IchieEzeji said:

Let's not waste our precious time, energy, breath and internet time arguing with unrepentant atheists, agnostics, pagans, free thinkers and faithless fellows. But a little word for them.

For ROSSIKE, know that your blasphemy cannot be explained away via the porous argument that christianity was brought to Africa by the whites. I remain a proud Igbo man, and a title-holder at that. Every race on earth believes there exists an Almighty God. Are u part of that belief? I doubt. And i have studied the Bible to know that its accounts are unassailably true. The fact that Jesus Christ lived in Isreal, was cruxified on the cross, died, was buried and rose from death is confirmed by Roman accounts and the writings of Josephus, a non-christain Jewish historian of the 1st century AD. These are secular records for atheists, agnostics, pagans and free thinkers like you to read and believe, since you object to Biblical accounts.

1) There are no ''Roman accounts'' about a ''Jesus Christ''

2) Josephus' accounts are known to be a FORGERY. They are also NOT eyewitness accounts since Josephus was born AFTER the alleged crucifixion, thus even if real, the testimony was based on ''hearsay'' or ''tradition'' and is thus invalid.



The Jesus Forgery

http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm

When addressing the mythical nature of Jesus Christ, one issue repeatedly raised is the purported "evidence" of his existence to be found in the writings of Flavius Josephus, the famed Jewish general and historian who lived from about 37 to 100 CE. In Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews appears the notorious passage regarding Christ called the "Testimonium Flavianum" ("TF":

"Now, there was about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works,--a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day." (Whitson, 379)

This surprisingly brief and simplistic passage constitutes the "best proof" of Jesus's existence in the entire ancient non-Christian library comprising the works of dozens of historians, writers, philosophers, politicians and others who never mentioned the great sage and wonderworker Jesus Christ, even though they lived contemporaneously with or shortly after the Christian savior's purported advent.


A False Witness

Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century. Indeed, the TF was rarely mentioned, except to note that it was a forgery, and numerous books by a variety of authorities over a period of 200 or so years basically took it for granted that the Testimonium Flavianum in its entirety was spurious, an interpolation and a forgery. As Dr. Gordon Stein relates:

", the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars."

So well understood was this fact of forgery that these numerous authorities did not spend their precious time and space rehashing the arguments against the TF's authenticity. Nevertheless, in the past few decades apologists of questionable integrity and credibility have glommed onto the TF, because this short and dubious passage represents the most "concrete" secular, non-biblical reference to a man who purportedly shook up the world. In spite of the past debunking, the debate is currently confined to those who think the TF was original to Josephus but was Christianized, and those who credulously and self-servingly accept it as "genuine" in its entirety.

To repeat, this passage was so completely dissected by scholars of high repute and standing--the majority of them pious Christians--that it was for decades understood by subsequent scholars as having been proved in toto a forgery, such that these succeeding scholars did not even mention it, unless to acknowledge it as false. (In addition to being repetitious, numerous quotes will be presented here, because a strong show of rational consensus is desperately needed when it comes to matters of blind, unscientific and irrational faith.) The scholars who so conclusively proved the TF a forgery made their mark at the end of the 18th century and into the 20th, when a sudden reversal was implemented, with popular opinion hemming and hawing its way back first to the "partial interpolation theory" and in recent times, among the third-rate apologists, to the notion that the whole TF is "genuine." As Earl Doherty says, in "Josephus Unbound":

"Now, it is a curious fact that older generations of scholars had no trouble dismissing this entire passage as a Christian construction. Charles Guignebert, for example, in his Jesus (1956, p.17), calls it 'a pure Christian forgery.' Before him, Lardner, Harnack and Schurer, along with others, declared it entirely spurious. Today, most serious scholars have decided the passage is a mix: original parts rubbing shoulders with later Christian additions."

The earlier scholarship that proved the entire TF to be fraudulent was determined by intense scrutiny by some of the most erudite, and mainly Christian, writers of the time, in a number of countries, their works written in a variety of languages, but particularly German, French and English. Their general conclusions, as elucidated by Christian authority Dr. Lardner, and related here by the author of Christian Mythology Unveiled (c. 1842), include the following reasons for doubting the authenticity of the TF as a whole:

"Mattathias, the father of Josephus, must have been a witness to the miracles which are said to have been performed by Jesus, and Josephus was born within two years after the crucifixion, yet in all the works he says nothing whatever about the life or death of Jesus Christ; as for the interpolated passage it is now universally acknowledged to be a forgery. The arguments of the 'Christian Ajax,' even Lardner himself, against it are these:

'It was never quoted by any of our Christian ancestors before Eusebius. It disturbs the narrative. The language is quite Christian. It is not quoted by Chrysostom, though he often refers to Josephus, and could not have omitted quoting it had it been then in the text. It is not quoted by Photius [9th century], though he has three articles concerning Josephus; and this author expressly states that this historian has not taken the least notice of Christ. Neither Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho the Jew; nor Clemens Alexandrinus, who made so many extracts from ancient authors; nor Origen against Celsus, have ever mentioned this testimony. But, on the contrary, in chap. 25th of the first book of that work, Origen openly affirms that Josephus, who had mentioned John the Baptist, did not acknowledge Christ. That this passage is a false fabrication is admitted by Ittigius, Blondel, Le Clerc, Vandale, Bishop Warburton, and Tanaquil Faber.'" (CMU, 47)

Hence, by the 1840's, when the anonymous author of Christian Mythology Unveiled wrote, the Testimonium Flavanium was already "universally acknowledged to be a forgery."

As Wells says:

"As I noted in The Jesus Legend, there is an ancient table of contents in the Antiquities which omits all mention of the Testimonium. Feldman (in Feldman and Hata, 1987, p. 57) says that this table is already mentioned in the fifth- or sixth-century Latin version of the Antiquities, and he finds it 'hard to believe that such a remarkable passage would be omitted by anyone, let alone by a Christian summarizing the work.'" (Wells, JM, 201)

The Catholic Encyclopedia (CE), which tries to hedge its bet about the Josephus passage, is nevertheless forced to admit: "The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations." In the same entry, CE also confirms that Josephus's writings were used extensively by the early Christian fathers, such as Jerome, Ambrose and Chrystostom; nevertheless, as noted, except for Jerome, they never mention the TF.

Regarding the TF, as well as the James passage, which possesses the phrase James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, Jewish writer ben Yehoshua makes some interesting assertions:

"Neither of these passages is found in the original version of the Jewish Antiquities which was preserved by the Jews. The first passage (XVII, 3, 3) was quoted by Eusebius writing in c. 320 C.E., so we can conclude that it was added in some time between the time Christians got hold of the Jewish Antiquities and c. 320 C.E. It is not known when the other passage (XX, 9, 1) was added,  Neither passage is based on any reliable sources. It is fraudulent to claim that these passages were written by Josephus and that they provide evidence for Jesus. They were written by Christian redactors and were based purely on Christian belief."


