If Christ died on the cross for all of humanity

What you are doing is committing the fallacy of equivocation.

The universe we live in has LAWS. Physical laws. Remember, we are talking about "INSIDE" the universe.

One of those laws is that "something cannot come from nothing". This is a conservation law in the field of phsyics. Even if you try and think of something coming from nothing is absurd.

Remember, we are talking about a law INSIDE this universe.

Then when the atheist after hearing this will then say, "who created God". When they ask this question, they are making an assumption that the physcial laws of this universe, inside it, APPLY to those outside it.

What do we know of the physical laws in a supernatural world?

NOTHING, so any equivocating is commiting a fallacy.

Therefore the question is not logical.

Is part of your religious beliefs that you must throw out insults in every comment?

Anyway, I don't think I'm the one that is narrow minded here. You choose to believe that God created man, etc., and everyone else is wrong. I truly have no clue how things came about or will end because I don't think there is any real evidence to prove that. I don't know though, but some of the beliefs and suggestions that it takes to get to heaven for example......just don't sound very "god"{ like to me.

 

What in the world are you talking about? Inside....outside....whatever...it was a simple question. I thought there might be a reasonable answer, but clearly not.

As simple as the question sounds, the question does not make sense.

Your question assumes that everything that exists, must have a cause. In this world that we live in, that is absolutely correct, even though some atheists are in denial about this.

When you suggest everything has a cause, that rule applies to this universe that we live in.

When you ask who created God, an assumption is made that the rules of cause and effect apply outside this universe - the supernatural. It is committing a fallacy of equivocation.

Its like saying, "what does God eat in heavan"? Because you know to survive on this earth, you must eat, you are equivocating a law of survival that exists on this earth to something outside it.

Jesus Christ did convince people on who He really was. He had His very close 12 disciples with Him always. He performed many miracles that His disciples and the masses witnessed, His disciples knew He was the Son of God. He resurrected from the dead and then spoke to His disciples to spread the Good News in which we can see today that there are an estimated 3 billion people who are Christians.

So to you our all loving God should just accept everyone into heaven?

If that was the case then people could just go wild and do anything their wicked hearts desired. Think about it for a second, suppose that Jesus Christ told people that no matter what they did, they all will still go to heaven because God loves us all. I can just imagine how totally wicked this world would be much, much, more than it is already. There would be no need for the Ten Commandments. We, the human race would have already annihilated ourselves a long time ago.

This would have meant that Jesus wouldn't have had to sacrifice His life on the cross, I mean for what? Even if you didn't believe what He said, you would still go to heaven. So there would have been no need to sacrifice Jesus life on the cross to pay for all the sins of humanity.

Our all loving God has indeed executed the right plan. He has given us a way to cleanse our sins by accepting Jesus Christ as our Lord Savior in order for us to be saved and spend the rest of eternity in paradise in God's Kingdom of Heaven. Those sinners who won't ever accept Jesus Christ as their Lord Savior and continually reject him until the day they die, will spend eternity in hell.

The bottom line is that we are all sinners and none of us deserve to go to heaven to live for eternity, however our all loving God has executed the right plan, a plan of grace and salvation.

Jesus Chirst our Lord Savior said, "If you trust me, you are trusting not only me, but also God who sent me. For when you see me, you are seeing the one who sent me. I have come as a light to shine in this dark world, so that all who put their trust in me will no longer remain in the dark. I will not judge those who hear me but don't obey me, for I have come to save the world and not to judge it. But all who reject me and my message will be judged on the day of judgment by the truth I have spoken. I don't speak on my own authority. The Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to say it. And I know his commands lead to eternal life, so I say whatever the Father tells me to say." ----John 12: 44-50.

[Quote: Originally Posted by E-Muffin]

Is part of your religious beliefs that you must throw out insults in every comment?

--------------------------------------------------------------------

 

My...my...aren't we being so extra sensitive?...hihihihihi!

Will an apology help make you feel better?

You should see what kk and ahd call me...and I don't confront them about it...lol

Tell me, have you ever said something to somone that would have been taken as an insult?...just the truth and nothing but the truth now!

 

Correction: Tell me, have you ever said something to someone that would have been taken as an insult?...just the truth and nothing but the truth now!

I see what you are trying to say at least. I just personally don't think it makes sense, but I know where you are coming from.

 

of course...I'm just surprised because it doesn't seem to be the "Christian" way.

Since it has been asked over and over again.

