₦airaland Forum

wegevv:
The general public is mostly anti-christian. That is not news. Virtually all scholars who have done research say he existed

I will be glad if I see their findings.

wegevv:
The general public is mostly anti-christian. That is not news. Virtually all scholars who have done research say he existed

I'm not saying that he didn't exist or he did, There just no evidence for it. You need to agree that there's no evidence for his existence

wegevv:
It's not true. Virtually all scholars believe he existed based on research not faith

What research?
They don't have evidence.

Where are the evidence that Jesus existed found by your scholars?

wegevv:
There's no evidence it is a fallacy lol

You refuse to accept that any historical figures from a certain time exists based on your standards. That is fine my bro. Free country

These are your scholars, I think I share their sentiment as well.
No evidence but it doesn't mean he didn't exist it he did exist.

Nothing to point to to be sure

wegevv:
There's no evidence it is a fallacy lol

You refuse to accept that any historical figures from a certain time exists based on your standards. That is fine my bro. Free country

But even this so called scholars accept that they don't have evidence for it but agree based on probability.

I ca share you links for you to read about it

wegevv:
I've previously admitted I'm a zombie. Just don't see the logical consistency in looking for the type of evidence that no one expects to exist for historical figures of a certain time lol

I'm not Saying he didn't exist it not. I'm just saying that there is no evidence.
Don't be unsecured, I'm not trying to make you unbelieve it.

The only way anyone can accept the existence of Jesus Christ is on the basis of Belief, noot evidence because there is none that he did. That's my point l, even the so called scholars don't have evidence

wegevv:
Historical scholars do not have consensus on Robin Hood even though he was thought to exists after Jesus. That's how strong the literature evidence is for historical figures like Jesus and Alexander the Great who existed much earlier

I'm still trying to find an actual evidence for Jesus. You should try as well

wegevv:
Historical scholars do not have consensus on Robin Hood even though he was thought to exists after Jesus. That's how strong the literature evidence is for historical figures like Jesus and Alexander the Great who existed much earlier

So your only argument is a fallacy of appealing to authority?
That fallacy is what actually seperate Jesus from Robin Hood, not actual evidence

wegevv:
Again I obviously accept that Newton existed. My arguments are to show that based on your standard one could easily argue that Isaac Newton didn't exist because there is no empirical evidence. And he only died a couple hundred years ago.

But the standard that most scholars use for historical figures is different. The further back you go the harder it is but still virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed because there is enough written about them from various sources.

Based on your standard no one can prove that any historical figure from over a thousand years ago existed lol.

These are my standards.

1. There are manuscripts actually written and Signed by Isaac Newton.
2. The family of Isaac Newton are still in England and they even talk to BBC. Their family house still exist and even where Isaac newton resided.
3. There are actually descriptions of what Isaac newton looks like.
4. There are proven records of Isaac newton's contributions in science in terms of inventions.
5. There are archeological remnant of Isaac Newton.

Show me any of these for Jesus Christ and I will agree with you are not deliberately creating another argument in order not avoid presenting evidence for Jesus.

MightySparrow:
There are a lot of evidences of His existence. I have argued with some people that claim that there is no God. If the claim is true, why does He have many messagers and His history meanders through all civilizations?
Even now, as Moses, Paul, Ezekiel had encounters with Jesus, many still have same today. After an encounter, you don't doubt. The outcome of such encounters made people to believe in them.


Jesus is not only a historical person, He is also a contemporary person. All other Gods speak only by oracles, Jesus is different.

However, you don't compel His encounters. He gives to whoever at His discretion.

So, Jesus exists.

going by your argument, we can also argue for the existence of Robin hood and King Arthur as historical figures. Of course, you and I know that there are no evidence that they existed

MightySparrow:
There are a lot of evidences of His existence. I have argued with some people that claim that there is no God. If the claim is true, why does He have many messagers and His history meanders through all civilizations?
Even now, as Moses, Paul, Ezekiel had encounters with Jesus, many still have same today. After an encounter, you don't doubt. The outcome of such encounters made people to believe in them.