Higher Criticism by Christian Authorities

The many reasons for concluding the Josephus passage to be a forgery have been expounded upon by numerous well-respected authorities, so much so that such individuals have been compelled by honesty and integrity to dismiss the Testimonium in toto as a forgery. In The Christ, John Remsburg relates the opinions of critics of the TF from the past couple of centuries, the majority of whom were Christian authorities, including and especially Dr. Lardner, who said:

"A testimony so favorable to Jesus in the works of Josephus, who lived so soon after our Savior, who was so well acquainted with the transactions of his own country, who had received so many favors from Vespasian and Titus, would not be overlooked or neglected by any Christian apologist (Lardner's Works, vol. I, chap. iv)."

Yet, the TF was overlooked and neglected by early Christian writers. In other words, they never cited it because it didn't exist.

Another authority, Bishop Warburton, called the TF a "rank forgery, and a very silly one, too." Remsburg further related the words of the "Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England," who stated:

"Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery, interpolated in the text during the third century by some pious Christian, who was scandalized that so famous a writer as Josephus should have taken no notice of the gospels, or of Christ, their subject, "

In addition, the Rev. S. Baring-Gould remarked:

"This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl. A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. I, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl. A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl. A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl. A.D. 193), and Origen (fl. A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. I)."

Remsburg also recounts:

"Cannon Farrar, who has written an ablest Christian life of Christ yet penned, repudiates it. He says: 'The single passage in which he [Josephus] alludes to him is interpolated, if not wholly spurious' (Life of Christ, Vol. I, p. 46).

"The following, from Dr. Farrar's pen, is to be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica: 'That Josephus wrote the whole passage as it now stands no sane critic can believe.'"

And so on, with similar opinions by Christian scholars such as Theodor Keim, Rev. Dr. Hooykaas and Dr. Alexander Campbell. By the time of Dr. Chalmers and others, the TF had been so discredited that these authorities understood it as a forgery in toto and did not even consider it for a moment as "evidence" of Jesus's existence and/or divinity. In fact, these subsequent defenders of the faith, knowing the TF to be a forgery, repeatedly commented on how disturbing it was that Josephus did not mention Jesus.

In the modern apologist work The Case for Christ, Lee Strobel relates a passage from a novel published in 1979 by Charles Templeton, in which the author states, regarding Jesus, "There isn't a single word about him in secular history. Not a word. No mention of him by the Romans. Not so much as a reference by Josephus." (Strobel, 101) Strobel then reports the response by Christian professor Edwin Yamauchi, who claimed that Templeton was mistaken and that there was a reference to Jesus by Josephus. Yamauchi's fatuous response ignores, purposefully or otherwise, the previous ironclad arguments about which Templeton was apparently educated, such that he made such a statement. In other words, Templeton was evidently aware of the purported reference in Josephus but had understood by the arguments of the more erudite, earlier Christian authorities that it was a forgery; hence, there is "not so much as a reference by Josephus." In this facile manner of merely ignoring or dismissing the earlier scholarship, modern believers cling to the long-dismissed TF in order to convince themselves of the unbelievable.

For a more modern criticism, in The Jesus Puzzle and his online article "Josephus Unbound," secularist and classicist Earl Doherty leaves no stone unturned in demolishing the TF, permitting no squirming room for future apologists, whose resort to the TF will show, as it has done in the past, how hopeless is their plight in establishing an "historical Jesus." Concerning the use of Josephus as "evidence" of Jesus's existence, Doherty remarks:

"[I]n the absence of any other supporting evidence from the first century that in fact the Jesus of Nazareth portrayed in the Gospels clearly existed, Josephus becomes the slender thread by which such an assumption hangs. And the sound and fury and desperate manoeuverings which surround the dissection of those two little passages becomes a din of astonishing proportions. The obsessive focus on this one uncertain record is necessitated by the fact that the rest of the evidence is so dismal, so contrary to the orthodox picture. If almost everything outside Josephus points in a different direction, to the essential fiction of the Gospel picture and its central figure, how can Josephus be made to bear on his shoulders, through two passages whose reliability has thus far remained unsettled, the counterweight to all this other negative evidence?"

Other modern authors who criticize the TF include The Jesus Mysteries authors Freke and Gandy, who conclude:

"Unable to provide any historical evidence for Jesus, later Christians forged the proof that they so badly needed to shore up their Literalist interpretation of the gospels. This, as we would see repeatedly, was a common practice." (Freke and Gandy, 137)

Despite the desperate din, a number of other modern writers remain in concurrence with the earlier scholarship and likewise consider the TF in toto a fraud.

The Suspect: Eusebius (c. 264-340)
In addition to acknowledging the spuriousness of the Josephus passage, many authorities quoted here agreed with the obvious: Church historian Eusebius was the forger of the entire Testimonium Flavianium. Various reasons have already been given for making such a conclusion. In "Did Jesus Really Live?" Marshall Gauvin remarks:

"Everything demonstrates the spurious character of the passage. It is written in the style of Eusebius, and not in the style of Josephus. Josephus was a voluminous writer. He wrote extensively about men of minor importance. The brevity of this reference to Christ is, therefore, a strong argument for its falsity. This passage interrupts the narrative. It has nothing to do with what precedes or what follows it; and its position clearly shows that the text of the historian has been separated by a later hand to give it room."

Regarding the absence of the TF in the writings of earlier Christian fathers and its sudden appearance with Eusebius, CMU says:

"it has been observed that the famous passage which we find in Josephus, about Jesus Christ, was never mentioned or alluded to in any way whatever by any of the fathers of the first, second, or third centuries; nor until the time of Eusebius, 'when it was first quoted by himself [sic].' The truth is, none of these fathers could quote or allude to a passage which did not exist in their times; but was to all points short of absolutely certain, forged and interpolated by Eusebius, as suggested by Gibbon and others. Even the redoubtable Lardner has pronounced this passage to be a forgery." (CMU, 79-80)

Moreover, the word "tribe" in the TF is another clue that the passage was forged by Eusebius, who is fond of the word, while Josephus uses it only in terms of ethnicity, never when describing a religious sect. Kerry Shirts adds to this particular point:

"Eusebius studied Josephus diligently, and could thus masquerade as he, except when he used the word 'tribe' to describe the Christians. All the literature from the Ante-Nicene Fathers show they never used the word 'tribe' or 'race' with reference to the Christians, was [sic] either by the Fathers or when they quoted non-Christian writers. Tertullian, Pliny the Younger, Trajan, Rufinus--none use 'tribe' to refer to Christians. Eusebius is the first to start the practice."

