A friend of mine claims to be Jesus--is that possible?
356254
No, I don't think it is possible. Jesus said that he would come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, so if this guy hasn't been heard and seen by everybody, he's just a Messiah-wannabe. Jesus said, "Many will come in My name and deceive many."
965357
I saw the same thing and am trying to find that gospel and the gospel of Mary and to tell you the truth all of the gospels they were talking about. I'm not so sure that it is real or fake but the bible says test all things.... also says seek wisdom, not just biblical wisdom. Kudos from me, your on the right track...however, I seriously doubt the authenticity of the book. Googling it doesn't help much!
982221
There is no ( or at the very least, precious little) evidence of a person called Jesus outside of the bible.  Xians will say Josephus mentioned him, but in fact, the only translation we have of Josephus was done by a christian writer in the 4th century...we don't have it in the original Latin.  And what is mentioned is very weak and open to interpretation and very likely was subject to interpolation.\n\nThe Romans were meticulous record keepers.  If Jesus existed, and had fostered the kind of revolution that would get their attention by threatening Roman rule, performing miracles, there would be copious writings about him from the Romans, and other sources.\n\nPaul the Apostle is agreeably the earliest christian writer, and he wrote probably a couple decades after the putative events.  Yet Paul makes no reference to a recently living Christ...and if you read his works separate from the rest of the NT, he seems to be writing of a supernatural creature who fought a battle, died and rose again in a spiritual realm, eons ago.  Paul went to Jerusalem to visit Peter, and yet he makes no mention of a pilgramage to Golgotha, or the tomb or any sites that would be shrines to a real person recently living, crucified and risen again ascending into heaven. Paul is bizarrely disinterested in anything relating to a real physical Jesus.\n\nAll other accounts, were written much later.  The earliest Gospel of Mark (by the way, it wasn't written by anybody called Mark, it is anonymous) couldn't have been written any earlier than 40-50 years after the events.  The Gospels all contradict each other as to Jesus life, miracles and death.  I recommend any of Randall Helms books on the New Testament and Gospels for a detailed overview of the problems.\n\nIt really is quite interesting if you are prepared to have an open mind about it.  Jesus, if he existed, was at best a wandering prophet/holyman/philospher.  We have lots of legendary heroes with stories about them, like King Arthur, William Tell...but we know they never actually existed.  I think it more likely he never actually existed, and was created as a "founding father" in the heroic tradition by the early church.
740595
Would that be classified as another mystery of Christ? I believe even those who do not know of Jesus must feel his presents withnin creation. He is all in all. Yes interesting.
1051730
The proof is not just on paper, it's written on my heart.  When you experience Jesus, when you get to know Him personally, there is no question.  \n\nDo you think thousands of people around the world would give their lives just for something written on paper? The proof is in the heart my friend.
286041
Here it is another 15 year old sermon from an unbeliever . . . and for an unbeliever . . . I am more familiar with the scriptures and historical documents than some of these believers.\n\nWHO IS JESUS CHRIST?\n\nSince Jesus Christ (Yeshua the Messiah) walked this earth as a human 2,000 years ago, there has been a controversy over who he really was. The Bible tells us in many places that there is only one true God (Deu. 6:4; Mal. 2:10; Mark 12:32; Rom. 3:30; Jam. 2:19; etc.). So where does Yeshua fit into the Godhead? \n\nMost modern Christians have been taught that Jesus is the second co-equal "person" in a triune Godhead composed of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. However, many (if not most) Christians don't really understand the Trinity. Other believers today, perceiving problems with the Trinity doctrine, have adopted a belief in the "Oneness" of God which is similar to the ancient doctrine of Modalism. \n\nBefore we can truly understand who the Messiah is, we need to look at the historical background of first-century Jewish religion and subsequent philosophical/religious doctrines that arose to explain his identity. This is going to examine the beliefs of first-century Jews regarding the Godhead and present the succeeding theories put forth to define who Yeshua is. Then we will discuss by harmonizing the Scriptures with this information to better understand what the Bible really says about the identity of the Messiah. \n\nFirst, let's start by looking at what first-century C.E. Jewish religion believed about the Godhead. There has been a tendency by scholars to define first-century orthodox monotheistic Judaism in rather restrictive terms. Jewish literature or beliefs from that time frame that seem to stray from the accepted norm have been reinterpreted to accommodate Trinitarianism or used to