Was Jesus real?

Ben Masada

New member
1. Let's hear the evidence.
2. I'd expect to see Him walking around. Please note: Many groups have legends and myths about their leaders. It does not make the stories true. A legend about somebody seeing him after the Resurrection is a legend, not evidence.

Shalom Chair, I am having a small problem to understand what you really mean with the last statement above. You say that, "A legend about somebody seeing him after the resurrection is a legend, not evidence." What is legend, seeing some one walking after his resurrection or that he resurrected at all? You seem to mean that a legend is SEEING him walking after the resurrection and not that he resurrected at all. I would say that a legend would be seeing someone walking around after his death and not after his resurrection; because, after ones' resurrection, death is obvious to have happened. Are you implying that resurrection is a fact, being legend only to see him walking around afterwards?
 

chair

Well-known member
Shalom Chair, I am having a small problem to understand what you really mean with the last statement above. You say that, "A legend about somebody seeing him after the resurrection is a legend, not evidence." What is legend, seeing some one walking after his resurrection or that he resurrected at all? You seem to mean that a legend is SEEING him walking after the resurrection and not that he resurrected at all. I would say that a legend would be seeing someone walking around after his death and not after his resurrection; because, after ones' resurrection, death is obvious to have happened. Are you implying that resurrection is a fact, being legend only to see him walking around afterwards?

I rather lost you. I am only pointing out that what is being sold is a report of what happened. But the report itself is a religious legend, so it doesn't hold much weight unless you happen to follow that particular religion.

The only evidence for the "Resurrection" is the report in the NT that people saw Jesus walking around after his death. If you are a Christian believer, that is fine and well, but if you are not, the NT have no weight as evidence.
 

chair

Well-known member
Isa 42:18 Hear, ye deaf; and look, ye blind, that ye may see.

19 Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the Lord’s servant?

20 Seeing many things, but thou observest not; opening the ears, but he heareth not.

21 The Lord is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.

Ain't nothing to see. If you have something- let me know.
 

Ben Masada

New member
Nothing in the passage says that the church replaces Israel.

And I have never said that Israel has been replaced by the Church. My point was to show the foundation of the NT, whereas a foundation of wish-thinking they could replace Israel. We are as much alive today as in the days of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

Indeed, it is obvious that the passage is talking of spiritual things: nothing prevents Jews from believing in Jesus and becoming heirs of Abraham, who believed and was accredited as righteous before he was circumcised as well as being heirs of Abraham according to the flesh by being circumcised.

We don't need to believe in Jesus to become heirs of Abraham. We have been heirs of Abraham since about 4 thousand years before Jesus showed up in the horizon. (Gen. 17:19)

Whether or not the Jews are the covenant people of God is matter between you and God and nothing to do with the Bible or Christians.

Why then the NT claims the New Covenant with Christians and not with the House of Israel and the House of Judah? (Jer. 31:31)

there is now no longer any Jew or that Christians have replaced Jews. Neither does it mean that in order to become Christian a Jew must abandon his Jewishness. It just means that in the church, we don't see Jews any differently to the way we see non-Jews. The distinction is obsolete.

Most definitely, Christians have not replaced the Jews and I have never said they have. But Jews are present, alive and kicking, which I would like to remind you that this is an attempt at Replacement Theology. It didn't take too long for your mouth to betray your mind.

Paul is speaking metaphorically, (see v 24), encouraging those who still think that being Jewish saves them or who think that keeping the law saves them, to escape from such bondage and become heirs of Abraham through their faith. He isn't saying that they must abandon their Jewishness.

Are you sure that keeping the Law won't keep you saved from sins, aka from troubles? Would you like to challenge me on that? I could prove to you that it does

The issue exists very much today with the fanatics in Israel who think that because God promised them the land that they have a right to it.

Are you implying that the Land promised to us by the Lord has not giving us the right to it? Don't you see this as an attempt at promoting RT? A preacher can't spend 5 minutes speaking from a pulpit without promoting RT.

