Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
SpiritWriter

Does the name Jesus make you mad? Why ?

138 posts in this topic

" Jesus is just all right with me, :su

Jesus is just all right, OOh yeah,

Jesus is just all right with me,

Jesus is just all right....

hhhhO Yeahhh !!!....." Doobie Brothers

I recommend this song if you need uplifting in Jesus name..... :clap:

I have heard many Christians hymns / songs, but that one is one I have not heard before... Jesus is just alight? < -- Where I come from, that is saying he is average lol He must have sat up all night to write those lyrics

Like for example - Joe plays baseball.. Is Joe really good at baseball? .."Ack well he just alight at baseball" .. = He is ok at it,.but could be better !!

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have family members named Jesus....doesn't make me mad. It does however make others mad if I use my cousins name in vain for some reason. Jesus just freaking get over it already people!!!!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i bet you all vote for obama too.(socialist ideas of getting rid of freedom to worship)

That would be rather....tricky...Well I would imagine it would be for anyone who didn't live in the US ....and was not a citizen...!!

Edited by Beckys_Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have family members named Jesus....doesn't make me mad. It does however make others mad if I use my cousins name in vain for some reason. Jesus just freaking get over it already people!!!!

Do they pronounce is as Jesus ? OR like many do and it sounds as if they are saying Hey Zeus? I know that may sound funny, but when I hear them say the name it does sound as if they are calling - Hey Zeus lol

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does lack of evidence negate the existence of something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does lack of evidence negate the existence of something?

Not necessarily. But it does mean that there isn't a reason to believe in the thing; i.e., lack of evidence of leprechauns doesn't negate the possibility that there are leprechauns somewhere, there simply isn't any reason to think that there are (ergo, until we find some leprechauns, it's perfectly reasonable to say that there are no leprechauns, or at least that there probably aren't leprechauns).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. But it does mean that there isn't a reason to believe in the thing; i.e., lack of evidence of leprechauns doesn't negate the possibility that there are leprechauns somewhere, there simply isn't any reason to think that there are (ergo, until we find some leprechauns, it's perfectly reasonable to say that there are no leprechauns, or at least that there probably aren't leprechauns).

So you agree with me, good! Now take your belief out of it and points raised were there is no evidence for his existence, this alone does not suffice as proof of Jesus not existing does it. Based on lack of evidence you can hold any belief you like, but you can't categorically say he did not exist. You can say there are reasons to believe he did not exist, and the counter is there are reasons that he did exist, and cases can be presented either way.

Jesus is spoken about and talked about by so many people over centuries etc from relevant regions to other parts of the world etc.

To suggest he did not exist would also suggest that there was an almost global conspiracy on an unpresidented scale and over 100s of years. If so then you also have to prove that conspiracy with proof and reasoning.

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you agree with me, good! Now take your belief out of it and points raised were there is no evidence for his existence, this alone does not suffice as proof of Jesus not existing does it. Based on lack of evidence you can hold any belief you like, but you can't categorically say he did not exist. You can say there are reasons to believe he did not exist, and the counter is there are reasons that he did exist, and cases can be presented either way.

Jesus is spoken about and talked about by so many people over centuries etc from relevant regions to other parts of the world etc.

To suggest he did not exist would also suggest that there was an almost global conspiracy on an unpresidented scale and over 100s of years. If so then you also have to prove that conspiracy with proof and reasoning.

:)

I certainly don't think that there was a conspiracy; but neither do I think that evidence demonstrates Jesus' existence, at this time. People having talked about him proves nothing; documentation would, but alas, there is no contemporaneous documentation of Jesus' existence. I think perhaps he did exist, but it would not be surprising in the least if he did not. In any case, his mere existence would not be step in the direction of proving his possession of magical powers, now would it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly don't think that there was a conspiracy; but neither do I think that evidence demonstrates Jesus' existence, at this time. People having talked about him proves nothing; documentation would, but alas, there is no contemporaneous documentation of Jesus' existence. I think perhaps he did exist, but it would not be surprising in the least if he did not. In any case, his mere existence would not be step in the direction of proving his possession of magical powers, now would it?

