Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Did Jesus Exist?
- Thread starter ScienceRocks
- Start date
Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.I am not asking you to make that leap in logic just yet. I am just trying to establish the reasonableness that when anyone creates something, as a rule, their creation is the realization of their intention. Pretty much common sense, right?When you create something is your creation the realization of your intention? As a rule. Can we agree on that?I disagree. There are two theories about how life was created. One is the creation theory, the other is spontaneous generation followed by evolution. There is honestly no evidence presented for EITHER position. There IS evidence for evolution, we have actually seen it happen, but for the spontaneous generation aspect there is zero evidence.
The fact that we are here as people, is not evidence for the creation theory. It is evidence of the evolutionary theory, certainly the fact that our DNA is so close to chimpanzees
reinforces that line of thought. But, yet again, who's to say that a God didn't start the spark of life, and then sit back and see how the experiment turns out?
That's the problem with the arguments, any bit of evidence that you present to support the existence of a God, can likewise be used to refute it.
Yes, when I create something. How can you claim to know the intent of a God? Seems like a few scriptures warn against that IIRC.
I'm not sure what scriptures you are referring to but lets park that one for later. Fair enough?
Ok, so again using your own experience and logic, when you create something do you usually do so for a reason? As a rule of course.
Sure, so explain all of the failures. If God wanted dinosaurs, and if he made them, why then did he wipe them out? Same go's for the Neanderthals, they were a far more robust group than modern humans. Why did modern man succeed where neanderthal failed? I can go on and on, but I think you get my drift.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
You really aren't interested in cooperating are you? You want to jump right into the meat of the discussion without working through the data in a systematic way. What's the worst thing that could happen?Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.I am not asking you to make that leap in logic just yet. I am just trying to establish the reasonableness that when anyone creates something, as a rule, their creation is the realization of their intention. Pretty much common sense, right?When you create something is your creation the realization of your intention? As a rule. Can we agree on that?
Yes, when I create something. How can you claim to know the intent of a God? Seems like a few scriptures warn against that IIRC.
I'm not sure what scriptures you are referring to but lets park that one for later. Fair enough?
Ok, so again using your own experience and logic, when you create something do you usually do so for a reason? As a rule of course.
Sure, so explain all of the failures. If God wanted dinosaurs, and if he made them, why then did he wipe them out? Same go's for the Neanderthals, they were a far more robust group than modern humans. Why did modern man succeed where neanderthal failed? I can go on and on, but I think you get my drift.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
Sometimes you create things just for the heck of it? Is that the rule or the exception. Are you telling me that as a rule people create things for no purpose at all. Let's try to define the rule by the rule and not define the rule for the exception. Fair enough?
I submit to you that creating things to see if you can do it is a reason and inherent to that creation is some purpose.
I submit creating things in Minecraft with your daughter for fun and spending time with her is a reason and serves a purpose.
So, do you really want to go on record that as a rule when you create something you do so for no apparent reason and your creation is not intended to serve any purpose. Because I think we are done here if that is your position.
You really aren't interested in cooperating are you? You want to jump right into the meat of the discussion without first instead of working through the data in a systematic way. What's the worst thing that could happen?Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.I am not asking you to make that leap in logic just yet. I am just trying to establish the reasonableness that when anyone creates something, as a rule, their creation is the realization of their intention. Pretty much common sense, right?Yes, when I create something. How can you claim to know the intent of a God? Seems like a few scriptures warn against that IIRC.
I'm not sure what scriptures you are referring to but lets park that one for later. Fair enough?
Ok, so again using your own experience and logic, when you create something do you usually do so for a reason? As a rule of course.
Sure, so explain all of the failures. If God wanted dinosaurs, and if he made them, why then did he wipe them out? Same go's for the Neanderthals, they were a far more robust group than modern humans. Why did modern man succeed where neanderthal failed? I can go on and on, but I think you get my drift.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
Sometimes you create things just for the heck of it? Is that the rule or the exception. Are you telling me that as a rule people create things for no purpose at all. Let's try to define the rule by the rule and not define the rule for the exception. Fair enough?
I submit to you that creating things to see if you can do it is a reason and inherent to that creation is some purpose.
I submit creating things in Minecraft with your daughter for fun and spending time with her is a reason and serves a purpose.
So, do you really want to go on record that as a rule when you create something you do so for no apparent reason and your creation is not intended to serve any purpose. Because I think we are done here if that is your position.
