What made Jesus so special I'm sure other people died on a cross thinking they were helping people.

Because those that died on the crosses usually didn't have parables and lead others to believe they healed the blind and so on. A lot of those that died on crosses were seen as vile criminals. And the Bible didn't hurt Jesus' reputation either.

Plus, Jesus is mentioned or referred to or has something to do with, all three major world religions. I think he'd be a pretty important guy.

Special is a religious concept, One that knows he is all things doesn't need to be special, If jesus is a real man, IMO if jesus was really a person his message would of been come on people this life stuff isn't rocket science how you treat yourself and how you percieve yourself is what you will become. some thing along the lines of do unto others yet he isn't the first one to have said that its been all said before, the message just hasn't been applied by the majority.So it seems "special" to so many. namaste sheri

I think the reason that he is special to Christians is that he is considered the messiah that was prophesized in the old testement of the bible. Up until he was ressurected i think that there was no one --even the believers of God..that had alot of evidence that humans would ever live an afterlife and live in heaven. Although Christians havent seen the evidence on earth (his ressurection) their faith in Jesus is that evidence through what is written about him in the bible.He also is believed to have given the correct knowledge of right/wrong to show what God wanted us to follow.And he died for human sin and what he went through on the cross was the only way god knew the message would get out fully..thats what i think most Christians believe.

^^True. The Old Testament has little to say of the after life. Solomon (presumably it was him, though it's not certain), while writing Ecclesiastes continually questioned the meaning of life. The evil prosper, the righteous suffer. What good is following God if this is all there is?

Anyhow, I suggest watching the Narnia Chronicles, or reading the book would be better. Aslan (the Lion) is representative of Jesus. Aslan sacrificed himself to save Edmund, and through that selfless sacrifice rose again. That is what is so special about Jesus. He died for a purpose - to save mankind (and womankind for those who feel I might be being sexist) from the punishment we all deserve for disobeying God.

But that's just my opinion.

Regards, PA

I suggest you reread the Hebrew Scriptures. There is actually a lot about the afterlife.
there are many such references. when you die, you go to a place where your "people" are. mine are not in your make-believe xian hell. there is much reference to "She'ol", the place where the soul (neshamah) goes after death. The reason there is no talk of punishment in the afterlife in the Tanach is because it does not exist. If there were such a place as "heaven" or "hell", why would it not have been mentioned. Maybe because they were invented by the n.t. writers? reread the quote from ecclesiastes again. maybe you will understand it this time. "What good is it to follow god if this is all there is?" means that there is good reason to follow god. a good Jewish translation is available online- I suggest that you go there instead of king james.

http://www.chabad.org/default.asp

Outside of the Bible there is VERY little evidence to prove that Jesus even existed.

Jesus' existance is still a hot topic and will always be one until "proof" is found, which i believe will happen in our lifetimes. By proof i mean substantial proof for a historical Jesus that oh so many doubt.

What made Jesus special? He did not act like worldly rulers. He introduced a totally different concept of leadership. He advised his disciples: "Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." He demonstrated this concept by washing the feet of His disciples . Later He gave his life for them and apparently for us . On the other hand He did prove His authority and trustworthiness by the many signs He provided, and by the many prophecies He fulfilled particularly by getting out of the tomb.

Some of those who are opposed to the message of Christ, think of His crucifixion as an insult, but Jesus spoke of it as a means of being glorified. For example, shortly before His crucifixion He said to His disciples, "The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. I tell you the truth, unless a grain of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds".

I try not to think of one of the greatest tricks the 'devil' could ever pull of- being that he tricks you into thinking he doesn't exist. So if a human being isn't capable of it, it was possible probably back in the day to get someone not to let any human being convince them there was a devil - unless there was a God. So being that if Jesus was 'special' it still requires a person to cast the devil out of someone. To think of that as 'healing' could be one thing, but to prove you can exist to people thousands of years after youve died is very special for a gift, I think.

Proof that Jesus exists lies in the historic records. However, the Jesus that the church depicts is not the real Jesus who existed. For example, at the tiem he lived, the 'church' of that time did not allow men to live unmarried. So we can assume that jesus was married...

And for those of you who are unware..the bible is a collection of books by 4 evangelists whose aim was to deliver Jesus as diivine. However, other scripts which were not destroyed and which were also written by persons who were with Jesus (and are kept secret by the church) tell that Jesus was married..or with a "companion"..which at that time was the wife...along with other stunning facts...but i wont go into them in this post..(try the Gospel of Philip)

oh and if ure intersted try http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

I knew we were going to get into this . . . . "Proof that Jesus exists lies in the hisotric records . . . . what records? What unadultered, proveable historic record?

