₦airaland Forum

LordReed:
It doesn’t matter why they adopted it, that is not an indication that the religion is therefore true or has more merit than any other religion.

It had to have meant something, don't you think? See below

MaxInDHouse:
If so then each historian will right what is important to them as for Jesus he was a nobody then that's why Pharisees need someone to identify his face, Herod wanted to know him because of the death of John the baptist that he killed thinking Jesus could be resurrected John and most importantly the Roman governor Pontius Pilate found the whole story as nonsense but he felt the Jewish religious leaders were simply jealous that Jesus (a younger Jew) is stealing their members.

So no right thinking historian of his time could think of writing about a nobody!🙂

Exactly. If people were to be written about by order, he'd be among the last written. Allegedly walking on water and raising the dead would convince historians even more that they were dealing with fiction not worth mentioning!

musicwriter:
It's so funny you're calling your Jesus a "nobody" out of desperation.

Be informed that historians don't deny that there were people called Jashua (Jesus). Contrary to your view, Rome recorded names of a lot of popular and not so popular Yashuas (Jesus'ES), they recorded everything, including the names of their warrior horses, in fact, just open your Bible and there are names of family trees of several generations. I think there are even names of beggars. That's how meticulous the Roman empire kept record.

Of course, there must have been thousands of people called (Yashua) Jesus 2,000 years ago. Because Joshua is just a Jewish name meaning "God saves". In Igbo language it's CHINAZO, which means the same thing- God saves. It's even a popular Igbo name.

What historians say is that there's no proof of any Yashua (Jesus) who was born by a virgin, walked on water, resurrected from dead.

For details, below is how Kenneth Humphreys, answered the question of numerous Jesus's, in his book; Jesus never existed:

Was there a Jesus? Of course there was a Jesus – many!

The archetypal Jewish hero was Joshua (the successor of Moses) otherwise known as Yehoshua (Yeshua) bin Nun ('Jesus of the fish’). Since the name Jesus (Yeshua or Yeshu in Hebrew, Iesous in Greek, source of the English spelling) originally was a title (meaning ‘saviour’, derived from ‘Yahweh Saves’) probably every band in the Jewish resistance had its own hero figure sporting this moniker, among others.

Josephus, the first century Jewish historian mentions no fewer than nineteen different Yeshuas/Jesii, about half of them contemporaries of the supposed Christ! In his Antiquities, of the twenty-eight high priests who held office from the reign of Herod the Great to the fall of the Temple, no fewer than four bore the name Jesus: Jesus ben Phiabi, Jesus ben Sec, Jesus ben Damneus and Jesus ben Gamaliel. Even Saint Paul makes reference to a rival magician, preaching ‘another Jesus’ (2 Corinthians 11,4). The surfeit of early Jesuses includes:

Jesus ben Sirach.
This Jesus was reputedly the author of the Book of Sirach (aka 'Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus the Son of Sirach'), part of Old Testament Apocrypha. Ben Sirach, writing in Greek about 180 BC, brought together Jewish 'wisdom' and Homeric-style heroes.

Jesus ben Pandira.
A wonder-worker during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus (106-79 BC), one of the most ruthless of the Maccabean kings. Imprudently, this Jesus launched into a career of end-time prophecy and agitation which upset the king. He met his own premature end-time by being hung on a tree – and on the eve of a Passover. Scholars have speculated this Jesus founded the Essene sect.

Jesus ben Ananias.
Beginning in 62AD, this Jesus had caused disquiet in Jerusalem with a non-stop doom-laden mantra of ‘Woe to the city’. He prophesied rather vaguely:

"A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against the whole people."

– Josephus, Wars 6.3.

Arrested and flogged by the Romans, Jesus ben Ananias was released as nothing more dangerous than a mad man. He died during the siege of Jerusalem from a rock hurled by a Roman catapult.

Jesus ben Saphat.
In the insurrection of 68AD that wrought havoc in Galilee, this Jesus had led the rebels in Tiberias ("the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people" – Josephus, Life 12.66). When the city was about to fall to Vespasian’s legionaries he fled north to Tarichea on the Sea of Galilee.

Jesus ben Gamala.
During 68/69 AD this Jesus was a leader of the ‘peace party’ in the civil war wrecking Judaea. From the walls of Jerusalem he had remonstrated with the besieging Idumeans (led by ‘James and John, sons of Susa’). It did him no good. When the Idumeans breached the walls he was put to death and his body thrown to the dogs and carrion birds.