Based on your rather narrow view all creation is for a specific reason. I say that that is not true. Most of what i create does indeed have a purpose, but not all. Sometimes the creation is incidental to the activity. Can you agree to that?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
I asked you very politely if we could work through this in a systematic way. You are skipping steps. We
will get to all of these questions in due time, but groundwork must first be laid for my position to make sense to you.
So either you are interested in understanding the basis for my belief or you are not interested in understanding the basis for my belief. This isn't a competition. This isn't a debate. It is a discussion.
Again you are skipping steps. I am asking you to use your own experiences and logic as the basis for your answers. We will get to the universe soon enough.You really aren't interested in cooperating are you? You want to jump right into the meat of the discussion without first instead of working through the data in a systematic way. What's the worst thing that could happen?Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.I am not asking you to make that leap in logic just yet. I am just trying to establish the reasonableness that when anyone creates something, as a rule, their creation is the realization of their intention. Pretty much common sense, right?
I'm not sure what scriptures you are referring to but lets park that one for later. Fair enough?
Ok, so again using your own experience and logic, when you create something do you usually do so for a reason? As a rule of course.
Sure, so explain all of the failures. If God wanted dinosaurs, and if he made them, why then did he wipe them out? Same go's for the Neanderthals, they were a far more robust group than modern humans. Why did modern man succeed where neanderthal failed? I can go on and on, but I think you get my drift.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
Sometimes you create things just for the heck of it? Is that the rule or the exception. Are you telling me that as a rule people create things for no purpose at all. Let's try to define the rule by the rule and not define the rule for the exception. Fair enough?
I submit to you that creating things to see if you can do it is a reason and inherent to that creation is some purpose.
I submit creating things in Minecraft with your daughter for fun and spending time with her is a reason and serves a purpose.
So, do you really want to go on record that as a rule when you create something you do so for no apparent reason and your creation is not intended to serve any purpose. Because I think we are done here if that is your position.
Based on your rather narrow view all creation is for a specific reason. I say that that is not true. Most of what i create does indeed have a purpose, but not all. Sometimes the creation is incidental to the activity. Can you agree to that?
As a rule, do your creations serve a purpose? Were they created for a specific reason?
I know you have science background and I know that you know that proxies are used in scientific investigations all the time.
That is what I am doing right now. I am using your experiences as a proxy. How I tie that back to the universe will be done in a very reasonable and defensible manner. I promise I won't go off the deep end on you.
What these first questions go to is to establish reasonableness of assumptions. So that if we work through a purely hypothetical scenario of there was Creator, then we can assess the reasonablness of assuming it was created for a reason or purpose using our own experiences as a guide.
Then we can go and look at the data that supports and/or contradicts that assumption that the universe was created for a reason or purpose.
Last edited:
again you are skipping steps. I am asking you to use your own experiences and logic as the basis for your answers. We will get to the universe soon enough.You really aren't interested in cooperating are you? You want to jump right into the meat of the discussion without first instead of working through the data in a systematic way. What's the worst thing that could happen?Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.Sure, so explain all of the failures. If God wanted dinosaurs, and if he made them, why then did he wipe them out? Same go's for the Neanderthals, they were a far more robust group than modern humans. Why did modern man succeed where neanderthal failed? I can go on and on, but I think you get my drift.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
Sometimes you create things just for the heck of it? Is that the rule or the exception. Are you telling me that as a rule people create things for no purpose at all. Let's try to define the rule by the rule and not define the rule for the exception. Fair enough?
I submit to you that creating things to see if you can do it is a reason and inherent to that creation is some purpose.
I submit creating things in Minecraft with your daughter for fun and spending time with her is a reason and serves a purpose.
So, do you really want to go on record that as a rule when you create something you do so for no apparent reason and your creation is not intended to serve any purpose. Because I think we are done here if that is your position.
Based on your rather narrow view all creation is for a specific reason. I say that that is not true. Most of what i create does indeed have a purpose, but not all. Sometimes the creation is incidental to the activity. Can you agree to that?
As a rule, do your creations serve a purpose? Were they created for a specific reason?
Let's make a deal. I would love to work through your philosophy tomorrow. How about we get together here at around 2 pm tomorrow. Does that work for you?
Tuatara
Gold Member
No he doesn't. He has had many public debates on the issue. That is not shutting down anyone. Actually I'm going to call you out on this. Please provide evidence where he shuts down anyone.I finished reading a book about Holocaust deniers last year. The title escapes me but the author made a great point. He said the only ones worse than holocaust deniers are the ones that don't allow them to speak. For when you don't allow them to speak you are showing them you fear that they might be right.wut? lolI dont think theres proof for or against god.Wow, let's call anyone who argues history a Nazi sympathizer. Did you also know that the story of Paul Revere's midnight ride with his "The British Are Coming" is also false. History is rewritten all the time.