Excuse me . . . I meant "unadulterated"

Choose wisely, a record, or someone you can see in front of you.

Nor did it hurt the reputation of all those executed/resurrected/son-of-god/savior gods that preceded Jesus – you know, Mythra, Osiris, Krishna, etc. They all had parables, healed the infirm, raised the dead, and so on. Then there is Apollonius, who lived at the same time as Jesus supposedly lived, who is recorded (by several different historians, followers, etc) to have performed the very same “miracles” as did Jesus (yet no contemporary writer mentions Jesus), was claimed to have been the “Son of God”, had disciples, had gospels written about him, and even wrote several books on various subjects, himself (he did not die on the cross though).


The other Savior gods were mentioned in the other major religions of their time, so the fact that Jesus was referred to in other religions means nothing really.


Unfortunately, Christians have been searching for proof since the mid 1st century CE. From Origen onward, they have not been able to present any evidence (much less proof) that Jesus even existed, nor was who they claimed he was. Heck, they can’t even say when he was born, can’t even pinpoint which century he was born in….this in itself is highly suspect, even Mithra’s birthday is known (Dec 25, 272BCE), yet the Christian scriptures nor the early Church Fathers can’t pinpoint his birth century, with one gospel indicating 1st century BCE and the other indicating 1st century CE and the Church Fathers even further apart! Doesn’t really give much hope of finding “proof” of his existence.




However, he did this centuries after other savior gods said and did the same thing. This is why many scholars call him the “copy-cat savior”.


Unfortunately there is no evidence, much less proof, that Jesus ever existed. Everything that Christians like to quote is either a Christian hoax or so late in time that it can only be hearsay, there exists nothing contemporary that even mentions a Jesus of Nazareth, even though there were many contemporary historians (Jewish and otherwise) writing about occurrence at that time. Not a one mentions Jesus!

well i guess you should take a look at http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/ ....is all that evidence a hoax?

The rock band? Or are you talking about Mithra with an i? This all comes down to popularity again. Mithra is not as popular as Jesus.

Osiris didn't have parables. When I said parables I was aiming at those crucified around the time of Christ. Their parables, if they had any, were not recorded several times, nor did they have a wide following. As for Apollonius, he lost his popularity throughout the Middle Ages.

Sorry, I had just PMed Mythra and I guess the name stuck...Mithra naturally....

Since they all predated Christianity and Jesus by centuries, there would have been none that were crucified around that time.....

All that proves is that the old Christian custom of burning heretics and non-believers is quite effective in quashing the competition! The fact that Apollonius was recorded and Jesus was not speaks volumes on who was real and who didn't exist!

I know I was responding to this:


I have to agree here.

Thanks Gid. I don't use King James though. I don't like it. I prefer the ESV, but since it's a newer translation, I am more familiar with the NIV.

Regards, PA

I don't know about that he was mighty popular in his day.


Maybe his popularity is why most of the stories about Jesus' birth are actually stories about Mithras.

I meant not as popular as Jesus in today's time.

i like the niv, but only trust jewish translations for the hebrew scriptures.

^^Wouldn't the Jews have an agenda to erase any ties that Jesus might have to the Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah? I'm not attacking, just asking.

Though by the same token, the Christian translators would have just the same agenda. As a general rule of thumb, if I need something clarified, I'll go to the original Hebrew or Greek root and do my own research on it rather than simply base my study on one or two particular translations.

Regards, PA

Many fail to realize that scholars and people that have doubted the people or events of the Bible have been corrected by archelogical evidence within the last century, you say Christians have been trying to prove Jesus for the last God knows how long, but the fact is within the last 100 years the Bible and its stories and its people seem to be coming to life, theres never been a better time in Bible study and discoveries than now, and it will only get better. We shall wait and see.

This was true only for the first part of the period. Since the 60's more and more scholars, historians, and archaeologists are going over the the minimalist view of Biblical history....Ever since the bibles were laid down (bible in one hand and shovel in the other of the old school), data has been shown to have been skewed by the Bibicalists and new or more accurate picutures of that history arrived at.

agenda? to preserve the scriptures and translate them directly from hebrew. the masoretic tradition is much older that the n.t.