That being Jewish somehow makes them better than others and gives them a right to be violent. That is the same bondage as Paul is describing. Wanting something better for Jews is not replacement theology.

You know this is not true but, to see through the screen of RT is too hard for you.
 

Ben Masada

New member
I rather lost you. I am only pointing out that what is being sold is a report of what happened. But the report itself is a religious legend, so it doesn't hold much weight unless you happen to follow that particular religion.

The only evidence for the "Resurrection" is the report in the NT that people saw Jesus walking around after his death. If you are a Christian believer, that is fine and well, but if you are not, the NT have no weight as evidence.

Oh! I am sure that the NT has no weight at all as evidence. Now, as I can see, you have fixed that statement to reflect the truth. Now, you say that the only evidence for the "resurrection" is the report in the NT that people saw Jesus walking abound after his death and not after his resurrection. After his death, there is no way to imply resurrection but, after his resurrection, it is already implied that he resurrected.

When Mary Magdalene went to the disciples of Jesus after she saw the empty tomb and told them that Jesus was not there, the disciples did not believe her and even said to her that she was speaking an idle tale of nonsense. (Luke 24:11) They didn't even mention a single word about resurrection. Why? Because they had never heard about such a thing in Israel. Why? Because they were Jewish and Jesus had never said anything about it. Why? Because he knew that once dead, no one will ever return from the grave. (Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12;23; Job 10:21)
 
Last edited:

Caino

BANNED
Banned
In the original gospel of The Kingdom of Heaven (a spiritual fellowship comprised of those who by faith realize the fatherhood of God and brotherhood of ALL mankind) Jesus liberated believers from the bondage of traditional religion, the yoke of self centered ceremonialism.
 

Caino

BANNED
Banned
Oh! I am sure that the NT has no weight at all as evidence. Now, as I can see, you have fixed that statement to reflect the truth. Now, you say that the only evidence for the "resurrection" is the report in the NT that people saw Jesus walking abound after his death and not after his resurrection. After his death, there is no way to imply resurrection but, after his resurrection, it is already implied that he resurrected.

When Mary Magdalene went to the disciples of Jesus after she saw the empty tomb and told them that Jesus was not there, the disciples did not believe her and even said to her that she was speaking an idle tale of nonsense. (Luke 24:11) They didn't even mention a single word about resurrection. Why? Because they had never heard about such a thing in Israel. Why? Because they were Jewish and Jesus had never said anything about it. Why? Because he knew that once dead, no one will ever return from the grave. (Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12;23; Job 10:21)

This is an example of what I tell people on TOL all the time, it's their own scripture that blinds the Jews, they have also been indoctrinated into the false teaching that the writings of holy men, some more holy than others, are actually the writings of God.

I find it sooooo frustrating that so many sincere and faithful people like Ben are literally not allowed to think beyond the bondage of the Priestly authors (and redactors) of scripture.

In the narratives of Jesus he had alluded to the necessity of leaving and life after death on several occasions, so Ben is just flat wrong on this issue. But I also believe that some of the apostles didn't believe the reports until they saw it with their own eyes which is frankly understandable.
 
Last edited:

Aimiel

Well-known member
Quoted from Dr. Simon Greenleaf's book: "The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence:"

