₦airaland Forum

oteneaaron:
Awesome!

Should I create the thread where we share our thoughts or will you create it?

I will study chapter 1 and 2 today, and share my findings.

It's nice to have a study buddy on Nairaland.

Create it...

Lawag3:
Let's discuss Maynman, was Jesus a real person historically? what's your reason for your answer present evidence to back up your answers that should be easy for you.

If you are referring to the jesus is the gospel stories , then am afraid he never really existed.

I have shown here that Christianity is not derived from Judaism. I have also shown how Christianity started as the worship of Serapis in Egypt...and it spread to the Roman world. It became one of the religions in the Roman empire.
When Constantine became empire he wanted a single religion for his empire and after much deliberation and argument they choose Christianity at the council of Nicea. Since then they have been holding different councils to fine tune the religion and Serapis became jesus at the council of Ephasius...in 430CE.

guysbewise:
The New Testament is not a historical book. This topic is based on historical records.

GOD in the Old Testament never promised to mate with another man's wife to send his son so that he be crucified. If you study Greek and Roman history you will know that such is a Roman pagan belief.

Proving that Jesus Christ was a Roman invention does not disprove the GOD of Creation in the Old Testament.

Even we don't have the complete and original Old Testament today as the Romans tooks them away and hid them and the rest in Israel they destroyed

Have you seen a lawyer who believe in chapter one of Nigeria constitution but does not believe in chapter two of the Constitution.

Any lawyer who believes so is not fit to be a lawyer because chapter one of a constitution will always validate the subsequent chapter.

So also, the Old testament which you believe validated the New testament.
Regrading the birth and existance of Jesus Christ, the Old testament validated it in the book of Isaiah 7 : 14.

Isaiah 7: 14 says - " Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. A Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son...."

Are you now saying that the book of Isaiah was also invented by the Romans?

MikeofAfrica:
Have you seen a lawyer who believe in chapter one of Nigeria constitution but does not believe in chapter two of the Constitution.

Any lawyer who believes so is not fit to be a lawyer because chapter one of a constitution will always validate the subsequent chapter.

So also, the Old testament which you believe validated the New testament.
Regrading the birth and existance of Jesus Christ, the Old testament validated it in the book of Isaiah 7 : 14.

Isaiah 7: 14 says - " Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. A Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son...."

Are you now saying that the book of Isaiah was also invented by the Romans?

Imagine that when the Europeans came to the area now called Nigeria they found our own written contitution and what they did was to conquer the people and took that original written constitution to Europe where they hid it from all the people and then they wrote and placed a new contitution on the original one they took saying the new one has fufilled the old one. So the truth is that a lawyer in Nigeria who have studied the original constitution very well will never accept the new one added to it from Europe, same with the Jews and is why they will not accept the New Testament because they know it have nothing the do with their Torah.

That verse you quoted in Isaiah is a young woman in Hebrew and not a virgin as in the Greek and Roman tranlations which all other versions have come from today.

"JESUS Christ was a fictional character invented by the Romans as a form of psychological warfare against Jewish people, a biblical scholar has sensationally claimed"

+++

"And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." -1 John 4:3

"For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist." - 2 John 1:7

sonmvayina:
Hahahahha,

So you are a dummy then?

If the Government of England is a dummy for validating the Bible , then I am happy to be a dummy also.

If the Government of the United States is a dummy for accepting the writings of the Bible, then I am happy to also be dummy since the most intelligent people on Earth seems to be dummy.

So tell me , are you not also a dummy for accepting the earth is Spherical in shape?

guysbewise:
Imagine that when the Europeans came to the area now called Nigeria they found our own written contitution and what they did was to conquer the people and took that original written constitution to Europe where they hid it from all the people and then they wrote and placed a new contitution on the original one they took saying the new one has fufilled the old one. So the truth is that a lawyer in Nigeria who have studied the original constitution very well will never accept the new one added to it from Europe, same with the Jews and is why they will not accept the New Testament because they know it have nothing the do with their Torah.

That verse you quoted in Isaiah is a young woman in Hebrew and not a virgin in the Greek and Roman tranlations which all other versions have come from today.

