₦airaland Forum

OkCornel:
Thanks for confirming the existence of Jesus Christ of Nazareth with your first screenshot.

Did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!

Maynman:
They said Chrestus was present during the rome fire, did jesus ever go to rome? What century?
That’s what Tacitus said lol

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Desperate forger, Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

OkCornel:
Who is the "they" that said Chrestus was present in Rome fire? Your scholars or sources no get name?

Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?
If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!

Maynman:
Did jesus ever go to rome for evangelism?
Bwahahahah

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!

OkCornel:
Read;

The message on Jesus Christ was preached to Jews who traveled for the Passover after the ascension of Christ.

That was how followers of Christus (who suffered the extreme penalty under Pontius Pilate) were present in Rome. Through evangelism and conversion. Not fleeing from war.

Acts 2 v 5-11;
5 Now there were staying in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven.
6 When they heard this sound, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard their own language being spoken.
7 Utterly amazed, they asked: “Aren’t all these who are speaking Galileans?
8 Then how is it that each of us hears them in our native language?
9 Parthians, Medes and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia,
10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome
11 (both Jews and converts to Judaism); Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!”

These Jews, including the ones who came over from Rome for the Passover later converted to Christianity.

Acts 2 v 41;
41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

And just to add, towards the end of his life when he was held under house arrest in Rome, Apostle Paul devoted his life entirely to preaching about Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God to Jews and Gentiles that visited him.

The details are in Acts 28 v 11-31.


Now that this has been explained;
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Desperate forger, Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!
Thanks for confirming the exis

Maynman:
You are using New Testament that’s complied by known Chrestian forgers?
Did jesus ever go to rome?
The fire was started by Chrestian

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Desperate forger, Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!
Thanks for confirming the exis

OkCornel:
He can't even complete his sentences properly

Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences

Maynman:
Desperate forger, Followers of Jesus were first called Chrestian first in antioch, yes or no?

Who is mary, joseph and James the just in antiquities of the jew

Yahweh is a fraud,who sent jesus?
Exposed!

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences

Maynman:
Did jesus ever go to rome? You went to bring “visitors from rome” bwahahahah
Your desperation is glaring, Yahweh worshipper

OkCornel:
Yawns...
Go to school. The visitors from Rome were part of the people converted to Christianity after they listened to Peter preach on the day of Pentecost. They went back to Rome to preach about Jesus Christ too.

Also, Paul preached about Jesus Christ to the Jews and Gentiles that visited him when he was under house arrest in Rome.

That was how Christianity got to Rome before the great fire of 64 ad.

Now that being said...

He can't even complete his sentences properly cheesy

Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?
If yes, kindly provide evidences

OkCornel:
KnownUnknown, MaxinDHouse, Islamvirgins

Please read this article.
Is historic Jesus = Jesus Christ of Nazareth?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

Some kain arguments just dey pointless.

Maynman:
You posted nothing . I hope you don’t end up like islamvirgins
James the just was mentioned in the antiquities of jew, and alpheus is the father, he was mentioned else where in the book!

IslamVIRGINS:
Animal what's your problem again

Maynman:
Roman Catholic created Jesus Chrestus and nicene Christianity

KnownUnknown:
Did a man called Jesus of Nazareth walk the earth? Discussions over whether the figure known as the “Historical Jesus” actually existed primarily reflect disagreements among atheists. Believers, who uphold the implausible and more easily-dismissed “Christ of Faith” (the divine Jesus who walked on water), ought not to get involved.

Numerous secular scholars have presented their own versions of the so-called “Historical Jesus” – and most of them are, as biblical scholar J.D. Crossan puts it, “an academic embarrassment.” From Crossan’s view of Jesus as the wise sage, to Robert Eisenman’s Jesus the revolutionary, and Bart Ehrman’s apocalyptic prophet, about the only thing New Testament scholars seem to agree on is Jesus’ historical existence. But can even that be questioned?
The first problem we encounter when trying to discover more about the Historical Jesus is the lack of early sources. The earliest sources only reference the clearly fictional Christ of Faith. These early sources, compiled decades after the alleged events, all stem from Christian authors eager to promote Christianity – which gives us reason to question them. The authors of the Gospels fail to name themselves, describe their qualifications, or show any criticism with their foundational sources – which they also fail to identify. Filled with mythical and non-historical information, and heavily edited over time, the Gospels certainly should not convince critics to trust even the more mundane claims made therein.

Also important are the sources we don’t have. There are no existing eyewitness or contemporary accounts of Jesus. All we have are later descriptions of Jesus’ life events by non-eyewitnesses, most of whom are obviously biased. Little can be gleaned from the few non-Biblical and non-Christian sources, with only
The first problem we encounter when trying to discover more about the Historical Jesus is the lack of early sources. The earliest sources only reference the clearly fictional Christ of Faith. These early sources, compiled decades after the alleged events, all stem from Christian authors eager to promote Christianity – which gives us reason to question them. The authors of the Gospels fail to name themselves, describe their qualifications, or show any criticism with their foundational sources – which they also fail to identify. Filled with mythical and non-historical information, and heavily edited over time, the Gospels certainly should not convince critics to trust even the more mundane claims made therein.

Roman scholar Josephus and historian Tacitus having any reasonable claim to be writing about Jesus within 100 years of his life. And even those sparse accounts are shrouded in controversy, with disagreements over what parts have obviously been changed by Christian scribes (the manuscripts were preserved by Christians), the fact that both these authors were born after Jesus died (they would thus have probably received this information from Christians), and the oddity that centuries go by before Christian apologists start referencing them.

So what do the mainstream (and non-Christian) scholars say about all this? Surprisingly very little – of substance anyway. Only Bart Ehrman and Maurice Casey have thoroughly attempted to prove Jesus’ historical existence in recent times. Their most decisive point? The Gospels can generally be trusted – after we ignore the many, many bits that are untrustworthy – because of the hypothetical (i.e. non-existent) sources behind them. Who produced these hypothetical sources? When? What did they say? Were they reliable? Were they intended to be accurate historical portrayals, enlightening allegories, or entertaining fictions?
Ehrman and Casey can’t tell you – and neither can any New Testament scholar. Given the poor state of the existing sources, and the atrocious methods used by mainstream Biblical historians, the matter will likely never be resolved. In sum, there are clearly good reasons to doubt Jesus’ historical existence – if not to think it outright improbable.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/

OkCornel:
Fringe theorist, did Jewish scholars and historians unanimously deny the existence of Jesus Christ?

If yes, kindly provide evidences.

Maynman:
Lol. These are the evidences of your savior, yahweh worshipper?

OkCornel:
Do you have evidences of Jewish historians and scholars unanimously denying the existence of Jesus Christ of Nazareth?

KnownUnknown:
Leave me out of it. There is no historical Jesus and even if there was, so what?
If there was, all you have is some random Jew who led a cult 2000 years ago.
Does the existence of Muhammad validate the incredible and improbable claims made about him and Islam? Apply the answer to your super jew that looks like Kenny Loggins.