TheKak

I always wondered this, as the only "proof" that I could find of Jesus ever existing came from the Bible, which has mistakes abound in it. I found a page with lots of proof that Jesus did not in fact exist (or rather shows the lack of proof that he ever existed), and I was wondering if anyone could make a counter argument (or link to one) so I have both sides of the story. This page is a very long read, but also very worth it when trying to shed light on the actual history of the Bible.

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

__________________
Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

Lebell

Most historians I've read agree that a person named Yeshua (Jesus) very likely existed about 2000 years ago and was crucified at a fairly young age by the Romans.

Pontius Pilate has been verified as being real (archeologists recently found inscriptions in Isreal bearing his name.)

The works of Josephus mention Jesus, but there are arguments as to whether the references are original or are post document insertions.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

irateplatypus

i think there is great proof in the fact that the apostles who claim to have known him ended up giving their lives and dying horrible deaths for preaching that he was the Son of God. No matter what you think of modern-day Christianity, it is hard to believe that a religion that spread like wildfire and endured massive persecution was based on a man of pure invention.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

hannukah harry

No.

wilbjammin

Thank Paul for what Jesus is known as today more than anything else.

__________________
Innominate.

SecretMethod70

Historically speaking, there is very little question as to whether Jesus of Nazareth existed or not. I've never heard of a reputable historian make the claim otherwise.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

CSflim

Well to point out that someone named (or not named as the case happens to be) Jesus existed about 2000 yeras ago is rather a trite point.

Did Sherlock Holmes exist?
Well yes he did, except his first name wasn't Sherlock, and he wasn't a detective, but he did live in 19th Century London.
This brings out the absurdity of the argument clearly.

Rather we must ask ourselves did this Jesus character (or rather the person who we, in modern times, refer to as Jesus ) actually do and say all of these things that are so commonly attributed to him?
There is indeed evidence that a man named "Jesus" (Yeshua) lived, caused a lot of bother with the established authority, who sam him as a threat to public order/control and had him executed.

But did he actually do and say all of those things that are attributed to him? What evidence is there of the fact that he was the son of god? Raised from the dead three days after good friday? Born of a virgin? Healed the sick?

Perhaps even more to the point, is what does this historical figure have to do with a modern worldview?
Is there reason to believe that the claims he apparently made we actually true? How is he any different from any of the modern-day lunatics who claim to have great insights into god/reality/spirituality/whatever?

In other words:
Jesus probably existed in some form or another...but so what?

__________________

hannukah harry

while i agree with csflim that there was probably someone around during that time causing trouble, (and in my opinion got the religous stuff, virgin birth, resurection, added on after the fact mixing old familiar mythology with the new mythology being made), outside of the bible, i've never heard/seen any evidence that he existed. i have to assume he's based on a real person, kinda like king arthur, but who he's based on, i don't know. the earliest parts of the new testament were written somewhere between 40 and 60 years after J supposidely died. That's long enough, considering life span in that time, that most likely it wasn't written off of first hand info. i don't know, just seems fishy to me. That's why when that faked inscription on teh burial thing found a year or two ago saying "james brother of jesus" was found, it could have been a huge deal, some actual proof that he existed (albeit circumstantial). oh yeah, and the romans were pretty good about keeping records, so him not showing up in them seems odd too. if i'm wrong about any of this, point me to the links/info to correct me.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