People spoke of him wrote about him and believed in him shortly after him (relatively speaking), a whole history exists about him in scripture form all be it not perfect but it's documentation. If your rejecting the scripture as proof coz it's not gods word that's a bad excuse to leave it out, even if it's written by men (which it is), then it's still evidence relating to him. There maybe not that much else corroborating the scripture (maybe we just ain't found it yet), but scripture, people, regional and global indications of his existence. Now for you to reason he did not exist you have only option is conspiracy, because we know lack of evidence does not negate existence but at the same time you bring baggage which is denial of scripture as proof or documentation, denial of aural traditions about him and etc. Therefore you can only reason he did not exist is because over centuries, thousands and thousands people globally colluded to create this myth of his existence. If so then you have to prove it with reasoning and proof that such a conspiracy took place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does lack of evidence negate the existence of something?

Well we first need to ask if this peson would know where to look for evidence. if he isn't aware of existing evidence, then he certainly wouldn't be one to say his perspective negates anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we first need to ask if this peson would know where to look for evidence. if he isn't aware of existing evidence, then he certainly wouldn't be one to say his perspective negates anything.

Whether you lack evidence or don't where to find it is irrelevant cause it still does not his existence.

If you approach it with baggage, ie, not considering scripture as evidence, then your coming with a bias, what ever that might be or what ever the reasoning for rejecting the only thing which relates to him the most is not a great academic approach is it?

Leave the baggage, you have scripture, aural tradition, other scriptures referring to him, regional and global references to him. If you come with baggage which rejects this outright from the beginning then you are being disingenuous towards the whole argument.

My point is simple, if you believe he did not exist, your only plausible reasoning is that it was all a conspiracy, if so you then have to substantiate it. Lack of evidence alone does not negate existence, but if you from the start reject and ignore certain sources and evidence then demand evidence, it's a bit hypocritical and simply arguing from ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point is simple, if you believe he did not exist, your only plausible reasoning is that it was all a conspiracy, if so you then have to substantiate it.

A global worldwide conspiracy that spans thousands of years among disconnected people, would be harder to prove than the idea that Jesus doesn't exist. Jesus exist...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly don't think that there was a conspiracy; but neither do I think that evidence demonstrates Jesus' existence, at this time. People having talked about him proves nothing; documentation would, but alas, there is no contemporaneous documentation of Jesus' existence. I think perhaps he did exist, but it would not be surprising in the least if he did not. In any case, his mere existence would not be step in the direction of proving his possession of magical powers, now would it?

When you watch trick by people such as Dynamo...

Walk on water..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kne6YnjcruQ

Walks down a building..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy9Ylzc3Jps

And many more like it - Levitation, walking through glass etc etc..

If he was back in the times of Jesus, I am willing to bet that many would think he was from god or gods son too...

My point is.. I think that if this Jesus was real, he may have been the Dynamo of his day and a few of the stories exaggerated from tales past around...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People spoke of him wrote about him and believed in him shortly after him (relatively speaking), a whole history exists about him in scripture form all be it not perfect but it's documentation. If your rejecting the scripture as proof coz it's not gods word that's a bad excuse to leave it out, even if it's written by men (which it is), then it's still evidence relating to him. There maybe not that much else corroborating the scripture (maybe we just ain't found it yet), but scripture, people, regional and global indications of his existence. Now for you to reason he did not exist you have only option is conspiracy, because we know lack of evidence does not negate existence but at the same time you bring baggage which is denial of scripture as proof or documentation, denial of aural traditions about him and etc. Therefore you can only reason he did not exist is because over centuries, thousands and thousands people globally colluded to create this myth of his existence. If so then you have to prove it with reasoning and proof that such a conspiracy took place.

Unfortunately, scripture hasn't proven itself to qualify as documentation; it hasn't given us anything to set it apart from fiction. That's what I meant. No official records of his trial and execution, no census records, nothing. That's what I meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A global worldwide conspiracy that spans thousands of years among disconnected people, would be harder to prove than the idea that Jesus doesn't exist. Jesus exist...

Precisely :) it's harder to prove reasoning for his non existence than for his existence, ie scripture, aural traditions, foreign scriptures references to him etc. I'm not trying to prove it either way, just putting some perspective and context.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you watch trick by people such as Dynamo...

Walk on water..

Walks down a building..

[media=]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wy9Ylzc3Jps

And many more like it - Levitation, walking through glass etc etc..

