The True Identity of Jesus

Jesus was a Jewish yogi. Who came home after a long absence.

He has all the hallmarks of someone trained in eastern disciplines. Caravans to India were common in Jesus' day.

What young man from a small town could resist seeing for himself what other's speak of? India was pretty exotic even back then.

When mystics come back from their immersion in the divine, the first lessons will come out sounding like whatever religion that person grew up in. In Jesus's case, it was Judaism. And this is exactly what he did.

He began to speak as a Rabbi, well versed in scripture. But then the enlightenment allows for a wider perception and begins to flavor the message. Now he's blending the wisdom of the east with a very orthodox message. Now he's got people's attention. Now he declares himself a law unto himself. Above Judaism, the law of the land. On equal with God.

The Jewish version of God anyway.

Jesus was a man. In the final stages of his spiritual maturity.

Something the younger birds in the nest don't quite understand yet.



x

There is enough historical evidence to suggest that someone named Jesus did indeed exist.

The fact that he was crucified in the manner of Jews lends further evidence to his lineage.

I strongly disagree with the Christian idea of Jesus. It puts a great distance between Jesus and regular people. Jesus was regular people. Who had a remarkable experience that all are worthy of.

Christians have made a mess of things. You don't need this religion. You just need to be aware of you natural attraction to your source.

Clinging to this human self portrait is the problem.

To know God, and the thread that ties it all together, you have to let go and jump in. You'll swim back to your human self later. A changed person. But you've got to be brave enough to jump out of the nest.

How are you going to fly otherwise?



Response: Well, what I've come to learn is that Jesus is in fact a muslim. A muslim by definition is "one who submits their will to Allah (God)". This is exactly what Jesus did in both religious accounts from the qur'an and the bible.Though Jesus was a descendent of the jews, his religion was not Judaism.

There is no evidence outside of the Bible to support the existence of Jesus. If you can produce eyewitness accounts of Jesus then I am happy to believe there was a man called jesus.

So far no-one has been able to.

Strange do you not think that there is not one single eyewitness account of the Son of God?


Once you prove there was a man called Jesus, the next step for you is demonstrating him as everything you have stated above.

Response: Well here's a question. Why is Santa Clause so widely acknowledged as a fictional character and Jesus is not? Also, I'm sure you believe you have great-great- great-great- grandparents right? If so, how do you know? You can't provide any eyewitnesses can you?

...To know God, and the thread that ties it all together, you have to let go and jump in. You'll swim back to your human self later. A changed person. But you've got to be brave enough to jump out of the nest.

How are you going to fly otherwise?

x

Response: Well here's a question. Why is Santa Clause so widely acknowledged as a fictional character and Jesus is not?

There is no evidence outside of the Bible to support the existence of Jesus. If you can produce eyewitness accounts of Jesus then I am happy to believe there was a man called jesus.

So far no-one has been able to.

Strange do you not think that there is not one single eyewitness account of the Son of God?


Once you prove there was a man called Jesus, the next step for you is demonstrating him as everything you have stated above.

There is no historical documentation that proves the fact of Jesus' existence with the exception of........

1.) Tacitus {A.D. 56-117} in one of his historically validated writings "Annals", he makes direct mention to the fact and existence of Jesus. In the ANNALS he told of the great fire of Rome, which occurred in A.D. 64. Nero, who was the Roman Emperor in office at the historical point of time, was suspected by many of having ordered the city set afire. Tacitus wrote, "Nero fabricated scapegoats...and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). THEIR ORIGINATOR, "Christ", had been executed in Tiberius' reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilatus......."

2.) Seutonious {A.D. 120}, mentions Jesus twice in his writing "Claudis"....once in 25:4 in reference to the history documented in Acts 18:2....and once again in his history of "Nero" -- 16:2.

3.) Pliny the Younger {A.D. 110} used the name "Christ" 3 times in making reference to the originator of the "sect" of Jews...known as Christians

4.) Celsus {A.D. 178} in his work "True Discourse"....he argued that Jesus owed his existence to the result of fornication between Mary and a Roman Solider....as he matured he began calling himself God.

5.) Josephus {A.D. 37-100} mentions Jesus twice in his historical accounts of Jerusalem...the first account is in dispute...but never proven invalid in anything other than speculation...with the first mention..the account which is in dispute by the secular humanists because of its direct and graphic description of Jesus is made in his work {Antiquities of the Jews) 18:3:3....and again he also mentions John..the one called the Baptist 18:5:2, strange that it is not in dispute...being found in the exact same Chapter. But this is not the only mention of Jesus as there is another account of Jesus which is undisputed 20:9:1, where he mentions the fact of Jesus being the brother of James.

