I just came upon the conclusion that nobody mentioned in the bible actually ever existed.

If anyone can show us ONE PERSON named in the bible who they believe actually lived, WITH PROOF by way of their grave, or their modern descendants (ie family), or by external documentary mention outside of the bible by contemporaneous eyewitnesses etc etc, I'll be glad to alter this position.

Many thanks.

What about "Pharaoh" the king of Egypt ?

So it seems all this while u have been reading the back of the Bible, well ignorance to some is a bliss,

enilove:
What about "Pharaoh" the king of Egypt ?

Hahaha.... Kai... My people. ''Pharaoh'' is not the name of anyone who ever existed. ''Pharaoh'' was a title given to a king of Egypt, just like ''Oba'' is a title for a Yoruba king. Egypt had hundreds of Pharaohs in a long line of dynastic, monarchical kingship spanning thousands of years. Each Pharaoh had a name, eg Pharaoh Akhenaton, Pharaoh Tutunkhamun, Pharaoh Rameses, Khufu, Thutmose, Sneferu, Djekafre Isesi, Menkaure, Neferefre, Bakare etc etc (Note the African names - Egypt was a black African empire for thousands of years prior to foreign invasions). The bible to my knowledge doesn't actually mention any Pharaoh by name, simply saying ''the Pharaoh'' did this or said that.. So saying ''King Pharaoh'' did this or that is an admission of comical illiteracy regarding what one is talking about.

hopeforcharles:
So it seems all this while u have been reading the back of the Bible, well ignorance to some is a bliss,

Sorry but this doesn't answer the question posed. Take your dumbitude elsewhere pls.

You can start with Solomon and his encounter with the queen of Sheba. And how she took his religion back to Africa. In fact the ethiopian eunuch Philip witnessed to in the new testament still practised according to the Torah and was confused until Philip explained the Messiah to him. And of course, the Ethiopian got news back to his court. This is known, verified history. and you can see its evidence in Ethiopia.

Or you can research Cyrus the great, who was prophesied about 300 years before he was born, and as prophesied would break the leaved gates of the Babylonian empire. He was born as prophesied, rose to power as prophesied and did what was thought to be impossible to babylonian fortifications.

Or the seven churches mentioned in Revelations, which still exist to this day in syria, iraq etc and have communities that still live from that time till present day. they have lots of oral and written history through time, and those have been studied and written about. in fact they contain probably the greatest clues on how christianity took over the pagan western world

One of the "funny" things about the internet is that the deluge of information is providing more confusion than revelation. The facts I stated here are not new. They are as much verified history as is Alexander the Great or Salahuddin. Anyhow, I am sure you know how to google. Feel free to post your how you came to your conclusions too. Like I told Gatiano, any source you can quote has not stood up to the intellectual beating the bible has taken. And it is still standing

birdman:
You can start with Solomon and his encounter with the queen of Sheba. And how she took his religion back to Africa. In fact the ethiopian eunuch Philip witnessed to in the new testament still practised according to the Torah and was confused until Philip explained the Messiah to him. And of course, the Ethiopian got news back to his court. This is known, verified history. and you can see its evidence in Ethiopia.

Or you can research Cyrus the great, who was prophesied about 300 years before he was born, and as prophesied would break the leaved gates of the Babylonian empire. He was born as prophesied, rose to power as prophesied and did what was thought to be impossible to babylonian fortifications.

Or the seven churches mentioned in Revelations, which still exist to this day in syria, iraq etc and have communities that still live from that time till present day. they have lots of oral and written history through time, and those have been studied and written about. in fact they contain probably the greatest clues on how christianity took over the pagan western world

One of the "funny" things about the internet is that the deluge of information is providing more confusion than revelation. The facts I stated here are not new. They are as much verified history as is Alexander the Great or Salahuddin. Anyhow, I am sure you know how to google. Feel free to post your how you came to your conclusions too. Like I told Gatiano, any source you can quote has not stood up to the intellectual beating the bible has taken. And it is still standing

Where is the evidence that Solomon ever existed? I think the Ethiopians simply repeated the biblical claim regarding this character.

This is really astonishing. I see a huge congregation of thousands of Nigerians in a hall, each brandishing a bible, singing and praising in a loud cacophony of noise. Yet not ONE person in that hall can show conclusively that a SINGLE person named in their bible ever existed. A loud cacophony by thousands of hypnotized, thoughtless, robotic, ignorant dummies. The white man has really dealt with us.