In Antiqua Mater: A Study of Christian Origins, Edwin Johnson remarked that the fourth century was "the great age of literary forgery, the extent of which has yet to be exposed." He further commented that "not until the mass of inventions labelled 'Eusebius' shall be exposed, can the pretended references to Christians in Pagan writers of the first three centuries be recognized for the forgeries they are." Indeed, Eusebius's character has been assailed repeatedly over the centuries, with him being called a "luminous liar" and "unreliable." Like so many others, Drews likewise criticizes Eusebius, stating that various of the Church historian's references "must be regarded with the greatest suspicion." As Drews relates, Swiss historian Jakob Burckhardt (1818-1897) declared Eusebius to be "the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity." (Drews, 32/fn) Eusebius's motives were to empower the Catholic Church, and he did not fail to use "falsifications, suppressions, and fictions" to this end.

Conclusion: Josephus No Evidence of Jesus
Even if the Josephus passage were authentic, which we have essentially proved it not to be, it nevertheless would represent not an eyewitness account but rather a tradition passed along for at least six decades, long after the purported events. Hence, the TF would possess little if any value in establishing an "historical" Jesus. In any event, it is quite clear that the entire passage in Josephus regarding Christ, the Testimonium Flavianum, is spurious, false and a forgery. Regarding the TF, Remsburg summarizes:

"For nearly sixteen hundred years Christians have been citing this passage as a testimonial, not merely to the historical existence, but to the divine character of Jesus Christ. And yet a ranker forgery was never penned,

"Its brevity disproves its authenticity. Josephus' work is voluminous and exhaustive. It comprises twenty books. Whole pages are devoted to petty robbers and obscure seditious leaders. Nearly forty chapters are devoted to the life of a single king. Yet this remarkable being, the greatest product of his race, a being of whom the prophets foretold ten thousand wonderful things, a being greater than any earthly king, is dismissed with a dozen lines, "

The dismissal of the passage in Josephus regarding Jesus is not based on "faith" or "belief" but on intense scientific scrutiny and reasoning. Such investigation has been confirmed repeatedly by numerous scholars who were mostly Christian. The Testimonium Flavianum, Dr. Lardner concluded in none too forceful words, "ought, therefore, to be discarded from any place among the evidences of Christianity." With such outstanding authority and so many scientific reasons, we can at last dispense with the pretentious charade of wondering if the infamous passage in the writings of Josephus called the Testimonium Flavianum is forged and who fabricated it.

Excerpted from Suns of God: Krishna, Buddha and Christ Unveiled by Acharya S.

Sources:

Anonymous, Christian Mythology Unveiled, 1842
ben Yehoshua, mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html
Catholic Encyclopedia, "Flavius Josephus," www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm
Charlesworth, James H., www.mystae.com/restricted/reflections/messiah/sources.html
Doherty, Earl, pages.ca.inter.net/~oblio/supp10.htm
Doherty, Earl, The Jesus Puzzle, Canadian Humanist, Ottawa, 1999
Drews, Arthur, Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus, Joseph McCabe, tr., Watts, London, 1912
Freke, Timothy and Gandy, Peter, The Jesus Mysteries, Three Rivers, NY, 1999
Gauvin, Marshall, www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live_/html
Jerome, www.ccel.org/fathers2/NPNF2-06/Npnf2-06-03.htm
Johnson, Edwin, Antiqua Mater: A Study of Christian Origins, www.christianism.com/articles/1.html
Josephus, The Complete Works of, Wm. Whitson, tr., Kregel, MI, 1981
Kirby, Peter, home.earthlink.net/~kirby/xtianity/josephus.html
Origen, www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-55.htm
Oser, Scott, www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html
Remsburg, John, The Christ, www.positiveatheism.org/hist/rmsbrg02.htm
Shirts, Kerry, www.cyberhighway.net/~shirtail/jesusand.htm
Stein, Dr. Gordon, www.infidels.org/library/modern/gordon_stein/jesus.html
Strobel, Lee, The Case for Christ, Zondervan, MI, 1998
Taylor, David, www.mmsweb.com/eykiw/relig/npref.txt
Wells, G.A., The Jesus Legend, Open Court, Chicago, 1997
Wells, G.A., The Jesus Myth, Open Court, Chicago, 1999

Sweetnecta:

@Johnkester: « #184 on: Today at 10:02:29 PM »Before the bold, you seemed to have been consistent with reality, vis a vis, a rice grain sowed shall bring forth rice grain[s], and s sinner shall be punished for it, a cause and effect reality syndrome. How is God the father of a human being who is clearly a servant by his own tongue? How is an innocent person by your statement going to dieso that Adolf Hitler does not die a second death? How powerful is this man in ability to serve as ransom for forgiveness, when God the Everlasting Cherisher, Designer of all, Most Powerful to Forgive, since He is the Only One Who Owns and Controls Forgiveness will now kill somebody innocent and even as your people say that he was sent for this purpose only cried out in a blaming bid to God, "my God, my God. . . . hy has thou forsaken me?" If this was your second in command,Mr. Johnkester and he say as the Bible reported that Jesus said, above, will you count him as a loyal Manager of your company, will you have full confidence in him,or he will jobless the following morning?

How is it possible that when it comes to responsibility, all christians want Jesus to be responsible for what should have been their responsibility. Is there a need for Jesus to die? None, since a sinner must be responsible for his own sin.

@Sweetnecta

I tried to understand your post but I am not quite sure I got it right.  However, in the event that your post is implying that I am in support of the death of Christ on the cross, let me emphatically in the strongest terms possible state that such is not my position.  I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT CHRIST DIED TO CARRY AWAY ANYONE'S SINS.

If you go through my post very well, you will notice that I was pointing out fundamental contradictions with the assertion made by christians that Jesus died in order to carry away their sins.  That assertion is and will always remain a blasphemy against the Holiness of God, His Love, Justice, Wisdom and Perfection.  As already stated in my earlier post, He said in His commandments:  Thou Shalt Not Kill.  This means that killing is a sin, yet some human beings now have the effrontery to assert that He allowed men to kill His Son so that He can forgive their sins! Outrageously grotesque assertion! A figment of their indolent imaginations!  That is what I will say to the assertion. 

Death on the cross was not the mission of Christ on earth but His Message.  Men alone have distorted everything to the point of absurdity because, like you rightly pointed out in your post, they would rather pass the responsibility for their wrongdoings and sins to another.  But they will come face to face with the stark reality when they eventually pass on and are confronted with their sins, when they will have to experience the force of reality of the saying that WHATEVER A MAN SOWS, THAT SHALT HE REAP! There their experiences will force them to discard this absurdity and embrace the Truth, if they do not wish to be lost for all eternity!

