Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

And Science has all the answers ? Ha ! Now that's a good one.

rickynews
And Science has all the answers ? Ha ! Now that's a good one.

Science doesn't have all the answers. The point of science is to search for those answers, however, and not rely on one's personal belief's. However, I do believe that for the answers that science cannot explain, and hasn't discovered yet, a personal belief system is appropriate.

Well said. I agree.

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: windword
reply to post by arpgme

 

Christ means anointed, not "brother". I'm not sure where you got that from.

It's interesting to note that Jesus was never anointed!

Although some people, in an attempt to legitimize the title bestowed on Jesus after his death, they cite the story of some random woman performing an erotic foot massage with expensive perfumed oil, tears and her hair, as if some random woman's pedicure is the same as Daniel picking of his "horn of oil" and anointing Saul or David.

So you to, two thousand years later, reject his claim, to be the king of Israel ?

Well, he is the king of Israel, a new Israel, he himself created, consisting of himself and the christians in a spiritual (not physical) kingdom.

originally posted by: rickynews
And Science has all the answers ? Ha ! Now that's a good one.

It's when systems claim to have all the answers crap starts floating fan-wise. The all-ineffable all-knowing all-seeing God of Church Christianity is wrong, for they have turned God into a human, represented by one Frans carrying a funky hat living in a flat with a modest chapel included and view over Peter's Square from his livingroom. So much for sell all you own and give the money to the poor....

a reply to: Ove38

So you to, two thousand years later, reject his claim, to be the king of Israel ?

Jesus, if he even really existed, was never the King of Israel. He never claimed to be king of Israel and the Jewish people never celebrated him as their king.

Well, he is the king of Israel, a new Israel, he himself created, consisting of himself and the christians in a spiritual (not physical) kingdom.


"The New Israel" is a state of mind. It has nothing to do with any man who may have walked the earth 2000 years ago.

originally posted by: Ove38

So you to, two thousand years later, reject his claim, to be the king of Israel ?

Now I do love revisionist history... Could you point out either a religious text or Latin document affirming your belief that Jesus claimed kingship over Israel?

Well, he is the king of Israel, a new Israel, he himself created, consisting of himself and the christians in a spiritual (not physical) kingdom.

Oh... I see what you've done there, you twist scripture to make your misconceptions work for you. I find it incredibly interesting how often people will twist and reconfigure opinions outlined in scripture in order to reaffirm their own notions of how they want their faith to be. Jesus spoke of the kingdom of heaven, but never once alluded thatathe kingdom of heaven was a continuation of Israel or any other earthly concept.

a reply to: peter vlar

You are correct; Jesus was speaking of the 'afterlife' or the REAL REALITY (not this game board 3D played as human pieces of God particulated); with earth NOT EVER being the "final destination". The eternal Soul will skip back up to where it belongs after loosing this material body; (wiping its brow, glad I survived that weird experience) to return back to the higher realms or dimensions its/soul originally manifested from. He was speaking in metaphor to people who were largely uneducated, "The Kingdom of Heaven" is just a reference to those higher places that are above the damnation of hell that Judaism taught. Jesus never claimed kingship of any earthy lands. He wasn't a Christian, he was an Essene that was of the 'Order of the White Brotherhood' white magic Egyptian Mystery schools.

Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

Jesus as a programed INSERT 'ideaform' to disrupt the 'sad sack' STUCK in negative (within that 2000 year era of Pisces, dead heavy) Universal bios running all by itself, as it is a self explaining SYSTEM, you are just a "Ride Along".

originally posted by: Liquesence


Joseph impregnated his out-of-wedlock woman. Being ashamed of this, they invented the "divine" impregnation.

Maybe Mark or Paul saw through this, which is why they didn't include it. Rolling their eyes like "yeah right," while the couple is going on about God impregnating her.

I had a similar theory after I stopped studying the bible. I thought that maybe Mary had been unfaithful to Joseph (in the unlikely event they were actual people) and spun a web of lies to cover it up. Of course that was before I found out that when it was first translated the word for "Virgin" and that for "Young Woman" are the same but for 1 letter and that was the probable source of the virgin birth.

One thing that is historical fact is the Council of Nicia where the Emperor Constantine and co. voted that Jesus should be Divine and not mortal and then processed to trim the books of the bible to represent what they thought should fit. So tell me again how the bible is the word of god and not written and further edited by man???

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

Jesus as a programed INSERT 'ideaform' to disrupt the 'sad sack' STUCK in negative (within that 2000 year era of Pisces, dead heavy) Universal bios running all by itself, as it is a self explaining SYSTEM, you are just a "Ride Along".

Glad you cleared that up...