If he was back in the times of Jesus, I am willing to bet that many would think he was from god or gods son too...

My point is.. I think that if this Jesus was real, he may have been the Dynamo of his day and a few of the stories exaggerated from tales past around...

It's worthy of note that the miracles of the other "prophets" of Jesus' time were a little flashier; some of them were claimed to have flown around Jerusalem. Sorry Jesus, but that's slightly more impressive miracle than the "water-walking" parlour trick... in my books it is, anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, scripture hasn't proven itself to qualify as documentation; it hasn't given us anything to set it apart from fiction. That's what I meant. No official records of his trial and execution, no census records, nothing. That's what I meant.

Trial records? Consensus records? Do you have such evidence for other figures at that time?

My point is not that the scripture is proof of his existence, but in corroboration with aural traditions, regional traditions, with global references and other scriptural references about him, relay information about a person allegedly existing, you dismiss the entire corpus because the scripture has not been proven, proven or verified in what way?

You seek documented evidence about a Jew from non Jew and non Christian sources at the expense of the latter two sources.

The Jewish Talmud refers to him, the Talmud is a rabbinic commentary on the Torah, and other Jewish legal, historical, spiritual aspects, they refer to him, not in a nice way, but still refer to him. The Talmud was always evolving even during his time.

So basically being selective about evidence is disingenuous in my humble opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worthy of note that the miracles of the other "prophets" of Jesus' time were a little flashier; some of them were claimed to have flown around Jerusalem. Sorry Jesus, but that's slightly more impressive miracle than the "water-walking" parlour trick... in my books it is, anyway.

Walking on water was not like dynamo I believe I think one should read it fully understand the context. Raising the dead, healing the blind etc, feeding 100s with hardly anything etc etc etc. Miracles are miracles, but they have no bearing on his existence.

Ps magic and illusions were widely known at the time and practised by people then and before.....miracles of prophet were miles apart from trickery and illusions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's worthy of note that the miracles of the other "prophets" of Jesus' time were a little flashier; some of them were claimed to have flown around Jerusalem. Sorry Jesus, but that's slightly more impressive miracle than the "water-walking" parlour trick... in my books it is, anyway.

There was another man that was around the same time as Jesus ( saw this in a documentary a while ago ) I think his name was Stephen? Anyway , he started doing tricks and one of them was levitation...When Peter and other followers of Jesus saw him preform those tricks, they stoned him to the ground as if to say - Don't you dare try and steal Jesus's spotlight...!!!

Another story that is rather recent - A young toddler ( aged 3 ) in China ( or some place close ) could bless bottled water and his parents and friends of the family were convincing the crowds he was like a spiritual healer, and when the locasl drank the water, they all claimed it cured them... I believe that to be the mind over body trick...

Are you a fan of House?.. One of the episodes had a man who lost one of his arms in a war, it blew off as he was griping someone or other... For 36 years after the accident, he still felt the pain of his fist clenched, even though his hand was gone, he still felt pain... Dr Gregory House strapped the man to a chair... He placed a box in front of him, and a mirror inside.. He had a hole cut on the outside of the box, big enough for the man's arm to fit through. House tells the man to put his arm through the hole of the box...

When the man put his arm through the hole of the box, House then told him to hold it out in front of the mirror ( so it would show a reflection and look as if he is looking at both arms and hands ) ...He then asked him to straighten his hand out flat looking into the mirror at the same time... The man does this ..Within seconds, tears fell from the man's face and he looks to House saying.. For the first time in 36 years, he no longer feels the pain from his missing hand.......... The mind truly is that powerful

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trial records? Consensus records? Do you have such evidence for other figures at that time?

My point is not that the scripture is proof of his existence, but in corroboration with aural traditions, regional traditions, with global references and other scriptural references about him, relay information about a person allegedly existing, you dismiss the entire corpus because the scripture has not been proven, proven or verified in what way?

You seek documented evidence about a Jew from non Jew and non Christian sources at the expense of the latter two sources.

The Jewish Talmud refers to him, the Talmud is a rabbinic commentary on the Torah, and other Jewish legal, historical, spiritual aspects, they refer to him, not in a nice way, but still refer to him. The Talmud was always evolving even during his time.

So basically being selective about evidence is disingenuous in my humble opinion.

I said contemporaneous. Of course the Talmud refers to him; centuries after he is alleged to have lived. Ergo: not evidence of his existence. The Romans kept very meticulous records of trial proceedings and census records of the populous; true, not all of these survive today, but nonetheless, my point was that Jesus is not recorded in any documents of the time. Scripture and oral tradition are stories; inseparable from fiction unless documentation showed otherwise, which, again, it does not.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Walking on water was not like dynamo I believe I think one should read it fully understand the context. Raising the dead, healing the blind etc, feeding 100s with hardly anything etc etc etc. Miracles are miracles, but they have no bearing on his existence.

Ps magic and illusions were widely known at the time and practised by people then and before.....miracles of prophet were miles apart from trickery and illusions.

The difference was that people at the time had a notorious difficulty telling the difference between illusion and "miracle". In any case, you are correct, these things have no bearing on the existence/non-existence of Jesus. To continue a familiar theme: no contemporaneous documentation exists to demonstrate that (whether supernatural or illusion) Jesus' purported "miracles" ever happened.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was another man that was around the same time as Jesus ( saw this in a documentary a while ago ) I think his name was Stephen? Anyway , he started doing tricks and one of them was levitation...When Peter and other followers of Jesus saw him preform those tricks, they stoned him to the ground as if to say - Don't you dare try and steal Jesus's spotlight...!!!

Another story that is rather recent - A young toddler ( aged 3 ) in China ( or some place close ) could bless bottled water and his parents and friends of the family were convincing the crowds he was like a spiritual healer, and when the locasl drank the water, they all claimed it cured them... I believe that to be the mind over body trick...

Are you a fan of House?.. One of the episodes had a man who lost one of his arms in a war, it blew off as he was griping someone or other... For 36 years after the accident, he still felt the pain of his fist clenched, even though his hand was gone, he still felt pain... Dr Gregory House strapped the man to a chair... He placed a box in front of him, and a mirror inside.. He had a hole cut on the outside of the box, big enough for the man's arm to fit through. House tells the man to put his arm through the hole of the box...

When the man put his arm through the hole of the box, House then told him to hold it out in front of the mirror ( so it would show a reflection and look as if he is looking at both arms and hands ) ...He then asked him to straighten his hand out flat looking into the mirror at the same time... The man does this ..Within seconds, tears fell from the man's face and he looks to House saying.. For the first time in 36 years, he no longer feels the pain from his missing hand.......... The mind truly is that powerful

Indeed. I admit I chuckled a bit at the implications of that first paragraph... "Jesus can do miracles by the power of God... obviously... but that Stephen guy levitating?! Blasphemy!"

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. I admit I chuckled a bit at the implications of that first paragraph... "Jesus can do miracles by the power of God... obviously... but that Stephen guy levitating?! Blasphemy!"

That exactly what the crowds condemned Jesus for - Blasphemy.. They claimed he must have been from the evil spirits.. ( unclean spirits ) ... The bible itself condemns all magic tricks, claiming them to be tricks of satan :P

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was another man that was around the same time as Jesus ( saw this in a documentary a while ago ) I think his name was Stephen? Anyway , he started doing tricks and one of them was levitation...When Peter and other followers of Jesus saw him preform those tricks, they stoned him to the ground as if to say - Don't you dare try and steal Jesus's spotlight...!!!

Simon Magus.(Think that's who your talking about)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference was that people at the time had a notorious difficulty telling the difference between illusion and "miracle".

Correct you are.. You forgot to mention that many people in today's world can't tell the difference either.. If anyone tries to say - Oh but people all know the difference, then they obviously have taken a narrow view and they must think everyone is in the know and all agree with the same idea ... I know that it is not like that.. I have met people who cannot tell the difference... I used to think they were kidding around, but shockingly, they were serious !!!

You also have many of those desperate to convince you that miracles are real that they will gladly deny other possible answers Put it this way.. If you were clinging to religion tightly and you believed all you read, there is no way in hell you will listen to any other logical ideas and possible answers from anyone.. In fact, you may get on your high horse and rant, argue and LOL at any logical reasoning... Denial and clinging to one side will do that to so many.. Humans are weird creatures lol

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.