No, I call anyone who tries to revise history for personal, or political gain, a revisionist. Nazi's are the most well known version of that contemptible form of "history" study, but your hero carrier, is cut from the same cloth. He has a political, and a personal reason to try and rewrite history. That makes him a contemptible person. History is. It cares not a tot about a persons individual proclivities, or political aspirations, or religious beliefs. It just is. Anyone who tries to destroy that, as this asshole is doing, is a criminal, destroying the record of humanities progress and retreat from primitive man, to modern man.
Anyone who engages in the destruction of history is committing a crime against humanity.
Feel free to laugh, but that is a fact. History is all we have, the taliban blew up giant Buddhas because they weren't part of their religion, they are criminals. Those ancient statues were centuries old. A few assholes felt that they were superior to the needs of all of mankind. I had the great fortune of actually seeing them, but my daughter never will. That is incredibly sad to me as they were truly magnificent.
What this asshole carrier is attempting is in the same vein. He wishes to destroy history because it doesn't support his particular idea of how the world should work.
You allow them to speak and then you destroy their argument. Shutting people down means you have something to hide or fear.
I have no problem allowing revisionists to speak, what I won't allow is them trying to prevent others to speak. That's what your dear mr. carrier does, he tries to shout down anyone who has an opposing viewpoint.
Tuatara
Gold Member
Go back and read my post. You are just repeating yourself without actually countering anything I said.Wrong. Religious means to believe in a religion. Atheism is not a religion.Exactly.Do agnostics make arguments against the existence of God?
Nope. We merely point out that what people claim to be evidence for existence generally isn't. The whole point about being an agnostic is not to argue for EITHER side. It is merely to make sure that arguments are made in a proper manner.
An atheism doesnt even pass "go," let alone reaching this level of logical critique.
Atheists are every bit as religious as their religious counterparts.
They claim they don't believe in God or gods.They claim that there is no God.There is no evidence for either positions just like there is no evidence for the belief or non belief of Unicorns. Do you believe in unicorns?But they have no evidence for that position.Some do but most just believe in a God or gods.Theists argue that there IS a God, but, yet again, they have no evidence to support that position.
Wrong again, you really need help on what words mean. Where is the faith in not believing in a god?Both theists, and atheists use arguments based on faith.
I cannot speak for theists bit I would not demand anyone think like I do. I have yet to see any atheist do this. If they have please point it out.I have no problem with a person who believes in a God, nor do I have a problem with a person who doesn't. What I DO have a problem with is those individuals who demand that I think like them.
There's that word again. There are people on street corners waving bibles in people faces, there are thousands of radio and TV stations that try to indoctrinate the masses with their religion and there are numerous missionaries that travel the world pushing their religion on those people. How does this compare to anything you have seen by atheists?Overwhelmingly it is militant atheists who are trying to impose their viewpoint on me.
Let us count the ways that atheism is a religion.
1. Atheism is a BELIEF SYSTEM. Just like any other religion.
2. Atheists have dogma-There is no God. Theists have dogma, there IS a God.
3. Just as theists are wont to proclaim their belief in God so too are atheists prone to wearing t-shirts, and bumper stickers etc. that declare the opposite.
4. Many atheists CONGREGATE in groups for mutual support and understanding. They even have retreats! Sound familiar?
5. So, just as some sects of Buddhism have no belief in a super natural, yet are considered a religion, so to are some sects of atheists. If it smells like a duck, walks like a duck, and squawks like a duck....it's a duck!
Oh, and to date, in all of my 70+ years of life, I have never, ever had a person wave a bible in front of me trying to get me to convert. Not once. I did have a Islamist strongly suggest that I not return to his country if I didn't become Muslim once, a fairly long time ago, and I have militant atheists calling me names because i don't spurn my religious colleagues, so you tell me, which is worse? A bible thumper who doesn't thump, or an atheist standing in front of me yelling that i shouldn't work with a religious colleague?
To be honest I'm not sure. Maybe, but if the weather is good here, probably not. I'll know more in the morning.again you are skipping steps. I am asking you to use your own experiences and logic as the basis for your answers. We will get to the universe soon enough.You really aren't interested in cooperating are you? You want to jump right into the meat of the discussion without first instead of working through the data in a systematic way. What's the worst thing that could happen?Actually, I don't get your drift. The laws of nature are such that given enough time and the right conditions, beings that know and create will eventually arise. The evolution of intelligent life is built into the laws of nature.