Thagrastay

To deny the existence of Jesus of Nazareth is to deny the existence of all of Western culture right up until today. Our entire calendar is based upon his life and death. Today we call it BCE and CE, but it was always referred to as BC and AD, Before Christ and Anno Domani. Je sus of Nazareth is mentioned in numerous secular texts throughout history, not the least of which are the four gospel accounts which were written during the lifetimes of the people who actually lived during those days and saw what actually transpired. The Book of Luke alone contains many, numerous facts of history that have proven to be excellent clues to the times and events and has time and again demonstrated itself to be chief among scholarly historical works. The epistles of Paul, written before the Gospels also testify to the events of the life of Jesus of Nazareth and the numerous miracles He performed, including His crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection, and his testimonies went undisputed during his days. This is a significant point to remember- the Gospel accounts and the Eopistles were written during the contemporary periods following the death and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth and they were undisputed by the people that witnessed these events.
Put into context, that would be similar to, if the Gospels were untrue, someone writing biographies about the first Gulf War and making incredibly fantastic claims- just unbelievably wild things, and nobody who was there during that time challenging those claims.
Remember that all the challenges to the Gospel accounts and the epistles came well after the authors were dead and gone. During the lifetimes of the eyewitnesses, their claims went unchalenged, but were substantiated.
Jesus of Nazareth lived and presched and taught and performed miracles and walked on water and healed the sick and forgave sins and died on the cross to pay the penalty for all of our sins so that each one of us could be reconciled to God and go to Heaven. Then He was buried in a tomb provided by a man maned Joseph of Arimathea and on the third day rose from the dead and was seen by over 500 people- not as the beaten, bloodied man they saw on the cross, but as a resurrected man, with the crucifixion wounds, no less, and He spent time with them and finally ascended into Heaven. This is the testimony of several eyewitnesses who underwent extreme torture and punishment and finally death and did not change their testimony. Only fools would die for a joke.

__________________
"That's it! They've got the cuffs on him, he's IN the car!"

SecretMethod70

CSflim...the question of what makes him different from any of the other lunatics today has another side. What made him different from any of the other dozens of people claiming to be the "messiah" during his time. This is not to say that this is proof he was in fact the messiah - that's not part of this issue - what it does clearly show though is that there was something special about this Jesus person that made him stand high aboce the rest of the potential "messiahs" of his time. In fact it's interesting to note that Jesus never once referred to himself as the son of God but, rather, as the son of man. Son of God is an interpretation of his existence that began with the apostles as they worked to finally understand exactly what he did and what he meant after his death. As for evidence of him being the son of god or resurrected, obviously there is no evidence in the way we know evidence. If there were, it wouldn't be a matter of faith. Ultimately, it comes to the same question now that it was then, that man cannot understand the perfection of God - that the perfection of God is beyond human understanding of tangible perfection. In terms of the past, people expected the messiah to come and become a great ruler and king, etc etc...obviously Jesus did not do that and was, thus, not the messiah. The point of Jesus though is that that form of thought - and its equivalent today - is not the perfection of God. Humans can't comprehend something that is not of this created universe basically.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

TheKak

You obviously didn't read the link I posted Thagrastay. There were no written accounts of Jesus by eyewitnesses, it was all second hand info. There are zero (thats right, count them zero) accounts by historians of his time of him being alive. He was supposed to be known "far and wide" yet not a single historian of his time mentioned him (especially someone who could walk on water and heal the sick)? Read the link, please. The authors of the Gospels aren't even known! As for BC and AD, that dating system was made about 600 years after the fact, so who cares. A few quotes:

"Paul's biblical letters (epistles) serve as the oldest surviving Christian texts, written probably around 60 C.E. Most scholars have little reason to doubt that Paul wrote some of them himself. However, there occurs not a single instance in all of Paul's writings that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does he give any reference to Jesus' life on earth."

"Nowhere do any of the New Testament epistle writers describe a human Jesus, including Paul. None of the epistles mention a Jesus from Nazareth, an earthly teacher, or as a human miracle worker. Nowhere do we find these writers quoting Jesus. Nowhere do we find them describing any details of Jesus' life on earth or his followers."

So the only proof you have of this miracle worker are stories in a book written from hearsay, and letters that never even mention a man Jesus? Sorry, doesn't cut it for me, find me real proof. Though CSFilm has a good point, I think this is an important question because so many people put so much faith into this man who may have never even existed (and they probably have never in fact questioned his existence, most likely indoctrinated from birth).

__________________
Roses are red, violets are blue, I'm a schizophrenic and so am I.

ARTelevision

The human failing best referred to as "the cult of personality" has served up some strange "heroes" over the ages.

There's no shortage of emotional excess, wild-eyed zealotry, rapt devotion, or fawning celebrity worship in humankind. These are some of the behaviors we exhibit daily with varying degrees of intensity.