Why do you like dancing around the truth.

The Europeans can seize the Constitution of a Country , rewrite it and use it to deceive that country.

However the Europeans can NEVER rewrite the Constitution of another country and use it to deceive her own people. It is only a fool that will deceive his own children . The Romans are not fools and can not decieve her citizens.

That is the truth you are avoiding.

If it is truth that the Romans rewrote the Bible to deceive the Jews and other nations, then the Roman people will not be reading the same Bible since they falsified it.

The fact that they are reading the same Bible in Rome till today means that they believe both the OT and NT are authentic.

Mainwhile, the death of Jesus Christ was prophesied by Isaiah in Isaiah 53 : 3-12. Hence the OT also validated the situations resulting to the death of Jesus as narrated in the NT.

Was that passage in Isaiah 53 written by the Roman Government?

MikeofAfrica:
If the Government of England is a dummy for validating the Bible , then I am happy to be a dummy also.

If the Government of the United States is a dummy for accepting the writings of the Bible, then I am happy to also be dummy since the most intelligent people on Earth seems to be dummy.

So tell me , are you not also a dummy for accepting the earth is Spherical in shape?

The earth is flat...

That a lot people believe a lie does not make it truth

That only few people people believe a truth does not make it a lie..

MikeofAfrica:
Have you seen a lawyer who believe in chapter one of Nigeria constitution but does not believe in chapter two of the Constitution.

Any lawyer who believes so is not fit to be a lawyer because chapter one of a constitution will always validate the subsequent chapter.

So also, the Old testament which you believe validated the New testament.
Regrading the birth and existance of Jesus Christ, the Old testament validated it in the book of Isaiah 7 : 14.

Isaiah 7: 14 says - " Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. A Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son...."

Are you now saying that the book of Isaiah was also invented by the Romans?

Hahaha

Isaiah 7 is about a war, it is not a messianic prophesy. The woman in question is Isaiah's wife and the son is a sign for king Ahaz that his kingdom will survive the war....

This is what me mean by being lied to...

MikeofAfrica:
Why do you like dancing around the truth.

The Europeans can seize the Constitution of a Country , rewrite it and use it to deceive that country.

However the Europeans can NEVER rewrite the Constitution of another country and use it to deceive her own people. It is only a fool that will deceive his own children . The Romans are not fools and can not decieve her citizens.

That is the truth you are avoiding.

If it is truth that the Romans rewrote the Bible to deceive the Jews and other nations, then the Roman people will not be reading the same Bible since they falsified it.

The fact that they are reading the same Bible in Rome till today means that they believe both the OT and NT are authentic.

Mainwhile, the death of Jesus Christ was prophesied by Isaiah in Isaiah 53 : 3-12. Hence the OT also validated the situations resulting to the death of Jesus as narrated in the NT.

Was that passage in Isaiah 53 written by the Roman Government?

You are the one running away from the truth when the facts are all available now for free.

The New Testament written by the Romans was just a modification of their pagan belief as they already beleive that their rulers are from their gods that mated with their women so it was easy to make the Roman people to accept the New and their own version of the Old Testament and when emperor Constantin made that decree for it be be the official religion of Rome then no one dare challenge him but to obey.

Isaiah 53 : 3-12 is not about Jesus Christ as it says: He shall divide the spoil with the strong, he will see his offspring; and he will prolong his days

Also look at what is under the Vatican in Rome:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGmW71sWetI

sonmvayina:
The earth is flat...

That a lot people believe a lie does not make it truth

That only few people people believe a truth does not make it a lie..

In other words, you do not really believe the words of the philosophers that you are referring to their books.

They all believe that the Earth is Spherical in Shape which is also the position of both the Bible and Quran.

Hence if you believe the philosophers lied to you that the Earth is Spherical , why do you now believe them when they told you that Jesus Christ do not exist?

sonmvayina:
The earth is flat...

That a lot people believe a lie does not make it truth


That only few people people believe a truth does not make it a lie..

In other words, you do not really believe the words of the philosophers that you are referring to their books.