But I don't understand what this has to do with having a reason for creating something. To be honest you seem to be looking for ways to avoid answering questions which should be self evident. I am asking you to use your own experiences - as a proxy - and logic to see what kind of information we can gleam from investigating creation.
If you will answer the questions, I will make my point as quickly as possible. I promise.
So do you generally create things for no reason? Or is there a purpose for what you create?
How do you know that? What gives you the impression that intelligent life will naturally occur given enough time? The laws of nature are actually pretty basic, eat and you live, don't eat and you don't. Fall from a high place and you go "splat", procreate or go extinct, those are the fundamental laws of nature.
As far as creation go's, you haven't answered my question. If God created dinosaurs, why did they then go extinct?
And yes, sometimes i create things purely for the heck of it. Just to see if I can do it. lately my daughter and I have been building things in Minecraft. I do that because i love spending time with her, what we create is immaterial. It's the time spent with her that I treasure.
Sometimes you create things just for the heck of it? Is that the rule or the exception. Are you telling me that as a rule people create things for no purpose at all. Let's try to define the rule by the rule and not define the rule for the exception. Fair enough?
I submit to you that creating things to see if you can do it is a reason and inherent to that creation is some purpose.
I submit creating things in Minecraft with your daughter for fun and spending time with her is a reason and serves a purpose.
So, do you really want to go on record that as a rule when you create something you do so for no apparent reason and your creation is not intended to serve any purpose. Because I think we are done here if that is your position.
Based on your rather narrow view all creation is for a specific reason. I say that that is not true. Most of what i create does indeed have a purpose, but not all. Sometimes the creation is incidental to the activity. Can you agree to that?
As a rule, do your creations serve a purpose? Were they created for a specific reason?
Let's make a deal. I would love to work through your philosophy tomorrow. How about we get together here at around 2 pm tomorrow. Does that work for you?
How about we say 2 pm tentatively? If I can't make it I'll send you a PM to let you know.
I'd really prefer this discussion not be adversarial. I have no preference to convince you. I am perfectly happy to agree to disagree. I do however have a preference for you to have an open mind and to give me the space I need to lay it out the basis for my beliefs in a logical and orderly fashion. Otherwise, it really would be a waste of time for both of us. I don't want to waste your time anymore than I want you to waste my time. I'm thoughtful that way.
If you would rather have this discussion in a PM we can do that too.
ScienceRocks
Democrat all the way!
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #231
- Jun 19, 2009
- 17,417
- 6,794
- 335
Shooting your eye out with those weak bb rifles is a myth like Jesus.
'Christmas Story' Myths: Can You Really Shoot Your Eye Out with a BB Gun?
Don't bust on the Ralphie, he can rock a mean pink bunny outfit. *L*
"He looks like a deranged Easter Bunny"
'Christmas Story' Myths: Can You Really Shoot Your Eye Out with a BB Gun?
Don't bust on the Ralphie, he can rock a mean pink bunny outfit. *L*
"He looks like a deranged Easter Bunny"
daisiesRwild
Member
Did Jesus Exist?
I was blown away with the lack of evidence for Jesus outside of the bible. The bible of course is a mish mash of text that doesn't even make much sense!
Watch through this video and come to your conclusion.
the bible makes perfect sense when yyou are awakened byt the holy spirit
- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,445
- 1,310
- 140
The Truth About Jesus’ Death
It is a long read but the truth must be told completely
I began by reading the New Testament which is full of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus taught us how to be kind to others, as in the stranger but most of all Jesus used the Book of Ezekiel, the third of the Latter Prophets in the Tanakh and one of the major prophetic books in the Old Testament. It records six visions of the prophet Ezekiel, exiled in Babylon, during the 22 years from 593 to 571 BC.
Book of Ezekiel – Wikipedia
During this period Jerusalem was under the rule of the Romans which the local community strongly rejected.
in Palestine there were a number of occasions when more restless elements in the population resisted Roman abuses and followed the tradition of “zealousness for the Law.”
under the Romans (ruled 37-4 B.C.E.). Herod surrounded himself with Greek scholars and undertook many building projects, including a magnificent and fortified palace. He rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem.
Before he died, Jesus of Nazareth was born.
The history of the Jews in the Roman Empire
Rebellion in Judaea
Although Judaea was ruled by the Romans, the governors there had practiced the same kind of religious tolerance as was shown to Jews in Rome.