"Special" people are held up as figureheads for days, years, decades, millenia. The needs of the audience and the historical and social contexts of this phenomena provide all the explanation necessary to understand it.

__________________
create evolution

SecretMethod70

TheKak, obvoiusly one comes to the conclusions that one chooses, but I can tell you right now that, unless Jesus were a hypocrite there would be no historical evidence of any "miracles" he performed. His teaching was centered around humility and a humble person wouldn't make a big deal out of the good that they do. And, historically speaking, he most likely wasn't known far and wide. In fact, his followers were probably a fairly small number at the time of his death - perhaps only in the hundreds. Of course, what must also then be realized is the equally valid question of why a person who did have so few followers when he died eventually gave birth to a new world religion. Many other people have had a couple hundred followers and the same did not occur. The point is that, while he may or may not have been the "son of God" and while he may or may not have performed "miracles," it's clear that he was special in some way or another in that, at the least, he was an unusually good person.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Lebell

Trite?

How so?

The question was whether or not there was a historical Jesus.

The answer is most likely "yes".

The question was not who was he and did he do what the Bible says he did.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Lebell

The Kak,

Paul's writings are some of the best proofs for an historical Jesus.

While it true that Paul never met Jesus physically (I'll set aside his experience on the road to Damascus for now), it is also true that Paul/Saul WAS going around the country side persecuting followers of Jesus before his conversion.

So we have the questions:

1) Why would there be followers of a man that didn't exist?
2) Why would a Jewish authority (which Saul was) go around persecuting them instead of saying, "Hey, this guy didn't exist!!"

It just doesn't sound right.

It is much more likely that Jesus was a real person.

What else He might be is up to you to figure out.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

water_boy1999

Yes there was a Jesus. I don't prescribe to this belief because I am religious. In fact, I am far from religious. I think that there was a man, named Jesus, who said and did wonderful things, was a great orator, was charismatic, and demanded respect from his followers. It is as simple as that. The Bible is a fable. It is a story that starts with one man, Jesus, then evolves over centuries to give people something to believe in. I don't believe in miracles. I think miracles are things conjured up over the centuries to make this well loved man seem more "god-like", hence coining him the son of God.

So, in summation class, I believe there was a Jesus and I do believe he was a great man in his time. Son of God? No, just a regular guy who is hyped up over the centuries to give people an excuse to sit on their arse's on Sunday mornings and listen to a bunch of made up stories by a preacher.

__________________
Doh!!!!


-Homer Simpson

RippedSock1

Yes, Jesus did exist. He managed to get many personal followers. These people believed in this man so much that they died horrible deaths in His name. Either all of these men were high on Hebrew mushrooms or they actually, positively believed in Him.

There were also many enemies of Jesus who wrote about Him. I, unfortunately forget this particular person's name, but he was a political ruler some 20 years(?) after Jesus' death. He talked of Christianity being laughable but admitted that Jesus was an extraordinary being.

The arguement about Jesus existing can also be asked in other ways: Did George Washington really exist? He's written down in History books but I haven't seen him, you haven't seen him, no one today has seen him. I little trust is involved. I can easily say that everything written in history about George Washington is false just as another person could say that everything written about Jesus is false. It's just accepted that they both existed and we trust that most of what is universally written about them is true.

hannukah harry

to expand on what art was saying, remember david koresh in waco? i would have to call him a joke, and he had lots of followers, and oh, yeah, they died for him. all it takes is a charismatic leader and people will follow and do things you wouldn't expect.

i've heard the far and wide thing before, but i'm not sure where it's from. if someone could find it, that would be super. either way though, a few hundred followers is all it takes. they themselves didn't really make christianity what it is today, rome did. it's very likely that christianity would have died a backwater religion if constantine didn't pick it up. and how do we know that what david koresh taught his followers wouldn't have become a new powerful religion? his failure in doing so is because they all pretty much died with him. also, look at scientology. we don't take it seriously, but others do. it's not that hard to create a religion, especially in superstitiuos times.

