it. I see no problem with there being someone called jesus, just the riddiculous claims made in his name.
1st off, no one actually knows when he was born or died! People could easily have been telling the tale 'he died just a few years ago' for a thousand years!! regardless of the time, there isn't any reason whatsoever to believe that the claims are in anyway true, including his existence let alone magic powers.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
To believe the fantastical claims of the bible you ultimately have to believe Iron Age mythology over 21st century science. There is nothing more to say on the matter.
But I tell you what, let's put the plausibility of jesus' mgic powers to the test. What do you think would be the judges'response would be if you replied in court that you 'have a friend with magic powers' to whatever the question might be, as part of your defense?
I rest my case (pun intended).
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Funny how that very court puts its trust in God isn't it?
ithcus777 3 years ago
not in my country! Which is by the way far better than the US on all reasonable measures of morality; violent crime, divorce rates, STDs, educational standards, gender equality, teenage pregnancy and so on. Even within the US your most religious cities are amongst the worst! Additionally the UK is not even the best in these measures, Japan is. And guess what, Japan is the most secular nation in the developed world. You can take your iron age bullshit and shove it where the sun don't shine!
artyfarty2 3 years ago
You know a simple thank you for bailing your sorry socialist country out financialy, and defending your sorry butts in wwII would be better. Don't you think? . the only reason europe is safe is because all the bad guyes know if the mess with your wennie behinds, we are going to come and kick their tails.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Don't give me that nonsense about the US 'saving our butts'. No country does anything unless there is something in it for themselves. Besides, what exactly did you do to save my butt? I guess I shouldn't expect better morality from a christian than for him to claim credit for something he didn't do. It amazes how little of the surface of christians you have to scratch to find that christianity is a thin veneer on a mass of arrogance and stupidity.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
If you don't think the u.s. saved Europe in WWII, and keeped the soviets from enveloping all of Europe you are blind.
ithcus777 3 years ago
I repeat, no country does anything unless there is something in it for themselves and what exactly did you do to save my butt?
Nothing! You are just claiming credit for something you had no involvement in. You disgust me.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
I also must warn you. I will not allow profantity on my video. I am more then willing to discuss the issue, and realize it may get heated at times. But profanity is unneccesary. I will be forced to block you and remove your comments if you persist.
thank you
ithcus777 3 years ago
Did you spot a profane word? no!
I shall reiterate. You are no better than the creationists. Your propsition is no different to theirs. They take a literal interpretation of the Bible over the far superior understanding of the world obtained by science. You are doing exactly the same. You compared me to a creationist as an instrument of riddicule. Now take a hard look at what it is you are proposing in the face of scientific knowledge. It is absurdity of the most profound kind.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
This is your quote
"You can take your iron age bullshit and shove it where the sun don't shine!"
Bullshit is a profane word!! But you know that. You atheists are famous for denying the obvious.
Here you appeal to authority on the matter of abiogenesis. there is no proof. Noone certainly has observed it. yet you accept it.
But when the vast majority of historians say Jesus existed. Well we can't be sure can we?
As I said you are a hipocrite.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Since 'bullshit' isnt even banned from your children's time TV I would hardly call it profane.
where do I appeal to anything on abiogenesis? when did I even mention it? You are now showing yourself not only to be a hypocrite but also a liar.
Er no, the vast majority of christians 'scholars' who become 'scholars' to try to ratify their beliefs!
No one can walk on water except in your world of christian 'scholarship'! Go on, bite the bullet and accept the 6 day creation.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
What it all boils down to is that you have a story that you want to be true, so you are willing to suspend superior scientific understanding to gratify that desire. This is not scholarship, it is infantile stupidity.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
ok if you don't accept abiogenesis( maybe I was presumtuous in saying you did) then tell me. How did this all happen?
ithcus777 3 years ago
I have no opinion on the theories surrounding abiogenesis, since I know virtually nothing about them. Even if did it would be irrelevant to this discussion, so stop trying to change the subject.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Abiogenesis is the term given to the idea that nonliving matter became living without the help of a deity.
