Q. Do Muslims believe in the virgin birth of Jesus?

That;s why google provides other links for you to read. I'm sure you'd rather spend your time lobbing insults at people here, but please try to inform yourself just a little bit on at least one topic currently up for discussion.

Current debate isn't either if Jesus existed or not; its whether he was son of God or not. Do you not remember Cameron's special on Discovery a few months back? It's given as fact that Jesus existed. You can argue for/against him being the son of god. But saying he didn't exist is kinda silly.

 

There is no proof that he actually existed, let alone if he is son of God or not.

I am familiar with different publicity schemes and other outright frauds about this subject and there is no proof for his existence. It seems you are the one who should try to inform yourself about what you are trying to discuss.

How do you know that he existed if you can not post a proof and you can only provide a stupid link to Google search?

 

I am sorry that Jesus existed in a time when the only thing passed down is the written word and little else. I wish they had digital cameras for you and film that you could look at to placate yourself, but there is written evidence from people who both hated him, judged him and liked him to prove he existed. If you fail to see that and need to dig up a body somehow, then I can understand your sadness.

I'll remind someone, that next time the universe is recreated, to create digital cameras first, just for you.

 

Jesus existed in a time that Roman and Jewish historians documented all significant events such as wars, floods, femen,... but there is no record about his existence from any of such historians from his time. Everything about his existence is from later years and after the establishment of new religion and myth of Jesus.

Nice try to sound smart and look like you know what you are talking about but too bad it didn't work.

 

The main records that have survived from the Romans were mainly from wealthy people and rulers. Jesus was neither, obviously, so like millions of other people, (that I suppose you don't think existed) there is not a lot written down. Shocking! If your argument is that if there is nothing written about him at the time; he didnt' exist. Then you almost have to argue that the only people who lived in Rome were the upperclass people. Certainly, no historian was writing stuff about Bob the sewer maintenance guy. He, therefore did not exist?

You assume historians write down everything and they do not. Especially at that time. By your method of deciding if someone existed or not, it is not difficult to wipe away many-many historical people from the history books. Where would you like to start?

 

Another bunch of BS to hide the fact that you don't know what you are talking about. I didn't say that Roman and Jewish historians wrote biography of rich and famous, I posted that they documented all the significant events of their time such as wars, floods and other important events for example if this Jesus existed and made all those miracles.

If there is no evidence of his existence as you claim then how do you know he existed? In this case, as far as we know, Jesus belongs to the same category as Santa Claus and tooth fairy. It is good for making weak minded and children happy.

 

And again, I'm reminding you that historians did not catalog everything that ever happened. Christianity was not a big event during christs life; it took off -after- his death. So if you want to whine that historians did not write down miracles; that's fine. But we are not talking about that. We are talking about a person. Christ, not being rich/famouse/elite was not noteworthy, so it is not shocking that there is not a lot written that is contemporary.

If you want to talk about whether the miracles happened and if they were noteworthy to the historians; that's different. Please stick with something.

You make a good case. I don't think hannibal, nefretiti or many others existed. We have less proof of their existence. And millions of others in the past. All are santa claus, I suppose.

 

Since miracles happened to a limited number of people who were told not to tell anyone, it's hard to imagine why a historian would document, for all they know, a rumor or legend. Most people didn't believe the miracles anyway. Just like today. Assumptions are made to make the impossible, possible in logical terms.

It's not like today where someone, somewhere has nothing better to do than report on obscure, questionable events. And then they're promptly maginalized as tabloids. Historians are not going to negate their entire life's work by recording what many assumed was just tabloid material.

Jesus had nothing nice to say to people who demanded signs. If Jesus wanted his miracles highly publicized he would have gotten a PR person.

As far as any secular historian was concerned, Jesus was just a man who was rumored to be able to do miracles. Those rumors spread and that's why we see people coming up to him believing he can do miracles and since they believed, then Jesus would do a miracle for them personally.

gworld, and many like him, expect Jesus to go to them to do a miracle. They won't believe the "rumors" until someone they assume is an expert tells them it's okay. But hey, they're open minded.

 

There are records of different historical figures existence and that is the reason we know that they existed. There is no proof of Jesus existence and the whole myth of Christianity including the date for birth of Jesus is based on Persian mythology of worshiping the sun which became popular in Roman empire.

You can thank Persians for giving you the Jesus to believe in.

 

I'd view gworld's post but I need verification that it's worth reading first. Random quotes and rumors on the internets aren't going to get him off my ignore list.

 

As I said, which you seem to be avoiding, is that many historical figures have little or less evidence of their existance than does Jesus. Nefrititi is one. Evidence of obscure people is virtually impossible to find. Christianity didn't take off until -after- his death, so its not improbable that little was written at the time about him. There was no NYT people section.

But let's discuss someone who has an greater chance of not-existing (based upon your criteria) than Jesus. Hannibal.

Based upon your view; Hannibal didn't exist. There aren't any contemporary writings about him (strike 1); it is all written after the fact. Isn't this your problem with Jesus?

There is no archaeological evidence of his city either. There isn't any carthigian writings of him either - given he was their greatest military leader, you'd think there'd be evidence don't you?