for all you know, it was only the crazies that did follow jesus. i bet malaria was probably a problem back then...

there are currently no documents within 40-60 years of his supposed death. if i'm wrong, prove it, please. could you be more specific of this political ruler? find the source?

and there's a big difference between believing george washington and jesus existed. for jesus we have stories by people who did not live during his lifetime, or were no more than kids when he died telling stories. there is no other proof. anytime you hear about J after the bible, it's not about a historical J, but the religous icon. and that doesnt' make proof... i can write aobut the easter bunny, based on a book i read about him, doesn't make it historically accurate. for Washington, we have lots of historians mentioning him, we have treaties, we have other signed documents, we have portraits from while he was alive, we have transcripts of speeches, etc. There's more than compelling evidence he lived, not so much for J.

__________________
shabbat shalom, mother fucker! - the hebrew hammer

asaris

Yes, but Washington lived in a far more literate age, and was the leader of an important nation. How many sources do we have that other ancient figures actually existed, who weren't rulers of a country? If I recall correctly, and it's been awhile since I've looked into it, we have more evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus than for most figures of that age. In any case, writings attesting to his existence only 20 or so years after his death is very, very good by ancient standards.

As far as craziness goes, it's one thing to die for someone who isn't who you thought he was, and another to do so for someone who never existed. And regardless of whether or not any of the NT was written by eyewitnesses, its clear both from the NT itself and other extra-canonical sources, that there were eyewitnesses to his life and death.

It's one thing to argue about Christ's divinity. But to argue about his historical existence, when, as has already been pointed out, nearly all reputable historians agree that he did, just seems utterly pointless.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

Thagrastay

Once more into the fray- To argue the existence of Jesus is ridiculous. Here it is 2000 years later and you people are rewriting history. It isn't surprising, really.
Here are things to ponder- the Romans never denied crucifying Jesus. The Jews never denied the tomb was empty. Their argument was the manner in which it became empty. Despite the srguments, Jesus did declare Himself to be G*d and it was for this very reason He was killed. Consider the times and the place in which Jesus decide to enact His ministry. This was Israel at a time when there was a Temple and a High Priest. During this period there were ongoing sacrifices and oblations. The Laws and traditions were being strictly adhered to! During this time, a man could go to India, or Rome or Spain or Britain or China or any number of places on the globe and claim to be G*d, but the one place on the entire planet that you could not go and claim to be the Almight Ancient of Days, was Israel! They stoned you for that there! But it was in that time and place that Jesus appeared claiming to be the Son of Man- a title the Hebrew peoiple well understood. He used that title when refering to Himself in His human aspect, and only used the I AM statement when speaking of His Divinity. But when He was brought before the High Priest of Israel, and asked who He was, Jesus told the Sanhedrin that Abraham had longed to see this day at which they responded that he was barely over thirty- what did he know of Abraham. Jesus replied: "I tell you the truth- before Abraham was, I AM" at which Caiphas tore his priestly robes and declared Jesus to be a blasphemer! The High Priest of Israel recognized immediately that Jesus had claimed in his presence to be G*d, and the only response he could give was to tear his priestly garments! Harry! am I wrong? Yeshua declared Himself before the High Priest of Israel and was executed by the Romans at the request of the Sanhedrin for claiming to be The Most High.

__________________
"That's it! They've got the cuffs on him, he's IN the car!"

Mojo_PeiPei

Does anyone know anything about the Shroud of Torin? I remember hearing about it, was wondering if it got proven either way.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

tecoyah

it was a dark ages forgery-proven.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Lebell

Yup.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

irateplatypus

I apologize in advance for this sounding rude, though it isn't meant that way.

This quote reveals that you know little to nothing about the structure of the Bible. The Bible starts with Genesis, Jesus doesn't come in (except within the confines of prophecy) till the last 3rd. While the argument can be made that the entire Old Testament is in fact a "gearing up" for Jesus, that interpretation is not present in my perception of your post. After Jesus, the narrative of the Bible only continues for less than a hundred years. As a complaint directed towards people in a more general sense: many assume that because they were raised in what is thought of as a Christian society, that they have a good idea of what the Christianity or the Bible is all about. This notion is, I feel, damaging to both Christians and those who choose other paths because it creates such a depth of unrealized misunderstanding.