Apart from the Pharoahs of Egypt, can we point at any burial tomb of the biblical kings of Israel? Ok let's assume Moses and Jesus mysteriously disappeared without evidence, what about the others? All the Kings of England, Spain, most of Egypt's, Nigerian kings etc can be found . where is the Tomb of Kng David?

ifeness:
Apart from the Pharoahs of Egypt, can we point at any burial tomb of the biblical kings of Israel? Ok let's assume Moses and Jesus mysteriously disappeared without evidence, what about the others?

I've checked and there is none. Nobody can point today at the tomb of 'King David', or 'Saul' or 'Aaron', 'Jacob', 'Abraham', 'Peter', 'Sarah', 'Noah', 'Joseph', 'Isaiah', 'Mary' etc etc. Didn't any of these people have families? Or descendants? No trace of them either. And no mention of these characters in any documents outside the bible. As for 'Jesus', the least said about that one the better. Mr 'son of God', yet not a single shred of evidence he ever walked this earth.

Nebuchadnezzar existed tho other fables bible associated him with is just laughable, emperor Xerxes of persia is another... Augustus Caesar did too... they are many of them..

johnydon22:
Nebuchadnezzar existed tho other fables bible associated him with is just laughable, emperor Xerxes of persia is another... Augustus Caesar did too... they are many of them..

...kings and emperors... these are hardly bible characters.. The inventors of the bible stories could easily attach their tales to the time periods in which certain kings reigned..''In the reign of Caesar, Jesus walked the sands of Galileee...'', ''Pharaoh said to Moses... let my people go...'' etc etc.. What we need is evidence of a 'Jesus' and a 'Moses'.

ROSSIKE:
I've checked and there is none. Nobody can point today at the tomb of 'King David', or 'Saul' or 'Aaron', 'Jacob', 'Abraham', 'Peter', 'Sarah', 'Noah', 'Joseph', 'Isaiah', 'Mary' etc etc. Didn't any of these people have families? Or descendants? No trace of them either. And no mention of these characters in any documents outside the bible. As for 'Jesus', the least said about that one the better. Mr 'son of God', yet not a single shred of evidence he ever walked this earth.

So I guess we can safely call them Hollywood characters.

johnydon22:
Nebuchadnezzar existed tho other fables bible associated him with is just laughable, emperor Xerxes of persia is another... Augustus Caesar did too... they are many of them..

I think he meant the Biblical Israeli Characters. People like Moses we given leverages and Hollywood ending to their stories. Two angels fought for his body o because he was a chosen figure of God. A prolific figure like Solomon should at least have his Tomb preserved for all to see. Jesus was given as escape route(Yes he flew to heaven,so no evidence)

ifeness:


I think he meant the Biblical Israeli Characters. People like Moses we given leverages and Hollywood ending to their stories. Two angels fought for his body o because he was a chosen figure of God. A prolific figure like Solomon should at least have his Tomb preserved for all to see. Jesus was given as escape route(Yes he flew to heaven,so no evidence)

Yeah..

ROSSIKE:


Hahaha.... Kai... My people. ''Pharaoh'' is not the name of anyone who ever existed. ''Pharaoh'' was a title given to a king of Egypt, just like ''Oba'' is a title for a Yoruba king. Egypt had hundreds of Pharaohs in a long line of dynastic, monarchical kingship spanning thousands of years. Each Pharaoh had a name, eg Pharaoh Akhenaton, Pharaoh Tutunkhamun, Pharaoh Rameses, Khufu, Thutmose, Sneferu, Djekafre Isesi, Menkaure, Neferefre, Bakare etc etc (Note the African names - Egypt was a black African empire for thousands of years prior to foreign invasions). The bible to my knowledge doesn't actually mention any Pharaoh by name, simply saying ''the Pharaoh'' did this or said that.. So saying ''King Pharaoh'' did this or that is an admission of comical illiteracy regarding what one is talking about.

I've been looking into the account of the plagues of egypt recently and I realized most actually happened but over a long time - many generations but probably somehow the jews heard of this and decided to bank on it by putting their God into the equation

macof:

I've been looking into the account of the plagues of egypt recently and I realized most actually happened but over a long time - many generations but probably somehow the jews heard of this and decided to bank on it by putting their God into the equation

The tale of moses being put in a basket and set adrift in a river was actually hewn from the legend of Sagon the king of Akkad...

johnydon22:


The tale of moses being put in a basket and set adrift in a river was actually hewn from the legend of Sagon the king of Akkad...

Interesting.... Some of my research seems to indicate that the biblical 'Moses' tale is suspiciously similar to the story of Pharaoh Thutmose I (1506 - 1493 BC). I'll check it out more to see what comes up.

