Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
Why Do You Hate Jesus?
64 Answers
Why, apparently do so many people hate Jesus, or even the thought of Him?
That is what comes across so often on this topic.
And by the way - happy new year.
That is what comes across so often on this topic.
And by the way - happy new year.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Oh, Theland ..... you have been missed - and not by the custard pie!! Haaaaaa!
On to the serious stuff again. Perhaps it does seem like a red rag to a bull to you - but I stick with my original assessment and say that it isn't Jesus the person people are getting at - it's the religion created in his name.
On to the serious stuff again. Perhaps it does seem like a red rag to a bull to you - but I stick with my original assessment and say that it isn't Jesus the person people are getting at - it's the religion created in his name.
Gormless, you are quite quite wrong.
Caesar wrote a lot about himself.
There are contemporaneous reports and records about him - people writing down what they saw and heard at the time.
There are lots of eye- and ear-witnesses to things he did and said.
There is lots of evidence on the ground in the countries he visited and conquered. I could go on...
None of this applies to Jesus. He wrote nothing. No-one wrote a word about him during the supposed time of his life. There are no ear- or eye-witnesses or any physical evidence. He was introduced to the world in about AD 55 by Paul, a man who had never met him. The gospels were written years after the supposed events by unknown people who weren't there and about whose characters and truthfulness we know nothing. Again, I could go on...
You could hardly have picked a worse comparison!
Caesar wrote a lot about himself.
There are contemporaneous reports and records about him - people writing down what they saw and heard at the time.
There are lots of eye- and ear-witnesses to things he did and said.
There is lots of evidence on the ground in the countries he visited and conquered. I could go on...
None of this applies to Jesus. He wrote nothing. No-one wrote a word about him during the supposed time of his life. There are no ear- or eye-witnesses or any physical evidence. He was introduced to the world in about AD 55 by Paul, a man who had never met him. The gospels were written years after the supposed events by unknown people who weren't there and about whose characters and truthfulness we know nothing. Again, I could go on...
You could hardly have picked a worse comparison!
Anything we know about Genghis Khan was written nearly a hundred years after his death.
He died in 1227, Jami al-Tawarikh, an Iranian, was born 20 years after that and went on to write much of what we know today. He based it on a text called Secret History of the Mongols which was an anonymous hand written document, written long after Genghis� death. Any Chinese chronicles from the time, merely refer to the nomadic grey eyed tribes of the plains and their barbaric leaders.
So you could say Genghis was introduced to the world in 1306 by a man who never met him.
He died in 1227, Jami al-Tawarikh, an Iranian, was born 20 years after that and went on to write much of what we know today. He based it on a text called Secret History of the Mongols which was an anonymous hand written document, written long after Genghis� death. Any Chinese chronicles from the time, merely refer to the nomadic grey eyed tribes of the plains and their barbaric leaders.
So you could say Genghis was introduced to the world in 1306 by a man who never met him.
Maybe so, but no one is making any claims for Genghis Khan that require him to be anything other than human, are they?
To use the expression popularised by Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Oh, and Theland:
Rev. Lovejoy: "Homer, were sending you as a missionary to spread the Christian religion."
Homer: "Huh? But I don't even believe in Jeebus!" (5 sec. later...) "Jeebus! Help me Jeebus!"
So I was quoting The Simpsons. Ha ha.
To use the expression popularised by Carl Sagan, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
Oh, and Theland:
Rev. Lovejoy: "Homer, were sending you as a missionary to spread the Christian religion."
Homer: "Huh? But I don't even believe in Jeebus!" (5 sec. later...) "Jeebus! Help me Jeebus!"
So I was quoting The Simpsons. Ha ha.
I think Waldo's mis-spelling of the traditional anglicisaed spelling of Jesus was to poke fun at those who believe in him not to display some sort of hatred for the man himself - that's certainly the way I'd read it.
More to the point why do you think people hate Jesus? - i've never met an atheist who did - although I've met plenty who hate Christians - but that's a very different thing.
There's a lot in Christianity to hate after all.
Imagine the way you feel about the Catholic Church - a lot of us feel that way about all religions
Is it that you think that the Christian Church on Earth is exactly how God/Christ wants it to be, therefore because someone hates Christianity they must hate Jesus?
More to the point why do you think people hate Jesus? - i've never met an atheist who did - although I've met plenty who hate Christians - but that's a very different thing.
There's a lot in Christianity to hate after all.
Imagine the way you feel about the Catholic Church - a lot of us feel that way about all religions
Is it that you think that the Christian Church on Earth is exactly how God/Christ wants it to be, therefore because someone hates Christianity they must hate Jesus?
Naomi, if you take the time to read my post, you will note that it was a comparison of historical written evidence I was making, nothing else. Why do you persist in misunderstanding the candour of my posts?
I could go into details surrounding Shinto, the Kojiki, the Bushido Code, the Kamikaze and the Yasukini Shrine if you like, but that was not the intention of my original post.
I could go into details surrounding Shinto, the Kojiki, the Bushido Code, the Kamikaze and the Yasukini Shrine if you like, but that was not the intention of my original post.
�I see no point in comparing the historical written evidence of anyone else with that relating to Jesus�
Nor do I, but if chakka cites that Jesus was introduced to the world by a man who had never met him (ad infinitum on every thread) and that makes his existence questionable, then why not mention our only historical written evidence of Genghis being written by a non-Mongolian man who never met him, 80 years after his death.
Would chakka claim it is likely that Genghis never existed because of the lack of written evidence during his lifetime? I doubt it.
Nor do I, but if chakka cites that Jesus was introduced to the world by a man who had never met him (ad infinitum on every thread) and that makes his existence questionable, then why not mention our only historical written evidence of Genghis being written by a non-Mongolian man who never met him, 80 years after his death.
Would chakka claim it is likely that Genghis never existed because of the lack of written evidence during his lifetime? I doubt it.
