References to the “atheistic historians” mentioning Jesus are of suspect (remember the church controlled these writings for many years). All of these historians, including Josephus, were born after the death of Christ. In fact, the Jewish copies of the works of Josephus do not contain the two references to Jesus and the references Christians use do not flow well within the text (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus ). So, which text is accurate? Even at that, Josephus’ Antiquities was written around 93.

Also, check out this earlier post by HIS Is Jesus mentioned in the Talmud?

Paul

Thanks for actually asking what others think here. Many Christians who post here do not. I would urge you to turn the same skeptical eye you use on other religions on your own one day. If it passes scruntiny to you that is fine, but if it raises more questions, maybe we will see you here again.

Best…

I read the ‘about’ section here and I can really relate to part of what is says…”We also believe that whether or not you believe in God, you should live your life with love, kindness, compassion, mercy and tolerance while trying to make the world a better place. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will have made a positive impact on those around you.”. That mindset is how I ended up doing what I do now…

I have a hard time calling myself a Christian because there seems to be so much negativity attached to it, but by most classifications I am.

I am skeptical Christian not in the way of being skeptic of my faith, but being skeptic of how others live theirs…BUT I guess that makes me judgmental of others doesn’t it? SIGH!

Maybe in the future as time permits I will chime in again somewhere…

And as always I hope you have not found my comments ‘attacking’ or rude. Its hard to tell how ‘one’ means things when their humor or attitude gets lost in typed text.

@HeIsSailing – Being in the organization I am (and all the international travel it has exposed me to) it helps me tremendously to observe other cultures, religions, and to be able to dialog with a new perception. That has been an asset in being able to Listen to others without trying to run them over with my perceived truths.

I like your statement: I may have major disagreements with you concerning Christianity…

(laughing) Thats quite alright…I have Christians that have major disagreements with me concerning Christianity!

And the Bible being put together with so many written stories of the same Jesus by different authors with the same story, is that not overwhelming evidence enough that Jesus is indeed the risen savior, resurrected?

I recently re-read the Bible, including the 4 Gospels, and I just don’t see that. All four are similar in some ways, but there are real inconsistencies between the four as well – especially in the Passion and Resurrection accounts. I know there are Gospel harmonies that can reconcile the differences – but doesn’t just the fact that Gospel harmonies exist in published form sort of an admission that these accounts are *not* the same? They are the same only if they are harmonized and made to be the same? It sure seems that way to me.

The accounts of Jesus in other Scriptures are not evidence of anything in my mind… for instance, your reference from the ‘Bhavishya Maha Purana’ came from this site, http://www.proaxis.com/~deardorj/legends.htm
which also contains references to the Jesus visiting Kashmir from a flying saucer. Did this happen? Or am I missing the whole point?

Joe’s earlier assertion that Christianity must be true because it is the only major religion that has God reaching down to mankind rather than man trying to reach God is another way of saying that Christianity must be true because it is the only religion that teaches salvation solely by grace. Assuming that is true (and I don’t doubt that it is in most Christian circles – but not all), that says nothing about the validity of Christianity. I knew some Muslim apologists who used the Christian idea of salvation by grace to be evidence that is is *not* true! On a similar note, I have heard Christians state that since Hindus believe in polytheism than Hinduism must not be true. Because it is polytheistic – period. CS Lewis makes this blanket statement in ‘Mere Christianity’. Hold on. This is a unique characteristic among major world religions – and that makes it false, while another unique characteristic in Christianity makes that one true????

This is not objective truth. This is cultural and religious ego-centrism that is difficult to look past. It just depends on what rationale you want to give whatever particular religion that you follow.

Tyrone, what you and Joe say just means to me that religions are different – they have different ideas about mankind’s dilemmas, sufferings, purposes and salvation. Because one has a unique idea does not make it uniquely true – it makes it uniquely a different religion.

At least that is the way I see it. By the way, I may have major disagreements with you concerning Christianity, but I want to let you know that I am certain you and your wife are doing more good from your location in Africa than I am doing from my relatively comfortable Texas home. I admire that tremendously, and my hat is off to you.

Jesus was who he said he was in the Bible, if not can you give me your view of doubt?

I will answer your question with another (how Zen of me!)…how do you know the Bible accurately reports what Jesus actually said?

My answer is that no one alive today knows and while my interest in such matters is a little out of date, the last time I was actually interested, the oldest textual evidence for the Gospels was a fragment of the Gospel of John dated by style of script to around 125 AD (and that was controversial at the time). There are many educated men and women here who know much more than I here – maybe they have a more up to date answer.

It seems that Jesus did exist according to other writings beyond the Bible. And the Bible being put together with so many written stories of the same Jesus by different authors with the same story, is that not overwhelming evidence enough that Jesus is indeed the risen savior, resurrected?

So whether you want to call that Christianity or not, I’ll leave that up to you…but why is this part so hard to except for some people.

Are the other writings of Jesus more convincing that he was not the Messiah?

Does Josephus the Historian have more credibility in his rendition of Jesus?

There are a lot of different views and points from this one post but I am wondering how many of you would at least agree Jesus was who he said he was in the Bible, if not can you give me your view of doubt?

I come from this point because it seems the most plausible in my mind. And if not in yours, it would be good for me to see another point of view.

BUT I will admit after reading Leo’s previous post I am probably green behind the ears on some of the texts. I have some general knowledge of some, but I am not a whiz.

Its getting late for me here I am on GMT 0 time zone so its 220am. But please please give me your views and maybe I can read a few tonight then tomorrow when i get up.

No worries on the email response thing I am sure some of mine come up in the answer line-up wrong.

I think what you are being asked (and I could be way off the mark here) is – just how does this provide any ‘proof’ that Christianity is true???