Jesus ben Thebuth.
A priest who, in the final capitulation of the upper city in 69AD, saved his own skin by surrendering the treasures of the Temple, which included two holy candlesticks, goblets of pure gold, sacred curtains and robes of the high priests. The booty figured prominently in the Triumph held for Vespasian and his son Titus.

But was there a crucified Jesus?

Certainly. Jesus ben Stada was a Judean agitator who gave the Romans a headache in the early years of the second century. He met his end in the town of Lydda (twenty five miles from Jerusalem) at the hands of a Roman crucifixion crew. And given the scale that Roman retribution could reach – at the height of the siege of Jerusalem the Romans were crucifying upwards of five hundred captives a day before the city walls – dead heroes called Jesus would (quite literally) have been thick on the ground. Not one merits a full-stop in the great universal history.

But then with so many Jesuses could there not have been a Jesus of Nazareth?

The problem for this notion is that absolutely nothing at all corroborates the sacred biography and yet this 'greatest story' is peppered with numerous anachronisms, contradictions and absurdities. For example, at the time that Joseph and the pregnant Mary are said to have gone off to Bethlehem for a supposed Roman census, Galilee (unlike Judaea) was not a Roman province and therefore ma and pa would have had no reason to make the journey. Even if Galilee had been imperial territory, history knows of no ‘universal census’ ordered by Augustus (nor any other emperor) – and Roman taxes were based on property ownership not on a head count. Then again, we now know that Nazareth did not exist before the second century.

It is mentioned not at all in the Old Testament nor by Josephus, who waged war across the length and breadth of Galilee (a territory about the size of Greater London) and yet Josephus records the names of dozens of other towns. In fact most of the ‘Jesus-action’ takes place in towns of equally doubtful provenance, in hamlets so small only partisan Christians know of their existence (yet well attested pagan cities, with extant ruins, failed to make the Jesus itinerary).

Notice I put "nobody" in quotes. You are conflating stature of Jesus today with that of then. If people were to be mentioned by order, Jesus would be among the last mentioned. His ministry was only 3 years old, he was only 33, he was not a high priest or political figure, he was not from a wealthy or influential family, he had no connections to wealthy or influential people, he had very few followers, his followers had no regular "church" or meeting place, his "ignominous" death and his denial by his closest friends, etc. Put that in context of today's Nigeria, do you know any itinerant preacher with 3-year old ministry and very few followers and no church building who'd be included in history of Nigeria? That the person allegedly walked on water and raised the dead would be further good reason to exclude them!

If despite all that he's being worshipped as God today and His words never forgotten (exactly as he said), if that doesn't convince you. nothing else would!

LordReed:
Yes the issue is the tales of supernatural occurences. You have no wayto support those without simultaneously accepting any other similar tales from other religions.

Like I pointed out to you using the now infamous Nazi symbol which was NOT a symbol of hate before the Nazis started using it, symbols can be repurposed for any thing. You Christians for example believe the rainbow to be a symbol for something other than LGBTQ pride symbolism. The cross previously being a symbol of shameful death doesn't mean anything in the grand scheme of things, it is what it means to you Christians that matters. In other words a symbol is only as meaningful as you want it to be.

Ok, so that settles it. Sonmvayina no more talk of Jesus never existing.
As for cross, the point is that they didn't adopt it based on nothing - if Christ never existed and therefore never crucified on the cross

MaxInDHouse:
I'm asking what you meant by the word "CONTEMPORARIES"
Please don't change the subject!

I said "contemporary historian", a historian living around the same time as the person or happening.
Example, someone writing a history of the Biafran War today would be a contemporary historian. As opposed to someone writing it 500 years from now.
Example. Josephus would be considered a contemporary historian of Jesus though he was born after His death.

musicwriter:
Oh. Really?

So, you now believe what historians say?

If so, Why Is Jesus Not Included In Academic History Books?

Because he was a "nobody", just one of several itinerant preachers, non of whom was mentioned.
Same reason you wouldn't mention some minor preacher with few followers in Ibadan if you were writing history of British Empire.
You are confused by stature of Christ today

MaxInDHouse:
Please what do you meant by the word "contemporaries"?

Are you talking about people who must pen down the history while it's happening or people who lived the same time with Jesus?🙂

If someone writes "Nigrrian Church history from 1914 to Present (2026)" you'd wonder why they didn't mention Oyedepo

musicwriter:
That's what they said Constantine said! Isn't that what I told you??

Several historians saying same thing!
HOW ELSE would you know what happened if not through historians? Will you go back and witness it? Please make sense!

musicwriter:
There may have been a mix-up in dates. But it was someone else that said that Constantine said...
Constantine himself never said he saw a vision of a cross.