Non-Christian, Non-Jewish Historians Comment on the History of Jesus

Cornelius Tacitus (c. A.D. 55-120)

A Roman historian who lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors¹, Tacitus has been called "the greatest historian of ancient Rome.  His most famous works are the Annals and theHistories.  The Annals covers from 14 A.D. to approximately 68 A.D. (the death of Augustus up to the time of Nero), while Historiesproceeds from 68 A.D. (Nero's death) to 96 A.D. (the time of Domitian).

Here is what Tacitus wrote concerning the history of Jesus, and the existence of Christians in Rome:

"But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the price could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome.  Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities.  Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also." (Annals XV, 44)¹.

Some points to note about the narrative from Tacitus:

• He mistakenly refers to Jesus as "Christus", however this was a common practice among the pagan writers at that time
• He supports the fact that Christ existed, and was put to death by Pontius Pilate - agreeing with the Christian scriptures
• He alludes to "the pernicious superstition" which broke out, was repressed, but then spread even more - even throughout the city of Rome itself.  This may indeed be referring to the core belief which caused the early church to explode and "turn the world upside down" -- that Jesus had died indeed, but that He had also risen from the grave. . 

Continued...

Suetonius

Another Roman historian, Suetonius, a court official under the emperor Hadrian, stated in his Life of Claudius (written about 120 A.D.) that Christians were expelled from Rome because of Christ (whom he calls Chrestus)::

"As the person were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome". (Life of Claudius, 25:4)¹

In another of his works, Suetonius records the punishment that Christians were receiving in Rome during the time of Nero (64 A.D.):

"Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition." (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

This "superstition" undoubtedly refers to the conviction by early Christians that Christ had been crucified and risen from the dead.

Pliny the Younger

C. Plinus Secundus, called Pliny the Younger to distinguish him from his uncle, was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor about A.D. 112.  He wrote to the emperor Trajan to seek advice on how to deal with the problem of Christians in his province.  He recounted to Trajan in his letters that he had been killing so many, he was considering whether he should continue killing anyone who professed to be a Christian, or only certain ones.  He explains that he made them bow down to statues of Trajan, and "curse Christ, which a genuine Christian cannot be induced to do."  In the same letter he say of the people who were being tried:

"They affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god,and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to do any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up." (Epistles X, 96)

Phiegon

Another secular authority, Phlegon, wrote a book entitled Chronicles, which was quoted by Julius Africanus.  Like Thallus, Phiegon acknowledges that a darkness fell upon the land about the time of Christ's death, and like Thallus he attributes this to a solar eclipse:

"During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon." (Africanus, Chronography, 18.1)

Mara Bar-Serapion

In the British Museum we have the text of a letter written by a Mara Bar-Serapion to his son, encouraging him to pursue wisdom.  This letter, written by this Syrian and probably Stoic philosopher, is dated about 70 A.D.  He compares Socrates, Pythagoras and the King of the person (which by context points to Jesus):

"What advantage did the person gain from executing their King? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished."

Jewish Historians Comment on the History of Jesus

The Talmud

The Talmud is comprised of two separate books of Jewish writings. The first is the Mishnah, which is the Jewish code of Jurisprudence.  It was compiled sometime after the destruction of Jerusalem (A.D. 70), and was completed in A.D. 200.  ThisGemaras.  Together these two works comprise the Talmud.

References to the history of Jesus in the Talmud do not question that Jesus Christ existed - the issue they quarrel with is is with the Christian belief in His virgin birth.  They record (not surprisingly) that He was born under shameful circumstances:

The Babylonian Talmud:  "R. Shimeon ben Azzai said [concerning Jesus]: 'I found a genealogical roll in Jerusalem wherein was recorded, Such-an-one is a bastard of an adulteress'". (b.Yebamoth 49a; m Yebam. 4:13)

In another passage we are told that Mary, "who was the descendant of princes and governors, played the harlot with carpenters" (b. Sanh. 106a)

In another passage we find: "His mother was Miriam, a women's hairdresser.  As they say, ...''this one strayed from her husband'" (b. Sabb. 104b).

Points to note:

• These are evidences that Jesus' virgin birth was a claim of the early Church, and that it required a rebuttal by the Jewish authorities.
• The notion that Mary was descended from "princes" is consistent with the genealogy given in the gospel of Luke, which records her lineage dates all the way back to King David.  The allusion to "carpenters" is an obvious reference to Joseph.
• Notice that the response did not include a denial of Jesus' existence - only that he was born under other circumstances.

Josephus

Josephus ben Mattathias (c. 37/38 A.D.- sometime after 100 A.D.) has been described as a Jewish aristocrat, a priestly politician, a reluctant commander of rebel troups in Galilee during the first Jewish revolt again Rome (66 - 73 A.D.), a Jewish historian in the pay of the Roman emperors, and a supposed Pharisee. After capture by Vespasian in 67 A.D., Josephus served the Romans as mediator and interpretor during the rest of the revolt.  He is famous for two great historical works:  The Jewish War(written in the early 70's), and Jewish Antiquities, finished about 93-94¹.

