Most Indians Hindus I Meet Don't Realize Jesus was an Actual Person
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
It’s not ridiculous when we look at other linked religions’ development. There were many different Messianic movements within Judaism, including one popular among Nazarenes. Jews who followed Jesus’s teachings saw themselves as Jews and continued living in accordance to Jewish law. Some resisted proselytizing to Gentiles. Once Gentiles no longer had to follow Jewish law, conversions skyrocketed and Christianity quickly became majority Gentile. |
Anonymous
I’m not the PP you think you’re responding to. |
Anonymous
|
I have a great respect for the Eastern Religions - Hinduism, Buddhism and Shintoism. I think they were more spiritually evolved.
The abrahamic religions are the religions of strife. Maybe because their basis is not spiritualism and they claim that they are superior. It is their way or the highway. Most of the strife in the world today is perpetuated by the followers of these three religions. |
Anonymous
You really need to watch the news more. |
Anonymous
| Woah, I’m Hindu, and I’m blown away that there are stupid, uneducated Hindus out there? Not one bit. Just like there are idiots in every other major religion. They don’t represent their entire faith, just themselves. |
Anonymous
There's historical evidence of a Jewish preacher whose teachings differed from the mainstream Judaism of the era and society in which he lived. But there's little evidence of the figure described by the religion that was formed around him and his purported teachings several centuries after his death. |
Anonymous
Not really -- Unlike DCUM, Wikipedia is moderated to assure accuracy and also cites other sources. DCUM is a chat board. It does not purport accuracy -- it is conversation. |
Anonymous
Maybe dual bashing- since Jesus didn’t exist and all so Christianity has been debunked by Dcum’s finest |
Anonymous
Do you really think that trying to verify the historical Jesus means debunking Christianity? I am an atheist, but whether or not Jesus actually existed has little to do with whether I believe in Christianity or not. There are many thoughtful Christian scholars (probably all of them) that don't take the bible as literal history. |
Anonymous
|
OP - St Peter was put in charge by Jesus himself before his death. He was basically Jewish who just viewed Jesus as the messiah the Jews were waiting for. Peter himself appointed the first Pope hence the Roman Catholic Church started. At this point a lot of folks thought you had to be Jewish to believe in Jesus. But they adjusted that and anyone could join and it took off.
On a side note around 25 years ago had a cool conversation with Arch Bishop of NY. Anyhow he told a story that Jesus shook hands with St. Peter and St. Peter shook hands with first Pope. So on through history to become a Priest you shake hands with a Cardinal or Bishop a chain unbroken. He shook hands with me and said you are shaken hands with someone who down the chain shook hands with Jesus. Considering Priests have a 50 year career I am like 40 people removed from shaking hands with Jesus Christ. Now since I have shook hands with many Hindu people there are lots of Hindus 41 degree of separation from Jesus. Now all of you are only 41 degrees of separation from Jesus |
Anonymous
| There are documented accounts of Jesus as early as the first century. Scholars at the time did not debate his existence. But I suppose if you’re an atheist on here no answer is good enough so it’s an easy way to pile it on. |
Anonymous
I have no issue with research that Jesus was a historical person. That does appear to be fairly well accepted by scholars. But obviously, that he likely existed says nothing at all about anything else. |
Anonymous
Why would the apostles go to their deaths if Jesus did not do what was written? They had nothing to gain by spreading his Word. |
Anonymous
Without wishing to pick a fight with you about Wikipedia, but are you aware that wiki has sites from other countries? In their languages? If I look up Nikola Tesla I can see on wiki.org that he was a Serbian-American scientist. If I look at wiki.sr(Serbia) it says one of most famous Serbian and world inventors. If I look up Croatian wiki, it says he was a Croatian/American scientist... and adds by origin Serbian from Croatia. This is where correction comes, which is better than politicians who claim he was the greatest son of Croatia and full on Croat. Whose house they burned twice, whose extended family escaped to mountains in Bosnia because they were Orthodox Serbs, and during WWII Croatian Ustasha state had concentration camps to exterminate Serbs, Jews and Roma people. Not Nazi Germans, Croatians. Today they are trying to bury that memory and claim Croats were the ones that were killed by Ustashas. Holocaust museum in NY has the figure of 350K killed by Croats in WWII. This is why Serbs went nuts in 1990s and hence committed ethnic cleansing themselves, with a slogan never again. Now, Croats did kill in 1990s Serbs too and Muslims, BBC footage follows them shooting old men who didn't want to leave their homes in Croatia, BBC also shows Serbs plain killing Muslims while goading them that they will be safe. Serbian wiki writes nothing of Serbian crimes, Croatian wiki writes nothing of Croatian crimes. We can't trust wiki, but it does try to moderate when it can. |
Anonymous
I find wiki a good, first check on info and it almost always provides further resources. If you don't trust wikipedia, then go to other, better sources to determine if they are saying the same things. That's what I do. Anything you see on a message board like DCUM is hearsay and opinion. It may or may not be accurate and has no requirement to be factual. Wikipedia is not like that. It is monitored for accuracy. I often cite wikipedia regularly provides multiple links to reliable news or academic source for additional information on the subject being discussed. |