But even if Constantine saw any cross vision, it doesn't matter because the cross had been in use before Constantine

It is not just a mix-up in dates, you are totally mixed up. See below, Constantine himself.
Yep, his army were bearing the cross of Horus!

musicwriter:
Emperor Constantine never saw any vision!! The story of Constantine's alleged vision was told many years after the death of Constantine by (I think Eusebuis) a propagandist who made up much of the falsehoods found in the history of Christianity today.

But even if Constantine saw such vision, why should it mean anything to a rational, intelligent person?

Yet Eusebius died b4 Constantine! 🤣😂🤣😅😍
Was his army bearing the cross symbol (historical fact) also Eusebius??!

musicwriter:
The image of the Greek son of God Dyionasis should tell you that crucification had been before your Jesus. Wasn't Dyionasis crucified before Jesus? Didn't the ancient Egyptian cross (ankh) represent salvation and eternal life?

If you truly love your Jesus, why not go read history to find out where Christianity got it from?

You were asked if Constantine also got it from Dyionasis? Was that who his cross dream was about?

musicwriter:
Indeed, that's all you know!!

But there are more that you don't know.

The cross had been used by other belief systems. It also represented salvation and eternal life before Christianity.

Was Constantine also copying Horus? See below

musicwriter:
I was talking to you, so stop passing the onus to prove the existence of your Jesus to someone else. The cross had been in use by other belief systems before anybody heard of Jesus.

And I'm talking to you (see above). When else in history were there so much crucifixions as symbolized by the cross?

musicwriter:
It's a pity you're bent on this cross thing because you simply don't know where the Christian cross came from.

The cross came directly from the ancient Egyptian son of God Horus and other Christo-messiahs that predate Christianity. Before anybody heard of Jesus, the cross was already a symbol of salvation and eternal life.

By the way, before Christianity adopted the cross, it used to be a fish, then a sheep. They've been used as well but Christendom just settled for the cross at last because all the other older saviors and Messiahs used cross.

Attached is the ancient Egyptian cross, which predate Christianity.

The other is a drawing of the Greek son of God Dyionasis, who also died on a cross by crucification before Jesus.

All we know is that there were tons of crucifixions around the time Christ was crucified and no other time in history was that the case!

musicwriter:
It's a pity you're bent on this cross thing because you simply don't know where the Christian cross came from.

The cross came directly from the ancient Egyptian son of God Horus and other Christo-messiahs that predate Christianity. Before anybody heard of Jesus, the cross was already a symbol of salvation and eternal life.

By the way, before Christianity adopted the cross, it used to be a fish, then a sheep. They've been used as well but Christendom just settled for the cross at last because all the other older saviors and Messiahs used cross.

Attached is the ancient Egyptian cross, which predate Christianity.

The other is a drawing of the Greek son of God Dyionasis, who also died on a cross by crucification before Jesus.

sonmvayina what do you say to this? And while at it also tell us HOW this below was talking of Israel and not Jesus!

Isaiah 53
4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression and judgment he was taken away.
Yet who of his generation protested?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was punished.
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

sonmvayina:
https://www.nairaland.com/6612275/isaiah-53-why-suffering-servant

Here is Isaiah 53 verbatim:

He was despised and rejected by mankind,
a man of suffering, and familiar with pain.
Like one from whom people hide their faces
he was despised, and we held him in low esteem.

4 Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
yet we considered him punished by God,
stricken by him, and afflicted.
5 But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him, and by his wounds we are healed.
6 We all, like sheep, have gone astray,
each of us has turned to our own way;
and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.

7 He was oppressed and afflicted,
yet he did not open his mouth;
he was led like a lamb to the slaughter,
and as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
so he did not open his mouth.
8 By oppression[a] and judgment he was taken away.
Yet who of his generation protested?
For he was cut off from the land of the living;
for the transgression of my people he was punished.
9 He was assigned a grave with the wicked,
and with the rich in his death,
though he had done no violence,
nor was any deceit in his mouth.

10 Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes[c] his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.

sonmvayina:
igbos occupying the east part of Nigeria and the white man came and was trying to force Christianity on the igbos and they resisted.....would you term it persecution of Christians?

Are you ok? Was Rome occupying a part of anything? Were they not ruling almost all the world?

sonmvayina:
it is not a prophecy actually.
in Isaiah 53, let me educate you. it is the kings of the earth that are talking. it is what they will say when they witness the salvation of Israel.
it is not Isaiah talking and it is not God talking...

who can believe what we (The kings of the earth) has seen(the salvation of Israel)

Delulu. You were given two complementary chapters Leviticus 16 and Isaiah 53

sonmvayina:
that's not love,that is weakness....I know you have NEVER turned the other cheek, so don't push it...

