Thread: Christmas poll

I don't like how the poll question deals with certainties. "Yes, definitely"? No one can be 100% sure as we were not there, nor do we have any har evidence. Then by the same logic you might ask how a person could respond "Definitely not"? Therefore I would say it is possible the MAN could have existed (even though there is no historical proof to back this up, as the bible doesn't count) at that time, albeit possibly a fraud artist or schizophrenic rather than a messiah.

'The Bible doesn't count' ?

Now that's convenient.

I'm a devout Christian, ABSOLUTELY. God's pretty cool huh?

Originally Posted by Sailor

Just got home from the local pub with the lady of my life, so maybe i shouldn't write this at all, but here we go. I'll propably delete this later.

Some facts. The archives of Roman census have been stored in several places. Most of them have remained 100% intact and not single one of them state that there ever was a census in certain time and certain place. Was there a conspiracy to take away these records? Why?

The earlist remaining copies of the evidence (NT) have been written hundreds of years later. They were propably modified, banned, twisted, and some of them got totally banned, and those who did it were the early Christians. Why? And even if they were modified we have no way to know for sure. The earliest copies of Josephus are from the year 1000 AD or so.

Some of people here told that there is a scripts from non-Christian, Roman wittnesses about this man doing his miracle deeds. I (and the world) would like to know some more.

So here we have the facts as far as i know. I might be wrong, and it sure wouldn't be the first time.

I have no bad feelings about those who are Christians. The message of the NT is important and human. I just don't want to put my own belief on something that is just a rumour or second or third hand testemonies. In such case there would be lot of bullshit in this world to worship.

Latsly this is not so important. If i hear someone walking on a water, the it must be waterskiing or then it was winter when the lake was on ice.

Here is a site interested in Roman history, not Biblcal interests. So, it would appear to be somewhat unbiased for the sake of our discussion. It clearly says that the figures are pretty unreliable, etc, etc. I would assume the people who put together that site did more research into Roman census facts than any of us here in this thread. I think that the topic of the census is rather inconclusive for both sides.

Question, Do you give and receive Gifts at Christmas? If you don't believe why?
This is a chart out of book Called "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell. It's a good place to look for evidence if someone wants to investigate both side of the story.
As for the Hear say about the Census ( And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed. 2 (And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria.)) It was not the MO of the Romans to have people return to a traditional home for a count. It was though the MO of the Jewish government and a census could have been ordered by Caesar via King Herod and Cyrenius' mention may be just a time index since that would be consistent with other biblical dating.

A known work of inconsistencies at the very least. At the other end of the story they can't even get the date and time of Jesus crucifixion right.

There is more proof of Biblical accuracy than any other writing of antiquity and it was more than enough for Professor Simon Greenleaf (The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined by the Rules of Evidence‎, An examination of the testimony of the Four Evangelists by the rules of evidence administered in courts of justice with an account of the trial of Jesus) and for CS Lewis (Check out any of his writings he just didn't write much on Biblical proof) As for the date and time of Jesus' Crucifixion there is no dispute on either count. The Jews used a lunar calender and their days began at sunset not sunrise. (God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning--the first day.) Genesis 1:5

The Jews did write it all off as silliness as evidenced by the fact that they're still all Jewish. Also, if I'm not mistaken, the gospels were written and preached, not for the people of Israel/Palestine, but for the Greeks. And written at least sixty years later. That's a lifetime. At that time maybe two. In actuality the stories could have been told by the original disciples' descendants. Not saying they were, just that there is a reason to doubt, yet again the veracity of their telling.

Jewish is a Nationality and contrary to popular belief there are many who have accepted Jesus as Lord. They call themselves "Jews for Jesus" Jews for Jesus - http://www.jewsforjesus.org/ As for not being for the Jewish people... Paul says this in the Book of Romans (1:16) For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

As for the date of writings, Most ancient works were "copied down" way after the fact. Before the printing press verbal communication was the #1 way for common man to teach and to train. There use to be a thing called Integrity and honor to the word. Besides there are more original language manuscripts of the New Testament than any other work in history. With the # of manuscripts STILL available and the accuracy between them is the proof that the Gospel has not been watered down by "tradition and / or age"

Outside this very argument there is no reason to consider that the gospels are based on any real person at all again because there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever.

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.(Josephus /Antiquities of the Jews 18.63-64) This is just 1 There is more.

Here is just a couple of more statements made in the bible

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."
20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength. (1 Corinth.1:18-25)


16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son. 19 This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21 But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God."(John 3:16-21)

Originally Posted by ControlFreak1

'The Bible doesn't count' ?

Now that's convenient.

Not if you're xtian. Actually, no testimony counts as hard evidence and the bible suffers from too many inconsistencies to be considered. That's just as it is.

Originally Posted by ENUF2

Question, Do you give and receive Gifts at Christmas? If you don't believe why?

Probably because people, well European people anyway have been doing so for many thousands of years, culturally, even for Saturnalia and Mithras' birthday, December 25th, Sol Invictus.

PS Your bias is showing.

Originally Posted by xman

Not if you're xtian. Actually, no testimony counts as hard evidence and the bible suffers from too many inconsistencies to be considered. That's just as it is.
While I am not exactly disagreeing with your point I do notice you pick and choose at will which testimony you will accept as hard evidence.


Probably because people, well European people anyway have been doing so for many thousands of years, culturally, even for Saturnalia and Mithras' birthday, December 25th, Sol Invictus.

PS Your bias is showing.
So is yours my friend!!

Faith is required for belief in God and belief in Jesus being who he said he was. There is a Roman document where a Roman official describes Jesus as having a rather ruddy complexion but I'll be damned if I can remember where I read it. If I find it I will provide the link.

Originally Posted by JMS

While I am not exactly disagreeing with your point I do notice you pick and choose at will which testimony you will accept as hard evidence.

Fascinating. I'd be pleased if you could point out those instances for me so that I might reevaluate my position.

Originally Posted by JMS

Originally Posted by xman

PS Your bias is showing

So is yours my friend!!

Yes I believe you're right.

Originally Posted by xman

Fascinating. I'd be pleased if you could point out those instances for me so that I might reevaluate my position.

You might take a look at almost any link you have posted concerning global warming. they all follow like an opinion piece with little or no facts attached to them, And while the links you present may have factual backing those links fail to represent those facts.
I have other examples but have to track them down which I am just too damned lazy to do.

Originally Posted by JMS

You might take a look at almost any link you have posted concerning global warming. they all follow like an opinion piece with little or no facts attached to them, And while the links you present may have factual backing those links fail to represent those facts.
I have other examples but have to track them down which I am just too damned lazy to do.

Hold on here. Let's focus this discussion on the discussion contained within this thread, and not cross-reference other discussions held on other threads about other things.

Otherwise we may end up with comments such as these:

Seraphim, you like to take a dremel to perfectly fine razors. This is proof that you are a deranged individual, and should most likely be locked up, and thus all of your points are moot.

If X has been alledged as to "picking and choosing" in regards to the points he is making here, then point those out, not global warming, etc.

Obviously many of us have a strong point of view, one way or the other, and therefore argue the point from that perspective.