If you don't believe in God, by default you believe in abiogenesis. ther is no proof yet you accept it. Why. and How did it happen?
ithcus777 3 years ago
Still trying to change the subject eh! We talk about the necessity of gods when you have grown out of this naiive mentality of accepting the absurd on the basis of an iron age man's say so.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
besides. what makes you think I'm an atheist?
artyfarty2 3 years ago
O.K. I'l bite.
What are you
ithcus777 3 years ago
I'm a thinking, caring human being, that is as much as you should need to know.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
O.K. you attack christianity. I have asked you how everything got here if no God. You won't commit to atheisism. And you have the audacity to judge me?
"that is as much as you should need to know."
I'm done playing gamesd with you.
Goodbye.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Maybe B.S. isn't banned from childrens shows in your country. But you won't find it even on regular T.V. here.
Since this is my video we will play by my rules. If you don't like it, no one is asking you to stay.
"Er no, the vast majority of christians 'scholars' who become 'scholars' to try to ratify their beliefs!"
and atheists don't become scientists for the same reason?
Richard dawkins now theres an objective chap for you.
ithcus777 3 years ago
"and atheists don't become scientists for the same reason?" er no. Lack of belief is not something you need to ratify. I don't believe that mars is made of fudge. Do I need to ratify that? No! If you make an extraordinary claim of this order, such as the NT does, then you need to show me there is good reason to believe it. So far nothing! All you have is a fiction story, and obviously so.
Still you prefer to believe that this story trumps scientific understanding. And you call that 'scholarly'.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
I have no problem with the existence of someone called Jesus. There of plenty of reason to accept this. It is not an extraordinary claim. What is extraordinary is believing the claims made surrounding this existence. Christians believe these stories to be true, not for any scholarly or scientific reasons but because they want to. Believing the extraordinary on the basis of obvious tall tales is not clearly not very clever. So why do you do it?
artyfarty2 3 years ago
We are going in circles. No schalorly reason? we just ahd adiscussion about how you Think the scholars are biased. My video " What the early christians believed" shows that scholars say 7 letters of Paul are authentic and we can draw every christian belief from them. but we've already been here.
ithcus777 3 years ago
'Authentic' in this contect just means that someone called paul is directly responsible for these words.
I don't care whether paul said these things or not. The simple fact is that someone said it, and you believe it, and why? because you want to. That is the sum total of your position.
It is an extraordinary proposition that you are willing to accept on no evidence other than someones' say so. And you think this is smart? In my world that is called being gullible!
artyfarty2 3 years ago
As I said 7 letters written by Paul are considered authentic. Meaning He wrote them. They were writen around 50 ad. just 30 years after the resurection. And we can pull out just about every beleif thats around today from those letters.
Watch the video and you'll see our beleifs did not evolve over decades or centurys.
Also there is no evidence of a dying and rising God before Christ. They believed in the gods themselves, but the death and resurection aspect was added to compete with us
ithcus777 3 years ago
What evidence is there that it was in fact written anywhere near 30 years after his supposed existence and death? Nothing!
I don't see any point in responding further. You are in a bubble! You obviously like what you believe and are determined to stick with it no matter how flakey. I'm bored. Adios.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
The evidence is that the majority of historians say so. These are the experts. To diagree with it is to do so in spite of what the experts in the field say. And is no different then creationists saying the earth isn't 4 billion years old in spite of what the experts say.
Do you doubt the earth is 4 billion years old? No. why? because the experts say so.
You are a hipocrite!
Goodbye
ithcus777 3 years ago
Now that is funny. You giving me a lecture about bowing to the authority of clerical scholars because 'they are the experts'. Fine if that's how you want to play it let's see where this goes. All of the 'miracles' performed according the bible defy the laws of nature. NO ONE HAS EVER BROKEN THEM! But you think its 'scholarly' to accept biblical nonsense because someone wrote it 1900 years ago! You are no better than the young earth creationists!