Point is, they were NOT a "death cult"

sonmvayina:
that's not what I asked. well, I will take it that the answer is NO.

If Igbos rulled Nigeria and were beheading and persecuting Christians you wouldn't call it persecution??!

sonmvayina:
what am I supposed to see.
I asked for a passage or passages that says God had a son he was sending to earth as a ransom, you are quoting Isaiah 53 about a suffering SERVANT, after Isaiah has finished telling you that the servant is Israel....see 45:1-7 for confirmation...

I am still waiting...

Why are you emphasizing "servant"? Jesus himself described His mission as one of service, famously saying He came "to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Matthew 20:28 and Mark 10:45).
What else are you waiting for? Who else fulfills Isaiah's prophecy??

MaxInDHouse:
They actually wrote about false Christ but they may not be talking about Jesus.

That's my own point!🙂

Who and where?
Even His apostles did not write about Jesus till long after His resurrection

sonmvayina:
ok, please can you quote from the Tanakh where it says God has a son, he was sending as a ransom for humans.....
I will become a JW today.....if you can and we will end this discussion. but if you can't, are you willing to consider the fact you have been fooled and lied to..?

See below

MaxInDHouse:
Was there any who specifically mention Jesus by name?
I understood what you are saying but it's evident that there were three individuals in the first century claiming Christ so the people you are quoting may be talking about any of them!😟

OP's point is that no contemporary historian wrote of any one of them - even negatively

sonmvayina:
During the colonial era, when Christianity was trying to gain access to the igbo heartland, the igbos resisted....will you consider this persecution??

If Igbos were rulling Nigeria and beheading Christians and banning their religion, YES!

sonmvayina:
it's a torture and death symbol.....it is not a love symbol

But they were a love group who "made up" turn the other cheek!

sonmvayina:
hahahahha,
let me make this easy for you,
show me where it is written in the Tanakh (old testament) That God had a son that he was sending to earth to die for the sins of men.

See below

MaxInDHouse:
Your grievances against me shouldn't be this obvious to everyone at least i never insulted anyone like your other friend. We true Christians keeps stubborn unbelievers in suspense. Sonmvayina will do everything to get a response from me because he knew how powerful my comments are.
So try to be respectful in your comments next time no faithful one is here to insult others for their comments.


There were two people before Jesus who tried to make themselves relevant in the first century {Act 5:36-37} Jesus himself spoke of those who have come claiming they are the Messiah! John 10:8

His point is that no contemporary historian wrote about Jesus, even denouncing him or warning people not to follow his "false doctrine"

sonmvayina:
Because the stories told about Jesus in the gospel does not check out.
1. The virgin birth is a No no
2. The idea of a logos is a Greek philosophy
3. The zombie apocalypse is rad
I can go on and on....the story point to the fact that it is actually a fictional character. That's why he don't feature in a real history text book.The cross is a symbol of torture and death. probably because it is a death cult/religion.Those stories was told by Christian themselves....I will take it with a pinch of salt.I don't think so. I think he was the one who wrote the book of Mark and his colleagues used it as a template to write the rest, The only surviving text we have are from post Nicaea.But, Romeo actually died for Juliet. does it mean they are real??

See below

sonmvayina:
you no go university? you no know wetin be cult?
A death cult are group of people that carry out human sacrifices, maybe in order to end their activities, they created a story about God sending his son to die as the final human sacrifice.......and then built a religion round it and forced people to believe it. if they don't, they kill them.....so, people fearing their life, accepted just like you...

Amazing that a thinking human being actually believes this is the reason Christians use cross!

sonmvayina:
lol, active where? The role of the Messiah God promised was to usher an era of world peace and end all oppression. Isaiah said "Men will hammer their sword into ploughshares....and learn of war NO MORE. it has not happened. so when did this Messiah come and the world is still at war.....Don't be fooled my brother.

Active in people's lives and demons flee at mere mention of His name, and countess miracles attributed to him. The era is still comming and commingbof Jesus was prelude to it[/quote]

sonmvayina:
h

I wonder why? given that it is a torture and death symbol.

maybe they are giving us a clue that they arise from a death cult.
human sacrifice belongs to the realm of Lucifer....God hates it.

It never remotely occurs to you that they were indeed following a crucified person and the cross is the symbol of that crucifixion??
Again, what us meaning of "death cult"?