There are other internal marks of truth in the narratives of the evangelists, which, however, need here be only alluded to, as they have been treaded with great fullness and force by able writers, whose works are familiar to all. Among these may be mentioned the nakedness of the narratives; the absence of all parade by the writers about their own integrity, of all anxiety to be believed, or to impress others with a good opinion of themselves or their cause, of all marks of wonder, or of desire to excite astonishment at the greatness of the events they record, and of all appearance of design to exalt their Master. On the contrary, there is apparently the most perfect indifference on their part, whether they are believed or not; or rather, the evident consciousness that they are recording events well known to all, in their own country and times, and undoubtedly to be believed, like any other matter of public history, by readers in all other countries and ages. It is worthy, too, of especial observation, that thought the evangelists record unparalleled sufferings and cruel death of their beloved Lord, and this too, by hands and with the consenting voices of those on whom he had conferred the greatest benefits, and their own persecutions and dangers, yet they have bestowed no epithets of harshness or even of just censure on the authors of all this wickedness, but have everywhere left the plain and unencumbered narrative to speak for itself, and the reader to pronounce his own sentence of condemnation; like true witnesses, who have nothing to gain or to lose by the event of the cause, they state the facts, and leave them to their fate. Their simplicity and artlessness, also, should not pass unnoticed, in readily stating even those things most disparaging to their dullness of apprehension of this teachings, their strives for preeminence, their inclination to call fire from heaven upon their enemies, their desertion of their Lord in his hour of extreme peril; these and many other incidents tending directly to their own dishonor, are nevertheless set down with all the directness and sincerity of truth, as by men writing under the deepest sense of responsibility to God. Some of the more prominent instances of this class of proofs will be noticed hereafter, in their proper places, in the narratives themselves.

Lastly, the great character they have portrayed is perfect. It is the character of a sinless Being; of one supremely wise and supremely good. It exhibits no error, no sinister intention, no imprudence, no ignorance, no evil passion, no impatience; in a word, no fault; but all is perfect uprightness, innocence, wisdom, goodness and truth. The mind of man has never conceived the idea of such a character, even for his gods; nor has history or poetry shadowed it forth. The doctrines and precepts of Jesus are in strict accordance with the attributes of God, agreeably to the most exalted idea which we can form of them, either from reason or from revelation. They are strikingly adapted to the capacity of mankind, and yet are delivered with a simplicity and majesty wholly divine. He spake as never man spake. He spake with authority; yet addressed himself to the reason and the understanding of men; and he spake with wisdom, which men could neither gainsay nor resist. In his private life, he exhibits a character not merely of strict justice, but of flowing benignity. He is temperate, without austerity; his meekness and humility are signal; his patience is invincible; truth and sincerity illustrate his whole conduct; every one of his virtues is regulated by consummate prudence; and he both wins the love of his friends, and extorts the wonder and admiration of his enemies. He is represented in very variety of situation in life, from the height of worldly grandeur, amid the acclamations of an admiring multitude, to the deepest abyss of human degradation and woe, apparently deserted of God and man. Yet everywhere he is the same; displaying a character of unearthly perfection, symmetrical in all its proportions, and encircled with splendor more than human. Either the men of Galilee were men of superlative wisdom, and extensive knowledge and experience, and of deeper skill in the arts of deception, than any and all others, before or after them, or they have truly stated the astonishing things which they saw and heard.


We actually have more evidence of Jesus' birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension than we have evidence of anyone in antiquity; yet no one questions whether Copernicus or Aristotle existed. It's evident, not only from our reading about Him, but the impact He made upon this world. We adjusted our calendar to show time before Christ,' and after Christ (B.C. / A.D.). The Spirit of God witnesses together with our spirit upon the inside of us as to the Truths of The Holy Scriptures. This is something that only born again Christians recognize, from their youth.

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
Oh! I am sure that the NT has no weight at all as evidence.
Dr. Simon Greenleaf, a professor of law and once considered the world's foremost authority on evidence in jurisprudence and one of the founders of Harvard Law School would greatly disagree with you. His book, "The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence," explains all the reasons why. An excerpt from his book can be found HERE. You should get a copy. You can download it for free or order a paper copy from Amazon. This quote is from the opening forward on the above mentioned page: "Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of the Harvard Law School, originally set out to disprove the biblical testimony concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was certain that a careful examination of the internal witness of the Gospels would dispel all the myths at the heart of Christianity. But this legal scholar came to the conclusion that the witnesses were reliable, and that the resurrection did in fact happen."
 