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Of course they break the laws of nature thats why they are called MIRACLES
I've got one for you how does it not break the laws of nature for nonliving matter to become living without a parent? in otherwords abiogenesis. This is the only option without God. You don't believe in God. So you must accept this. Explain how it is "natural". Because its never happened since it supposedly happened 4 Billion years ago.
ithcus777 3 years ago
We can talk about the necessity of gods when you have grown out of this childish notion that iron age mythology is a good basis for believing that science is wrong.
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Uhm yep your right. Experts (even atheist/agnostic biblical scholars) say 7 of Paul's letters are authentic. In one authentic letter Galations it says Paul meets Jesus's brother. It's obvious james knew Jesus because James didn't beleive in him at first. This alludes to Jesus being historical. It's attested all throughout Paul's letters that Jesus was crucified. Paul's letter's were indisputably made in 50 -55 AD. Don't listen to anyone that twists these words to THERE agenda. Good work.
clarkster28 3 years ago
Thank you my brother
ithcus777 3 years ago
I'll send you a link, to watch 'Zeitgiest'. It is a conspiracist film and they draw some rather paranoid conclusions through the entire film, but listen to the facts (which there are citations for on their website). There can be no doubt that the Jesus myths are recycled myths from over 2000 years earlier!
artyfarty2 3 years ago
Again my video titled "What did the early christians believe" is in part a response to Zeitgeist and the God who wasn't there.
Funny how one of the sources in zeitgeist has a video defending the movie. In it she admits none of the claims can be substatiated through the general reliable sources like encyclepedias. Her excuse is that scholars don't make the conevtions. But she does.
Now hows faith rests on propaganda.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Dying and rising from the dead as well as virgin birth and being the son of god are all ubiquitous in Egyptian mythology so much of this is ill-researched.The fact is that if Christianity shed its legacy of superstition and became the social philosophy that many believe was its origional form before being hijacked and used as a political tool by the holy Roman empire, it would have far greater credibility in today's society. A step toward this would be the acceptance of myths as just that.
hexatonia 3 years ago
Sorry, but according to wikipedia. The majority of scholars and historians say Jesus was a real person, was a jew, was crucified, and his followers claimed he rose from the dead. 7 of Pauls letters in the bible, written 20 yrs after the resurection, are considered "authentic" by scholars(meaning he wrote them)they confirm the belief in The HUMAN/GOD Jesus on earth(he wasn't gnostic) the curcifiction, and resurection and physical appearences of Jesus. What you are saying is just wrong
ithcus777 3 years ago
If you can show proof that a god was believed to have died and rose from the dead before Jesus there are orginizations that will pay you money. I'm not saying belief in that god before Jesus. But belief in the death and resurection of that god b4 Jesus.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Uhm actually the dying and rising god myth's have been debunked. Almost all historians know that the Jesus story isn't copied from the God stories. Dying and rising God's were considered very alien to Judaism at that time so it's very unlikely Judaism would invent something like that. It is true maybe there were few dying and rising god's but they weren't really resurrection, another god brought the other back to life so that's reanimation maybe not resurrection. Jesus was said to rise himself.
clarkster28 3 years ago
Can you quote your sources regarding the fact that no resurrection story existed outside the Christian faith until the third century? Also you mentioned that a minority of scholars believe that the Christian myth was created from existing religions. Can you provide a list of non-apologists that support this? Thanks.
devileddog 3 years ago
If you would have listened to the video I gave sources on both.
"no resurrection story existed outside the Christian faith until the third century?"
First its the second century. and the source is Dr Gary habermas directoe of theology at liberty unmiversity.
"minority of scholars believe that the Christian myth was created from existing religions."
