alafoli, Exactly what evidence have you obtained that disproves the reality of God and the truth of Christianity?

Atheism, per materialism, cannot not speak of love or human dignity, they are mere illusions produced by the electro-chemical reactions of the brain.

The problem is not the moral state of man, be he atheist or be he Christian. The problem is that atheism is bankrupt in the sense that nature alone cannot offer a coherent formula for morality.

Although I don't agree with all of the above, Pete, you are making a categorical error. From the Biblical perspective, Satan, aka, the devil, is the god of this world. Before you misunderstand that, it is not referring to the physical world, but the world system. When man turned his back on God, he forfeited the authority over the world, given to him by God. What heweeps is trying to say, is not t...more

Although I don't agree with all of the above, Pete, you are making a categorical error. From the Biblical perspective, Satan, aka, the devil, is the god of this world. Before you misunderstand that, it is not referring to the physical world, but the world system. When man turned his back on God, he forfeited the authority over the world, given to him by God. What heweeps is trying to say, is not that the devil has power over him, but that as man has given the devil the right to rule the world, he wouldn't consider doing any less. Of course, we can get into more theology, but I think it sufficient to say.

But why am I telling you this since you profess atheism? It is because you are offering a false dilemma. The natural reaction for someone who doesn't understand something, is to attack and insult. Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean that there is not a plausible explanation.less

“Josephus includes information about individuals, groups, customs and geographical places...His writings provide a significant, extra-Biblical account of the post-Exilic period of the Maccabees, the Hasmonean dynasty, and the rise of Herod the Great. He makes references to the Sadducees, Jewish High Priests of the time, Pharisees and Essenes, the Herodian Temple, Quirinius' census and the Zealot...more

“Josephus includes information about individuals, groups, customs and geographical places...His writings provide a significant, extra-Biblical account of the post-Exilic period of the Maccabees, the Hasmonean dynasty, and the rise of Herod the Great. He makes references to the Sadducees, Jewish High Priests of the time, Pharisees and Essenes, the Herodian Temple, Quirinius' census and the Zealots, and to such figures as Pontius Pilate, Herod the Great, Agrippa I and Agrippa II, John the Baptist, James the brother of Jesus, and a disputed reference to Jesus (for more see Josephus on Jesus). He is an important source for studies of immediate post-Temple Judaism and the context of early Christianity.

“A careful reading of Josephus' writings allowed Ehud Netzer, an archaeologist from Hebrew University, to discover the location of Herod's Tomb, after a search of 35 years — above aqueducts and pools, at a flattened, desert site, halfway up the hill to the Herodium, 12 kilometers south of Jerusalem — exactly where it should have been, according to Josephus's writings.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus#Significance_to_scholarshipless

“...you have to admit it is just a little controversial.” I don't think it is controversial at all Cudd. You speak of incredibility and I would have to say that to deny that this is originally Josephus, is incredible. You have not offered any evidence to prove otherwise. The only thing you have submitted is a hypothetical scenario based on your imagination, which does nothing to erase the h...more

“...you have to admit it is just a little controversial.”

I don't think it is controversial at all Cudd. You speak of incredibility and I would have to say that to deny that this is originally Josephus, is incredible. You have not offered any evidence to prove otherwise. The only thing you have submitted is a hypothetical scenario based on your imagination, which does nothing to erase the historical data. At first you claimed that Origen had nothing to say on the subject which I countered with one of two quotations and now, the only thing you seem to have left in your arsenal is a hypothetical.

My point was that although we do not know Josephus' sources, it is obvious that they weren't the N.T. documents. Did he interview a follower of Christ, a member of the Sanhedrin court, a Roman official or a combination of people? Given the language, the marginal reports and the way the individual events are distributed throughout his work, it would seem most likely that he was corroborating with a combination of Roman and Jewish officials regarding numerous events. Although he worked with the Romans, his father was a Jewish priest. As an historian, Josephus had plenty of contacts and sources. He appears to have played a role in the negotiations between Rome and Jerusalem and even married into a distinguished family.

Given the date of his writings (early 70s), and the vast amount of independent historical corroboration with persons and events whose closest parallel is found in the four Gospels, I find it incomprehensible to dismiss Jesus as a mere myth.less

Good point Cudd. Incidentally, as you mentioned, "...your own right to hear and be exposed is as much involved as is the right of the other to voice his or her view..." made me think of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his arguments against segregation, which denies that interaction.