There are two passages in his Jewish Antiquities that are of particular interest.  The first records testimony about Jesus, his life and impact during the rule of Pilate.  Parts of this passage have been disputed by some, based on the contention that Josphus, being a person, would not have said some things in the passage.  There is some evidence that later scribes elaborated on the original text.  I have bolded the sections which are not in dispute by scholars, so that the reader can clearly see those sections which are agreed by most scholars to be the historian's original words.

"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 person, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal menu among 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." (Antiquities, XVIII, 3, 3).²

Points to note from the sections that are undisputed:

• Josephus records not only that a Jesus lived, but that he was wise and a doer of "wonderful works" (which can easily be interpreted to mean his miracles).
• He credits Jesus with such wise teaching that he drew many to him, including both person and Gentiles.  This was in fact what worried the religious leadership at the time - that Jesus was drawing so many that their power base might be in jeopardy
• He corroborates what is taught in the gospels - that Jesus was accused the religious leadership, condemned by Pilate, and crucified on a cross.

The second writing from Josephus (not in any dispute) concerns the condemnation of James, the brother of Jesus:

"... Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned." (Antiquities XX, 0.1).

Key points to note:

• The reference to "Jesus the so-called Christ" does not make sense unless Josephus had referred to Jesus earlier in his writings (which he did -- in XVIII, 33)
• This passage from a third party historian corroborates the historical passage in the Acts of the New Testament, which also states that James the brother of the Lord was accused unjustly and stoned.
• The James Ossuary is a recent archeological find which further testifies of the existence of James as the brother of Jesus.

Early Church Fathers

Next to the apostles of Jesus, the most extensive source of writings that attest to His existence are those of the early church fathers - leaders, teachers or apologists in the emerging Christian movement.  The following is but a sampling:

Ignatius

Identified through tradition as a disciple of Peter, Paul and John, Ignatius wrote seven letters while on his way to Rome to be executed. 

"Jesus Christ who was of the race of David, who was the Son of Mary, who was truly born and ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him, who in the like fashion will also raise us also who believe on Him." (Trallians, 9)

Justin Martyr

Most scholars agree that Justin Martyr was one of the greatest Christian apologists who ever lived.  He was a learned man, and became a professor of philosophical Christianity in his own private school in Rome.  Born around A.D. 100, he was scourged and beheaded for his faith around A.D. 167.¹  Here are a few samples from his writings concerning the history of Jesus:

"Now there is a village in the land of the person, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born,as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea." (First Apology, 34).

"For at the time of His birth, Magi who came from Arabia worshipped Him, coming first to Herod, who then was sovereign in your land." (Dialogue with Trypho, 77)

"For when they crucified Him, driving the nails, they pierced His hands and feet; and those who crucified Him parted His garments among themselves, each casting lots for what he chose to have, and receiving according to the decision of the lot." (Dialogue with Typho, 97)

"Accordingly, after He was crucified, even all His acquaintances forsook Him, having denied Him; and afterwards, when He had risen from the dead and appeared to them, and had taught them to read the prophecies in which all these things ere foretold as coming to pass..." ((First Apology, 50)

What Can We Say About the History of Jesus?

The indisputable conclusion from all of these friendly and unfriendly historical sources is that there really was a Jesus of Nazareth in history.   A Jesus who lived a life unlike any another other before Him or since; one who taught like any other teacher has ever taught; one who performed real miracles that defied the laws of nature and testified to His divinity; one who really died on a cross outside the city of Jerusalem; one who made claims unlike any other; and one -- and the only one - who really rose from the dead.

Thanks so much matt!!...great work!!...great contribution!!

Excellent stuff Matt.

No problem guys. I also wanted to say thanks for standing up for the truth in these last days that we are living in.

(1) Who in the world believes something that they know is not factual? If you believe something, it better be a fact, lest you be knowingly believing in a false thing. Would you reject Christianity knowing that it "Christianity is wrong" is not a fact? If it's not a fact, then its non-factual (ie. wrong). Or maybe it's this term "fact" that I'm not understanding. You see, I'm a computer engineer (computer scientist). I work in terms of logic, true or false. If something is not true, then it is false. There is no other logical answer.

(2) You misunderstand what I mean when I say "values". I mean it as empirical values. Not like, preferences or anything, but the fact that values exist in and of themselves -- quantity. Maybe that term would work better for you, would you say that "Who created quantity?". Of course not. That would be a silly question.