PureX

Well-known member
Quoted from Dr. Simon Greenleaf's book: "The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence:"

There are other internal marks of truth in the narratives of the evangelists, which, however, need here be only alluded to, as they have been treaded with great fullness and force by able writers, whose works are familiar to all. Among these may be mentioned the nakedness of the narratives; the absence of all parade by the writers about their own integrity, of all anxiety to be believed, or to impress others with a good opinion of themselves or their cause, of all marks of wonder, or of desire to excite astonishment at the greatness of the events they record, and of all appearance of design to exalt their Master. On the contrary, there is apparently the most perfect indifference on their part, whether they are believed or not; or rather, the evident consciousness that they are recording events well known to all, in their own country and times, and undoubtedly to be believed, like any other matter of public history, by readers in all other countries and ages. It is worthy, too, of especial observation, that thought the evangelists record unparalleled sufferings and cruel death of their beloved Lord, and this too, by hands and with the consenting voices of those on whom he had conferred the greatest benefits, and their own persecutions and dangers, yet they have bestowed no epithets of harshness or even of just censure on the authors of all this wickedness, but have everywhere left the plain and unencumbered narrative to speak for itself, and the reader to pronounce his own sentence of condemnation; like true witnesses, who have nothing to gain or to lose by the event of the cause, they state the facts, and leave them to their fate. Their simplicity and artlessness, also, should not pass unnoticed, in readily stating even those things most disparaging to their dullness of apprehension of this teachings, their strives for preeminence, their inclination to call fire from heaven upon their enemies, their desertion of their Lord in his hour of extreme peril; these and many other incidents tending directly to their own dishonor, are nevertheless set down with all the directness and sincerity of truth, as by men writing under the deepest sense of responsibility to God. Some of the more prominent instances of this class of proofs will be noticed hereafter, in their proper places, in the narratives themselves.

Lastly, the great character they have portrayed is perfect. It is the character of a sinless Being; of one supremely wise and supremely good. It exhibits no error, no sinister intention, no imprudence, no ignorance, no evil passion, no impatience; in a word, no fault; but all is perfect uprightness, innocence, wisdom, goodness and truth. The mind of man has never conceived the idea of such a character, even for his gods; nor has history or poetry shadowed it forth. The doctrines and precepts of Jesus are in strict accordance with the attributes of God, agreeably to the most exalted idea which we can form of them, either from reason or from revelation. They are strikingly adapted to the capacity of mankind, and yet are delivered with a simplicity and majesty wholly divine. He spake as never man spake. He spake with authority; yet addressed himself to the reason and the understanding of men; and he spake with wisdom, which men could neither gainsay nor resist. In his private life, he exhibits a character not merely of strict justice, but of flowing benignity. He is temperate, without austerity; his meekness and humility are signal; his patience is invincible; truth and sincerity illustrate his whole conduct; every one of his virtues is regulated by consummate prudence; and he both wins the love of his friends, and extorts the wonder and admiration of his enemies. He is represented in very variety of situation in life, from the height of worldly grandeur, amid the acclamations of an admiring multitude, to the deepest abyss of human degradation and woe, apparently deserted of God and man. Yet everywhere he is the same; displaying a character of unearthly perfection, symmetrical in all its proportions, and encircled with splendor more than human. Either the men of Galilee were men of superlative wisdom, and extensive knowledge and experience, and of deeper skill in the arts of deception, than any and all others, before or after them, or they have truly stated the astonishing things which they saw and heard.


We actually have more evidence of Jesus' birth, life, death, resurrection and ascension than we have evidence of anyone in antiquity; yet no one questions whether Copernicus or Aristotle existed. It's evident, not only from our reading about Him, but the impact He made upon this world. We adjusted our calendar to show time before Christ,' and after Christ (B.C. / A.D.). The Spirit of God witnesses together with our spirit upon the inside of us as to the Truths of The Holy Scriptures. This is something that only born again Christians recognize, from their youth.