If anyone is sincerely seeking answers to the challenge below, then I would recommend the following web sights: Secular References to Jesus: Josephus by J.P. Holding http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/josephus.html Holding also has a book available on the subject: Shattering The Christ Myth Alleged Similarities between Jesus and Pagan Deities http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_sim...more

If anyone is sincerely seeking answers to the challenge below, then I would recommend the following web sights:

Secular References to Jesus: Josephus by J.P. Holding
http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/josephus.html
Holding also has a book available on the subject: Shattering The Christ Myth

Alleged Similarities between Jesus and Pagan Deities
http://www.thedevineevidence.com/jesus_similarities.html

Refuting the myth that Jesus never existed by James Hannam
http://www.bede.org.uk/jesusmyth.htm

Proving the historic Jesus By Harry V. Martin
http://dmc.members.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html

Extra-Biblical with Gary Habermas
http://www.errantskeptics.org/extraBiblicalWorksheet.htm

Extrabiblical, Non-Christian Witnesses to Jesus before 200 a.d.
Christian Thinktank
http://christianthinktank.com/jesusref.html

Resurrection Probably Reported in Same Year It Happened by Craig Blomberg
http://blog.bible.org/primetimejesus/content/resurrection-probably-reported-same-year-it-happened


List of biblical figures identified in extra-biblical sources - Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Biblical_figures_identified_in_extra-Biblical_sources


For some serious scholarly work on the historical Jesus, I recommend the following:

The Resurrection of the Son of God by N.T. Wright
The Historical Jesus of the Gospels by Craig S. Keener
Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony by Richard Bauckhamless

Cudd, I appreciate your eagerness to explore the historical Jesus and the rise of the early church, but before we do that we need to settle our prior discussions. The historical Jesus is predicated upon the historicity of his personage. It would do no good to debate certain aspects of his life if you do not even believe he existed.

Well then, Cudd, I geuss you'll have to contend with both Christian scholars and secular since the overwhelming majority in both camps would disagree with you. Josephus certainly didn't get his information from the New Testament, once again that leaves room for an alternative source, one that is not necessarily Christian. If you have read the N.T. as you claim, then you would know that what he sa...more

Well then, Cudd, I geuss you'll have to contend with both Christian scholars and secular since the overwhelming majority in both camps would disagree with you. Josephus certainly didn't get his information from the New Testament, once again that leaves room for an alternative source, one that is not necessarily Christian. If you have read the N.T. as you claim, then you would know that what he says is not exactly a parellel version. James' death, for example, is not mentined in the N.T. Furthermore, you seem to be placing Josephus in the same category as Eusebius as you attempt to defame his third to fourth century testimony. The fact is, Josephus only briefly mentions Jesus, James, Pontius Pilate and John the Baptist and they are scatered throughout his text. This reveals that he did not run to the disciples or the Gospels to get his stories. You forget, he was in fact a Jew, a pharisee, with pleanty of connections among Romans and Jews. Perhaps you misunderstood me and thought I was meaning for Josephus' work to stand or fall on the testimony of Eusebius, this is not the case.

As per your misinformation on Origen, please allow me to offer one direct quote:

"This James was of so shining a character among the people, on account of his righteousness, that Flavius Josephus, when, in his twentieth book of the Jewish Antiquities, he had a mind to set down what was the cause why the people suffered such miseries, till the very holy house was demolished, he said, that these things befell them by the anger of God, on account of what they had dared to do to James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ; and wonderful it is, that while he did not receive Jesus for Christ, he did nevertheless bear witness that James was so righteous a man. He says farther, that the people thought they had suffered these things for the sake of James."
-Origen, Comment. in Matth. (230 C.E.)

What does this imply? Although there was an obvious later interpolation, Josephus did in fact write on Jesus, who was called Christ and his brother, James.

We can take a look at the Greek and Hebrew later if you would like, but the argument in regard to him using the term Christ seems like a bit of a stretch.less

I know nothing about the movie, but I would say this is an over-reaction. There are movies where Disney emphasizes the father figure, such as Finding Nemo and The Lion King. My problem with Disney is the way they often neglect Christian history in movies such as Pocahontas. But then, they are certainly not the only ones.