Peace!

ROSSIKE, i commend myself for mustering the patience to read your unwieldy arguments which are based on the writings/refutals of atheists, agnostics, pagans, mystics, occultists some of whom you attempted to pass off as 'christians', probably because they bear christian names or make false calims thereto. You call Gordon Stein and G. A. Wells chrsitians? Funny! However, a search on them on the internet will do to clarify their 'faith'. What else should one expect from such persons, except unceasing but fultile efforts to bring down christianity? Thus, their biased views - amplified by yours - are of no moment to me. I do beleive the contents of the Holy Bible, and that Jesus Christ lived, was cruxified on the cross of calvary, died and resurrected on the 3rd day, ascended into heaven and is coming back. I don't care if any atheist dismisses same 1 million times over.But the fate of the atheists i mentioned earlier should teach you and your co-travellers some lesson, that is if you are willing to learn. Unfortunatley, Bernard Shaw said "we learn from history, but we learn nothing from history".

Come to think of it, Celsus' attempt at refuting Christ ended up acknowledging his existence and the fact that he prerfomed miracles.

It baffles me that you deny the existence of Roman accounts on Christ. Have you searched Roman accounts and there was no Pontius Pilate who was Roman governor of Judea? If there was, find out if he left notes of what he did there as governor. Read the 'Acts of Pilate', his notes to Emperor Tiberius on his activities as procurator of Judea, and see if he mentioned the cruxicion of Christ. What do you say about the accounts/writings of other Romans such as Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, etc who acknowledged the existence of Jesus Christ? Even the atheistic Lucian acknowledged Christ's existence in his writing. I know you will, as atheists are wont to do, dismiss them as interpolations by christians.

Do you dismiss creation just because there are no secular records of it? But you believe and canvass evolution which has no historical proof? Do you dismiss the existence of the Almighty God just because your 'science' says it is unable to get facts in proof of that? Tell me, isn't 'metaphysics' a part of philosophy? On what scientific grounds is it based?
Good day.

I believe the claims that jesus is the son of God and savior can be viewed and measured by concluding these three facts: either a lair,lunatic,or lord,as he claimed to be.
If, when jesus made his claims,he knew that he was not God,then he was lying and delibrately deceiving his followers. But if he was a liar,then he was also a hypocrite because he told others to be honest,whatever the cost,while he himself lived a colossal lie. More than that,he was a demon,because he told others to trust him for their eternal destiny. Last, he would also be a fool because it was his claims to being the son of God that led to his crucifixtion.
Many will say that jesus was a good moral teacher. Let's be realistic. How could he be a great moral teacher and knowingly mislead people at the most important point of his teaching,which is his own identity?
Maybe we would have to conclude logically that he was a delibrate liar. This view of jesus,however,doesn't coincide with what we know either of him or the results of his life and teachings. Wherever jesus has been proclaimed,lives have been changed for the good,thieves are made honest,alcoholics are set free,hateful individuals become channels of love,unjust persons become just.
How, in the name of logic,common sense,and experience,could an impostor-  that is deceitful man have invented,and consistently maintained from the begining to the end,the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality? How could he have conceived and successfully carried out a perfect and flawless plan of deceit,and yet maintained a sublime moral magnitude,and sacrifice his own life for it,in the face of the strongest prejudices of his people?
If jesus wanted to fool people to follow him,he wouldn't go to the small jewish nation;a country thoroughly adhering to the undivided unity of God.Why didn't he go to egypt or greece,where they serve various gods? Logically,he couldn't have been a liar.
Then maybe a lunatic?

Was he a lunatic,to have made such claim,and died for it?
If it is inconceivable for jesus to be a liar,then couldn't he actually have thought himself to be the son of God? After all,its possible to be both sincere,and yet be wrong. But for someone to think himself "the son of God,"especially in a fiercely monotheistic(one God) culture,and telling others that their salvation depended on believing in him,is no mere fantasy but the thoughts of a lunatic in the fullest sense. Was he such a person?
Someone who believes he is God sounds like someone today believing himself napoleon. He would be schizophrenic a person who is more autistic than realistic. He would be deluded and self-deceived,and probably be locked up so he wouldn't hurt himself or anyone else. Yet in jesus we don't observe the abnormalities and imbalance that usually go with being deranged. The skill and depth of his teachings support the case only for his total sanity and flawless mental soundness. If only we were as sane as he! How could he be an enthusiast or a madman who never lost the even balance of his mind,who sailed serenely over all the troubles and persecutions thrown at him,as the sun above the clouds,who always return the wisest answers to tempting questions,who calmly and delibrately predicted his own death on the cross,his resurrection on the third day,the founding of his church,and the destruction of jerusalem- predictions which have been literally fulfilled? A character so original,so complete,so uniformly consistent,so perfect,so human and yet above all human greatness,can be neither fraud nor fiction. He his far from being a lunatic!

Are there any other possibilities to his claim? Was he really lord?

@IchieEzeji i love some post with proof i mean where the OP get there source from yours did not indicating any wish means you can just sit down and type with your little knowledge that you hear from some pastor's or read from one book that is author by some pastor's but in Rossike case he wrote everything and give sources did you hear me say sources more than one so i believe in all he said up there.

bashy_demy:

@IchieEzeji i love some post with proof i mean where the OP get there source from yours did not indicating any wish means you can just sit down and type with your little knowledge that you hear from some pastor's or read from one book that is author by some pastor's but in Rossike case he wrote everything and give sources did you hear me say sources more than one so i believe in all he said up there.

Your religion is Islam; only a slowpoke will argue with you. Your name is all over the place, you are the potential terrorist and troublemaker, The entire world knows your idea and belief towards livelihood! , Oh yeah, those 70 virgins are waiting for you too! Do you guys love sex that much
Once again, its pointless arguing with you, i'd rather enlighten an atheist than waste my breath on Muslims; especially a blockhead type like you, Keep bombing and constituting nuisance all over the world.

Checking the history and evidence that surrounds Jesus and your Mohammed, Any sensible person would follow the gentle, loving, peaceful Jesus; not a warlord, wife-snatching terrorist,

I'm a different Christian, i will put your crap in your face; don't mess with my Jesus.

@roymary what's your Degree in Stupidity? pls dont be mad its just a Question.

roymary:


Your religion is Islam; only a slowpoke will argue with you. Your name is all over the place, you are the potential terrorist and troublemaker, The entire world knows your idea and belief towards livelihood! , Oh yeah, those 70 virgins are waiting for you too! Do you guys love sex that much

I want you to point out any Quran verses that promise 72 virgin if you cannot then you are a disgrace to yourself, to your family, to your religion, to your nation and to the entire world hat why i say i believe in comments like this with proof so kindly proof it in a Quran where 72 virgin was promise or mention.

roymary:


Once again, its pointless arguing with you, i'd rather enlighten an atheist than waste my breath on Muslims; especially a blockhead type like you, Keep bombing and constituting nuisance all over the world.