Jesus is not only a historical person, He is also a contemporary person. All other Gods speak only by oracles, Jesus is different.

However, you don't compel His encounters. He gives to whoever at His discretion.

So, Jesus exists.

Can you show me one evidence presented by any of your historians that Jesus Christ walked on this planet and let's end this long argument?

I need just one

wegevv:
We have gone from "Jesus never existed because there is no evidence" to "Aside from the bible".

But despite moving the goal post, majority of scholars in this area do point to evidence outside the bible that Jesus existed. A quick google will tell you that.



PS: pretty sure your believe that Isaac Newton did exist is based on your reliance on authority on the matter not any evidence you have seen lol

Again, even if Isaac newton didn't exist, it's till not evidence that Jesus existed.

The existence of Isaac is mutually exclusive to that of Jesus. We still need evidence separately to prove the existence of Jesus Christ

wegevv:
We have gone from "Jesus never existed because there is no evidence" to "Aside from the bible".

But despite moving the goal post, majority of scholars in this area do point to evidence outside the bible that Jesus existed. A quick google will tell you that.

my apologies if I infer that Jesus never existed.
But I have been making it clear that "there's no evidence that he did"
It doesn't mean that he didn't, it also does mean that he did.
I just won't accept your claim that he did until I see evidence for that.
I won't also accept the claim of anyone who say he didn't

PS: pretty sure your believe that Isaac Newton did exist is based on your reliance on authority on the matter not any evidence you have seen lol

I don't believe, I can see evidence that he existed.

Mind if I show you some and you show me that of Jesus? Deal?

wegevv:
Saying you don't know he existed is different to saying you don't believe he existed. I believe we have made some progress lol ❤️

Then I need to lecture you on how beliefs and knowledge works.
People like me who rely on knowledge don't believe anything, we accept the evidence before us. It's called empiricism.

I don't believe Jesus existed, I don't disbelieve either. I just don't know if he did or not based on the available evidence. The difference is that, I don't rely on belief to accept his existence like you, I rely on knowledge. (two different things).

I don't have to believe that if I jump from a the 50 storey building that I will die or at least I will be severely injured, I know it. It is why I won't do it, you also don't have to believe it because you will accept it by knowledge.

So I don't accept that Jesus ever existed because there no knowledge of it that proves that, this doesn't also mean that I outrightly reject it.

wegevv:
I mean I don't think so either. But someone could follow the same reasoning you're following and conclude that Isaac Newton didn't exists. The fact that there is a house somewhere that people claim he lived in or there are humans today claiming to be his descendants is not "empirical evidence" is it lol.

Someone cannot follow suhc reasoning when we can still trace Isaac newton's lineage.

The legacies of Isaac newton are far more provable than that of Jesus. His works are a living fossil of his existence. Aside from the bible, which is a claim, no one can really point to any evidence that Jesus walked on this planet

wegevv:
You said you don't believe he existed. Do you have evidence he never existed? lol

Do you have evidence that I didn't place a teapot somewhere between the orbit ot Mars and Earth that no telescope can see?

You say you couldn't find evidence he existed. I'm assuming you read the reasons why virtually all those scholars believe he existed. But you decided to believe he never existed without evidence he didn't exists?

I have read all and still cannot find an empiricsl evidence, so I don't know if Jesus actually existed.
You can show me evidence from those scholars that has convinced you this far

Doesn't seem like a logically coherent position to take to me

It is, I have to see evidence before I believe it. That's logic

wegevv:
I mean if I wanted to be obtuse I could say that pictures is not enough empirical evidence that Isaac Newton existed. I mean Newton died in the 18th century and I understand the camera was only invented in the 19th century. So what you're seeing are drawings.