America's founders understood the radical nature of free speech and decided that those who take advantage should be silenced by the truth rather than taking away their rights. Yes, it is true that the ten commandments were forcefully removed from Alabama's courthouse, but the defiant judge in the case has never been arrested for his public proclamations against the ruling. He has been allowed ...more

America's founders understood the radical nature of free speech and decided that those who take advantage should be silenced by the truth rather than taking away their rights.

Yes, it is true that the ten commandments were forcefully removed from Alabama's courthouse, but the defiant judge in the case has never been arrested for his public proclamations against the ruling. He has been allowed to pray at gatherings on the state capitol as well. Although I thought the supreme court's ruling on the matter was destructive America, including the court itself, it was not a matter of free speech and I don't believe that was the offered as an argument by Judge, Thomas Moore.

Many of the other examples that you offer have actually been taken to court where they have ruled in favor of the Christians' freedom of speech. For the courts, there is a difference between someone expressing their beliefs as an individual versus as a government institution. That is the critical diffrence in their eyes.

A boy may pray over his lunch at school and tell his friends about Jesus. A teacher, who is being paid by the government may not pray over the class. And they may not evangelize, unless a student approaches them and asks.less

Hahaha! The handkerchief bit was a good one Cudd. But, what you actually said was, "The churches answered criticism in the past with murder..." I did not ask if there were ever incidents where a professing Christian has committed murder. Unfortunately, there are examples of murder among both religious people and non-religious people. This is a factor that actually cuts right through your latest ac...more

Hahaha! The handkerchief bit was a good one Cudd. But, what you actually said was, "The churches answered criticism in the past with murder..." I did not ask if there were ever incidents where a professing Christian has committed murder. Unfortunately, there are examples of murder among both religious people and non-religious people. This is a factor that actually cuts right through your latest accusation below, which I would love to take the time to get into, but I would rather stay on one topic at a time. You accused churches of murder, not child neglect or child endangerment.

Incidentally, in the early church period, it was Christians who rescued babies that were abandoned by Romans to die from exposure to the elements. Of course, it is Christians today who have waged war against abortion and built shelters for abused women. I've never once seen a homeless shelter, financed solely by secular humanists. I'm not accusing all atheists of ill will, but you cannot expect to be taken seriously if you go around making false pretenses that it is atheism that has made America the most generous country on earth. Neither will such accusations, that churches go around committing murder help your cause. If you want to be respected, then I suggest that you act like a Christian, albeit a Christian atheist as mentioned before.less

Having said all that, I didn't actually say that Josephus is the "best" historical proof. He's just one of many examples. Historically speaking, I think that the best we have on Jesus is contained in various portions of the New Testament. Cudd, do you have any evidence that shows otherwise?

Thank you for bringing that up, I would expect nothing less from someone interested in the history of the matter. Cudd, if you are familiar with the Josephus controversy then you should know that there are two translations available, one that most likely is a Christian interpolation and another, shorter version, that is considered original by most scholars. Origin (185-254 A.D.) actually speaks of...more

Thank you for bringing that up, I would expect nothing less from someone interested in the history of the matter. Cudd, if you are familiar with the Josephus controversy then you should know that there are two translations available, one that most likely is a Christian interpolation and another, shorter version, that is considered original by most scholars. Origin (185-254 A.D.) actually speaks of the passage concerning Jesus, and states that he did not accept him as Christ; which confirms that Josephus did in fact refer to Jesus, while it was later embellished. Incidentally, we now have at our disposal not only the Greek translation which was interpolated, but Arabic and Syriac translations as well which contain a shorter version.

But, I was not merely referring to that particular entry. The point that I was making is that he refers to James as well as John the baptiser in different places. Now then, if Jesus was a purely mythological personage, why do we have this merging of the four gospels and Josephus?

"This James was of so shining a character among the people, on account of his righteousness, that Flavius Josephus, when, in his twentieth book of the Jewish Antiquities, he had a mind to set down what was the cause why the people suffered such miseries, till the very holy house was demolished, he said, that these things befell them by the anger of God, on account of what they had dared to do to James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ; and wonderful it is, that while he did not receive Jesus for Christ, he did nevertheless bear witness that James was so righteous a man. He says farther, that the people thought they had suffered these things for the sake of James."
- Origen, Comment. in Matth. (230 C.E.)