They all believe that the Earth is Spherical in Shape which is also the position of both the Bible and Quran.

Hence if you believe the philosophers lied to you that the Earth is Spherical , why do you now believe them when they told you that Jesus Christ do not exist?

.

Maynman:
Jesus is a common latin name, of course alot of jesus existed, have you read the talmud?

Now my question Lawag3, was Jesus a real person historically? what's your reason for your answer present evidence to back up your answers that should be easy for you.

Answer my questions first

sonmvayina:
Hahaha

Isaiah 7 is about a war, it is not a messianic prophesy. The woman in question is Isaiah's wife and the son is a sign for king Ahaz that his kingdom will survive the war....

This is what me mean by being lied to...

Flesh and blood cannot understand Prophetic messages.

In Genesis 3: 15 when God told the sepent that the seed of the Woman will bruise his heel, God was not talking about the physical kids of Eve( Cain and Abel) , He was talking about Jesus Christ who spiritually bruised the head of the Serpent and gave up power to do so- Luke10 vs 19.

Prophetic messages have both physical and spiritual dimension. The spiritual dimension supercede the physical dimension.

You understood the physical dimension of the prophetic message in Isaiah 7. The Spiritual dimension was fulfilled in Matthew 1: 18-21.

Mind you the name of Isaiah's son was not Immanueal as mentioned in the prophesy. Isaiah refused to name his Son , Immanueal, because he was expecting the fulfillment of the Spiritual dimension which is the birth of Jesus Christ.

Hence in the book of Isaiah 9: 6-7, Isaiah refered to that Child in his prophesy as " Mighty God, Everlasting Father". Isaiah can never refer to his biological son with such divine names.

Hence he was actually paying more attention to the spiritual dimension of the prophesy which is the birth of Jesus Christ the Mighty God and Everlasting Father

Lawag3:
Answer my questions first

I already did.

guysbewise:
You are the one running away from the truth when the facts are all available now for free.

The New Testament written by the Romans was just a modification of their pagan belief as they already beleive that their rulers are from their gods that mated with their women so it was easy to make the Roman people to accept the New and their own version of the Old Testament and when emperor Constantin made that decree for it be be the official religion of Rome then no one dare challenge him but to obey.

Isaiah 53 : 3-12 is not about Jesus Christ as it says: He shall divide the spoil with the strong, he will see his offspring; and he will prolong his days

Also look at what is under the Vatican in Rome:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGmW71sWetI

Let me agree with you that Emperor Constantine decieved the entire Roman Empire during his time and made them believe a fictional Jesus.

Now the issue is this, after the regime of the emperor, why was such believe not abolished outside the Roman Emperor? Since the Roman empire are no longer influencial in the world, why do Christians still believe the existence of Jesus.

Now over the years, many churches broke out of the Roman Catholic Church and expose some false teachings in the Catholic church. Did any of the churches doubt the existence of Jesus.

Even Islam which is not related to Christianity validated the existence of Jesus Christ.

I am not a Catholic and I am against most of her dogmas. However, we must not throw away the baby with the bath water. That is what you are doing.

The Roman Empire discovered that they can no longer deny the existence of Jesus after they killed Him and His disciples hence they decided to mix the teachings of Jesus with their own traditions in other to make their kingdom more popular.

That is the point you are trying to raise. The dirty bath water does not invalidate the existence of the baby. The demonic traditions of the Roman people does not invalidate the existence of Jesus.

That is the reason all other churches that are against the Roman tradition parctise in Roman Catholic church still believe in the existence and Lordship of Jesus Christ.

oteneaaron:
Interesting

Now we are getting somewhere.

Now about this "physical manifestation of the power of Jesus Christ".

What would you say about the "physical manifestation of power by the God's of our ancestors"?

What would you say about the "physical manifestation of power by the Asian Zen Masters"?

I'm sorry, but this doesn't cut as proof of the historicity of Jesus.

I confided in you that Jesus Christ is a Spiritual being which you can confirm through the physical manifestation of His power.

There are of course other Spiritual beings which we can also confirm their existence by the physical manifestation of their power.