ROSSIKE:
Interesting.... Some of my research seems to indicate that the biblical 'Moses' tale is suspiciously similar to the story of Pharaoh Thutmose. I'll check it out more to see what comes up.

am referring particularly to the "set adrift in the river" saga not the whole story... was hewn from the story of Sargon of Akkad..reigned 2334 BC – 2279 BC.
Thutmose story is common knowledge to have influenced the moses story greatly

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sargon_of_Akkad

Historically, the Roman Jewish historian Josephus tells us about John the Immerser, forerunner of the Christ (antiquity of the Jews xviii 5)

" Joannes, surnamed the Baptist, was a good man, and commanded the
Jews to practise virtue, as to justice towards one another and piety
towards God, and so to assemble for a general [ritual] bathing ; for this
washing would be acceptable to God if they made use of it, not in order to
obtain the remission of single infringements [of the law] , but for the
purification of the body, provided that the soul was thoroughly purified
beforehand by righteousness."

In addition to the above Josephus also informs us about the Herodian "Saulus" who persecuted the Christians and was visible at the murder of the martyr Stephen, this same "Saulus" was also responsible for the near murder of James "the Just", leader of the early Church and supposed brother of Jesus of Nazareth. This Saulus in my view is the the reconfigured "Apostle Paul" who appears in the Christian NT.

There are other historical references also.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cave_of_the_Patriarchs

Maybe few links below could help

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achaemenid_Empire

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylon

https://www.google.com.ng/?gfe_rd=cr&ei=oRVSVY7VJI7j8wfp6YHwAQ&gws_rd=ssl#q=who+conquered+babylonian+empire+in+539+bc

http://considerthegospel.org/blog/2013/08/20/was-there-a-noah-testimony-from-ancient-hindus-modern-calendars-part-1/

http://www.jw.org/en/publications/magazines/g201101/babylon-in-bible-history/#?insight[search_id]=ac92ad5d-4bb6-424e-831e-02151ddb4fd6&insight[search_result_index]=2

Well there exists a nation of Israel today and the OT captures a large part of their national history. Else why would the Israeli PM quote directly from the prophesy of Amos in the UN general assembly if the author and book were fictitious? The information age makes it possible to connect with one of them (Israelites) if you need firsthand information on the issue you have raised. (NL has more of naira spenders as members so you may not get much.).

Secondly, archaeological review may also be of help. Most of those events occurred a number of millenia(BC & AD) ago.

I guess no african can intelligently give you their version of what you seek concerning the Israel nation. Of course Africans existed in the BC millenia and the present generation of africans can be traced to the BC generation of which nothing is known.Now it will be mental denial to say they(BC africans) never existed since we have no proof, reference (burial ground etc) with which to identify them. However, I will be grateful if you can vouchsafe me with info on their names and where those BC millenia africans were buried.Or just identify what used to be the cemetery for subsaharan africans in a period say 1000 BC.

Sarassin:
Historically, the Roman Jewish historian Josephus tells us about John the Immerser, forerunner of the Christ (antiquity of the Jews xviii 5)

" Joannes, surnamed the Baptist, was a good man, and commanded the
Jews to practise virtue, as to justice towards one another and piety
towards God, and so to assemble for a general [ritual] bathing ; for this
washing would be acceptable to God if they made use of it, not in order to
obtain the remission of single infringements [of the law] , but for the
purification of the body, provided that the soul was thoroughly purified
beforehand by righteousness."

In addition to the above Josephus also informs us about the Herodian "Saulus" who persecuted the Christians and was visible at the murder of the martyr Stephen, this same "Saulus" was also responsible for the near murder of James "the Just", leader of the early Church and supposed brother of Jesus of Nazareth. This Saulus in my view is the the reconfigured "Apostle Paul" who appears in the Christian NT.

There are other historical references also.

Josephus was not an eyewitness to anything in the bible. He was born about half a century after 'Jesus' was alleged to have 'ascended into heaven'. Anything he wrote or claimed would have been told to him by the christians of his day. So he is not a credible witness.

Scholar8200:
Well there exists a nation of Israel today and the OT captures a large part of their national history. Else why would the Israeli PM quote directly from the prophesy of Amos in the UN general assembly if the author and book were fictitious? The information age makes it possible to connect with one of them (Israelites) if you need firsthand information on the issue you have raised. (NL has more of naira spenders as members so you may not get much.).

Secondly, archaeological review may also be of help. Most of those events occurred a number of millenia(BC & AD) ago.

I guess no african can intelligently give you their version of what you seek concerning the Israel nation. Of course Africans existed in the BC millenia and the present generation of africans can be traced to the BC generation of which nothing is known.Now it will be mental denial to say they(BC africans) never existed since we have no proof, reference (burial ground etc) with which to identify them. However, I will be grateful if you can vouchsafe me with info on their names and where those BC millenia africans were buried.Or just identify what used to be the cemetery for subsaharan africans in a period say 1000 BC.