The history of Palestine is the study of the past in the region of Palestine, defined as the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
The crucifixion of Jesus occurred in 1st-century Judea, most likely in either AD 30 or AD 33. According to the canonical gospels Jesus was arrested and tried by the Sanhedrin, and then sentenced by Pontius Pilate to be scourged, and finally crucified by the Romans.
Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia
In the canonical gospels, Pilate's court refers to the trial of Jesus in praetorium before Pontius Pilate, preceded by the Sanhedrin Trial. After questioning Jesus and receiving very few replies, Herod sees Jesus as no threat and returns him to Pilate.
At the time Jerusalem was part of Roman Judea, the charges of the Sanhedrin against Jesus held no power before Pilate. This was said after learning that Jesus did not wish to claim any terrestrial kingdom. He was therefore not a political threat and could be seen as innocent of such a charge.
Stepping back outside, Pilate publicly declared that he found no basis to charge Jesus,
Pilate's court - Wikipedia
Early in the morning the chief priests and elders planned to have Jesus executed.
Pilate had Jesus flogged. Soldiers put a crown of thorns and purple robe on Jesus, hit his face and mocked him saying: 'Hail, king of the Jews!'
Pilate, outside, repeated his not guilty verdict and presented Jesus: 'Here is the man!'
Chief priests [Rabbis] and officials shouted: 'Crucify! Crucify!' Pilate: 'Go ahead and crucify him. I myself find no guilt in him.' Jewish leaders: 'Our law says he must die because he claimed to be the Son of God.'
Pilate, interrogated Jesus inside. Jesus: 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.' Pilate tried to set Jesus free.
Jewish leaders [Rabbis]: 'If you let him go, you disobey Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.'
Pilate brought out Jesus around noon, saying: 'Here is your king.' They shouted: 'Take him away, crucify him!'
Pilate: 'Shall I crucify your king?' Chief priests: 'We have no king but Caesar.'
Pilate handed Jesus over to them for crucifixion.
Pilate came out and asked them why. They said only Pilate could apply the death penalty.
Pilate, inside: 'Are you the king of the Jews?' Jesus: 'My kingdom is not of this world, otherwise my servants would have fought to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.'
Pilate: 'You are a king, then!' Jesus: 'You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.' Pilate: 'What is truth?'
Pilate, outside: 'I find no guilt in him.'
In the New Testament, the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus refers to the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin (a Jewish judicial body) (NOTE: the Jewish leaders were Rabbis) following his arrest in Jerusalem and prior to the trial before Pontius Pilate.
Jesus is generally quiet, does not mount a defense, and rarely responds to the accusations, and is found guilty of various offenses.
Sanhedrin trial of Jesus - Wikipedia
Jewish tradition and texts portray the Sanhedrin to be an established court [all of them were rabbis], based in Jerusalem with strict guidelines on how to function.
Thereafter, in Pilate's Court, the Jewish elders [Rabbis] ask Pontius Pilate to judge and condemn Jesus, accusing him of claiming to be the King of the Jews. Such a claim would be considered treasonous, for being a direct challenge to the Roman authorities.
In conclusion, after reviewing all the available written facts concerning Jesus Christ, I find overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ did not die for our sins but was murdered by the Romans, at the request of the local Rabbis in Jerusalem and in return, the revolt against the Roman occupation would stop.
Jesus was teaching the Book of Ezekiel which portrayed the Jewish people badly.
The Rabbis wanted Jesus’ to shut up and the Romans wanted the rebellion to stop. Having Jesus killed solved both problems.
the truth, nothing but the truth
So help me God
-now comes the stupid, gullible and republicon response
-
Curious how each Gospel tells a slightly different story. It's almost like there were no witnesses so each author made up a story to suit their theology.The Truth About Jesus’ Death
It is a long read but the truth must be told completely
I began by reading the New Testament which is full of the teachings of Jesus Christ. Jesus taught us how to be kind to others, as in the stranger but most of all Jesus used the Book of Ezekiel, the third of the Latter Prophets in the Tanakh and one of the major prophetic books in the Old Testament. It records six visions of the prophet Ezekiel, exiled in Babylon, during the 22 years from 593 to 571 BC.
Book of Ezekiel – Wikipedia
During this period Jerusalem was under the rule of the Romans which the local community strongly rejected.
in Palestine there were a number of occasions when more restless elements in the population resisted Roman abuses and followed the tradition of “zealousness for the Law.”
under the Romans (ruled 37-4 B.C.E.). Herod surrounded himself with Greek scholars and undertook many building projects, including a magnificent and fortified palace. He rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem.