I thought this quote applicable to this thread:

...that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept His claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic--on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg--or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.
C. S. Lewis (1898 - 1963), from _Mere_Christianity

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Ustwo

Even as an atheist I believe Jesus was a real person. I love archeology and based on the evidence either Jesus did exist OR it was the most clever hoax of all time, aimed at people living in the future for whatever reason.

Occam's razor works well here.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Jay Francis

I doubt that Jesus existed. So much of the three gospels is fabrication, I mean think about it. A star that travels and then rests over a particular spot? This could only happen if one had no clue about what stars really were. The darkening of the sun upon the day of crucifixion? Passover is held during the full moon, so this would be astronomically impossible. The slaughter of the innocents? Some historian would have reported it if it really happened. That the old testament contains passages that predict and describe the coming of Jesus? Come on. You read the passages and they have nothing to do with what the writers of the gospels would have you believe they do. Christianity is a complete fraud, evolving out of the some weird goofy middle east that produced the other mystery cults, mithrainism, dionysisism, etc. etc. etc.

Mojo_PeiPei

Also to those who call the bible a "fable" you have no idea what you are taking about. "Mythology" aside the majority of the Old testament can be historically proven. So do be hatin'.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

Lebell

First, there are 4 Gospels, not 3.

Second, if you want a really good liberal discussion on the Gospels, what probably and probably didn't happen, head over to the Jesus Seminar website.

Theologians of all ilks (including an atheist or two) debate on what is in the Gospels.

The points you've made are discussed thoroughly.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

Thagrastay

This is the easiest way that I know of to understand the Bible:
The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed and the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed.
With that in mind, reconsider the texts, if you are of a mind to.

__________________
"That's it! They've got the cuffs on him, he's IN the car!"

asaris

This is actually one of the most plausible aspects of the nativity narratives, if you read it as giving astrological, rather than astronomical, data.

__________________
"Die Deutschen meinen, daß die Kraft sich in Härte und Grausamkeit offenbaren müsse, sie unterwerfen sich dann gerne und mit Bewunderung:[...]. Daß es Kraft giebt in der Milde und Stille, das glauben sie nicht leicht."

"The Germans believe that power must reveal itself in hardness and cruelty and then submit themselves gladly and with admiration[...]. They do not believe readily that there is power in meekness and calm."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

SecretMethod70

Also, there has been speculation that it refers to something that occurred around 4 BC (it's long been understood that Jesus was likely not actually born in the year we consider 0). If I remember correctly, something about a couple planets being in line which would cause what seemed like a very bright star.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

tecoyah

Not hatin'

But I guess I dont know what I am talking about......when it comes to the bible. Having only read three versions of it , and one of them three times.
I dont consider them as fables, but as interesting works of historcally based fiction. Unfortunately there are far to many areas of obvious fabrication to accept the texts as factual documents. I think the biggest problems arise when those individuals of an analitical nature attempt to explain these illogical situations to one of extreme faith.
Or when a fundamentalist attempts to "prove" what is essentially, an unprovable piece of the texts. The Noahs ark example is the most commonly used, as it is a completely impossible act of physical accomplishment, given the time and resources availible to the characters.

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

irateplatypus

Care to list a few of the many areas and the sources you used to come to that conclusion?

Don't forget, we're looking for obvious fabrications. Blatant fabrications that somehow slipped past the millions of learned men who have studied the texts for thousands of years, but have recently been discovered in our enlightened age.

Not differences in interpretation, obvious fabrications.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

tecoyah

Actually....no I don't care to, but thanks for the offer.
I have unfortunately had this type of discussion far to many times to have any incling to do it again.
I usually just get somewhat frustrated after the um-teenth time that the science is placed in doubt due to a lack of understanding the scientific method.

I would however, find it of great interest to hear some form of "logical" statement explaining how Jesus was unavailible for documentation for most of his life?

