We have bones of dinasours and not of Jesus ----and yet?

Question

Oh thats right Jesus was taken up - along with Enoch and Elijah

Not one of the 40 historians of the day note jesus in their work -

Yet in the bible written long after jesus - we are told he turned water into wine walked on water and was taken up into the sky


You'd think someone outside the bible would have noticed this

If there was a rumour of a guy in Canada who turned water into wine there would be no stone unturned and no house not searched -

But back then not one of the 40 historian's even make so much as a foot note

So the only thing we have to go on is the bible itself -
John from the Revelations dog and pony show - wrote in a proper Greek - Yet in the Gospels we are told he was inable to read or write Many other "gods" were born of a virgin - dead and risen 3 days later and many other "myth's" include 3 Kings
Yet - we are now to accept it is more than myth when it is clear none of it happened and it was copied from myth
Why do peole believe?

Answer 1

Because the brainwashing begins from the moment they're born. And by the time they're adults, their sense of reason has been completely destroyed to the point where they can't question the idiotic things they believe anymore.

Religion is the ultimate form of mental destruction.

Answer 2

Your question shows that you haven't studied as it is filled with falicious statements.

Josephus, a Roman-Jewish historian of the events leading up to the Jewish rebellion of 70 CE, writes about Jesus.

The Bible doesn't mention 3 Kings. It does mention unspecified number of Magi (it's Christian tradition that put the number three in there).

The Gospels were not "way after Jesus." The first one, Mark, was written around 70 CE. The last one, John, written around 100 CE. Even today we would accept as a pretty good source a book written within a hundred years of someone. In fact, the distance would lend credibility as it would give time to reflect upon who that person really is. And by the way, the fact that the gospels are coherent with the earliest writtings of the New Testament (the letters of Paul, begun in 50 CE) shows that there wasn't any major difference between what was being said about Jesus in the first couple of decades after his death and when the gospels were written.

Your argument about a guy in Canada doesn't hold water (or wine) because it assumes that news spread as quick back then as it does now (remember Jesus was active mostly in the Galilean countryside... and only rarely in the big cities)... and as if Fox News or CNN go back to the time of the Ceasars.

Your argument about someone who doesn't read or write necessarily having to be the guy who wrote the words shows that you are unaware of the thing people back then called a scribe (someone who would write down the words dictated to them).

You state that other "gods" were born of a virgin but you don't state which ones, suggesting you actually don't know this for yourself but just heard it. You state that other gods were dead for three days but rose again, but again, you don't state which ones, which again suggests that you are assuming from things you've heard. i would suggest you actually go and look for yourself if the things you state are true.

I believe not only because of what God has done in my life, both in showing me who he is and leading me to the Christian faith, but also because I have studied and understand why I believe what I believe and why it is credible. I also believe because I find the common objections (which I too once held) to be based mostly on faulty logic and on a misunderstanding of history and of what Christianity teaches.

Answer 3

"Yet in the bible written long after jesus" Say What!

Atheists always seem to tell Christians to do research. Well do yours. Most scholars conclude that the Gospels were all written before the year 100. John's Gospel is considere to be the last one written. The exact dates are still being debated, but they are coming down closer to the time of Jesus' life. Just page through any New Testament Survey to see what I am saying.

John "wrote" the Gospel that bears his name. If I sat down wnd recited a poem to my wife who wrote it down, which of us would get credit for writting it? The same goes for John.

Why would the 40 historians you mention care about a fellow by the name of Jesus in the reagion of Jerusalem? You have to remember that Romans and Greeks considered that part of their word nothing more than an armpit. Those assigned by the Romans to serve there considered it to be a sign of displeasure from their higher ups. Thus no one would record the fact of Jesus because they would consider it to be another story from those backwood folks called Jews.

Answer 4

Let me first ask, which forty historians are you referring to? Secondly, the man who wrote Revelation is the not the Apostle John, in fact, the early church did not accept this book because they did not know who this John was. Moreover, the man who wrote the Gospel of John is different from John the Evangelist who wrote the three books of John in the New Testament. The literay styles in all three books are quite different. Plus, there is no indication is John's Gospel or any of the gospels that he was illiterate.