Firstly, no one claimed Israelis as a people did not exist a millenia ago. Second, that Netanyahu or whomever quoted Amos does not mean Amos existed. People quote Jesus, Moses, Jacob, Mary etc all the time. That doesn't mean any of them ever lived. People claim in their ''holy books'' that ''God said'', and ''God did''. Doesn't mean God had anything to do with it. Fact is if you are going to claim that you have a holy book which God himself directed, you're going to need AT LEAST evidence that the actors in that book actually lived. The absence of such fundamental evidence suggests grand fabrication. Don't try to rope ancient Africans into your debacle. Ancient Africans never claimed God visited and spoke to them. If God did interract with them, we would similarly demand hard evidence that that was the case. Sorry... the ball is in your court to PROVE your fantastic claims about God dwelling among your people.

ROSSIKE:


Josephus was not an eyewitness to anything in the bible. He was born about half a century after 'Jesus' was alleged to have 'ascended into heaven'. Anything he wrote or claimed would have been told to him by the christians of his day. So he is not a credible witness.

And actually you are quite wrong, Josephus lived 37CE -100CE, and not half a century after the death of Jesus as you state. He was contemporary to what would have been the time of the biblical NT events, further as an historian his sources and recordings were impeccable, he was contemporary to the lifetime of the Apostle Paul for instance, and studied under Gamaliel. He recorded nothing about Paul but he had a lot to say about a "Herodian" prince named Saulus, it is largely down to Josephus that we can separate salient fact from biblical fable, for instance it is clear that a lot of the accounts recorded in the “acts of the Apostles” as recorded by Luke are completely inaccurate. Josephus gives us placement with direct dates and context. To state that Josephus is not a credible witness simply beggars belief.

ROSSIKE:


Firstly, no one claimed Israelis as a people did not exist a millenia ago. Second, that Netanyahu or whomever quoted Amos does not mean Amos existed. People quote Jesus, Moses, Jacob, Mary etc all the time. That doesn't mean any of them ever lived. People claim in their ''holy books'' that ''God said'', and ''God did''. Doesn't mean God had anything to do with it. Fact is if you are going to claim that you have a holy book which God himself directed, you're going to need AT LEAST evidence that the actors in that book actually lived. The absence of such fundamental evidence suggests grand fabrication. Don't try to rope ancient Africans into your debacle. Ancient Africans never claimed God visited and spoke to them. If God did interract with them, we would similarly demand hard evidence that that was the case. Sorry... the ball is in your court to PROVE your fantastic claims about God dwelling among your people.

Let's remain with the focus of your topic shall we? Hence the reference to africans is still very much admissible for our purposes. like you would ask a Greek today to prove that Alexander the great (353 - 326 BC) ever existed and his burial ground else he was a fictitious character? And your reference to Amos as being none existent...?

You commenced your post by declaring a conclusion...What's the basis of that conclusion? What primary and secondary sources informed your conclusion after all those who claim their descent/ancestry from the Israelites in the bible are still alive? What historical/ archaeological texts , objectively studied, furnished your literature review? Or did you just say, "I think it is thus hence it is thus?" Having arrived at that 'conclusion' , same is released for debate purposes? I thought science demands that such conclusions will come, swaddled in well referenced positions selected at random and not with a biased outlook?

What about Ramses the pharaoh.
He is mentioned in the bible and his remains is on display in the Cairo museum.

Sarassin:


And actually you are quite wrong, Josephus lived 37CE -100CE, and not half a century after the death of Jesus as you state. He was contemporary to what would have been the time of the biblical NT events, further as an historian his sources and recordings were impeccable, he was contemporary to the lifetime of the Apostle Paul for instance, and studied under Gamaliel. He recorded nothing about Paul but he had a lot to say about a "Herodian" prince named Saulus, it is largely down to Josephus that we can separate salient fact from biblical fable, for instance it is clear that a lot of the accounts recorded in the “acts of the Apostles” as recorded by Luke are completely inaccurate. Josephus gives us placement with direct dates and context. To state that Josephus is not a credible witness simply beggars belief.

Josephus is a respected historian but when it comes to the Acts I will choose Luke's reason being that the latter was a fellow traveller with Paul, (of whom Josephus did not know much,like you said) and the same Luke was inspired to write the Gospel named after him not as a historian but as one who had perfect knowledge of the things he wrote being inspired as 2 Peter 1:22 states.