__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha

Thagrastay

The problem here lies in the assumption by most people that the technology of the time of the flood was equal to that of about the time of the Roman Civilization. But this is far from the case. It is more credible to assume that the level of technological advancement at the time of the flood was at least equal to our own. It is also likely that most of the great mysteries of antiquity were antediluvian as well. The Sphynx was most likely built before the flood as it certainly bears signs of being covered by great flood waters. The landing strips on the Nazca Plains in Peru, the Monoliths at Easter Island, the various Stonehenge creations as well as the various other structures of questionable origin that dot our planet.
The french countryside, in some spots, is speckled with petrified stumps of equi-distant size and depth across the landscape, all snapped off at a similar level. Like modern day telephone poles would be in a similar situation.
The stories of Atlantis, or Lemuria could be about Sodom and Gommorah, or they could be about the pre-flood world. But it is silly to think that Adam and Eve's offspring who were the firstfruits, created directly by the hand of God, were anything less than Genius. Look at their accomplishments according to their generations, while also bearing in mind that these people lived centuries, rather than decades, and didn't face the modern problems of sickness and stupidity.
The legends of old- the Stories of Zeus and Odin and Hercules and such probably were based upon real exploits of the Nephilim- that race of Giants that existed as well. The Hindu sanskrits describe aerial dogfights between aircraft, and ancient artifacts have been found that look awfully close to our modern-day fighter jets.
The incredulity that Noah was faced with every day and the ridicule he endured may not have been because he was building an Ark, but because he was building an Ark in such and old-fashioned way.
To top that all off, there is no mention of rain in the Bible until the flood. That could be because they began polluting and it caused a manner of cloud-seeding. But that is pure speculation on my part. The Bible mentions that not only did the water come from above, but the wellsprings of the deep opened up and water exploded from beneath as well. This is what seperated the continents, and it was no gradual thing, either. In the end, most of the traces of pre-flood civilization were destroyed and Noah and his children were thrown into the stone age, left with their generations following, to communicate with cave paintings and animal skins and such.

__________________
"That's it! They've got the cuffs on him, he's IN the car!"

SecretMethod70

um...wow...I'm all for a historical Jesus, but that's some pretty shady science there Thagrastay.

Anyways, regarding documentation, it has to be kept in mind that the large majority of any documentation that there even was no longer exists for Roman and most other ancient civilizations. A great example is music. We have less than a dozen songs from ancient Greek civilization and not one of them is complete. Now, one could, I suppose, use this to try and claim that since we have no proof that there were any other songs besides these few we have, that there were no other songs in Greek civilization. Obviously that's not true. Likewise, most records of Roman civilization are no doubt long lost, not to mention that it stands to obvious reason that they were not concerned with the same things in their records as we are 2000 years later. Furthermore is the fact that, most likely, Jesus was illiterate and, thus, did not write anything himself.

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Thagrastay

Jesus, after returning from Egypt with His mother and step father, grew up in Nazareth. He lived the life of the son of a carpenter and was of no repute until His ministry began in earnest. This is not surprising for Hebrew men of His day and age. Most Rabbis didn't begin their ministries until about thirty years of age, since that was at that age that custom recognized them as real adult men and worthy of wisdom through study.

The scriptures tell us that Jesus spent His time studying the scriptures and learning and growing knowledge and wisdom. He was an unknown until His public ministry started at His baptism and declaration in the Temple with the words of Isaiah where Jesus announced that the year of Jubilee had come and that scripture had been fulfilled in their hearing.

__________________
"That's it! They've got the cuffs on him, he's IN the car!"

Mojo_PeiPei

Very solid. Not to mention that one could compare and contrast all of the stories of the ancient people's that are similar. Most noteable about the flood is the comparison between the bible version and then the story of Gilgamesh, and I even think there is an Aztec version.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

irateplatypus

your bluff was called.

__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill

Lebell

Tecoyah (and anyone else who is interested in a different perspective),

If you are truly that familiar with the Bible, I think you might find this book interesting:

Liberating the Gospels: Reading the Bible with Jewish Eyes by John Spong.

From one of the reviews on Amazon.com:

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!