And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
This quote is, itself, suspiciously over-stated and weakly reasoned.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
Weighing evidence means to take into consideration everything available to get to the conclusion of whether or not to accept the fact(s) stated; not rejecting something out-of-hand with just a cursory glance at one tiny portion of what one has in front of them.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Weighing evidence means to take into consideration everything available to get to the conclusion of whether or not to accept the fact(s) stated; not rejecting something out-of-hand with just a cursory glance at one tiny portion of what one has in front of them.
Well, the 'portion' you presented is over-stated and weakly reasoned. ;)

Personally, I don't feel any need to come to a conclusion about this question of Jesus' authenticity. For one thing, it's not going to be possible for me to ever arrive at anything but an opinion, anyway, as I was not there to see for myself, and there is too little evidence, now, to arrive at any degree of certainty. And for another, I don't feel that it matters much who or what Jesus was, or what exactly happened to him.

Even if Jesus stood right in front of me, told me he was God on Earth, and that he was raised from the dead, how would I be able to tell that what I was seeing and hearing was not some trick of my own imagination, or some clever trick or con by persons unknown, or perhaps a space alien, or even some demon, trying to use my own beliefs against me? And even if I assume it's all true, what does any of it really mean to me, anyway? Myself and my life would remain the same, regardless.

But none of that's going to happen, and it doesn't matter, anyway. Because for me, what matters are the ideals and promises that the story of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection convey to us; to me. And those ideals CAN be tested to determine whether or not they are helpful and true. All it takes is a little faith.

And I have tested those ideals, and I have found that they 'work' for me. And I have found that the promises accompanying those ideals do manifest, here and now, in my own life. And for me, that's good enough. I don't need to believe in divine beings walking the Earth, or supernatural 'miracles' and people returning from the dead. All I need is to keep trusting in the ideals Jesus preached, and I find the promises he made to us about those ideals do manifest. The story of the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth has taught me what I believe it was intended to teach me, and I have received the message and the blessings it brings. So the historical factuality of it is mostly irrelevant to me.

I still have my opinions about it, but that's all they are. And even if my opinions change, that won't change my faith in the ideals of Christ's message.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
True: all we have of God is by faith... we believe in Him, even though none of us have ever seen Him. Truth is, though: what we see of Him, by faith, is more real than the things that we see with our eyes, since these things we see with the eyes of our faith are eternal and what our eyes perceive are temporal. The Spirit of God is more real to me than my own knowledge or understanding. He is more personal to me than I am to myself. I trust Him more than I trust me. I expect great things in my life, because He is with me. I am no longer alive, but Christ lives in me.
 

jzeidler

New member
Dr. Simon Greenleaf, a professor of law and once considered the world's foremost authority on evidence in jurisprudence and one of the founders of Harvard Law School would greatly disagree with you. His book, "The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence," explains all the reasons why. An excerpt from his book can be found HERE. You should get a copy. You can download it for free or order a paper copy from Amazon. This quote is from the opening forward on the above mentioned page: "Greenleaf, one of the principle founders of the Harvard Law School, originally set out to disprove the biblical testimony concerning the resurrection of Jesus Christ. He was certain that a careful examination of the internal witness of the Gospels would dispel all the myths at the heart of Christianity. But this legal scholar came to the conclusion that the witnesses were reliable, and that the resurrection did in fact happen."


Looks like I know which book in reading next :) thanks Aimiel.
 

Aimiel

Well-known member
You're welcome. He was an atheist and was convinced by his friends that he should weigh the evidence found in Scripture to de-bunk The Bible. He not only found the evidence to be there and be true, but he came to know Jesus as Lord and God.
 

Ben Masada

New member
1 - This is an example of what I tell people on TOL all the time, it's their own scripture that blinds the Jews, they have also been indoctrinated into the false teaching that the writings of holy men, some more holy than others, are actually the writings of God.

2 - I find it sooooo frustrating that so many sincere and faithful people like Ben are literally not allowed to think beyond the bondage of the Priestly authors (and redactors) of scripture.

3 - In the narratives of Jesus he had alluded to the necessity of leaving and life after death on several occasions, so Ben is just flat wrong on this issue.