Before he died, Jesus of Nazareth was born.
The history of the Jews in the Roman Empire
Rebellion in Judaea
Although Judaea was ruled by the Romans, the governors there had practiced the same kind of religious tolerance as was shown to Jews in Rome.
The history of Palestine is the study of the past in the region of Palestine, defined as the territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River.
The crucifixion of Jesus occurred in 1st-century Judea, most likely in either AD 30 or AD 33. According to the canonical gospels Jesus was arrested and tried by the Sanhedrin, and then sentenced by Pontius Pilate to be scourged, and finally crucified by the Romans.
Crucifixion of Jesus - Wikipedia
In the canonical gospels, Pilate's court refers to the trial of Jesus in praetorium before Pontius Pilate, preceded by the Sanhedrin Trial. After questioning Jesus and receiving very few replies, Herod sees Jesus as no threat and returns him to Pilate.
At the time Jerusalem was part of Roman Judea, the charges of the Sanhedrin against Jesus held no power before Pilate. This was said after learning that Jesus did not wish to claim any terrestrial kingdom. He was therefore not a political threat and could be seen as innocent of such a charge.
Stepping back outside, Pilate publicly declared that he found no basis to charge Jesus,
Pilate's court - Wikipedia
Early in the morning the chief priests and elders planned to have Jesus executed.
Pilate had Jesus flogged. Soldiers put a crown of thorns and purple robe on Jesus, hit his face and mocked him saying: 'Hail, king of the Jews!'
Pilate, outside, repeated his not guilty verdict and presented Jesus: 'Here is the man!'
Chief priests [Rabbis] and officials shouted: 'Crucify! Crucify!' Pilate: 'Go ahead and crucify him. I myself find no guilt in him.' Jewish leaders: 'Our law says he must die because he claimed to be the Son of God.'
Pilate, interrogated Jesus inside. Jesus: 'You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin.' Pilate tried to set Jesus free.
Jewish leaders [Rabbis]: 'If you let him go, you disobey Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar.'
Pilate brought out Jesus around noon, saying: 'Here is your king.' They shouted: 'Take him away, crucify him!'
Pilate: 'Shall I crucify your king?' Chief priests: 'We have no king but Caesar.'
Pilate handed Jesus over to them for crucifixion.
Pilate came out and asked them why. They said only Pilate could apply the death penalty.
Pilate, inside: 'Are you the king of the Jews?' Jesus: 'My kingdom is not of this world, otherwise my servants would have fought to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders.'
Pilate: 'You are a king, then!' Jesus: 'You say that I am a king. In fact, the reason I was born and came into the world is to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.' Pilate: 'What is truth?'
Pilate, outside: 'I find no guilt in him.'
In the New Testament, the Sanhedrin trial of Jesus refers to the trial of Jesus before the Sanhedrin (a Jewish judicial body) (NOTE: the Jewish leaders were Rabbis) following his arrest in Jerusalem and prior to the trial before Pontius Pilate.
Jesus is generally quiet, does not mount a defense, and rarely responds to the accusations, and is found guilty of various offenses.
Sanhedrin trial of Jesus - Wikipedia
Jewish tradition and texts portray the Sanhedrin to be an established court [all of them were rabbis], based in Jerusalem with strict guidelines on how to function.
Thereafter, in Pilate's Court, the Jewish elders [Rabbis] ask Pontius Pilate to judge and condemn Jesus, accusing him of claiming to be the King of the Jews. Such a claim would be considered treasonous, for being a direct challenge to the Roman authorities.
In conclusion, after reviewing all the available written facts concerning Jesus Christ, I find overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ did not die for our sins but was murdered by the Romans, at the request of the local Rabbis in Jerusalem and in return, the revolt against the Roman occupation would stop.
Jesus was teaching the Book of Ezekiel which portrayed the Jewish people badly.
The Rabbis wanted Jesus’ to shut up and the Romans wanted the rebellion to stop. Having Jesus killed solved both problems.
the truth, nothing but the truth
So help me God
now comes the stupid, gullible and republicon response
zaangalewa
Gold Member
- Jan 24, 2015
- 21,169
- 2,144
- 140
"Did Jesus Exist?"
Not as perceived by Christians, no.
But "perceived" (whatever you like to say with this word) as what from whom? And how do you perceive the not naturally existing historical persons LaoTse, Robin Hood or William Tell?
