The case of a historical and supernatural Jesus

The case of a historical and supernatural Jesus

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

July 29th, 2011, 1:43 pm #1


I

The evidence is there is no conclusive evidence in support of a historical and supernatural "Jesus" as portrayed in the NT.

If there were such evidence, the world would know about it - the church would see to that - and there would be no more controversy over a historical and supernatural "Jesus" roaming the place some 2-thousand years ago.

So far, no such evidence, neither by the church nor by anyone else, has been presented, ever. The lack of conclusive evidence therefore, speaks in favor of the opposite.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
Last edited by JVH on July 29th, 2011, 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

July 29th, 2011, 2:16 pm #2

you said:

The evidence is there is no conclusive evidence in support of a historical and supernatural "Jesus" as portrayed in the NT.

ME: only those who wrote about him, but these obviously don't count:

you continue.....

If there were such evidence, the world would know about it - the church would see to that - and there would be no more controversy over a historical and supernatural "Jesus" roaming the place some 2-thousand years ago.


ME; Once again, those who claim to have EXPERIENCED Jesus yesterday, TODAY and in the future, are not important enough to consider........so we ignore them as evidence....


you continue..

So far, no such evidence, neither by the church nor by anyone else, has been presented, ever. The lack of conclusive evidence therefore, speaks in favor of the opposite.



ME: right!! who cares about the "evidence" of those we discount as having anything to say:
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 29th, 2011, 2:21 pm #3

Yvonne said: right!! who cares about the "evidence" of those we discount as having anything to say

What someone has to say about experiences isn't evidence. That's eyewitness testimony. Every professional investigator will tell you that eyewitness testimony is the flimsiest type of "evidence" possible. And, in courts of law, eyewitness testimony isn't even considered evidence because of how fallible human testimony really is.

It's not evidence. It's hearsay.

Now, there's nothing wrong with believing something because of an experience. But don't expect others to believe eyewitness testimony.

There's some validity in the saying "seeing is believing".

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

July 29th, 2011, 2:32 pm #4

What someone has to say about experiences isn't evidence


ME: Exactly!!!! thats why I don't consider what you say as evidence

or what others say as evidence either

I HAVE TO SEE IT WITHIN MY OWN CONSCIOUSNESS or I don't believe it period

even science......outside of me............means nothing if I can't EXPERIENCE it within me

if the TRUTH out there can't be experienced IN HERE.....in me........why SHOULD I BELIEVE IT

I am made of the same stuff scientists study

every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

July 29th, 2011, 3:26 pm #5

I

The evidence is there is no conclusive evidence in support of a historical and supernatural "Jesus" as portrayed in the NT.

If there were such evidence, the world would know about it - the church would see to that - and there would be no more controversy over a historical and supernatural "Jesus" roaming the place some 2-thousand years ago.

So far, no such evidence, neither by the church nor by anyone else, has been presented, ever. The lack of conclusive evidence therefore, speaks in favor of the opposite.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
II

Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny (the Younger), Suetonius, Talmud et al..

 

Even when the passages apparently referring to Jesus/Christ are genuine, none of them qualify as personal, eyewitness testimonies of the alleged authors themselves in respect to a historical and supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.

None of the authors lived during the purported advent of the supernatural Jesus the Christ as their birth dates will confirm. Their words therefore, qualify as <strong>hearsay</strong> - which explains how come none of them claim they have personally met or witnessed a supernatural Jesus the Christ - because what they are saying is what was being said - something they have in common with the gospel authors.

Except for an introduction in "Luke" -in which it is stated what follows is hearsay- the gospels are not signed and are written in the third person perspective, as by an out of sight narrator. The authors, blatantly, never situate themselves within the unfolding narrative nor give any hint they themselves were involved in the events described. Several narratives even involve Jesus by himself, i.e., without any witnesses present.

 

It appears impossible to produce demonstrable, firsthand witness accounts outside the NT about a supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.

And so we keep returning to square one: the lack of verifiable documentation of firsthand, during-the-event accounts outside the NT leading to the non-existing proof of a historical and supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
Last edited by JVH on July 29th, 2011, 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: September 30th, 2009, 7:55 pm

July 29th, 2011, 3:39 pm #6

What someone has to say about experiences isn't evidence


ME: Exactly!!!! thats why I don't consider what you say as evidence

or what others say as evidence either

I HAVE TO SEE IT WITHIN MY OWN CONSCIOUSNESS or I don't believe it period

even science......outside of me............means nothing if I can't EXPERIENCE it within me

if the TRUTH out there can't be experienced IN HERE.....in me........why SHOULD I BELIEVE IT

I am made of the same stuff scientists study
Yvonne said: Exactly!!!! thats why I don't consider what you say as evidence or what others say as evidence either

The difference is that I also present evidence that can be tested when I make a claim.

When you make a claim, you ask us to simply take your word for it.

Big difference.

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

July 29th, 2011, 3:41 pm #7

II

Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny (the Younger), Suetonius, Talmud et al..