Although Wikipedia is generally dominated by a more liberal view of Jesus, I find their entry on the topic most interesting:

"There is broad scholarly consensus that the two passages referring respectively to John the Baptist, and to James the brother of Jesus are genuine. A third passage, the famous Testimonium Flavianum found in the Antiquities of the Jews 18.63-64, in its current form summarises the ministry and death of Jesus; but the authenticity of this passage remains contested by many scholars, and has been the topic of ongoing debate since the 17th century. The most widely held current scholarly opinion is that the Testimonium Flavianum is partially authentic; but that those words and phrases that correspond with standard Christian formulae are additions from a Christian copyist.[3][4]

"In those parts of the Testimonium that are commonly regarded as authentic, Josephus describes Jesus as a teacher and miracle worker, attracting a large following who revered him after his death..."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus#Reference_to_Jesus_as_brother_of_James_.28xx_9.1.29less

Thank you Cudd, for taking the time to answer. May I ask upon what evidence you consider the New Testament documents to not be based upon eye witness testimony? To base your view on the lack of evidence is anything but concrete, especially when there is pleanty of the affirmative. Josephus for example, not only affirms the historical Jesus, but also John the Baptiser and James, the brother of Jesu...more

Thank you Cudd, for taking the time to answer. May I ask upon what evidence you consider the New Testament documents to not be based upon eye witness testimony? To base your view on the lack of evidence is anything but concrete, especially when there is pleanty of the affirmative. Josephus for example, not only affirms the historical Jesus, but also John the Baptiser and James, the brother of Jesus. Would it make an sense for Josephus to have invented the stories or based them entirely on Christian hearsay?

Furthermore, the historical documents offered below are not so far removed from Jesus' time frame to consider them obsolete. Not only that, but many historical documents were written, not only a few decades, but centuries after the fact. This says nothing as to the textual dating of specific passages as 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 that dates 1.5 to 8 years from the crucifixion.

No my friend, there is ample evidence. You may reject it all if you so desire, but then you would have to reject most everything that we know about most all historical persons and events.less

All in all, Cudd, I am surprised that you have given up your search so soon. I hope that you will reconsider making such blanket accusations in the future. Nobody likes to be falsely accused, neither atheists or Christians. I also would hope that you would not be opposed to calling others on the carpet for such propaganda.

Cudd, there is a distinction between justified killing, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, first degree murder and second degree murder. When you use the term murder most people understand it to be one of the latter two examples. You accused churches of "murder," second degree murder to be precise. Child endangerment does not fit that description. Furthermore, cults such as the ones offe...more

Cudd, there is a distinction between justified killing, involuntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, first degree murder and second degree murder. When you use the term murder most people understand it to be one of the latter two examples. You accused churches of "murder," second degree murder to be precise. Child endangerment does not fit that description. Furthermore, cults such as the ones offered thus far have been confronted by numerous Christian leaders and churches over their unbiblical teachings.

As per the Jesus Camp, I know very little, but it has been shut down due to criticism from Christians and the public at large. Once again, this is far from murder, however adamantly you may disagree with their theology. Passion does not equate with terrorism. For example, one of the most extreme Christian groups in America as already mentioned below is the Amish and yet they are total and complete pacifists.

Like it or not, this is America and we do still have freedom of religion. As long as radical atheists such as Dawkins and company are not given the keys to power, I think we can trust that we will continue to enjoy such freedom. As you have said, there is a wall.less

I have listened to a lot of news commentaries over the years. I have to say that I really enjoyed listening to Beck's news cast on CNN. It's been a few years since then and I still miss the program. I knew he was a Mormon back then, but it never carried into that particular broadcast. I was never a big fan of his personal three hour radio commentary. But now, after his Washington spirituality rall...more

I have listened to a lot of news commentaries over the years. I have to say that I really enjoyed listening to Beck's news cast on CNN. It's been a few years since then and I still miss the program. I knew he was a Mormon back then, but it never carried into that particular broadcast. I was never a big fan of his personal three hour radio commentary. But now, after his Washington spirituality rally, every time that I happen to tune into his program, I only hear about his take on spirituality. At one point I might have listened for a few minutes, but now I don't even bother checking his topic. Hopefully, he will get back on the issues that he was most respected.less

Shall I consider that a drive by shooting?