All of the above are from enemies of the Christ...with one of them being a Jewish historian hired by the Romans to give an accurate account of the Roman Campaign in Jerusalem....Josephus. These are "hostile" witnesses to the fact of Jesus being a real historical figure...but there are also confirmed and validated Historians of the Christian faith that lived and recorded history centuries before any Council of Nicasea in 325 A.D....that make direct mention of Paul's Letters and how they are used as Doctrine in the infant church and the Gospels....the works of Peter, John...James...etc....all making mention of the original manuscripts of the New Testament....HUNDREDS OF YEARS before the secular humanists claim of them being written in the 4th century...which was merely a canon or an alignment of these manuscripts in accepting them or rejecting them due to context and conformation of authorship.

Just a few of these VERY REAL HISTORIANS THAT MENTION...Jesus, and the New Testament Manuscripts.

Papias {A.D. 140}.....Justin Martyr { A.D. 100}.....Irenaeus {A.D. 180}.....The Christian Heretic Tetullian......Origen.....Pantaenus


And of course you are wanting to dismiss a self professed direct "eyewitness" account to the majesty of Jesus....simply because it is recorded in the the Holy Bible....yet you cannot prove this stated eyewitness did not occur. 2 Peter 1:16, "For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of the Lord Jesus Christ, BUT WERE EYEWITNESSES to His majesty."

Strange that you did not mention this eyewitness...can we assume that is simply slipped your mind and was not due to some underlying bigotry presented only in the form of ad hominem argument without any actual facts to debunk this eyewitness account?

LOOK AT THE DATES!!!!!!!!!

You have just written my argument for me, thank you very much.

Not ONE of your sources mentions they saw Jesus directly.

Read again what you posted and then tell me if you think any of the people you have quoted actually saw or met with Jesus.

I await the obvious answer.

Again...you want to dismiss the EYEWITNESS accounts recorded in the Bible? Without proof? And of course No historical figure in antiquity ever existed by your logic....A direct record of the execution of Jesus made in writing to be a specifically accurate account...by the GOVERNMENT AUTHORITY THAT had Jesus executed is not sufficient? But you still have failed to debunk The Bibles eyewitness account as proven via the Prima Facie evidence offered in actual historical documentation....proceed to debunk these accounts if you can. There is not only one but hundreds of eyewitness accounts in the Scriptures. I guess...that Paul did not exist, Peter did not exist, James did not exist....despite historical documentation to the contrary....it seems strange that JUST one figure is always dismissed in ad hominemin fashion in the attempt to disprove his existence....Jesus. :rollinglaugh: What I am laughing at is all the prima facie evidence offered by history. Do you actually know that the calender being used by you is based upon the HISTORICAL life of JESUS....B.C./A.D....ring a bell? Yet this historical figure that has the entire civilized world counting the days as measured by his Birth.....DID NOT EXIST. Sure....Sure.

The eyewitness accounts of Jesus in the Bible is cicular proof.

We need to establish independant verifyable evidence out side of the Bible, evidence that supports the case.

The Bible is ONE piece of evidence. The literature you have supplied with the dates are not first hand accounts of Jesus.

Look at it this way, a Lawyer is building a case to spport his clients argument. He is not going to use one piece of evidence to support his case (the bible) he will definately find and use eyewitness accounts. He will not however use second hand evidence as it is hear'say and conjecture, which is what you have supplied so far.

It's about building a solid case on multiple uses of evidence. So far your only one is the Bible. The Bible says jesus is real, how do we know he's real? Bible says so, Circular.

The 'Disciples' for instance, I don't believe they existed either, another made up story. Show me the evidence they existed outside of the Bible.

Chinese Calender Rring a bell?

Over 1 Billion People on this Planet use that as their calender.



The Chinese Calender was being used 2500 years before Jesus was supposed to have been born.

So you're saying the fact we use his supposed Date of birth for use in our calendars proves he existed. :rollinglaugh:

Now I see where this line of evidence is coming from, keep going the more you say it the more you believe it, for me the more yousay it the more ludicrous it sounds.

Jesus is God, Jesus is the son of God, Jesus is one of a trinity, Jesus is just a prophet, Jesus is a muslim, Jesus is a myth, etc. All of these different stories surrounding the person known as Jesus but what is the true identity of Jesus? Let's have a dialogue.

God is a fiction created by the elites of society to subjugate the common man