prove that Judaism was derived from the polytheistic religions surrounding Israel. \n\nRegarding how modern scholars tend to view first-century Jewish religion as either totally monotheistic or essentially polytheistic, University of Manitoba Professor Larry W. Hurtado wrote: \n\nI suggest that on both sides of the issue . . . there has been a tendency to proceed deductively from a priori presumptions of what monotheism must mean, instead of building up a view inductively from the evidence of how monotheism actually operated in the thought and practice of ancient Jews. There seems to be an implicit agreement on both sides that more than one transcendent being of any significance complicates or constitutes a weakening of or threat to monotheism. Those who see first-century Jewish religion as monotheistic tend, therefore, to downplay the significance and attributes given by ancient Jews to any transcendent beings other than God. For these scholars often, ancient Jewish monotheism must mean that the descriptions of such beings are largely rhetorical. Though I am convinced regarding some examples, I am not sure that the descriptions are always purely rhetoric . . . \n\nThose on the other side of the issue tend to emphasize the honorific ways in which transcendent beings other than God are described and the prominent positions they occupy in the religious conceptions reflected in ancient Jewish texts, alleging that first-century Jews were not really monotheists after all. It is clear that ancient Jews were not characteristically monists or unitarians, but does this mean that they were not monotheists? That is, on both sides there is a tendency to proceed as if we can know in advance what "monotheism" must mean, which turns out to be a very modern, monistic form of monotheism, and can accordingly evaluate ancient Jewish texts and beliefs as to whether or how closely they meet an a priori standard of "pure" monotheism. ("What Do We Mean by 'First-Century Jewish Monotheism'?," Journal for the Study of the New Testament) \n\nAs the above quote shows, Profe
685805
Priory of Sion and Da Vinci notwithstanding, of course it is possible. Remember that there are many years in the life of Jesus not accounted for in the Bible. Anyone who thinks that he did not have relations during this time period is being a little naive. I'm not saying that there is a conspiracy, just that we need to look at him as a man. Now...what would Jesus do?
710720
Dude, you've been smoking too many Dan Brown books. \n\n\nI've heard all kinds of crazy theories about Jesus but that doesn't mean they're true. Where's the documentation? Where's the historical proof? Where's the corroboration from witnesses? That's the problem with too many people: They hear something totally out in left field and believe it without any sort of evidence or even despite evidence to the contrary.
409654
Regardless of what has been found. You are always going to find someone trying to portray Christianity as fake or not real. Or in that fact people claiming that Christ is not the Savior for man kind. The only way to find out is see for your self. Open up the bible and read scripture. Or find someone to help you study the bible. The truth is there it is just up to you to search it out.\n\nGod Bless
788161
No. This is a common misconception, though, which was taken advantage of by numerous false 'psychic' mediums. They said that in order to confirm to the mark that they were 'of God'. Of course, that didn't work when the contacee realized that their dearly departed wasn't a Christian! \nDemons are perfectly capable of saying ANYTHING in order to deceive us, even saying 'Jesus is Lord'. They just don't mean it.
346999
there could be a huge possibility that the person beside jesus is mary magdalene and not an apostle (i think its peter) no one may ever know. it all depends on ones belief or research. \n\nsome people do believe that the cup of christ is mary magdalene and as the book "the da vinci code" explains to us that jesus may have had an offspring with mary magdalene, and that she started the merovingian blood line. \n\nsome people may say this as blasphemy or in-accurate but remember that there is still no REAL proof that jesus ever exsisted, we all base it on the bible and other written records but found not even one real evidence that he ever lived. so who could say that the person beside him is not a woman..
84164
The only proof I know of is that Jesus was resurrected. I would say that's as close to afterlife as you can get. So read the bible and there you may find your answer. :)
760637
I have yet to meet a non-Christian (besides obvious trouble-stirrers who are just saying things for shock value) who doesn't acknowledge Jesus as a good teacher and example of humankind--even those who don't believe he existed. A story can have just as much power as the truth, and in many cases, far more.
530387
hey my friend, I KNOW SOMEONE WHO KNOWS ALL THE TRUTH. GET ON YOUR KNEES AND SAY THIS..JESUS, I ACCEPT YOU AS MY SAVIOR AND LORD JESUS CHRIST.FORGIVE MY OF ALL MY SINS. I BELIEVE IN YOU AND LOVE YOU. I BELIEVE YOU DIED ON THE CROSS FOR MY SINS AND THAT I AM FORGIVEN.AMEN... After you say that prayer you wont need to look for fake people no more!!!!