What was the level of your idiotic pls tell me, you can't even argue cos i once said that the likes of you and fellow are too small to argue with me and it will really make me happy if you can invite Pastor Adeboye of Redeem and Oyedepo of winner's Chapel ETC to join me on NL.

roymary:


Checking the history and evidence that surrounds Jesus and your Mohammed, Any sensible person would follow the gentle, loving, peaceful Jesus; not a warlord, wife-snatching terrorist,

I'm a different Christian, i will put your crap in your face; don't mess with my Jesus.

Hmm you male me laugh once again Well i believe out of all the prophets (AS) of God the only prophet (AS) that was not mention in your Bible is Prophet Mohammad (AS) Solomon (AS)was mention and you all believe in him and always pray to God for his kind of wisdom he is also a warlord wife snatcher have about 1000 wives and concubine proof me wrong, Moses (AS) was also a warlord and kill million of pharaoh mens back then. David (AS) was also a warlord, so tell me what was the sword Jesus ask his Disciples to sell there bags and buy mean't for? everyone know that sword is meant for war but since his enemies are more than him he have to quit .Roymary wise up and stop messing yourself on here.

daylae:

I believe the claims that jesus is the son of God and savior can be viewed and measured by concluding these three facts: either a lair,lunatic,or lord,as he claimed to be.
If, when jesus made his claims,he knew that he was not God,then he was lying and delibrately deceiving his followers. But if he was a liar,then he was also a hypocrite because he told others to be honest,whatever the cost,while he himself lived a colossal lie. More than that,he was a demon,because he told others to trust him for their eternal destiny. Last, he would also be a fool because it was his claims to being the son of God that led to his crucifixtion.
Many will say that jesus was a good moral teacher. Let's be realistic. How could he be a great moral teacher and knowingly mislead people at the most important point of his teaching,which is his own identity?
Maybe we would have to conclude logically that he was a delibrate liar. This view of jesus,however,doesn't coincide with what we know either of him or the results of his life and teachings. Wherever jesus has been proclaimed,lives have been changed for the good,thieves are made honest,alcoholics are set free,hateful individuals become channels of love,unjust persons become just.
How, in the name of logic,common sense,and experience,could an impostor-  that is deceitful man have invented,and consistently maintained from the begining to the end,the purest and noblest character known in history with the most perfect air of truth and reality? How could he have conceived and successfully carried out a perfect and flawless plan of deceit,and yet maintained a sublime moral magnitude,and sacrifice his own life for it,in the face of the strongest prejudices of his people?
If jesus wanted to fool people to follow him,he wouldn't go to the small jewish nation;a country thoroughly adhering to the undivided unity of God.Why didn't he go to egypt or greece,where they serve various gods? Logically,he couldn't have been a liar.
Then maybe a lunatic?  

Now do u understand the trinity? before making another trilema for yourself, now let us examine what you wrote
Lord, Lunatic and Liar.

Is the opposite of lord Lunatic?
O
is the opposite of Lord Liar
No
the Opposite of Lord is Human, meaning Jesus was either Lord or Human, I pick Human, as he said I can by myself do nothing.

again you Lunatic and Liar claim, is the opposite of Lunatic Liar? No the it is sane, was Jesus sane yes, even though the bible claims his family thought him besides himself.
Now Jesus a Liar, no it is you who are the Liars as you are in the habit of misquoting Jesus, Now I dare you to explain Jesus statement " I can by mt self do nothing" and " i am a servant of God"

bashy_demy:

@roymary what's your Degree in Stupidity? pls dont be mad its just a Question. I want you to point out any Quran verses that promise 72 virgin if you cannot then you are a disgrace to yourself, to your family, to your religion, to your nation and to the entire world hat why i say i believe in comments like this with proof so kindly proof it in a Quran where 72 virgin was promise or mention.
What was the level of your idiotic pls tell me, you can't even argue cos i once said that the likes of you and fellow are too small to argue with me and it will really make me happy if you can invite Pastor Adeboye of Redeem and Oyedepo of winner's Chapel ETC to join me on NL.
Hmm you male me laugh once again Well i believe out of all the prophets (AS) of God the only prophet (AS) that was not mention in your Bible is Prophet Mohammad (AS) Solomon (AS)was mention and you all believe in him and always pray to God for his kind of wisdom he is also a warlord wife snatcher have about 1000 wives and concubine proof me wrong, Moses (AS) was also a warlord and kill million of pharaoh mens back then. David (AS) was also a warlord, so tell me what was the sword Jesus ask his Disciples to sell there bags and buy mean't for? everyone know that sword is meant for war but since his enemies are more than him he have to quit .Roymary wise up and stop messing yourself on here.

Lol

@vedaxcool: it would have been better you ignore my post ,instead of bringing out some incoherent agurment that only show you've totally misconstrue the meaning. word and opossite has nothing to do with this. Only a liar,or a lunatic can make such claim as did he;and the last possibility is that he is actually the son of God.
Someone who lived as jesus lived,taught as jesus taught can niether be a liar nor a lunatic. The other available altanative is that he is actually the son of God,as he claimed. The issue with the three alternatives is not which is possible,for it is obvious that all three are possible. But rather,the question is which is more probable? You cannot put him on the shelf as a great moral teacher or some prophet. That is not a valid option. If he is neither a liar,a lunatic,or lord, then who do you say he is? Unless you're saying he didn't actually confess to being the son of God?

daylae:


Someone who lived as jesus lived,taught as jesus taught can niether be a liar nor a lunatic. The other available altanative is that he is actually the son of God,as he claimed. The issue with the three alternatives is not which is possible,for it is obvious that all three are possible[b]. But rather,the question is which is more probable? You cannot put him on the shelf as a great moral teacher or some prophet. [/b]--->(says who, u with a faulty reasoning?)That is not a valid option. If he is neither a liar,a lunatic,or lord, then who do you say he is? Unless you're saying he didn't actually confess to being the son of God?

Again you exposed how the word trinity has left you struggling to reason, As Your claim was Jesus is either Lord, Liar, Lunatic. my response was that is the opposite of Lord - Liar or Lunatic, even a child in elementary school will say no, absolutely no, so common sense the opposite of Lord is Human, and that is what Jesus is, you are the one arguing with your tongue in cheek, as the other alternatives are either we read in the bible this

"I and the Father are one." (John 10:30).
31. "Again the Jews picked up stones to stone him,"
32. "but Jesus said to them, I have shown you many great miracles from the
Father. For which of these do you stone me?"
33. "The Jews answered him, saying : 'For a good work we stone thee not; but
for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself a God.'"
(John 10:31-33).
34. "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your Law, `I have said you are
gods'?"
35. "If he called them `gods,' to whom the word of God came --and the Scripture
cannot be broken--,"
36. "what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into
the world? Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, `I am
God's Son'?" (John 10:34-36).


