Image123: Thread title ought to be "Spurious claims of a fellow smiling to himself as he is typing".
And according to your reasoning, counterfeit 1000notes means the original 1000naira note is counterfeit. Jesus is the original legal tender anywhere anyday 2013 years and counting. He's alive.

Your argument of counterfeit notes would not fly in this context. Legal tenders are tangible objects with security features. I don't need faith to discern a real note from a fake one.Use things like gravitational force which cannot be seen,but this also would not fly as every person alive can independently confirm the existence of gravity. The fact that your religion depends on faith to thrive without any physical evidence is the reason why you can never prove the existence of Jesus to a rational mind who seeks physical evidence before drawing conclusions.

bolaino: I believe you've read lots of novels, in Shakespeare's books he makes references to places like london, venice, france and caLls names of popular rulers at that time, but does this makes the stories of Shakespeare true? No, cos it's fiction.

Apart from josephus, all contemporary writers at that time are quiet on the historical jesus, even philo a popular roman writer who wrote poems and books at the supposed time jesus entered jerusalem was quiet about jesus, the reason is obvious, cos there was no jesus in his time, and by the way jesus was a popular name at that time, yeshua/joshoua was and is still a popular hebrew name.

Were the isrealites in egypt? No, was solomon the wisest king at a time in the history of the world? There is no evidence to surport that claim, the bible makes a lot of claims that can not be verified, and thus it makes the bible nothing more than a Glorified story book.

That your today's date says 2013 after death is enough evidence, go figure. So if an historian in Rome doesn't mention a name of a man popular in Galilee(facially unknown by Herod, Pilate and the Sanhedrin), then the man never existed qed?

Alwaystrue: @Image,
Pls I have a question for you at the Abraham father of Christians thread. Thx

yes ma'am.

ezme:

Your argument of counterfeit notes would not fly in this context. Legal tenders are tangible objects with security features. I don't need faith to discern a real note from a fake one.Use things like gravitational force which cannot be seen,but this also would not fly as every person alive can independently confirm the existence of gravity. The fact that your religion depends on faith to thrive without any physical evidence is the reason why you can never prove the existence of Jesus to a rational mind who seeks physical evidence before drawing conclusions.

you're arguing from the wrong base. The op based his conclusions on Christ being false because there are many christs. i simply showed the fallacy behind such dull thought.

@op
Are u a scientologist??, if yes dat explains ur angle of perspective.
I rest my case!

bolaino: of course not, but in the case of the birth of these deities do u have any proof that the story of jesus came first before theirs?

that's the very point. It doesn't matter if Jesus came before or after. What matters is that He is the original.

Image123:
That your today's date says 2013 after death is enough evidence, go figure. So if an historian in Rome doesn't mention a name of a man popular in Galilee(facially unknown by Herod, Pilate and the Sanhedrin), then the man never existed qed?

lol, na really facially known by herod and pilate, do u have any of herod's writings that he acknowledged knowing jesus? The reason we're using the gregorian calender is cos of the catholics church hold on the world at a certain time, and since then there has been no need to change it,

Image123:
that's the very point. It doesn't matter if Jesus came before or after. What matters is that He is the original.

lol, it does my friend it does, if he came after then u can not say he is the original, the claim of jesus being the original of these deities is baseless,

Image123:
you're arguing from the wrong base. The op based his conclusions on Christ being false because there are many christs. i simply showed the fallacy behind such dull thought.

Is this what you understood from the opening post?

bolaino: yes bros I consulted different views before I arrived at my conclusions,But about showing u the links to these sites it's gon be kinda difficult cos I did most of my research in libraries not on the internet, and I arrived at my conclusions after careful and extraordinary scrutiny of the bible, but if u want a detailed site where u can see thousands of biblical contradictions u can visit this site, www.skepticsannotatedbible.org. You could search for books online written by a woman named archaya s murdoch, or read books by renown atheist richard dawkin, and not forgetting a book that helped too, a book by mangasarian, titled, the truth about jesus, is he a myth?