However the Bible told us the name of Jesus has been lifted above all names that at the mention of His name, all other powers will bow.

The world has gone past the stage of verifying whether Jesus exist or not. For Islam, Buhaddism, Freemason, Amork and other societies to accept the existence of Jesus, the issue has been concluded.

That is why the Bible says that it is only a fool that says in his heart that God does not exist.

guysbewise:
What you need to find out is why did no historian during the time of Jesus Christ write anything about Jesus Christ and what did the Romans do to all the Jewish Holy Books they found in Israel?

Books are usually written when the person is dead eg Micheal Jackson, Awolowo, Biggie, Tupac etc

So you have no thing

sonmvayina:
If you are referring to the jesus is the gospel stories , then am afraid he never really existed.

I have shown here that Christianity is not derived from Judaism. I have also shown how Christianity started as the worship of Serapis in Egypt...and it spread to the Roman world. It became one of the religions in the Roman empire.
When Constantine became empire he wanted a single religion for his empire and after much deliberation and argument they choose Christianity at the council of Nicea. Since then they have been holding different councils to fine tune the religion and Serapis became jesus at the council of Ephasius...in 430CE.

Nope the council of niciea was to depate on that divinity of Jesus and the trinity
The Council of Nicaea, the first ecumenical debate held by the early Christian church, concludes with the establishment of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Convened by Roman Emperor Constantine I in May, the council also deemed the Arian belief of Christ as inferior to God as heretical, thus resolving an early church crisis.


The controversy began when Arius, an Alexandrian priest, questioned the full divinity of Christ because, unlike God, Christ was born and had a beginning. What began as an academic theological debate spread to Christian congregations throughout the empire, threatening a schism in the early Christian church. Roman Emperor Constantine I, who converted to Christianity in 312, called bishops from all over his empire to resolve the crisis and urged the adoption of a new creed that would resolve the ambiguities between Christ and God.


Meeting at Nicaea in present-day Turkey, the council established the equality of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in the Holy Trinity and asserted that only the Son became incarnate as Jesus Christ. The Arian leaders were subsequently banished from their churches for heresy. The Emperor Constantine presided over the opening of the council and contributed to the discussion. Constantine only choose Christianity because himself was Christian

Maynman:
I already did.

You didn't all you did was to point out that they are many Jesus anyway Jesus Christ is real history points to it. The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur

Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

oteneaaron:
If only people would actually read the book the OP mentioned and weigh the options for themselves.

Instead, they would rather argue and dish out insults.

In the search for truth, we must be willing to hear all sides of the argument - then decide by our own volition on which side of the fence we belong to.

But unfortunately, majority of people are too lazy to do any research.

It you are interested, here are some books to aid in your research into the history and origins of the Jesus story.

1. Ceasar's Messiah - as mentioned by the OP

2. Who is This King of Glory? - by Alvin Boyd Khun

3. The Pagan Christ - by Tom Hapur

4. Who Was Jesus? Fingerprints of the Christ - by DM Murdock

5. The Jesus Mysteries; Was the Original Jesus a Pagan God? - by Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy

Don't be intellectually lazy, question everything, study, do research and open your mind.

It is the best thing you could ever do for yourself.

Books are not the wells of Truth, Truth is dug out by your own use of your hands and feet and facilities.

And this is full time reliance on "Dem Say" (hearsay evidence) which is not an evidence of Truth.

So this is just a case of you swallowing up the Lie you like.

People swallow greedily any lie that flatters them, but sip only little by little (or not sip at all) at a truth they find bitter.

Denis Diderot

Lawag3:
Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

And this is one of the proofs of Truth.

It is known if PDP did something wrong APC must complain about it and the record will be there most especially as devil's hate Jesus, so immediately, like APC their will be plenty plenty of records.

But until these liars who were not there came up to start lying, none of this happened.

MikeofAfrica:
Let me agree with you that Emperor Constantine decieved the entire Roman Empire during his time and made them believe a fictional Jesus.

Now the issue is this, after the regime of the emperor, why was such believe not abolished outside the Roman Emperor? Since the Roman empire are no longer influencial in the world, why do Christians still believe the existence of Jesus.