Imagine Jesus was telling the Jews the bible calls them gods which is higher than the small tittle he picked 'son of God', in fact to show you that , you are the Liars, why didn't Jesus insist that he was the son of God or even Lord, no instead he took his time to explain to them that "this is how we Jews talk" but at last Doctrine Manufacturers have done it again they quickly read I and God are One (In purpose - Guiding people to righteousness), and Conclude that Jesus is equal to God, Auzobilla. Please my advise to people like you is read with your head and gr-apse what the meaning of what you are reading not the indecent haste you display in making false claims.

Vedaxcool, can see that your assertions are just directly opposite to your comments.Well,let me help you anyways. If what you're saying is that jesus didn't confess to be the son of God, you are far from being right,cus the sciptures you posted didn't say otherwise.
For many people this is too exclusive,too narrow for them to want to believe. Yet the issue is not what do we think or believe,but rather,who did jesus claim to be.
Jesus christ is actually a name(jesus) and a title(christ). The name jesus is derived from the greek form of the name jeshua or joshua meaning "jehovah-savior" or "the lord saves." The title christ is derived from the greek word for messiah(or the hebrew mashiach- Daniel 9:26) and means "anointed one."
The strongest evidence of all is jesus being accused of blasphemy by the jews,and they are always ready to cast thier stones. A good example is during the feast of dedication in jerusalem,jesus was approached by some jewish leaders who asked about his being the christ. He ended his comments to them by saying, "i and the father are one"(john 10:30). The jews took up stone again to stone him. It is evident that those who heard this statement accused him of claiming to be the son of God.
Jesus continuously spoke of himself as one in essence and nature of God. He boldly asserted, "if you know me,you would know my father also"(john 8:19); "He who beholds me beholds the one who sents me"(john 12:45); "All may honor the son,even as they honor the father. All who does not honor the son does not honor the father who sent him"(john 5:23);etc these refrences certainly indicate that jesus looked at himself as more than just a man;rather he was equal with God. And that's why i coclude to say:only a liar,or a lunatic,or lord,as he claimed,can make such statements. Even his diciples confessed him to be. When he was asked by the priest,"are you the christ,the son of the blessed one?" He said, 'Iam.'
Also,no ordinary man forives sins,but jesus did (mark 2:5).

bashy_demy:

@roymary what's your Degree in Stupidity? pls dont be mad its just a Question. I want you to point out any Quran verses that promise 72 virgin if you cannot then you are a disgrace to yourself, to your family, to your religion, to your nation and to the entire world hat why i say i believe in comments like this with proof so kindly proof it in a Quran where 72 virgin was promise or mention.
What was the level of your idiotic pls tell me, you can't even argue cos i once said that the likes of you and fellow are too small to argue with me and it will really make me happy if you can invite Pastor Adeboye of Redeem and Oyedepo of winner's Chapel ETC to join me on NL.
Hmm you male me laugh once again Well i believe out of all the prophets (AS) of God the only prophet (AS) that was not mention in your Bible is Prophet Mohammad (AS) Solomon (AS)was mention and you all believe in him and always pray to God for his kind of wisdom he is also a warlord wife snatcher have about 1000 wives and concubine proof me wrong, Moses (AS) was also a warlord and kill million of pharaoh mens back then. David (AS) was also a warlord, so tell me what was the sword Jesus ask his Disciples to sell there bags and buy mean't for? everyone know that sword is meant for war but since his enemies are more than him he have to quit .Roymary wise up and stop messing yourself on here.

Conjectural Rants! I don't read such Books as your Quran!The whole world knows you as morons, cavemen sees the light more than yall.
Jesus was not and is not on the same level as those you sited in your lame illustration. Leaders are different from Prophets; Jesus came after the existence of most of those people and his lifestyle and history shows decency and transparency. Your prophet Mohammed killed and supported Killing. He was no peacemaker, he had no traits of forgiveness--- You all take after him. I hope your top-shot Osama is tamed so we could have some peace and sanity.

Your religion only preach violence and hate. I could stand an idol-worshiper than you sorry-arse Muslims, especially radical ones like you with no common sense.

Like i said, Keep bombing and stoning. Keep Hating and killing; the 70 virgins are waiting for you.

God has many who are serving Him and who are not conforming to the popular ridicules of this world. God did not dismiss Elijah from his duties because of how he felt at that moment, but instead, told him, “Go forth.” We are also to continue with our service to God, promoting the salvation that God brought to mankind through Jesus Christ and ignore whatever threats or intimidation or bullying the devil and his followers sends our way. Are you in a place of discouragement today? Don’t dwell there, but move on. God still has work for us to do. No distraction nor condemnation must shake our feet in the ways of our Lord Jesus Christ.Amen

@roymary but why are you serving a Fornication God that the inercourse btw your God and mary produce your Jesus a bastard son of Joseph

bashy_demy:

@roymary but why are you serving a Fornication God that the inercourse btw your God and mary produce your Jesus a naughty person son of Joseph

Your English literacy is so poor. Stick to that Quran. Bible is way too advance for you; and i'm not kidding, the problem with people like you is plainly inability to understand the wisdom and intelligence behind the things of Christ. Its beyond your comprehension. If you can not understand simple English language and its expressions, how on earth would handle sacred heavenly phenomenon.

You are better at throwing bombs ,missiles and growing dirty beards.  Stick to all that!

@roymary were just wake up from your slumber and stop saying cos i dont understand bible or English later you will say its because i don't have Christ in me that why i cannot understand him when will you wise up and stop changing the interpretation of your fraud Bible. Well i am only trying to help you out so you wont perish. Well not new to me when Jesus was alive i mean when he was sent to the lost sheep of Israel how many of the jew accept him? well they accept him up till this moment so some thief now wanna impose him on the rest of the world since the Jew that he was sent dint accept him wise up pls.