 

Even when the passages apparently referring to Jesus/Christ are genuine, none of them qualify as personal, eyewitness testimonies of the alleged authors themselves in respect to a historical and supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.

None of the authors lived during the purported advent of the supernatural Jesus the Christ as their birth dates will confirm. Their words therefore, qualify as <strong>hearsay</strong> - which explains how come none of them claim they have personally met or witnessed a supernatural Jesus the Christ - because what they are saying is what was being said - something they have in common with the gospel authors.

Except for an introduction in "Luke" -in which it is stated what follows is hearsay- the gospels are not signed and are written in the third person perspective, as by an out of sight narrator. The authors, blatantly, never situate themselves within the unfolding narrative nor give any hint they themselves were involved in the events described. Several narratives even involve Jesus by himself, i.e., without any witnesses present.

 

It appears impossible to produce demonstrable, firsthand witness accounts outside the NT about a supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.

And so we keep returning to square one: the lack of verifiable documentation of firsthand, during-the-event accounts outside the NT leading to the non-existing proof of a historical and supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
the Bible is meant to be experienced at the "end of time", hence during the 20th century:


it is being revealed NOW...........written by those who were hidden from us but who experienced these truths:

where do you THINK the STORIES came from if not from those who EXPERIENCED THEM???


an eye witness is an EYE witness, but the BIBLE explains that there are two kinds of 'eyes', spiritual and natural:


only those who have the spiritual eye revealed know that it exists


just like someone who found an archeological find proves its existence from the past..........same law


it amazes me that people who only believe in what they see, are so quick to believe those who claim to have discovered something and proven it........without seeing it for themselves scientifically


reading it in a book is enough for them because the writing is about the "outer world"



but the INNER WORLD is even more real.............any child understands this



the inner world and outer world eventually HAVE TO LINE UP for the INNER WORLD and the OUTER world to IMAGE or reflect one another


without the inner consciousness, there would be NO DESIRE TO SEEK for something scientifically


nobody is looking for a ZUMWAYKABA............


why not?
every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 1st, 2008, 11:52 pm

July 29th, 2011, 3:44 pm #8

Yvonne said: Exactly!!!! thats why I don't consider what you say as evidence or what others say as evidence either

The difference is that I also present evidence that can be tested when I make a claim.

When you make a claim, you ask us to simply take your word for it.

Big difference.

-----------------------------------------------
"Forget Jesus! Stars died so you could be here today." -- Dr. Lawrence Krauss, theoretical physicist
tested?

you believe what others saw.......regardless if you "THINK" their test was infalliable or not:


you don't KNOW what you KNOW without someone else proving it to you even if you never see it for yourself?

ok

every day is a new day to die to the old and live to the newness of life
Quote
Like
Share

JVH
Joined: July 20th, 2009, 1:33 pm

July 29th, 2011, 4:06 pm #9

I

The evidence is there is no conclusive evidence in support of a historical and supernatural "Jesus" as portrayed in the NT.

If there were such evidence, the world would know about it - the church would see to that - and there would be no more controversy over a historical and supernatural "Jesus" roaming the place some 2-thousand years ago.

So far, no such evidence, neither by the church nor by anyone else, has been presented, ever. The lack of conclusive evidence therefore, speaks in favor of the opposite.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
III

According to the bible, a supernatural Jesus the Christ was a historical person.

However, when trying to substantiate it, it proves problematic due to the lack of independent, contemporary, during-the-events, corroborating accounts of a historical and supernatural Jesus the Christ as portrayed in the NT.

The evidence is that there is no conclusive evidence in support of a historical and supernatural "Jesus" as portrayed in the NT. This utter lack of conclusive evidence speaks in favor of the opposite.


rejected and denied by many, accepted and embraced by few : incontrovertibility
- it is not what we (think we) know that matters, it is what we can show true that does
as the maxim demands; truth is demonstrably fact and fact is demonstrably true
everything else ... mere BS -


New!! Improved!! Now With CD-Formula!!
<img alt="[linked image]" src="http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc31 ... tworks.gif">

CD: short for inevitability
Last edited by JVH on July 29th, 2011, 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Tim
Tim

July 30th, 2011, 6:43 am #10

Stricken from the records like Moses was stricken from the Egyptian records.
A Hebrew Pharaoh, who believed in Jehovah, who is a singular God, was not cool with Egyptian philosophy.

Same thing with Jesus. The Jews expected this kick ass world concurer, and instead they got this kind miracle worker who rallied people against the governments to glorify God his Father. And I think that's how it was viewed.

The Pharisees payed the soldiers to lie about Jesus resurrection.

And there you have it. Stricken concealed and lied about. For political reasons.

Today in the West we have free speech, but go to the Middle East even today, and they will kill you and me JVH for our beliefs. And they will rejoice about killing us.

To express you mind to Ishmaels ancestors is basically a death wish by torture.

John lost his head. Peter was hung upside down until dead. Judas killed himself. Jesus was nailed to a cross and left for dead.

The people you talk about JVH had balls of steel!
And I will be a patriot of them forever. I chose that.

Tim




Quote
Share