371661
The "Dead Sea Scrolls" don't prove that the Jesus of the Bible was a real person, nor do they prove that such a person performed the miracles attributed to him. \n\n"Noah's Ark" has never been found. That was a hoax and has been well-documented. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ark-hoax.html\n\nJust like all the other gospels, Judas' gospel proves nothing. The gospels in the Christian bible as we have it today, were written by anonymous authors, decades after Jesus' alleged death, with numerous contradictions, and they weren't eyewitness accounts.\n\nLaws aren't based on Christian principles. The idea of not killing one another, and treating others as you'd have them treat you, have been around much longer than Christianity has. In fact, the so-called "golden rule" was taught by Buddha hundreds of years before the Jesus story popped up.\n\nIf you want to look at Christian principles, let's see what Jesus allegedly said:\n\nLuke 14:26\nIf any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. (The word "hate" in that verse is "miseo", the Greek word. The same one from which we get other words that indicate hatred, like "misogynist." It definitely means HATE.)\n\nMatthew 10:35-36\nI am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.\n\nLuke 19:27\nBut those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. (This one is a parable, but read it and make no mistake: who do you think the king is?)\n\nMark 14:3-7\nYe have the poor with you always. (Here, expensive oil is used on Jesus. Instead of using the oil to sell to provide money for the poor, this was his response: "You'll always have the poor." How compassionate.)\n\nThe fact that the Christian religion is supposed to fulfill Judaism, yet completely contradicts it should be more than enough evidence to undermine Christianity, but the ignorance of Christians when it comes to the origins of their own religion prevents them from looking beyond what they're taught at church.\n\nChristianity is supposed to be the "fulfillment" of the "Old Testament" - if so, the Jewish Bible is what must be used to determine what such fulfillment will consist of. Using the Jewish Bible, it can be shown that to date, no one has come who has fulfilled the requirements of the Jewish Messiah. Furthermore, the Messiah was only ever for the Jews - not the Gentiles - so even if Jesus *had* been the Messiah, it wouldn't concern a non-Jew, anyway.\n\nOutside of the Christian bible, which was written by a combination of anonymous authors and Paul (a self-confessed liar), there is nothing to support the existence of an historical Jesus whatsoever. There is nothing that is both historical and contemporary to show that there ever was a Jesus of the Christian bible at all. The so-called Josephus passage that is often cited, was not contemporary (Josephus never saw Jesus, let alone met him), and that single passage is agreed by the majority of historians to be a forgery. After all, if he truly believed Jesus to be "the Christ", why was only ONE sentence devoted to Jesus in all his writings, and why did Josephus himself remain a Jew? Not very convincing.\n\nExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I, too, was once a wide-eyed believer. I truly believed with every fibre of my being that Jesus was Lord. Then I saw the light.\n\nI strongly recommend you research your claims and your supposed evidence a little more thoroughly. They're the same pieces of "evidence" that I once believed existed as well.\n\nGood luck on your journey.
1081825
Allowing that one does not accept the prophecy from the Old Testament as proof, many of his time refer to his actual existence.  Among these are Josephus, the Jewish Historian, Pliny the younger, Tacitus, Lucian and Hadrian.\nIn all fairness, none of these knew the historical Jesus.  In addition, none of the writers of the 4 gospels directly knew Jesus either.  Paul, however, relates the story of how Jesus appeared to him on the road to Damascus three times in the Book of Acts.  Despite several of these sources, in addition to the Babylonian Talmud, providing reasonable evidence to Jesus' existence, there is no intellectual exercise which will provide this, IMHO, nor do I think it should.  Each is only heuristic, rather than definitive, in its essence.\nNeither will the issue of faith alone provide any proof, as much as some would have it so; faith, by itself proves nothing except that one believes.  One may have faith alone in all sorts of absurdities.\n\nThe difficulty comes when we undeniably understand that we have both a material and spiritual component as human beings.  If we didn't, however, then this whole discussion would just be neurons bumping into one another and would be meaningless.\nThe spiritual component is very difficult to explain in any sense of materialism.  Philosophy treats any ventures into the realm of the spiritual as fantasy, at least that which cannot be verified.\nHowever, if faith in Jesus Christ created a real bond, then this bond would have to be created not only by the believer, but the respondent.  The respondent, in addition, would have to prove that he was God. The difficulty comes as to whether this is possible. How does one verify that God exists?\nBriefly, the Bible teaches us that each one of us who comes to Him must love Him because he loved us first.  In 2 Timothy 3:7, we read about those who seek to learn but never come to the truth.  Paul teaches us that we must love God if we want to know him. (Also see Ephesians 3:17; Philippians 1:9; Colossians 2:2; and also 1 John 2:5.) If we want knowledge without love, it isn’t enough.  We first see Him "as through a glass darkly"(1 Corinthians 13:12) but through our trials and efforts for Him, we come to see more clearly.  \nI suggest that the truth of Jesus lies not in any intellectual sense but in a personal relationship which must be individual: you can't believe because someone else believes and you can't discover it because someone else knows.  Intellectual truth leads to skepticism and denial.  While it is good to be skeptical of things, even Jesus' existence and association with the resurrection mysteries you cite, the real proof comes in the consistency of God's promise.  Be forewarned: new believers usually suffer persecutions.  In fact, persecutions are promised to all believers (2 Timothy 3:12.)  Not everyone wants you to believe in the truth of Jesus Christ.
322707
Go here and get the full thing, including how it was authenticated.  Sounds real to me.\nhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0406_060406_gospel.html