@vedaxcool:
@bashy phemy: I figured out you are muslims . I know what you're saying is that,"what makes jesus so different? It is absurd to believe he is actually the ultimate sacrifice for the sins of the world;and even his own people rejected this claims."
Why so much conflict over one individual? Why is it that his name,more than the name of any other religious leader,causes irritation? It is simply because of his claims to being the son of God,the messiah. But do you know he is the only one that has the credentials to support his claims to being messiah,God's son. Over and over again jesus appealed to the prophecies of the old testament to substantiate his claims as messiah.
To begin,we need to go back to genesis 3:15. Here we have the first messianic prophecy. In all scripture, only one man was "born of the seed of a woman"- all others are born of the seed of man. Another prophecy dating 1012 b.c also predicts that this man's hand and feet will be pierced(will be crucified). This description was written 800 years before crucifiction by the romans. Isaiah 7:14 adds that he will be born of a virgin;a natural birth of unatural conception,a criterion beyond human planing and control. The book of issiah even said he will be rejected by his own people(jews),and the gentiles(non jew) will believe in him. Malachi 3:1 said there will be a forerunner for him,one preparing the way before the lord,a john the baptist. John even confess him to be when he saw him.
I choose from the old testament because i know the muslims have great respect for it,and the quran also conform to its authenticity. But the muslims have their reservations about the new testamenet just like the jews. Why? Becuase its about the christ. But the jewish priests bore witness the birth,death,and his resurrection.

How many billions of rams should be killed for the atonement of sins,even since the time of abraham? You don't have kill another,the price had been paid over 2000  years ago!

^^^^

@daylae -- man you deserve commendation for being an expert in upside down thinking, if Jesus was the son of  God why din't he Just say I am oya stone me, no instead he told them " Ye are gods" according to the bible, but why is Jesus not being direct? the reason is that he is speaking Metaphorically.

Pls quote where in the quran that  the old testament, as the daft stories i read in the OT will make me vormit if I for any reason attribute them to God.
Ignoramus who told you muslims kill rams for forgiveness? pls provide proof as we pray to GOD directly for forgiveness and blessings.

@daylae you just proof your ignorance here if Muslims kill rams for forgiveness of sin how about millions of cows that was kill daily were they also for forgives? During your xmas most of the blessed xtain kill goat but most kill chicken were they also for forgiveness of sin? Kai daylae your mumu no get photocopy your mumu don over ripe

GOD KILL HIS SON OR THE SON WAS KILLED BY MEN.

PLEASE HOW CAN HUMANS SAY CRUCIFY HIM AND GOD BECOMES THE KILLER?

SURE JESUS WAS NAILED TO THE CROSS NOT BY SPIRIT BUT HUMANS.

Vedaxcool, i can see you're even lost within your own intelligence. I know you delibrately ignore the instances i gave you,and yet came alive with rediculous and bogus accusations and conclusions. I guess the sallah ram,to you, is just one of those meat to be eating? Ask your imam to tell you the basics of its practise.
Without the bible,the quran has no meaning,cus it solely depend on the bible for its religious refrences. And the quran have to talk about the life of chirst too,to save its  own validation.  But never have we seen a place where the bible make refrence(s) to the quran,or mohamed, a mere jihadist.

And the so called "holy month of ramadan," when you people show "soberness" for your sins and delude yourself in believing your sins are forgiving is just but a sham practice and a waste of your limited time on earth.

The one to whom your sins are commited against said he had forgiving you,and his ready to pay the price himself because of his love,and yet you rejected. Instead you re-invented the practice of old.
I say to you with all honesty that, your sacrifices is not to God;but the devil who inspired islam through his manipulating skills and deceit. Am just sorry you and few jihadist are his victims.
You people are now claiming that christ will send a comforter(mohamed) just so to belong. But i say to you,because the one who is the purpose for all the  prophecies had fulfill them,there is no need for another prophet again,unless deceptors jesus warned us about! That's why islam is always associated with killing,amputating,stoning, hanging,and  maiming of innocent souls. It is not of God!

^^^^^^^

Mugu bring Proof where is written that Muslims Sacrifice Rams for God forgiveness, I seriously Laughing at the Kind of Ignoramus you actually are, Bring evidence you Paulish Liar with little understanding of what Islam is actually about, It liberated us from Pagan worship where you go through a second Channel before gettinhg to God, we Muslims asked God for Forgiveness, as what will ALLAH do with the Sacrifice of rams, but at Last, the Bimbo showed how intelligent he actually is.The Bible is a big Joke, even your Pastors laugh at it's ,eaning when begging you for tihe to buy Hummers Lol , Just Kidding, but seiously the bible is a cheap Joke only a minute part of it can be said to be from God, Yet was it your Pastors that told this new Lie your spitting? Again, Jesus cannot send anybody to this earth as only ALLAH can send Prophets and Messengers, Jesus actually Prophecised about Muhammad PBUH, again your auot -lying brain did not stop you from Fabricating just like the master liar Paul


Paul says:
Rom.3
[24] they are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus,
[28] For we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.
Rom.5
[9] Since, therefore, we are now justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

Jesus says:
Matt.12
[37] for by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.


Now between Paul and Jesus who is telling the truth/ This is a very easy question not Jamb. I pick Jesus A.s

will be back shortly.

Was Jesus not sent to us to be "sacrificed" for the sins of mankind? What do you think the word "sacrifice" meant in this context? Tolotolo killing?

i care:

GOD KILL HIS SON OR THE SON WAS KILLED BY MEN.

PLEASE HOW CAN HUMANS SAY CRUCIFY HIM AND GOD BECOMES THE KILLER?

SURE JESUS WAS NAILED TO THE CROSS NOT BY SPIRIT BUT HUMANS.

@bashy _demmy: its quite understandable to be angry or attach  sentiments to your comments;but at least let common sense carry the day.
The practice whereby muslims slaughter and shed the blood of animals(ram,cow,as the case may be) is just to mimic the practice of old. If the rams are just for merriments,why do muslims go out of their way just to meet up with it? You don't just call a day "holy," slaughter a ram,and drain its blood on the earth for just fantasy. If you don't have the time to confide in your iman its essence, right away,i tell it to you its primary purpose is to show soberness and ask for the remission of sin. But the unfortunate thing is that no ammount of the blood of the billions of rams you guys have killed,or still will be killing,there is no remitance of sin. The blood of"the lamb of God," whose blood is the only price enough to cleanse your sins,and he doesn't have to shed it over and over again is the only one God enough(because of his deity),and the only one man enough(because he is the son of man) to cleanse sins totally. The only people that sheds the blood of animals are pegans,occultist and satanist;for the devil thinks he deserve some worships too.


The death of jesus on the cross was delibrate;not accidental or out of his hand. That's why he said "it is finished" on the cross,which means God's promise had been fufilled. We don't need to shed the blood of animals anymore. Because God gave us a green card we don't deserve doesn't mean we should find it preposterous to believe his offer.

@dayli

Jesus Never Fufilled his purpose since he said I was sent to the Lost sheep of Isreal, the question is are you a Jew? Did the JEws accept him? Was Jesus A.S a Christian as? but all  these question might be harder than Jamb exam to you but if you are honest you will be able to answer the easily. Again When Jesus said He is servant of God , to you it means he is equal to God, Pathetic indeed.