Now over the years, many churches broke out of the Roman Catholic Church and expose some false teachings in the Catholic church. Did any of the churches doubt the existence of Jesus.

Even Islam which is not related to Christianity validated the existence of Jesus Christ.

I am not a Catholic and I am against most of her dogmas. However, we must not throw away the baby with the bath water. That is what you are doing.

The Roman Empire discovered that they can no longer deny the existence of Jesus after they killed Him and His disciples hence they decided to mix the teachings of Jesus with their own traditions in other to make their kingdom more popular.

That is the point you are trying to raise. The dirty bath water does not invalidate the existence of the baby. The demonic traditions of the Roman people does not invalidate the existence of Jesus.

That is the reason all other churches that are against the Roman tradition parctise in Roman Catholic church still believe in the existence and Lordship of Jesus Christ.

Emperor Constantine used Christainity to unify all the different religions in Rome at the time. From my personal experience I find those who say they are following Jesus Christ are just using it as a cover for other stuff they are into and those who truly believe in Jesus Christ are just the gullible ones.

Did you know that the **** was founded by an Anglican pastor? During the colonial period the missionaries who brought Jesus Christ to Nigeria were aware of this. So churches that broke out of the Roman Catholic Church does not mean they got closer to the TRUE GOD of the Old Testament.

Source:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fq-ijPJt-hs

MindHacker9009:
Emperor Constantine used Christainity to unify all the different religions in Rome at the time. From my personal experience I find those who say they are following Jesus Christ are just using it as a cover for other stuff they are into and those who truly believe in Jesus Christ are just the gullible ones.

Did you know that the **** was founded by an Anglican pastor? During the colonial period the missionaries who brought Jesus Christ to Nigeria were aware of this. So churches that broke out of the Roman Catholic Church does not mean they got closer to the TRUE GOD of the Old Testament.

Change of Post!

No one is asking about how Constantine unified shiit or Anglican pastor. We are waiting to see how you you can prove the Truth of your claim, which is not standing at all.

All you people are doing is repeating your statements again and again which is Constantine created shit, this person says that Rome created it, (hearsay evidence).

NOTHING MORE WHICH IS EXACTLY HOW ALL LIES ARE.

Dtruthspeaker:
Change of Post!

No one is asking about how Constantine unified shiit or Anglican pastor. We are waiting to see how you you can prove the Truth of your claim, which is not standing at all.

All you people are doing is repeating your statements again and again which is Constantine created shit, this person says that Rome created it, (hearsay evidence).

NOTHING MORE WHICH IS EXACTLY HOW ALL LIES ARE.

You are a LIER and a deceiver.

MindHacker9009:
You are a LIER and a deceiver so stay out of this as it has nothing to do with you.

Shout and scream and display your insanity, but what is seen is "All talk and repetitions of talk" no Proof!

Lawag3:
You didn't all you did was to point out that they are many Jesus anyway Jesus Christ is real history points to it. The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur

Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

Present just ONE evidence to back this up.

Dtruthspeaker:
Shout and scream and display your insanity, but what is seen is "All talk and repetitions of talk" no Proof!

You are a LIER and a deceiver that's why you always like to display your insanity when you see the truth

Dtruthspeaker:
Books are usually written when the person is dead eg Micheal Jackson, Awolowo, Biggie, Tupac etc

So you have no thing

Flavius Josephus was a first century Romano Jewish historian and he wrote about events during his own time.

Dtruthspeaker:
Books are not the wells of Truth, Truth is dug out by your own use of your hands and feet and facilities.

And this is full time reliance on "Dem Say" (hearsay evidence) which is not an evidence of Truth.

So this is just a case of you swallowing up the Lie you like.

People swallow greedily any lie that flatters them, but sip only little by little (or not sip at all) at a truth they find bitter.

Denis Diderot

If you are too mentally lazy to do some actual research into the origins of the beliefs you hold, its your choice and I respect that.

But like I mentioned earlier, in the search for truth, we must be willing to hear all sides of the story and make our conclusions by our own volition.

Live and let live.