You could also say this about Robin hood and Kong Arthur.
But we can still find Isaac Newton family members in England and they still have a family house and even kept where Isaac lived. You cannot say that about Jesus.

Anyway I accept that all these people existed because there's no reason not to. Just showing you the natural extrapolation of your logic.

I don't think there's logic is comparing the existence of Isaac newton to that of Jesus Christ

wegevv:
I'm a Christian. I'd believe in Jesus even if the smartest people in the world concluded tomorrow that he never existed lol. You can make of that what you want but that's me. I'm a full on "Zombie" for Christ to use your own words lol.

sincerely, it's not a problem, as long as you draw inspiration from it. As long as you don't make it a fact that others must accept.

You've said you lean towards logic & science (unlike us zombies lol) but then said you "don't think such entity exist or ever existed" about Jesus and I'm saying that virtually all the smartest people in the world in the area of history agree that Jesus existed. Just like they do about Alexander the Great etc (I like that you didn't answer the question about the others lol)

Because you are saying this again does not mean that it's not a fallacy of appealing to authority. Tell those smart people to tell you the evidence so you can show me.

If you think it is "not nice" to tell you what the authorities in this area believe without providing evidence then I can only apologies. The internet is open to all though. I was only interested in offering that virtually all the authority in this area say Jesus existed.

do you think I have not searched the internet for evidence of Jesus?
If I saw one, then why am I still asking you?
If you think that I didn't search properly, you can refer me to link for one.

I've even admitted earlier that "I can't say your claim is objectively wrong" so not sure why you seem to be getting mad at me ❤️

I'm not getting mad my brother. It's just a friendly conversation.
Don't be defensive

wegevv:
Lol not "many". Virtually all who have studied it deeply.

It's nice to be on the side of authority for a change though as someone who believes in the virgin birth even though most authority in that area say it's not possible ever lol.

Do you believe Alexander the Great existed? William Shakespeare? Isaac Newton? ❤️

I don't know much about Alexander the great.
However, using Isaac Newton and William Shakespeare is a faulty equivalence, there are tonnes of evidence in form of pictures, their residence and even rooms that they both existed. None exist for Jesus.

The evidence for the existence of Jesus christ is equivalent to that of Robin hood. There's no evidence that both ever existed

wegevv:
Lol not "many". Virtually all who have studied it deeply.

So where is the evidence l, I will change my mind if you show me one

It's nice to be on the side of authority for a change though as someone who believes in the virgin birth even though most authority in that area say it's not possible ever lol.

Do you believe Alexander the Great existed? William Shakespeare? Isaac Newton? ❤️

it's not nice to follow authority without authority providing evidence. It makes one a zombie and that's why there's a fallacy specially created for it.
When referencing an authority, is important to bring the evidence this authority found. We need to start teaching religious people the basics of logic and reasoning

advanceDNA:
An atheist allowing jesus matter live rent free in his head....so much trouble over what does not exist

Does this prove that I understand the bible more than many Christians?
I don't believe because I have read it

According to the scriptures, it is not necessary to pay your "tithe" to a church. Scripturally, you decide how to pay your tithe, you also decide if you don't want to pay it. It all depends on whether you have faith in it or not.

The reason is because Tithing in the Bible are of two approaches, either by vowing to God that you will pay it (with reference to Abraham paying tithe to Melchizedek and Jacob in Genesis) or paying via the mosaic law in Deuteronomy 14.
And since we don't live by the law which suggest that you pay it to a levite (specifically, a person from the tribe of Levi), then you can take a cue from that of Abraham, who did it by vow (this is totally optional depending on your faith).
I believe that most churches cherrypick the laws of Moses into persuading members to pay it. It's understandable when they do that, because this is actually the major source of funds to run the church
However Galatian 3 vs 10-14 specifies that if you live by the law, you are bound to obey all part of the law. If you miss any, you are bound by the curses, it means that cherrypicking only tithe is tantamount to curses.