The difference between the most important historical person Jesus the Christ and this other three important historical persons is it "only" that you will find - if you will start to search - in Jesus a human being in the end; a 100% pure human being. And you will also find god; 100% pure god.
By the way: Robin Hood is meanwhile "unpopular" in the eyes of some super-capitalists of the USA. Reason: they "perceive" him to be a commie.
But what do "perceive" people really who try to see in Robin Hood a commie? The criminal ways how they came to their money on their own and the fear to lose this money?
Last edited:
Not so. Early in the fifth century BC, Jerusalem was subject to Neo-Babylonian authority.Jesus used the Book of Ezekiel, the third of the Latter Prophets in the Tanakh and one of the major prophetic books in the Old Testament. It records six visions of the prophet Ezekiel, exiled in Babylon, during the 22 years from 593 to 571 BC.
Book of Ezekiel – Wikipedia
During this period Jerusalem was under the rule of the Romans
Judeans were not revolting against Roman occupation when Jesus was crucified. The revolt didn't begin until the 60s AD.In conclusion, after reviewing all the available written facts concerning Jesus Christ, I find overwhelming evidence that Jesus Christ did not die for our sins but was murdered by the Romans, at the request of the local Rabbis in Jerusalem and in return, the revolt against the Roman occupation would stop.
. . .
The Rabbis wanted Jesus’ to shut up and the Romans wanted the rebellion to stop.
What did the rabbis want Jesus to "shut up" about? Did it have something to do with Roman law?
- Aug 6, 2017
- 5,445
- 1,310
- 140
During this period Jerusalem was under the rule of the Romans which the local community strongly rejected.Judeans were not revolting against Roman occupation when Jesus was crucified. The revolt didn't begin until the 60s AD.
What did the rabbis want Jesus to "shut up" about? Did it have something to do with Roman law?
More famous Jewish teachers come from Galilee than anywhere else in the world. They were known for their great reverence for Scripture and the passionate desire to be faithful to it. This translated into vibrant religious communities, devoted to strong families, their country, whose synagogues echoed the debate and discussions about keeping the Torah. They resisted the pagan influences of Hellenism far more than did their Judean counterparts. When the great revolt against the pagan Romans and their collaborators (66-74 AD) finally occurred, it began among the Galileans.
That the World May Know | Rabbi and Talmidim
in Palestine there were a number of occasions when more restless elements in the population resisted Roman abuses and followed the tradition of “zealousness for the Law.”
under the Romans (ruled 37-4 B.C.E.). Herod surrounded himself with Greek scholars and undertook many building projects, including a magnificent and fortified palace. He rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem.
Before he died, Jesus of Nazareth was born.
Life for the Jews under the procurators was exceedingly difficult. This protrait is confirmed by the Jewish historian Josephus who chronicled a number of events that provoked the Jews under Pilate and other procurators, leading to riots, beatings, and executions.
The last procurators in particular were indifferent to Jewish religious sensibilities; and various patriotic groups, to whom nationalism was an integral part of their religion, succeeded in polarizing the Jewish population and bringing on the first war with Rome in 66. The climax of the war, as noted earlier, was the destruction of the Temple in 70, though, according to Josephus, Titus sought to spare it.
Bar Kokhba Revolt, also called Second Jewish Revolt, (132–135 CE), Jewish rebellion against Roman rule in Judaea. The revolt was preceded by years of clashes between Jews and Romans in the area.
Bar Kokhba Revolt | History & Facts | Britannica
The history of the Jews in the Roman Empire
Rebellion in Judaea
Although Judaea was ruled by the Romans, the governors there had practiced the same kind of religious tolerance as was shown to Jews in Rome.
In 66 AD, this discontent exploded into open rebellion. Four years later, the Roman army had crushed the revolt, but had also destroyed the temple. The sacred treasures were seized and shown off in a procession through the streets of Rome.
The Roman Empire: in the First Century. The Roman Empire. Jews In Roman Times | PBS
-
So from your copy-and-paste exercise, you see now that Judea did not revolt against Rome when Jesus was crucified.During this period Jerusalem was under the rule of the Romans which the local community strongly rejected.
More famous Jewish teachers come from Galilee than anywhere else in the world. They were known for their great reverence for Scripture and the passionate desire to be faithful to it. This translated into vibrant religious communities, devoted to strong families, their country, whose synagogues echoed the debate and discussions about keeping the Torah. They resisted the pagan influences of Hellenism far more than did their Judean counterparts. When the great revolt against the pagan Romans and their collaborators (66-74 AD) finally occurred, it began among the Galileans.