What other myths do you speak of? You really need to elaborate more because you don't have much of an argument without proof of what you are talking about.
Oh, to answer your historian question, Josephus, a Jewish historian mentions Jesus twice in passages 18.3.3 and 20.9 of his book, Antiquities Of The Jews, Tacitus, a Roman historian mentions Jesus in his book Annals passage 15.44, Suetonius also mentions Jesus in his book Lives of the Caesars, Claudius 5.25.4.

Answer 5

Well for one, Jesus is mentioned outside of the New Testament. Josephus mentioned him in The Antiquities as well as his Testimonium Flavianum, Tacitus in his version of The Antiquities, in book 10 of Pliny the Younger's letters to Emperor Trajan, which means that he is mentioned by the historians of the day.

You also need to remember that to the Roman Empire this area was the back end of nowhere so not very much writing exists at all and that Jesus's life is the most documented ancient religious leader of all time by far with the sources closest to his own time.

Answer 6

you call it what you want. The truth is that I don't care what documentation there is on the subject. I know what is true and what is false. You choose not to believe and I choose to believe. Why do you have such a problem with it? You do you feel the need to try to prove us wrong? Is it because you want to say that you told me so? Or is it that you're too close minded to let any new idea into your life? How very very sad it must be to live life with your eyes closed. I truly feel sorry for you.

Answer 7

I'm sure there is a cloth kept somewhere that still has the face imprint (blood) from when someone wiped Jesus's face during the Crucifixion. Sorry my bible knowledge really has slipped over the years. I, along with millions of others would be interested in abit of DNA research done on that, it sure would answer the one question on many peoples lips "who's your Daddy!!"

Answer 8

Historians against Jesus.
What about historians against Christianity? What did their writings say? One of such anti-Christian mentality was Cornelius Tacitus, a Roman historian, senator, consul and governor of the province of Asia. Concerning Jesus and His followers, Tacitus wrote, "Nero…punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius' reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. But in spite of this temporary setback, the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judea (where this mischief had started) but even in Rome" (The Annals of Imperial Rome, XV, 44). Julian the Apostate (called such because he rejected Christianity after being raised in it), a fourth-century emperor, wrote, "Jesus, whom you celebrate, was one of Caesar's subjects. If you dispute it, I will prove it by and by; but it may be as well done now. For yourselves allow, that he was enrolled with his father and mother in Cyrenius…But Jesus having persuaded a few among you, and those the worst of men, has now been celebrated about 300 years; having done nothing worthy of remembrance; unless anyone thinks it is a mighty matter to heal lame and blind people, and exorcise demoniacs in the villages of Bethsaida and Bethany" (Cyril Contra Julian, VI, 191, 213). These are just two quotes from pagan Roman scholars who loathed Christianity. Since these men had access to government records, and hated what Christians believed and stood for, they could have easily "disproved" and discredited the existence of Christ if they so wished. But, because they could not do such a thing, their writings only add to the monumental proof of the life of Christ. What about the Jewish people? If Christ did not exist, how then could the Jews reject Him? In his book Antiquities of the Jews, Jewish historian Flavius Josephus writes about Jesus, His disciples and John the Baptist. He referred to John as "the good man" (XVIII, 5, 2). Modern-day scholars recognize Josephus' account of the death of James, "the brother of Jesus who was called Christ" (XX, 9, 1), as genuine. The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907 edition) explains that Jesus is also mentioned in the Talmud, the Jewish tradition consisting of the Mishnah and the Gemara. These references to Christ are found in the sections Shabbath 104b and 116b; Sanhedrin 43a, 67a and 107b; and Sotah 47a. You may want to read an article entitled "Jesus of Nazareth," from The Jewish Encyclopedia (1907), the articles "Jesus Christ" and "Talmud and Midrash" from The New Encyclopedia Britannica (1981), or the article "Jesus" in the Encyclopedia Judaica for more background concerning this subject. These sources offer valuable information regarding the many proofs of the life of Christ. They point to the immutable facts that He: was born of a virgin, was of Jewish nationality, preached the gospel, healed the sick and diseased, and was betrayed and brutally slaughtered.

Answer 9

a) that's what faith is, and it's not based on random 'facts' thrown together like you have here, none of which are referenced by the way, and b) it's the book of Revelation...not revelations...there was only One revelation...so start from there, take it easy, take a breath, and keep studying that bible against other references...maybe the deeper you dig, the more your heart will answer your questions for you

Answer 10

Interesting, and especially since the Christians say that Jesus "walked the earth" too.

Answer 11

You Will Understand All, Once You Become Born Again