"10. Those who depend on obeying the Law live under a curse. For the scripture says, "Whoever does not always obey everything that is written in the book of the Law is under God's curse
11. Now, it is clear that no one is put right with God by means of the Law, because the scripture says, "Only the person who is put right with God through faith shall live."
12 But the Law has nothing to do with faith. Instead, as the scripture says, "Whoever [does] everything the Law requires will live."
13 But by becoming a curse for us Christ has redeemed us from the curse that the Law brings; for the scripture says, "Anyone who is hanged on a tree is under God's curse."
14 Christ did this in order that the blessing which God promised to Abraham might be given to the Gentiles by means of Christ Jesus, so that through faith we might receive the Spirit promised by God."

So try to pay your tithe through faith and not through the law given to the children of Isreal for we are not bound by those laws. And if you don't have faith in tithe, don't pay it.


Even Jesus Christ made it clear Matthew 23: 23 and 24 that Tithe is not the most consequential thing for a Christian. It doesn't have much weight
Matthew 23:23-24 New King James Version (NKJV)
“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith. These you ought to have done, without leaving the others undone. Blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!

So as a Christian, Jesus christ is really not interested in your tithe. He's interests in Justice, Mercy and "faith".

In conclusion, so whether you want to pay it or not, or you want to pay it to your church or individuals, it's not so important to Jesus. What matters is whether you have faith. If you have faith that paying it to individuals is what works for you, go on. Don't pay it if you don't have faith in it enough to make that vow.

wegevv:
You can choose to believe he didn’t exist, it’s your right . But again, there is extremely strong consensus among historical scholars that Jesus existed in person. To say it’s debatable is just not an accurate description of the status quo among historians. To deny that he ever existed is to also deny much of human history for lack of “evidence” because research in this area kind of has to work differently.

yes, the existence of Jesus Christ is subject to believe and not a matter of fact and evidence.
Because many historians think that he exist does not mean he does if they don't give evidence, let's not commit fallacy of appealing to authority.

That’s why I didn’t say your claim is objectively wrong but instead said it’s not very pro-scientism (or maybe pro-academia is more appropriate). Again there are many ways to bash Christianity but this isn’t one of them ❤️

Academia doesn't mean in science.
There's no empirical evidence that Jesus exist, it's unscientific for me to think he does.

wegevv:
Workch you can’t claim to be pro-scientific research and then say “I don't think such entity exist or ever existed as there are no sufficient evidence to make such verdict” about Jesus.

please can you give me the evidence that Jesus Christ ever existed that I can test or has been tested to be true?

There is strong consensus from non-religious historians about Jesus existing and how he died. You can bash Christianity while sticking to the facts lol.

it's still very debatable within historians and again, historians do not have any evidence in form of manuscript or archeological artifacts to prove the existence of Jesus. If you have any, show me.

Anyway thank you for your honest answer about Christ. Christians indeed should all try to be Christ-like but none of us are perfect ❤️

you don't need to be a Christian to live a pristine life like Christ as described in the Bible. It's a lifr that can be lived even as an atheist, you just need to be humane

MightySparrow:
Okay, I appreciate that. Christ exists. All things seemingly revolve around him for some and actually for us Christians. You see , his teachings are like a constitution of a country. They are the ideals we all should keep to check excesses. There are some of us either by zeal or ignorance or knowledge, we want to act with pride our believe. We are still human.

Nonetheless, Jesus' teachings have shapen and built many great countries. These nations also have not obeyed 100% but at least better than ours. In summary, forgive our excesses. I will like to say like Paul in chains in front of a king who held similar view as yours. " I would like you to be like me except in these chains..."

Since Christ exists, I would love you are part of us without our excesses. I dó love you with the love of Christ.
Cheers brother.

like I said, I don't think there's enough evidence to conclude that a personality called Christ ever existed, I don't want to dwell on that as that's a claim that shapes the belief system of Christians.
But if you talk about his attributes and character as described by the Bible, it's wirht emulating.