Ooo. Strike 2 and 3. He's outta here. Therefore, you cannot logically claim that Hannibal existed right?

You could even make a case that Rome made him up, as you claim the Christians did Jesus. Rome had a lot to gain by "defeating" such a great tactician, didn't it? It seems to fit in with other Roman writings extolling how powerful they were militarily. In a hostile world, being able to defeat the greatest general ever is great propaganda.

Of course, like you, I'm conveniently ignoring all other evidence of his existence, because - again, like you - I am only choosing to go with sources that fit my current belief system.

 

You chose a wrong one to BS about. There are many historical facts available about Hannibal that you can read about it here:

Hannibal

Here is a coin with his picture on it:



As far as Jesus is concerned, it belongs to the same category as Santa Claus, tooth fairy and Easter Bunny.

 

That's nice. Roman coins of that era have pictures of gods on them. Does that mean they exist too?

Jesus has pictures of himself too. Yes, I read the wiki article actually. Thanks for linking it though. Every point I made is valid and are the exact same points you use to discount Jesus' existence. Your defense of this is just getting sad.

Let's continue to another, shall we?

Let's compare how much more we know about Jesus' life than we about Nefertiti's.

Known? Jesus' parents. Yes. Nerferitit's parents. No.
Known? Jesus' birthplace. Yes. Nerfertiti's birthplace. No.
Known? Jesus' age of death. Yes. Nerferiti's death. No.
Known? How Jesus died. Yes. How Nerfititi died. No.
Known? Jesus' tomb location. Yes. Nefertiti's tomb location. No.

We have a lot of information from Egyptian historians about people contemporary with Nerfertiti, but nothing on her. Does that mean she didn't exist either?

Do I need to continue to others? Or do you see the point yet?

 

I see that you are too desperate to believe in a fantasy while it is a known fact that there is no proof that Jesus ever existed. If believing in a fantasy, going to Church and hoping to have an afterlife in Heaven makes you happy, so be it. I see no reason to shatter your fantasies when it is obvious that you are in so desperate need of it.

 

As long as you realize you've given up an intelligent defense of your belief.

I think your problem comes from the fact that you cannot separate the man from the miracles. It is possible to believe that Jesus existed without having to believe he performed miracles. You won't melt.

 

What ever you say; if it makes you happy, I can also agree that Santa Claus exists and he is making toys for the Children all year around and then he fly around the world and give out toys to all the children during Christmas.
If you are good and believe in Jesus, may be he will bring you a toy too.

 

now its little kids and toys? Can a mod please ban this pervert? All he talks about is little kids, and now little kids and toys....

 

Let's keep this civil people. Attack the issue, not the person

Well, you have to look at the type of media they had back then. It took forever for news to travel. Hell, Roman soldiers would be fighting battles YEARS after the war ended (treaties were signed and everything) because they did not have a means of communication to spread the news quickly enough.

They didn't have mass communication systems back then like TV, Radio, and Newspaper circulations. They didn't even have typewriters or print paper. Everything was hand written and the towns were hundreds sometimes thousands of miles apart. With no planes/cars/trains.

Someone could dropdown from the sky here in New York, but it would take sometime before than news got to Chile or some other far away country without the internet, newspaper, radio, tv etc,.. and people only had donkeys and camels to move around with.

Also, the Roman Calendar 9Now used wordwide) Is based on Greek and Egyptian Calender. Jesus was looked upon as a crimminal, he was not viewed as an upstanding man in his society. Can you find detailed logs for all Roman prisonoers? I think NOT.

Also, if you choose to NOT beleive in god because there is no proof for him, then stop acting as if you're enlightened because you're the one who disbeleives in something there isn't any evidence to disprove.

You say prove god did exist (this whole thread), I am now asking you to prove he didn't.

 

Are you admitting that there is no proof such as historical documents for existence of Jesus?

If as you mention yourself there is no evidence of Jesus existence then what are we left with, except the stories in Bible (New Testament)?

Now lets discuss the Bible. Who are the authors of Bible and how did they know about Jesus, would you like to answer that?

 

Do NOT try and flip this on me. You have been demanding answers this entire thread and now it's your turn to answer. Can you furnish proof the Jesus never existed? You may not view the bible as very credible but it's something. What do you have? NOTHING! And as for "historical documents" that is irrelevant seeing as how the bible is considered a historical document. Check the definition of history:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/history

All history is biased. You get one side of the story and that is it. One person's interpretation. These are not usually firsthand accounts, just people looking in. Such as the Cold War. The Russians placed nukes in Cuba pointed at the US (The Cuban Missle Crisis), and Americans citizens took offense to that and called the Russians the aggressors and Barbarians. But it took years for the real story to come out that the US placed nukes in turkey FIRST pointed at Russia. Keep in mind this is in the 80's and news traveled just as fast then as it does now, and there was still a delay before the news got from Russia to here.

As for the authors of the bible, most of them knew jesus first hand and were there throughout his journey.


As for this thread. Jesus can neither be proven or disproven as many things surrounding him aren't empirical, so what is the point wasting time here?

//End of thread right?