Do u believe that Jesus died on the cross many years ago ? 📖 📖 📖

About 5000 or less years ago a man named Jesus walked the Earth. You know the story in the book of Matthew. He rose again on the 3rd day. Do you believe in the story and the crucifixion about the man named Jesus.

Happy Easter. 🐰

☺️

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

No.

mysteryespresso

@SatanBurger why

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@mysteryespresso 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.

https://jesusneverexisted.com/surfeit.htm

'Jesus of Nazareth' supposedly lived in what is the most well-documented period of antiquity – the first century of the Christian era – yet not a single non-Christian source mentions the miracle worker from the sky. All references – including the notorious insertions in Josephus – stem from partisan Christian sources (and Josephus himself, much argued over, was not even born until after the supposed crucifixion). The horrendous truth is that the Christian Jesus was manufactured from plundered sources, re-purposed for the needs of the early Church.

It is not with a human being that the Jesus myth begins. Christ is not a deified man but a humanised god who happened to be given the name Yeshu. Those real Jesuses, those that lived and died within normal human parameters, may have left stories and legends behind, later cannibalised by Christian scribes as source material for their own hero, but it is not with any flesh and blood rebel/rabbi/wonder-worker that the story begins. Rather, its genesis is in theology itself.

BritishFailedAesthetic · M

@SatanBurger

Then again, we now know that Nazareth did not exist before the second century.

Erm, even secular sources like Oxford Uni dismiss this claim with a quick google search.

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@BritishFailedAesthetic I tried to find the article you're talking about and can't find it, sorry.

BritishFailedAesthetic · M

@SatanBurger Even googling about the point you raised, clearly shows it to be misinformation, even Bart Ehrman disagrees with you.

Sharon · F

@SatanBurger It probably doesn't exist. The christian apologists are always making claims about having evidence but not one has ever been able to present a single shred of it.

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@BritishFailedAesthetic I tried to Google that exact phrase and didn't get anything. I think this will be like someone else I know on here. You make a claim and then I have to go find it and then when I can't, you'll tell me it's my responsibility to look up your claim that my comment is wrong.

I know some far right wingers that do that too on here, so you seem to have a lot in common.

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@Sharon Yeah when I looked it up, I got things like "it probably existed somewhere between" and " well we don't know" and "maybe" I tried looking it up on Oxford as British here suggested and got the same thing.

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@BritishFailedAesthetic

These six oil lamps were discovered in a Nazareth tomb, and have been used in the scholarly literature as proof of a village at Nazareth in Hellenistic times, as early as the third century BCE. In fact, the six lamps date from the Middle Roman to the Late Roman periods, long after the time of Christ. Gross misdatings of the primary evidence, sometimes involving discrepancies of up to 500 years, are frequently encountered in the Nazareth literature.

The compromised archaeology of Nazareth
The Myth of Nazareth shows that the village came into existence not earlier than 70 CE (the climax of the First Jewish War), and most likely in early II CE—the same era in which the canonical gospels were being edited. Furthermore, this study shows that there was a long hiatus in settlement in the Nazareth basin between the Late Iron Age (c. 700 BCE) and Middle Roman times (c. 100 CE). Finally, it is probable that the extensive remains in the Nazareth basin from the Bronze and Iron Ages are in fact to be identified with biblical Japhia. These conclusions are based on a unanimity of the material evidence from multiple excavations in the Nazareth basin. Whether we are speaking of “Herodian” oil lamps (which constitute the earliest Roman evidence), glass, metal, or stone objects, inscriptions, coins, “kokh” tombs with or without rolling stones, wall foundations, or agricultural installations—all of these point to a Jewish settlement beginning in early II CE and thriving in Late Roman and Byzantine times. Extra-archaeological data confirm this conclusion.

www.nazarethmyth.info

Most scholars summarily dismiss the “invention” of Nazareth on the grounds that the town is frequently mentioned in the Christian gospels. Unwittingly, archaeology is thus held hostage to literary considerations. The textual case for Nazareth in the gospels is much weaker, however, than is generally supposed. The settlement is named only once in the Gospel of Mark, at 1:9 (other instances in the Greek text read “Jesus the Nazarene”). The passage as it stands demonstrably conflicts with the remainder of the gospel, which locates Jesus’ home in Capernaum. Thus, it can be shown that the Gospel of Mark contains the later interpolation of a single word, “Nazaret” at 1:9.

Furthermore, the literary genesis of Nazareth occurs in one of the most problematic passages of Christian scripture, Mt 2:23: And he went and dwelt in a city called Nazaret, that what was spoken by the prophets might be fulfilled, “He shall be called a Nazoraean.” No such prophetic utterance has been identified in the Jewish scriptures. For its part, the Gospel of Luke is equally problematic. The enigmatic scene in the Nazareth synagogue (Lk 4:16-30) has been shown to be an elaborate reworking of prior materials. Furthermore, the third evangelist demonstrates a strident anti-Capernaum stance, one which impels him to divorce Jesus as much as possible from Capernaum roots.

Sharon · F

@SatanBurger These christian apologists think it's the job of Atheists to find evidence to support christians' claims.

SatanBurger · 36-40, F

@Sharon I believe people have confirmation bias, like those lamps that were incorrectly dated. They want to believe in it so bad that anything will suffice even if it's far reaching. It's funny cos I'm not even trying to be offensive but I can't lie when someone asks me if Jesus existed and the evidence is a little scant so I say probably not.