4 - But I also believe that some of the apostles didn't believe the reports until they saw it with their own eyes which is frankly understandable.

1 - Jesus himself said that the writings of God is the Truth given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. (John 17:17; Psalm 147:19,20)

2 - Caino, I am not a Christian who is not allowed to think beyond what is dictated by Paul. I am free to walk by sight and to think for myself and decide according to my understanding. (II Cor. 5:7)

3 - If I am wrong on this issue, so were Prophet Isaiah, King David and Job. (Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12:23 and Job 10:21)

4 - What did the apostles of Jesus see Caino with their own eyes? Would you remind me with? Did they see any evidence from the afterlife? They, for instance, denied the report of Mary Magdalene because they could not believe there was an afterlife. (Luke 24:11)
 

Ben Masada

New member
True: all we have of God is by faith... we believe in Him, even though none of us have ever seen Him. Truth is, though: what we see of Him, by faith, is more real than the things that we see with our eyes, since these things we see with the eyes of our faith are eternal and what our eyes perceive are temporal. The Spirit of God is more real to me than my own knowledge or understanding. He is more personal to me than I am to myself. I trust Him more than I trust me. I expect great things in my life, because He is with me. I am no longer alive, but Christ lives in me.

Well Aimiel, not every one who believes in God, do it by faith. I do it by Logic. The Logic that something cannot cause itself to exist and through the Physical concept of Causality which cannot go back ad infinitum.
 

Zeke

Well-known member
"Reject?" I don't even consider him. If you want me to consider him seriously, then provide some evidence for your claims. Then I can accept or reject him, or more precisely, your myths about him.

The default isn't "Christianity is true", and more than "Islam is true", or "Bahai is true". You need to provide the evidence.

You should include the Jewish religion along with the above, The observational proof isn't there nor is it supposed to be Luke 17:20-21, the peniel gland is the only place on can see the Divine world Gen 32:30.
 

Caino

BANNED
Banned
1 - Jesus himself said that the writings of God is the Truth given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. (John 17:17; Psalm 147:19,20)

No he did not, he said "The Word", the Living word of God in the heart of man. You assume he was referring to the "written word" of the priest.

2 - Caino, I am not a Christian who is not allowed to think beyond what is dictated by Paul. I am free to walk by sight and to think for myself and decide according to my understanding. (II Cor. 5:7)

I'm not a followers of Paul, his ideas contaminated and confused the religion that grew up about Jesus.

3 - If I am wrong on this issue, so were Prophet Isaiah, King David and Job. (Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12:23 and Job 10:21)

Isa 26:14 is about the final judgment of the unrepentant not a general statement about life for the saved? Any honest Rabi would concede that.

4 - What did the apostles of Jesus see Caino with their own eyes? Would you remind me with? Did they see any evidence from the afterlife? They, for instance, denied the report of Mary Magdalene because they could not believe there was an afterlife. (Luke 24:11)

The apostles were often confused but teachable. After they visited with the resurrected Christ, they had such a change of heart that they went forward into persecution even giving their own lives.
 

Zeke

Well-known member
1 - Jesus himself said that the writings of God is the Truth given to Israel only and to no other people on earth. (John 17:17; Psalm 147:19,20)

2 - Caino, I am not a Christian who is not allowed to think beyond what is dictated by Paul. I am free to walk by sight and to think for myself and decide according to my understanding. (II Cor. 5:7)

3 - If I am wrong on this issue, so were Prophet Isaiah, King David and Job. (Isa. 26:14; II Sam. 12:23 and Job 10:21)

4 - What did the apostles of Jesus see Caino with their own eyes? Would you remind me with? Did they see any evidence from the afterlife? They, for instance, denied the report of Mary Magdalene because they could not believe there was an afterlife. (Luke 24:11)

Luke 17:20-21 the same message as 2Cor 5:7, 1Cor 3:16, The no Jew or Gentile remarks by Paul, is the torn in the Jewish pride parade.
 
Top