It says so right in wiki.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Bart Ehrman, professor of theology at UNC-Chapel Hill is another good source.
jandrewclark 3 years ago
I've read all Of Dr. Ehrmans stuff. He contradicts most of what this guy is saying.
devileddog 3 years ago
yes indeed, but Ehrman's work does indeed back up the fact that the resurrection is not a common theme of the era. So, when this guy is saying that resurrection was not a common theme, he is correct, what he is not correct in is saying that Jesus was an exception. From everything we know the resurrection story is a late addition to the biblical text.
jandrewclark 3 years ago
The writtings of Paul which were written between 42-65 ad talk extensively about the death and resurection of christ. so no it wasn't a late addition. I didn't say Jesus was the exception, I said the others had the resurection story added to them after jesus.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Using the writings of Paul is not normally a good method when dealing with textual criticism, since most of the works of Paul are high controversial as their authenticity and dating in general. The references to the resurrection found at the end of the gospels is a known addition in the 3rd century and this lends very little credibility to the resurrection concept.
jandrewclark 3 years ago
According to wiki. 7 of his letters are deemed 'Authentic" by scholars, meaning he wrote them. Among them is Romans which talks explicitly of the resurection. Written at the time the jews and christians were expelled from Rome 54 ad.
I find no objective source to support your claim of the resurection being a 3rd century add on. Do you have a non atheistic, unbias source(wiki, britanic, world book) that shows this is a majority scholarly view?
ithcus777 3 years ago
I'm not sure you understand what I'm asking. Gary Habermas is a Christian apologist. That kinda takes away his objectivity on the matter. I would just like to see you quote more objective sources.
devileddog 3 years ago
Indeed he is. I guess I was impressed when I saw him debate the guy from skeptic magazine on this subject. He challenged him to name 1 historian that would say there is a claim of a dying and rising deity other then Jesus b4 the 2nd century. The guy from skeptic couldn't.
Again go to wiki, type in Jesus, click mythical view and it says most historians deem this view to be refuted. Its there. Sorry.
ithcus777 3 years ago
I encourage you to read Hector Avalos if you get a chance.
devileddog 3 years ago
LOL. You criticize me for citing a christian source, and now you give me a rabid atheist source. If thats not the pot calling the kettle black.
ithcus777 3 years ago
I wouldn't call Hector "rabid". His is atheist (or maybe agnositic). Of course his views are quite different from yours. So I understand why you'd be threatened.
You'll notice that I referred to your champion-0'-knowledge as a "Christian Apologist" - not a "Herpes carrying Christian Apologist". That's because I feel no need to demonize people with views that are different than mine.
devileddog 3 years ago
Your right, I shouldn't have demonized him. However, my point still stands. You criticize me for citing a christian source, then you refer me to an atheist source?
ithcus777 3 years ago
It is also a bit of a kneejerk reaction. i have found most atheists to be very rude and obnoxiuos. I most say you and the other guy have not been. I apologize for stereotyping you.
ithcus777 3 years ago
Thanks, I really wasn't trying to be rude. The question that you are addressing in your video is something that I've been interested in for a long time. I've read both sides of the argument extensively and am always curious as to others perspectives. My experience has been that many apologists make broad sweeping statements regarding biblical evidence and rarely can back them up. You, being on the other side of this argument might make the same statement about us rabid atheists jk.
devileddog 3 years ago
Well some yes. I've watched many documentaries about Jesus on discovery and PBS. They always have scholars who admit they do not believe in the resurection yet they admit Jesus existed, was crucified, and his followers claimed his resurection. Its hard for me to site that as evidence so I depend on wiki mainly.
The real question is did Jesus rise from the dead? If he didn't then whether he existed or not is irrelevent.
I've always felt atheists would be better off sticking to that.
ithcus777 3 years ago
I agree completely with you except for wiki references. My own bias there is that the theological articles in wiki have an "apologistic" (I think I just made this word up) feel to them.
Never the less, I have a real interest in all of this. Not because I wish to prove Christians wrong, but because I find the epistemology of Christian belief to be fascinating. For me it is a rich cultural history.
devileddog 3 years ago
thats funny I, as a christian, feel secular sources like wiki have an anti-christian slant. I am always refered to wiki when debating evolution.we are both guilty of cafeterianism(now I made up a word)when it comes to wiki.
If you genuinly have an interest in learning, not converting, about christianity, I suggest the Catholic church as a source of info. The protestants have rejected the history of the church. The Catholic church has been there from the beginning, and not so pushy.
ithcus777 3 years ago