alright I am a lousy typist. 'Serious thought OR point'. Moses founded no religion. The Prophet never claimed divinity nor did his followers. Depending upon the particular school you ask the Buddha did or did not survive death but Nirvana is all about breaking the wheel of life. As for Jesus it is the same deal it all depends upon the school you follow.
So I ask again are you trying to make a serious point?
Hey +Tris Lashmar, I am the one who believes in him. Therefore I don't have to try to proof His existence but, you on the other evidently do not believe in Jesus. So, I put the question to you, What proof do you have that Jesus did not exist?
+Tris Lashmar the historical existence of Jesus has been accepted by most academics for a very long time. I believe the question you are addressing is the question of his divinity and that of course is a question of faith.
+Tris Lashmar Do you have real proof in all the mysteries of Universe... ?? Here it is a question of Faith and Love not only a matter of physics and proof ... to see this and believe.. you should not be blind
Moses was not a religious founder, he was an obedient servant of Almighty G-d. Hen G-d came down on the mountain, the people were afraid and they asked for Moses to speak to them instead. Moses spoke,but not of his own.
I am just trying to get a handle on the logic of some of these comments. So most of these references are from the book that Emperor Constantine commissioned and the first gathering of its works to be considered canon weren't put together until 397AD.
From what I understand is that this was 350+ after Jesus died so there where no eye witnesses. Additionally I would find it hard to believe that he was anything more than a smart, caring and intelligent man but still only a man. The guy understood how we should treat each other, you know, ‘turn the other cheek’, ‘do unto others’, etc. but only a man. If he was reborn it is in belief of concept only, no one dies for a few days and comes back to life especially back in those days. This a great story and a recycled one that that the Egyptians used 2000 years before for Rar, the similarities are just unbelievable.
I am not truing to piss anyone off here I am just looking at the facts and this is how it falls when you do.
Hi +J. Brian Waddington In your highly educated, grand and ever expanding wisdom that you have allowed us to hear as you talk down apon us all from atop of your lofty and obvously high throne (it must get cold up there), you could be referring to the completion of the biblical document authoring (http://www.bible-reviews.com/charts_timeline.html) completed no later than the 2nd century. Maybe you can educate us on this subject.
Note that I wrote " the first gathering of its works" but, hey, I "seriously need to get an education dealing with the history of Christianity and perhaps logic."
+Tris Lashmar obviously your picture shows nothing above your nose because you have had a lobotomy. Go get some education. Study about a Jew named Paul who after the death of Jesus mentions him quite a lot in the first century. Perhaps you could read Josephus? Now this is my last post because I have neither the time nor the inclination to educate you.
+J. Brian Waddington thank you for comments, the serious point I was trying to make is Jesus is different from the rest because he is the only one to rise from the dead because he have power over death!, as to your point about Moses, since he wrote the Torah which is the bedrock of the Jewish faith I would say he can be call a founder
+Tris Lashmar and +Frank Warwick thank yall for your comment also, the fact of history shows his disciples claimed Jesus rose from the dead which they were witness to, they all died horribly for telling this truth, all they had to do to save their own lives was say it a lie "we made it up"
So it all boil down to is, they (the eye witnesses) either lying or telling the truth!
+Tris Lashmar no eye witness to Horus, also the sources of that tale is unreliable, Jesus on the other hand had eye witness account not just from his disciples but 500 here and 300 there and the source from his story are the most reliable in history according to the most respected historians in academia believers and non believers
Except of course there were dozens of gods who came back from death in their mythology and they all pre-date the "supposed" jesus like Horus:Born of a virgin, Isis. Only begotten son of the God Osiris. Birth heralded by the star Sirius, the morning star. Ancient Egyptians paraded a manger and child representing Horus through the streets at the time of the winter solstice (about DEC-21). In reality, he had no birth date; he was not a human. Death threat during infancy: Herut tried to have Horus murdered. Handling the threat: The God That tells Horus’ mother “Come, thou goddess Isis, hide thyself with thy child.” An angel tells Jesus’ father to: “Arise and take the young child and his mother and flee into Egypt.” Break in life history: No data between ages of 12 & 30. Age at baptism: 30. Subsequent fate of the baptiser: Beheaded. Walked on water, cast out demons, healed the sick, restored sight to the blind. Was crucified, descended into Hell; resurrected after three days.
+john karpf no eye witness to Horus, also the sources of that tale is unreliable, Jesus on the other hand had eye witness account not just from his disciples but 500 here and 300 there and the source from his story are the most reliable in history according to the most respected historians in academia believers and nonbelievers
Also the fact of history shows his disciples claimed Jesus rose from the dead which they were witness to, they all died horribly for telling this truth, all they had to do to save their own lives was say it a lie "we made it up"
So it all boil down to is, they (the eye witnesses) either lying or telling the truth!
+Leon Davis You don't know if there were eyewitnesses that saw anything about Jesus after his death, indeed if he ever existed. All you know is that someone wrote in a book that there were eyewitnesses. The "eyewitnesses' themselves didn't write anything. You are trusting the guy who wrote that there were eyewitnesses, you are not trusting the accounts of any eyewitnesses. There is no real historical evidence that jesus of nazareth existed as a person. There is no real evidence that any gods including yehweh ever existed. You might want to start with that one before you start with the myth of jesus.Because if there is no god, there's no reason for jesus. Because god is the one who condemned us and needed to save us from his condemnation by killing himself and then asking his supplicants to conduct ritual cannibalism and ritual vampirism. as a sign that they accept his sacrifice. There are a number of sacrifices in history, but if jesus was resurrected then it's no real sacrifice is it? If you lose something, you don't get it back, so jesus never really lost his life, he just had a shitty weekend.
Sorry but I live in the Philippines and that is not available at the local bookstore. +john karpf please understand that i am not arguing that the Jesus the anointed of G-d and son of the virgin existed. I am simply stating that a man named Jesus who was so remarkable that 2000 years later you are arguing over him existed and that there is ample historic evidence to support my belief.
Quest for the historical Jesus From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about the history of academic Jesus research. See Historicity of Jesus regarding his existence and Historical Jesus about portraits of his life. For the book by Albert Schweitzer see The Quest of the Historical Jesus. Part of a series on Jesus Jesus in Christianity[show] Jesus in Islam[show] Background[show] Jesus in history[show] Perspectives on Jesus[show] Jesus in culture[show] Portal icon Christianity portal Portal icon Islam portal v t e The quest for the historical Jesus is the academic effort to use historical methods to provide a historical portrait of Jesus. Since the 18th century, three separate scholarly quests for the historical Jesus have taken place, each with distinct characteristics and based on different research criteria, which were often developed during each specific phase. These quests were distinguished from previous approaches in that they applied the historical method to the study of biblical narratives. Textual analysis of biblical sources had taken place for centuries, but these quests introduced new methods and specific methodologies to determine the historical validity of their conclusions. After more than a century, the enthusiasm shown during the first quest diminished after the 1906 criticism of Albert Schweitzer, who pointed out various shortcomings in the approaches used at the time. The second quest started in 1953 and introduced a number of new techniques but reached a plateau in the 1970s. In the 1980s, another quest started as a number of scholars gradually began to introduce new research ideas. In 1992 the term third quest was coined to characterize the new research approaches which have continued to date. While there is widespread scholarly agreement on the existence of Jesus, and a basic consensus on the general outline of his life, the portraits of Jesus constructed in the quests have often differed from each other, and from the image portrayed in the gospel accounts. There are overlapping attributes among the portraits and pairs of scholars which may agree on some attributes, but the same scholars may differ on other attributes and there is no single portrait of the historical Jesus that satisfies most scholars.