Jesus Christ didn't die on the Cross because we read Jesus saying  "lord let this Cup pass over me"(Take this trial from me) and the " God heard" Meaning God accepted his Prayer, in essence the Jesus begged God to save me and God granted his wish, one way the muddled NT brought more confusion to the endless trail and confusions.

@daylae you are such an ignorance of what you dont know i ask you a Question but instead you keep blabbing aroung i said what was the Chicken Killed durring xmas for? remember i said some Xtain who God bless they kill Goat and some Kill cow i have also seen some xtain killing ram for xmas festive tell me what are they for? and beside if you have to sit down and think about the xmas you will that its a idol festive whereby it occur once in a year and same day every 25 Dec wish means that a special day for the worship of xtain idol. go and ask anywhere Ileya festival never fall within same date as your Xmas since the world round every year Ileya date change but xmas is 25th Dec wish is a set date to worship your idol guy wake up and get a life be wise.

@vadexcool Wow! Your level of ignorance is so overwhelming,and all your conclusions are based on deluded misinformation. You've shown you have no iota of understanding about islam already,but yet fooling yourself you understanding much of christianity.

I tell you in a lay-man's language that,if jesus didn't die on the cross,and didn't rise from the dead as he foretold,his diciples won't be going about preaching and healing multitudes in the name of jesus afterwards,and this even cost them their lives. Before,they were afraid and locked themselves up when jesus was captured and killed;even peter denied ever knowing him thrice. But all of a sudden,they came out bold as a lion,lamenting the name of christ,saying that he is the son of God,even to the point of their death. What do you think happend to their faith that was before dead? If jesus didn't die or resurrected,the jewish priests who are his arch enemies would have been out to confront and discredit their claims. And the romans would have come out to say he escaped before they could cary out his cruxifiction. Or he didn't rise from the dead but his corpse was stolen by his diciples while they were guarding the tomb. And saul of tarsus who was the greatest anti-christ of the time wouldn't have confess him to being who he was;and also die for this sake.

For God so love the world that he gave his only begotten son,that who so ever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. Don't know what you mean "the jews only"
and the jews refusing him is prophecy being fufilled! It is quite difficult to believe the messiah is living just three blocks from you. I don't blame them.

@daylaeam very mad at you for not answering my question or are you going to tell me you dint see my comment? maybe it scare you lol.

daylae:

@vadexcool Wow! Your level of ignorance is so overwhelming,and all your conclusions are based on deluded misinformation. You've shown you have no iota of understanding about islam already,but yet fooling yourself you understanding much of christianity.

I tell you in a lay-man's language that,if jesus didn't die on the cross,and didn't rise from the dead as he foretold,his diciples won't be going about preaching and healing multitudes in the name of jesus afterwards,and this even cost them their lives. Before,they were afraid and locked themselves up when jesus was captured and killed;even peter denied ever knowing him thrice. But all of a sudden,they came out bold as a lion,lamenting the name of christ,saying that he is the son of God,even to the point of their death. What do you think happend to their faith that was before dead? If jesus didn't die or resurrected,the jewish priests who are his arch enemies would have been out to confront and discredit their claims. And the romans would have come out to say he escaped before they could cary out his cruxifiction. O[b]r he didn't rise from the dead but his corpse was stolen by his diciples while they were guarding the tomb.[/b] And saul of tarsus who was the greatest anti-christ of the time wouldn't have confess him to being who he was;and also die for this sake.

For God so love the world that he gave his only begotten son,that who so ever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. Don't know what you mean "the jews only"
and the jews refusing him is prophecy being fufilled! It is quite difficult to believe the messiah is living just three blocks from you. I don't blame them.

Pls explain the bold part pls are you telling Jesus desciples are thieves? cmon OMG did your Jesus also teach them how to thief corpse. Well if they were Bold enough and Jesus is right why will they thief his corpse and run away?

bashy demmy: the reason i do overlook some things you said is just that they are somewhat unreasonable and shows your level of fatuity and dastard thinking.
You trying to say christians kill chickens for remission of sin is laughable and daunting. Christians celebrate christmas by killing and eating whatever individual so like and can afford. No incantations like muslims do,because theirs is offering a sacrifice to a god,which must be done by beaded alpha . It must also be a ram just to mimic the old practice of atonement,and for it to be accepted by the gods. Pegans do same too
Your last reply just emphasized your folly beyond doubt. Iam trying to correct vadexcool impression that chist death and resurrection could have been planned,you're still busy in your autistic behavior. Only a fool can believe such happening of great magnitude can be framed. When those people like the jewish priests and the romans could not oppose the fact that it happend,cus they can't deny it for they are witnesses,even the jewish priests took it upon themselves to kill his diciples for they fear the multitudes have accepted christ,meanwhile making them irrelevant. The fact that romans are followers of christ today shows they can't deny it. There is no two ways to the truth. And no matter how much water you pure on a drop of oil to cover it up,it will always float above the water. They could not hide it even if they wanted. Just coming out and say the deciples were lairs,that christ didn't die or resurrected the third day,there will be no christianity today.

bashy_demy:

@daylaeam very mad at you for not answering my question or are you going to tell me you dint see my comment? maybe it scare you lol.
Pls explain the bold part pls are you telling Jesus desciples are thieves? cmon  OMG did your Jesus also teach them how to thief corpse. Well if they were Bold enough and Jesus is right why will they thief his corpse and run away?

You are not only annoying; I gave up on exchanging facts with you considering your literacy level. You have a long way to go understanding the things of this world; Your handwork is all over the globe; every part of Jos feels your bizarre approach towards life. You live a shameless blood-shedding life. I wonder what gave you the pride to show your faces in public. Almost everybody hates you, Christianity is all about Peace. Christianity is for the Wise.

Your religion makes the whole world sick.

Have some shame.

@daylae are you daft i guess you dont know you right arm from left well if you wanna know more about the killing of the rams you need to go read more about the history of Abraham, but about the killing of chickens,goat by xtain for xmas where did that generate from pls tell me at least we could be able to trace ours to Abraham so how about yours?

@roymary if you dont know the source of any riot is better you close that your gutter Jos crisis was a tribal riot go and get your fact right its was a riot between the Hausa/Fulani and the Berom so if you are not stupid no only listen to the stupid medias are can you think and asking your are there no Muslims among the Berom? and again ask yourself are there xtain among the Hausa/Fulani but instead you come on here talking rubbish well this is not new to me since you only believe what the useless Nigeria media houses and since you cannot understand your Bible how on earth will you understand what is happening, and how you going to tell me the fight between Yoruba and House in mile 12 then was a religious crisis? are you going to tell me the riot between Yoruba and house in Bodija Ibadan then was also religious crisis since the xtains here are more than dem guy use your brain.