The Existence of Jesus Christ

That is one interpretation of the phrase 'The kingdom of God is within you'.

The reply to the first part seems to have been given without reading my post carefully. It is not the teacher for whom things became demanding but the students were not ready for it and left.As far as the second part is concerned we may just consider the way the religious thought has evolved. It started with the beliefs in ghosts and spirits; the only aspect of faith then was fear. That is why the main emphasis was on propitiating the deities. People then had individual, family and community deities. As the intellect and communications developed community worships of deities started. With further development and as the world started getting closer due to communications the communities became bigger and the concept of God developed and wlth education the holy masters who have been there in all ages put their teachings in writing. We now believe that there is only one God for the whole universe. The belief now is Fatherhood of God and brotherhood of mankind.This is what the religion of the present scientific age is or will be. This will not mean doing away with the present religions but identifying what is common. There is plenty in all the scriptures on this. What was earlier given orally or got established by legend was put in writing. So the concept of scriptures is not new, the form is.

This message has been edited by John 10:10, 03-17-2006 02:16 PM

The questions you are asking must be addressed in a different topic thread, as well as the question "What does it mean to walk with Jesus as Lord." When I try to answer these questions here, I am told this is off topic. The answers given by others do not come close to explaining Biblically what is meant.Blessings

---

The evil one comes to steal, kill and destroy; but I Jesus have come that you might have eternal Life and have eternal Life more abundantly - John 10:10

I am sorrry the questions are not answered as asked. I have given Biblical references but the questions have been skirted; why not take them on headlong as asked.Could please under which topic thread should the question be asked?God Bless

This thread is in one of the science forums. Empirical evidence is the gold standard for supporting arguments.In the social and religious forums, biblical references are allowed to support on-topic arguments.You can check the thread title and OP (opening post) to determine what is the topic for the thread.

---

Only 8 posts left until End of Thread.

​

It is a good time to start winding down and presenting summaries or conclusions.

​

Thanks for debating, carry on.

Message 5Catholic Scientist
I know this is an old post, but in it you say Did you ever find a source for this?
If you did I am sure that they are not actual records, because if they were it would be the historical and religious news of the millennium. Just curious as to what the real data is that they are using to claim such a thing.

Though it seems you may be unwilling to present you claims of evidence for Jesus Christ, here is a thread already up and running. No need to start a new thread.Come on show us what you and Mr Wright have.

---

Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

I don't pretend to have a educaion in either theology or history. There is a whole thread here going back years and there isn't a lot of point in rehashing it all. I'll just say this and let it go.Paul's early writings, including Romans, were written within 20 to 25 years of the resurrection. As I said there would be many around at that time who would have been able to point out that Paul was off base. Josephus was writing around 50 years after and wouldn't have including writing about something that had been discredited by eye witnesses.

And many did just that. There is no indication that Paul ever meet Jesus, but only that he believed in the existence of Jesus. Except that Josephus also only reports that there were people that believed there had been a character named Jesus who they considered to be the Messiah.Neither of those are evidence of the actual existence of Jesus, and even if there was absolute evidence that there had been a historical person named Jesus that did many of the things mentioned in the stories, it still says nothing about the divinity of the character.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

quote:

---

Paul's early writings, including Romans, were written within 20 to 25 years of the resurrection. As I said there would be many around at that time who would have been able to point out that Paul was off base.

---

And say almost nothing about the historical circumstances. There is no mention of the empty tomb, or of the women going to visit it. Even excluding the question of interpolations there is only the claim of some sort of resurrection, and a list of "appearances" (one of which, at least, was a vision and not an encounter with a physical person). I also have my doubts that errors in this very small body of material would have been easily identified - or corrected even if someone noticed them.

quote:

---

Josephus was writing around 50 years after and wouldn't have including writing about something that had been discredited by eye witnesses.

---

Even if the Josephus passage is not entirely a Christian interpolation it is almost certain that parts of it are, and the reference to the resurrection is quite likely not part of the original text.This is not good evidence.

Where is the evidence that "many did just that"?Paul may or may not have met Jesus but he certainly had considerable contact with those that had.

Did Paul ever meet this person? No. That Paul thought Jesus was real is not evidence. There is also a school of thought that Paul never thought of Jesus as a living person of this earthy plain. Earl Doherty makes a very convincing case for this in Jesus: Neither God Nor Man
The Case for a Mythical Jesus A number of issues wrong with this. First of all there is no evidence for this. Paul does not talk about the events mentioned in the gospels. Why would they point out something that isn't even presented. How do you know no one did? Finally, Paul was not preaching and writing in Jerusalem. There were no newspaper, no internet. Why would people in Jerusalem even know or care if someone was making up stories about a nobody from a quarter century earlier?As I suspected. No evidence just assertions.Josephus, Josephus. There is lots of contextual evidence that this is an interpolation or a forgery. Even if it is an actual writing of Josephus, it is not evidence. It is a passing reference of what other people believe about some guy in the past. It is not contemporary.If you are so inclined to understand why using Josephus is a bad move. Try reading this.
JOSEPHUS UNBOUND
Reopening the Josephus QuestionSo what we learn is even though you claim there is lots of evidence, there is in fact no evidence. There is absolutely no contemporary, extra-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ. Would you agree with that?

---

Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Again I ask. Where is your evidence? Show us this evidence.

---

Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts