As an anti-Christian Greek philosopher, Celsus mounted an attack on Christianity. Celsus wrote that some Jews said Jesus' father was a Roman soldier named Pantera. The views of Celsus drew responses from Origen who considered it a fabricated story.[13][14] Raymond E. Brown states that the story of Pantera is a fanciful explanation of the birth of Jesus which includes very little historical evidence—Brown's analysis does not presuppose the doctrine of the "virgin birth", but cites the lack of historical evidence for Celsus' assertion.[15] In addition, Celsus addressed the miracles of Jesus, holding that "Jesus performed His miracles by sorcery (γοητεία)":[16][17][18]

“O light and truth! he distinctly declares, with his own voice, as ye yourselves have recorded, that there will come to you even others, employing miracles of a similar kind, who are wicked men, and sorcerers; and Satan. So that Jesus himself does not deny that these works at least are not at all divine, but are the acts of wicked men; and being compelled by the force of truth, he at the same time not only laid open the doings of others, but convicted himself of the same acts. Is it not, then, a miserable inference, to conclude from the same works that the one is God and the other sorcerers? Why ought the others, because of these acts, to be accounted wicked rather than this man, seeing they have him as their witness against himself? For he has himself acknowledged that these are not the works of a divine nature, but the inventions of certain deceivers, and of thoroughly wicked men”.[19][20]

sonOfLucifer:
Hmmmm

You can't blame them though. Jesus was the ultimate scammer.

vooks:

2Peter 3:4 (NKJV)
3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days,....”

sonOfLucifer:

HI Vooks. The last days never end.

vooks:
PaulGrundy,
John12:10-11 (NKJV)
10 But the chief priests plotted to put Lazarus to death also, 11 because on account of him many of the Jews went away and believed in Jesus.
When the evidence was irrefutable, they sought to eliminate it

sonOfLucifer:

HI Vooks. The last days never end.

malvisguy212:
1 Thessalonians 5 and Matthew 24:42-43 teach us that the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night.

malvisguy212:

The master of the house will not know what hour the thief will come. Paul explicitly states that the coming of the Lord would only be a surprise to those living in darkness.

CoolUsername:
Jesus probably didn't even exist.

'God's word made flesh' never bothered to actually write anything.

No records of Herod killing infant boys at that time. Strange, considering the fact that Josephus, King Herod's historian lived during that time.

No records of an earthquake of walking dead parade during that time.

The gospels were all written decades after his death.

The gospels are conflicting: Two different genealogies of Jesus are given (spontaneous evolution? ).

The apocalypse which was clearly predicted in Matthew 24:20-34 never happened.

This is pretty damning evidence.

paulGrundy:


Your assertion is very funny, considering the fact that Josephus himself, a jewish historian, highly critical of Jesus, acknowledged his existence in his writings.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

paulGrundy:

Lies!!! They NEVER conflicted, though they are different Matthew and Luke actually give two different genealogies. Matthew give the genealogy of Jesus through Joseph, the legal, though not the physical father of Jesus. Luke, on the other hand, gives the ancestry of Jesus through Mary from whom Jesus was descended physically as to his humanity. This is a beautiful fulfillment of prophecy and actually testifies to the accuracy of the Bible. Through Joseph, Jesus became the legal heir to the throne while at the same time bypassed the curse of Coniah as prophesied in Jeremiah 22:24-30. Both, of course, were in the line of David so that Jesus had a legal right to the throne as the adopted son of Joseph and was at the same time a physical descendent of David through Mary.

The Ryrie Study Bible gives an excellent summary of the issues here:

Although Coniah had seven sons (perhaps adopted; cf. 1 Chron. 3:17), none occupied the throne. So, as far as a continuing dynasty was concerned, Coniah was to be considered “childless.” Although his line of descendants retained the legal throne rights, no physical descendant (no man of his descendants) would ever prosperously reign on the Davidic throne. The genealogy of Matthew traces the descent of Jesus through Solomon and Jeconiah (Heb., Coniah; Matt. 1:12); this is the genealogy of Jesus’ legal father, Joseph. Luke traces Jesus’ physical descent back through Mary and Nathan to David, bypassing Jeconiah’s line and showing accurately the fulfillment of this prophecy of Jeremiah. If Jesus had been born only in the line of Joseph (and thus of Jeconiah), He would not have been qualified to reign on the throne of David in the Millennium. See note on Matt. 1:11.

CoolUsername:

Really, so is Joseph's father Jacob or Heli?

CoolUsername:

Yeah, there are exactly TWO mentions of Jesus by Josephus and none of them have to do with Herod killing anyone for his sake.

Also, the two mentions of Jesus by Josephus seem to be sensationalized and embellished, making scholars very dubious about their authenticity. In fact, the second one is known as a forgery as the general consensus of scholars goes.

paulGrundy:


This response is very comedic

May I retraite again that Josephus is a trained Jewish historian, who does not believe in Jesus as the messiah, hence he has no MOTIVE to invent a "mysterious figure" given the seriousness of his job.[size=17pt]but you on the other hand, have a reason/MOTIVE to deny the existence of Jesus, because you see his existence as a threat to the prejudice you have towards the christain faith[/size].

You claimed Josephus sensationalized Jesus? You didn't provide proof of that. Meanwhile while you are on that lemme give you more non-christain proof of Jesus' existence.

1. Reporting on Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt ... on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of ... Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome....

2.Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians.[8] Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.[9]

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food – but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

3.There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200.[20] The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald ... cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

*note Yeshu is how Jesus is pronounced in hebrew

For many more......
http://www.bethinking.org/jesus/ancient-evidence-for-jesus-from-non-christian-sources

paulGrundy:


“Heli” and “Jacob” are two names for the same person.

By the standards of the day, skipping a few generations in a geneology for narrative effect was perfectly acceptable. Thus, to pick an example that ties in with another example, Zechariah the son of Berekiah the son of Iddo is sometimes just called Zechariah son of Iddo…Ezra calls him this for example.

As such, it is conceivable that Matthew skipped Heli on his way from Joseph to Matthat/Matthan, but Luke skipped Jacob.

vooks:

2Peter 3:4 (NKJV)
3 knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, 4 and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.”

paulGrundy:
A greek philosopher and critic of christainity wrote against Jesus, even accusing him of soccery and stage managing miracles.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celsus

What is the point am trying to make here? Some cessasionists, e.g Jehovahs witnesses and Co, have argued that miracles happening in our time are subject to criticisms, and that the miracles performed by Jesus and his apostles were never questioned by anybody, both critics and apologetics alike. Hence using that to support the notion the miracles no longer happen in our time.

We can see from the quote above, that the same criticisms that the likes of Oyakhilome, TB joshua, benny hinn, khulman and co undergo today, was the same accusations Jesus underwent.

Cc: Gombs, joagbaje, truthislight.