To the bolded, i once did a search on her and what i read about her was not good and if "ABOUT YOU" is not good, then surely what you bring out might be false as well. on Richard Dawkins, the much i know about him is that he is as fanatical as any other religious person but his is based on his atheistic view. well i wouldn't want to digress from the topic at hand, i would be glad if you can address the points ihedinobi raised earlier...

hisblud:

To the bolded, i once did a search on her and what i read about her was not good and if "ABOUT YOU" is not good, then surely what you bring out might be false as well. on Richard Dawkins, the much i know about him is that he is as fanatical as any other religious person but his is based on his atheistic view. well i wouldn't want to digress from the topic at hand, i would be glad if you can address the points ihedinobi raised earlier...

one method people use in trying to cover up the truth is discrediting the messenger of truth, archaya s might be a drunk or junkie (I'm not saying she is) but does that make the message she is preaching false? By discrediting the messenger you are making the message more interesting, there's nobody who does'nt have detractors,

I believe u read the "Not too good" things about archaya cos that was what u wanted to find, to discredit her work, she is a fine researcher end of story, her research speaks for it's self,

Richard dawkins is fanatical I agree wit u, but his works are eye opening to some certain stage. And I'm doing my best to answer iheniodo.

bolaino: it takes a man with a big heart to see that he is wrong and accept that he is wrong, freethinkers have a big heart, freethinkers don't go with the trend, but cos the most constant thing in life is said to be change, freehinkers take to change when it is necessary.

Nothing in this life can be 100% that's why in science no matter how accurate your result is it's value is set at 99.9%, imagine a doctor who was trained at a time when chloroquine was used in the treatment of malaria, and up till now with the invention of stronger and more effective drugs, still believe that chloroquine is still the best drug to treat malaria, that doctor is not competent,

We are in an ever changing world and we ought to accept these changes, no one man or no one book should claim to hold all the answers to the questions about life, the bible is a book that claims it is extraordinary and such it should be given extraordinary scrutiny.

So you believe that there is no constant reality but instead that we live in a kaleidoscope of illusions.

Ihedinobi:

1.Name the historians that 'disregarded' Josephus's works and provide excerpts of their theses debunking his writings.

2. Who accepts the claim that Josephus was a creation of the early church? Where did they say that they did?



3. Name some of the 'Bible scholars' that hold such a view and cite where they denounced the other three Gospels as copies of the Gospel of Mark.

4. Show how the Gospel of Mark holds Jesus as something less than the Messiah, not least how it holds that Jesus didn't think He was good.

5. Finally, how do the Gospels contradict each other in their accounts of Jesus's birth?



6. Show these similarities. What deities? And how are they similar to Jesus? And how do such similarities raise questions about the authenticity of the historical Jesus?



7. How do you know what God or the son of God would support or not support?



8. What if the Death of Jesus somehow only took away the pretence in man and forced evil to show its face so that it can be destroyed?



9. What point did you intend to make mentioning science?

10. What pain has Jesus caused?

11. How did you establish that Jesus was a mythical character?

12. Do you realize that it is a conteadiction to say that a mythical character did this or that or that something could be attributed to it?

Some of the above questions have been asked in my responses to your claims above, so you need not answer them again here.



We'll worry about the links later after you have shown what kind of grasp you have on the issues you've raised.

@Bolaine

Kindly itemise and deal with the above observation by ihedinobi... am waiting...thanks

bolaino: lol, na really facially known by herod and pilate, do u have any of herod's writings that he acknowledged knowing jesus? The reason we're using the gregorian calender is cos of the catholics church hold on the world at a certain time, and since then there has been no need to change it,

i said UNknown. Please re-read and comprehend. You lie about the calendar, so you see no need to change a 'lie'?

bolaino: well that's one of the problems with biblical prophecies, the prophecies in the bible are so vague that anything could be linked with anything to arrive at a conclusion,

the prophecies of Isiah were referring to a man, not a son of God, the prophesy was referring to someone who would literally rule the jews as their king and bring terror on the enemies of isreal.

And since the credibility of the bible is at stake, these prophecies will not be given much tought to, cos there's no proof that these claims were authentic, the bible is good story book, and it should remain as such.

1. How does this vagueness of which you speak prevent a religion from borrowing elements of a prophecy to make up a story? In fact, does this vagueness not account for why their own production of the birth of their God is markedly different fronm Christ's story while retaining the core of it?

2. What proof do you have that Isaiah was not at all speaking of a son of God? I do agree, for the record, that he was speaking of a man and that the man would literally rule the Jews and terrorize their enemies.

3. Your third point is utterly irrelevant to the question. The Bible or its prophecies need not be true for anyone to copy them whether crudely or verbatim.

bolaino: lol, it does my friend it does, if he came after then u can not say he is the original, the claim of jesus being the original of these deities is baseless,

His claim towers and overshadows every other claim by a very long mile. Answer ihedinobi my brother, no use our sidetalk hide face oh.

ezme:

I don't think prophecies from the bible should be used for defense purposes in this discourse. I believe someone try to disprove Jesus would actually tend to reject the bible entirely.


This is by the way; I was reading Mark 16 last night(NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION) and when I got to Mark 16:8. I found this in Parenthesis [The earliest manuscripts and some other witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20].

This teaches me to suspect that someone saw the need to improve on what was initially available.

Mark 16:1-8 talks about Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and Salome visiting Jesus' tomb.

Mark 16:9-20 talks about a risen Christ visiting the disciple, giving them the great commission and ascending into Heaven.

Do you realize that those practicing JUDAISM are still expecting the Messiah?

You do know the question we're concerned with, don't you? It is whether or not Krishna's birth story could have been derived from Christ's?

A story need not be true to be plagiarized wholly or in part. Thus the question of the authenticity of the Bible's prophecies does not arise at all.

ezme:

Is this what you understood from the opening post?

yes oh.

bolaino: of course not, but in the case of the birth of these deities do u have any proof that the story of jesus came first before theirs?

My friend, you actually have no right to demand proof from anyone until you have provided proof for the claims in your op.

But then, I've never been very impressed with the "freethinker's" grasp of logical reasoning.

ezme:

I don't think prophecies from the bible should be used for defense purposes in this discourse. I believe someone try to disprove Jesus would actually tend to reject the bible entirely.


This is by the way; I was reading Mark 16 last night(NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION) and when I got to Mark 16:8. I found this in Parenthesis [The earliest manuscripts and some other witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20].

This teaches me to suspect that someone saw the need to improve on what was initially available.

Mark 16:1-8 talks about Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and Salome visiting Jesus' tomb.

Mark 16:9-20 talks about a risen Christ visiting the disciple, giving them the great commission and ascending into Heaven.

Do you realize that those practicing JUDAISM are still expecting the Messiah?

Ihedinobi and image123 I would not mind if you can respond to this

ezme:

Ihedinobi and image123 I would not mind if you can respond to this

Look three posts above yours.

Ihedinobi:

So you believe that there is no constant reality but instead that we live in a kaleidoscope of illusions.

there are constant realities no doubt, but we live in an ever changing world and as humans we are expected to adapt to these changes, if u're all about being constant, why don't u ride around on horses or camels? Why use cars?

Image123:
i said UNknown. Please re-read and comprehend. You lie about the calendar, so you see no need to change a 'lie'?

the catholic church still has a strong influence on the world whether u chose to believe it or not, but that's not the issue at stake here, the calender could be changed in the future, I'm not the one to decide what calender the world should be using, and hope u know that in some eastern countries they use the lunar calenders,

Ihedinobi:

My friend, you actually have no right to demand proof from anyone until you have provided proof for the claims in your op.

But then, I've never been very impressed with the "freethinker's" grasp of logical reasoning.

lol, I have every right to demand historical proof of jesus, cos the bible is making extraordinary claims and such should expect extraordinary scrutiny, and asking u prove the historical jesus is one of them.

bolaino: there are constant realities no doubt, but we live in an ever changing world and as humans we are expected to adapt to these changes, if u're all about being constant, why don't u ride around on horses or camels? Why use cars?

My friend, you can't have it both ways. Either

1. You agree that there are immutables around which these changes occur so that even though knowledge increases and we gain better understanding of the world that surrounds us, we never obtain evidence that contradicts previous evidence. Rather, new evidence will enlarge upon the old and absorb it so that while we have no need to always refer to the old, reference to it within the right context is still correct.

In other words, it isn't the world that changes but our understanding of it that does.

By this token, your "freethinkers" sound rather dumb judging by your assertion of their inability to know any constants around which to comprehend evidence however ancient or modern.

Or

2. You believe that there are no constants and this world is so much illusion. In that case, you are not real and your freethinking is not real.

bolaino: lol, I have every right to demand historical proof of jesus, cos the bible is making extraordinary claims and such should expect extraordinary scrutiny, and asking u prove the historical jesus is one of them.

Lol. I was sure it was you, not the Bible, who started this thread with your incredible claims. It's only fair that you substantiate your claims before asking any responder to prove anything.

You know, you are not the first of your kind around here. And quite disappointingly, although not quite surprisingly, you are just as the others, in fact, somewhat worse than some of them.

Y'all show up, make silly claims that you have little hope of substantiating beyond sending responders to links which make the same spurious claims with no effort to prove them and claim to be intellectually liberated because you swallowed the whole thing without question and demand that we do the same.

When we refuse, you try to shift responsibility for your arguments on to us. You're so predictable.

Well, like I said, the peculiar thing about critical thinking is that it examines critically every case before it before buying it. Freethinkers, on the other hand, appear too intellectually lazy to really consider why they believe what they do or why they reject what they reject.

Ihedinobi:

Lol. I was sure it was you, not the Bible, who started this thread with your incredible claims. It's only fair that you substantiate your claims before asking any responder to prove anything.

You know, you are not the first of your kind around here. And quite disappointingly, although not quite surprisingly, you are just as the others, in fact, somewhat worse than some of them.

Y'all show up, make silly claims that you have little hope of substantiating beyond sending responders to links which make the same spurious claims with no effort to prove them and claim to be intellectually liberated because you swallowed the whole thing without question and demand that we do the same.

When we refuse, you try to shift responsibility for your arguments on to us. You're so predictable.

Well, like I said, the peculiar thing about critical thinking is that it examines critically every case before it before buying it. Freethinkers, on the other hand, appear too intellectually lazy to really consider why they believe what they do or why they reject what they reject.

Word set in MARBLE Stone!!! I Thank God for you bro...

Ihedinobi:

Lol. I was sure it was you, not the Bible, who started this thread with your incredible claims. It's only fair that you substantiate your claims before asking any responder to prove anything.

You know, you are not the first of your kind around here. And quite disappointingly, although not quite surprisingly, you are just as the others, in fact, somewhat worse than some of them.

Y'all show up, make silly claims that you have little hope of substantiating beyond sending responders to links which make the same spurious claims with no effort to prove them and claim to be intellectually liberated because you swallowed the whole thing without question and demand that we do the same.

When we refuse, you try to shift responsibility for your arguments on to us. You're so predictable.

Well, like I said, the peculiar thing about critical thinking is that it examines critically every case before it before buying it. Freethinkers, on the other hand, appear too intellectually lazy to really consider why they believe what they do or why they reject what they reject.

I had to respond to this, (so that conscience no go worry me) yeah, you're an example of the problem with faith, and don't give me that critical thinking story, you're a believer,

and if you reason critically about your beliefs you'll see the obvious flaws in them, you claim your God/son is the original among all the GOD/sons, but have u ever reasoned what if u could be wrong? What if budha is the real God/son, the same conviction you have about your God/son is the same or even stronger conviction adherents of other religions have about their God/sons,

There's absolutely nothing I'll say to u that'll make u change your perspective about your beliefs, even in the presence of strong facts and evidence, so that's why I've not bothered to answer your questions, cos u said they've been answered on a previous post, BUT one thing I would like you to reason CRITICALLY, is what if you're wrong? What if,

oh boy see wahala o. What if you're wrong too? Why would a person start critically thinking what if the fake doctors and fake currency notes are the real when he's been exposed to and using the real for years and to good effect?

bolaino: the catholic church still has a strong influence on the world whether u chose to believe it or not, but that's not the issue at stake here, the calender could be changed in the future, I'm not the one to decide what calender the world should be using, and hope u know that in some eastern countries they use the lunar calenders,

in others words, you now see how some historian in Rome may not know about Jesus, thank God. Go and read more since you can't pray, then you'll know more than all these spurious articles and websites you've been feeding on.

Ihedinobi:

1.Name the historians that 'disregarded' Josephus's works and provide excerpts of their theses debunking his writings.

2. Who accepts the claim that Josephus was a creation of the early church? Where did they say that they did?



3. Name some of the 'Bible scholars' that hold such a view and cite where they denounced the other three Gospels as copies of the Gospel of Mark.

4. Show how the Gospel of Mark holds Jesus as something less than the Messiah, not least how it holds that Jesus didn't think He was good.

5. Finally, how do the Gospels contradict each other in their accounts of Jesus's birth?



6. Show these similarities. What deities? And how are they similar to Jesus? And how do such similarities raise questions about the authenticity of the historical Jesus?



7. How do you know what God or the son of God would support or not support?



8. What if the Death of Jesus somehow only took away the pretence in man and forced evil to show its face so that it can be destroyed?



9. What point did you intend to make mentioning science?

10. What pain has Jesus caused?

11. How did you establish that Jesus was a mythical character?

12. Do you realize that it is a conteadiction to say that a mythical character did this or that or that something could be attributed to it?

Some of the above questions have been asked in my responses to your claims above, so you need not answer them again here.



We'll worry about the links later after you have shown what kind of grasp you have on the issues you've raised.

@Bolaine

Kindly address the itemise issues by ihedinobi... am waiting...thanks

2 Corinthians 4:4 KJV