That the World May Know | Rabbi and Talmidim
in Palestine there were a number of occasions when more restless elements in the population resisted Roman abuses and followed the tradition of “zealousness for the Law.”
under the Romans (ruled 37-4 B.C.E.). Herod surrounded himself with Greek scholars and undertook many building projects, including a magnificent and fortified palace. He rebuilt the Temple in Jerusalem.
Before he died, Jesus of Nazareth was born.
Life for the Jews under the procurators was exceedingly difficult. This protrait is confirmed by the Jewish historian Josephus who chronicled a number of events that provoked the Jews under Pilate and other procurators, leading to riots, beatings, and executions.
The last procurators in particular were indifferent to Jewish religious sensibilities; and various patriotic groups, to whom nationalism was an integral part of their religion, succeeded in polarizing the Jewish population and bringing on the first war with Rome in 66. The climax of the war, as noted earlier, was the destruction of the Temple in 70, though, according to Josephus, Titus sought to spare it.
Bar Kokhba Revolt, also called Second Jewish Revolt, (132–135 CE), Jewish rebellion against Roman rule in Judaea. The revolt was preceded by years of clashes between Jews and Romans in the area.
Bar Kokhba Revolt | History & Facts | Britannica
The history of the Jews in the Roman Empire
Rebellion in Judaea
Although Judaea was ruled by the Romans, the governors there had practiced the same kind of religious tolerance as was shown to Jews in Rome.
In 66 AD, this discontent exploded into open rebellion. Four years later, the Roman army had crushed the revolt, but had also destroyed the temple. The sacred treasures were seized and shown off in a procession through the streets of Rome.
The Roman Empire: in the First Century. The Roman Empire. Jews In Roman Times | PBS
It would be stranger still if all 4 Gospels repeated the same supposed eyewitness accounts in a "verbatim" manner. That would make it appear that there was some coaching going on.......all were reading from a script.Curious how each Gospel tells a slightly different story. It's almost like there were no witnesses so each author made up a story to suit their theology.
What? Are humans part of a "collective" mentality seeing everything as one, with everyone noticing "exactly" the same facts? Even in a court room you could have 5 witnesses to the same crime and each witness would present visible facts not noticed by the other 4 witnesses......or present some information that others assumed to be unimportant.
There is a important rule of law to remember. Adding extra information or substracting information from an eyewitness accout does not equal a fabrication, each person is an individual with different traits of observation that can be effected by eyesight, nerves, health.....etc., attention to detail, lack of attention to detail. There have been cases where even the color of clothing and hair were each testified as being different......but each person told that truth as they rememered. One had mistaken the color of hair as being read because all he noticed was the big red 1 on the baseball cap being worn......another stated the subject wore all blue......another black.......why? The subject was wearing a blue coat that he removed in order to run faster....etc.,
Example: Suppose you or someone else was repeating the events of how you and your wife witnessed a crime while shopping at the local mall. Your first question is the same one asked of your wife by the prosecutinig attorney. "Why were you at the mall on this day?" You answer, "I came along with the wife in order to purchase hunting supplies and a few cinnamon rolls..........there is this one little bakery that makes the very best pasteries.....". Your wife replies by telling the prosecutor about how this mall has great clothing stores.....
Both of you begin to tell your story about one certain event that occured at the same mall, on the same day......but each provided different details about as to why you and your wife were there on that particular day.......
Did you or your wife either........contradict the other's testimony?
The same is true of the Gospels........each told by someone with a different view point. In one account the author tells of there being 3 angels.....another remembers seeing only 2 angels at the grave of Jesus. Is this a contradiction? Of course not........there are many reasons as to why one mentions 3 another only 2......perhaps they arrived at slightly different times of day.....one angel has already gone and one witness had a glance at only 2 angels that were wittnessed existing the scence...etc., the first witness arrived much eariler than the latter witness and the actual scene changed in perception and reality.
This is just one example as to why some claim the Bible contracts itself. This is exactly the case between 2 different gospels accounts as to how many angels were seen at the grave of Jesus. 2 different numbers. But when you actually read of the 2 different accounts the passages actually document different time frames of each witnessed account.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
- Replies
- 60
- Views
- 810
- Replies
- 2
- Views
- 73
- Replies
- 344
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 103
- Views
- 748
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 21
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 74
- Replies
- 70
- Views
- 654
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8051
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 469
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-