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

Jesus as a programed INSERT 'ideaform' to disrupt the 'sad sack' STUCK in negative (within that 2000 year era of Pisces, dead heavy) Universal bios running all by itself, as it is a self explaining SYSTEM, you are just a "Ride Along".

Glad you cleared that up...

Glad you added your exhaustive (dangerous idea form, could make the brain swell) extensive well thought out conclusion/opinion.
I can explain the 'Ride Along"; you are just a witness, not a participant (think of it this way; you sign up for 'a ride along' in the back seat of a patrol car with a local police officer residing in your county; making calls on disturbances, domestic violence, lost cats; just to understand law enforcement and its intricate ins and outs of the job). Of course you are not going to understand what is transpiring; ITS THEIR JOB, you are just as a pre-teen experiencing. You in life are experiencing human form and never questioned WHY AM I ALIVE, who are those people that are my parents? You are Riding along with no idea of what your purpose is, (not to become a police officer) but not understanding what the significant meaning of your incarnation really is. It is interesting to me that no one has entertained the concept that major historical changes that have occurred on earth were jump started/changed (by potentially binary holographic individuals such as Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha) and were the result of systematic programed INSERTS into time frames, locales (civilizations) to change the course of negative programs/human karmic activity (for the positive). No one claims humans were capable of controlling this (the small stuff life reason for being, destiny; enlightenment) sometimes they need help. HOPE THIIS HELPS.

a reply to: vethumanbeing

Appreciate the effort there vethumanbeing, though as to why there appears nothing to indicate a genuine existence for jesus, think I will stick to my original opinion.

The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
a reply to: veteranhumanbeing

Appreciate the effort there vethumanbeing, though as to why there appears nothing to indicate a genuine existence for jesus, think I will stick to my original opinion. The most obvious answer is likely to be the correct one, in this instance.

I always in fact purposely miss/ignore "AN OBVIOUS" (because it belongs to someone else's program). What effort? I completely agree with you; I see no evidence of Jesus having left a written footprint/paw print legacy (children, language, legacy, oh those rascally genetics of having being an acknowledged God form and yet not having proclaimed/celebrated biological children NO and this is VERY odd). Don't think there are not institutions out there trying to find identify the "James (as the brother)" genes that may have passed down through the generations. Paul created Christianity 200 years after the fact of his crucifixion; Jesus was not a Christian AT ALL (not sure he Paul should have been the holder of that DOGMA; as a misogynist had NO children either). Its all very querulous and up to speculation. Your original opinion: "Glad you cleared that up" still holds water I suppose as you apparently THINK I cleared it all up.

Jesus had the right connections, that's why there is not much about Him, outside of the bible.

ya think all the high mucky muck bozo's back then, thought He would be worthy enough of any consideration?

Jesus didn't hang with the movers and shakers, the elite, the powerful.

could it be that those people dismissed Him as a flash in the pan? wiping out most of His followers, too?
maybe they were pissed He didn't hang out with them.

besides, no one likes to write about how they got their asses kicked.

originally posted by: Chamberf=6
Another thing that really bugs me about the Jesus story;

There is a 2 decade silence of his doings. Wouldn't his disciples and followers ask about his past? Was the Messiah so boring for 20 years that there is nothing noteworthy??

And accounts of his birth must just be hearsay, since the two gospel writers mentioning it weren't there...

AND the new testament books were written 70 to 100 years after Jesus lived anyway, so books names may well have just been attributed to people who never even wrote them --with even more hearsay.

They could have taken notes which were written up later. Just saying...there could be many explanations.

When dealing with the supernatural (if you believe in that kind of thing), especially a creator of all things (again, if you believe), what is impossible?

This is a personal choise for people to make themselves. We all believe things others may find silly. Its not a problem. Dont let it bug you out, especially if you dont even believe it. Why let others beliefs affect your personal happiness?

You are a good man, we all are. Dont let others beliefs annoy you. Concentrate on developing your own beliefs.

Peace.

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

What effort?

The one where you offered comment on the "exhaustive, brain swelling conclusion".

I completely agree with you;

Paul created Christianity 200 years after the fact of his crucifixion;

This shows clearly that we don't in fact, agree.

"Glad you cleared that up" still holds water I suppose as you apparently THINK I cleared it all up.

irony (noun)
- the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

originally posted by: tsingtao
no one likes to write about how they got their asses kicked.

True that...

Ancient Egyptian historians successfully utilized an extremely powerful mind control technique.

It was known as "history".

The art of propaganda through falsification of history has been around for most of recorded history.

Rewriting history was the first step in achieving the New World Order. Source

"It was also illegal to record any history in Egypt that made the Pharaoh look bad. That is why they did not record the God of the slaves whooping their butts. If any scribe did that, he probably would have been killed. As an Atheist friend of mine who loved Egypt told me, Egyptian history was basically propaganda." Source