Sarassin:


And actually you are quite wrong, Josephus lived 37CE -100CE, and not half a century after the death of Jesus as you state. He was contemporary to what would have been the time of the biblical NT events, further as an historian his sources and recordings were impeccable, he was contemporary to the lifetime of the Apostle Paul for instance, and studied under Gamaliel. He recorded nothing about Paul but he had a lot to say about a "Herodian" prince named Saulus, it is largely down to Josephus that we can separate salient fact from biblical fable, for instance it is clear that a lot of the accounts recorded in the “acts of the Apostles” as recorded by Luke are completely inaccurate. Josephus gives us placement with direct dates and context. To state that Josephus is not a credible witness simply beggars belief.

Josephus WAS born AFTER the 'ascension of Jesus' and was not an eyewitness to any of the events claimed in the bible. His book, Antiquities of the Jews, which claims to attest to Jesus' existence was penned in 94 AD! He therefore is not a credible authority. It is dishonest to claim he was ''contemporary'' to the events in the NT. There is nothing ''impeccable'' about his sources. His sources were sympathisers with the christian sect. A credible witness in the context of this topic must be an eyewitness contemporaneous to the events claimed in the bible. Not someone who depended on hearsay decades after the alleged events.

Scholar8200:
Josephus is a respected historian but when it comes to the Acts I will choose Luke's reason being that the latter was a fellow traveller with Paul, (of whom Josephus did not know much,like you said) and the same Luke was inspired to write the Gospel named after him not as a historian but as one who had perfect knowledge of the things he wrote being inspired as 2 Peter 1:22 states.

Clearly, I disagree,I find the historical records of Josephus far more interesting. It is perfectly acceptable to be inspired but it does not therefore follow that whatever Luke wrote was infallible. Historically the Gospel of Luke is the least reliable of the synoptics, it would be fair to say the author drew on the accounts of Matthew and Mark, embellished their stories and where necessary made subtle almost imperceptible alterations.

In the Acts,there are substantial historical inconsistencies in Luke’s account with respect to events placements and timings, some of which point to the fact that actually Josephus may have been a source for Luke. Doctrinally on many occasions the accounts of Paul presented by Luke does not reflect Paul’s own accounts of his beliefs in my view, but I digress from the OP .

I assume you are quoting 2 Peter1: 21

Scholar8200:

Let's remain with the focus of your topic shall we? Hence the reference to africans is still very much admissible for our purposes. like you would ask a Greek today to prove that Alexander the great (353 - 326 BC) ever existed and his burial ground else he was a fictitious character? And your reference to Amos as being none existent...?

You commenced your post by declaring a conclusion...What's the basis of that conclusion? What primary and secondary sources informed your conclusion after all those who claim their descent/ancestry from the Israelites in the bible are still alive? What historical/ archaeological texts , objectively studied, furnished your literature review? Or did you just say, "I think it is thus hence it is thus?" Having arrived at that 'conclusion' , same is released for debate purposes? I thought science demands that such conclusions will come, swaddled in well referenced positions selected at random and not with a biased outlook?

I can't believe you mentioned Alexander. There is COPIOUS evidence of Alexander's existence from a variety of sources. Even though he lived nearly 400 years before Jesus was allegedly born, we have statues of him. We know what he looked like. We know about his military rampage through Asia and north Africa. We know he was tutored by Aristotle. We know his father was Phillip II, a king. There are numerous documents, contemporaneous and otherwise attesting to his existence. So there is no way anyone would demand 'proof of Alexander's existence'. There is ample proof. NOT SO with the bible characters like 'Jesus', 'Solomon', 'David', and 'Moses'. My position is clear enough. If you're going to make claims that you interacted with God and his 'son', plus other actors as claimed in your 'holy book', you must provide evidence that those characters actually existed on this planet first, or it is a fabrication.

Sarassin:


Clearly, I disagree,I find the historical records of Josephus far more interesting. It is perfectly acceptable to be inspired but it does not therefore follow that whatever Luke wrote was infallible. Historically the Gospel of Luke is the least reliable of the synoptics, it would be fair to say the author drew on the accounts of Matthew and Mark, embellished their stories and where necessary made subtle almost imperceptible alterations.

In the Acts,there are substantial historical inconsistencies in Luke’s account with respect to events placements and timings, some of which point to the fact that actually Josephus may have been a source for Luke. Doctrinally on many occasions the accounts of Paul presented by Luke does not reflect Paul’s own accounts of his beliefs in my view, but I digress from the OP .

I assume you are quoting 2 Peter1: 21

Thanks for the correction regarding the highlighted. Although I would have loved to take you up, I suggest we focus on the topic at hand for now.