You can make any conclusion to me on the basis of christ existence, there's no evidence such a person exist.

MightySparrow:
What do you dislike about Christ?

I do not dislike christ, I don't think such entity exist or ever existed as there are no sufficient evidence to make such verdict. Irrespective of this, the teachings of Christ in the Bible is worth emulating and this world would be a better place if Christians can actually be Christ-like, but in reality they are not.

I don't dislike christians either, I dislike some of their behaviors

hisgrace090:
Things are acceptable by us if its allowed by the book "bible" God gave men wisdom to pursue science and satan gave men wrong wisdom to pursue dangerouse science to work against God.

This is exactly what I pointed out in the original post.

1.The have this moral superiority complex in them. You can see this with the missionaries who goes house to house to spread their religion. They always think that they know everything and their little pretty holy book has answers to everything. They think that the whole world should revolve around this book and the book should dictate how everyone live their lives including government policies.

2. They Disrespect other people's beliefs. You can see this in the missionaries who goes house to house to spread this religion. As soon as they see a Muslim, traditionalist or irreligious, they will immediate say we are here to safe you from hell fire. This itself is a very rude and what is worst they even claim the respective deities or rituals as Satan and satanic. Their lack of knowledge of a particular culture and practice and their intolerance in them makes them say this.

3.They are not pro science, the orthodox churches are a little more proscience than the pentecostal churches. The pentecostal churches as a matter of fact are running a deliberate anti-science campaign. They get triggered when they confront irreligious people and at first they try to show how science and Bible gets along well. As soon as you point them out one by one, they will play gymnastic and twist and turn and also cherry picking a few worlds to suit science. When you debunk all of it, they will claim that not everything in science are proven and most scientific theories are just theories and not a proven fact. This makes me laugh, as they don't even know what is a scientific theory means.

4. They are Over defensive. Well this is very much present in all religious people but Christian and Muslims tend to be extremely defensive and denial. Esp when it comes to the basic logic in the Bible.

5. Hypocrites. Yes, they are the most hypocrite people, they critise other religion and yet they can't stand a simple criticism.

6. Cheap behaviour/ religion business. Yes, they normally target the poor people and in the name of charity they try to convert the poor people. Charity is never done sincerely and its more of a religious and business purpose. What is worst, there are several cases where they convert people uneducated ones without their knowledge. This happens widely in rural area in Africa and India.

HellVictorinho6:
yeah,we cant dwell on that,but ur children will make u talk about it.

Well, I won't stop my children from going to church with her. The thing is, I will always tell them to be rational in everything they do including religious choices.
Going to church will help them see the flaws in religion, so it will make sense when I start coaching them on how not to be irrational.

HellVictorinho6:
how do u feel when ur fiance says u are an evidence of god?

she doesn't say that. If she does then I will just laugh and let it go.

frank317:
Of course it's not a religion, its a scam.

They call it a relationship with God and Jesus. This relationship requires praying, fasting, and going to worship centers and trying to serve a supposedly creator of the world (creator of the world... isnt that laughable?). Same thing every religion does.

My question is, how in the world do these people feel they are communicating to the creator of this world and not feel insane?

Imagine u have access to be the son or have relationship with common Tinubu or Dangote, u sure will feel this relationship, no need to convince anyone... people will naturally flock around you. how much more have relationship with the creator of this world who supposedly loves you unconditionally and wants the best for you. Yet you are here running round and round trying to prove him...

The creator of this world with multiple planets that has existed for billions of years is ur father and common fuel subsidy removal or Covid 19 is getting u to run helter skelter.. SMH. let's keep deceiving ourselves.

lol, funny guy. You are a comedian

helinues:
At least I have seen initiative of different km roads all made it on NL Fp

Have you not been seeing threads about development in Anambra stat

Nope I haven't been seeing what Soludo is doing.