Need proof of Jesus existence!

[doogieduff]

Hi everyone. I'm in the process of trying to get a girl saved, and we've made excellent progress. She now wants proof of Jesus' existence as a man. Not that He's God, like every other thread, but plainly that Jesus Christ existed as man. So I'm looking for the best evidence, outside the Bible of course, that Jesus Christ existed as a man.

[yxboom]

Taken from here (http://www.cin.org/archives/cinapol/200104/0041.html)


TERTIO MILLENNIO ADVENIENTE - "As the Third Millennium Draws Near"
By John Paul II


[section 5] ...
Such references to Christ are found for example in The Antiquities of the
Jews, a work compiled in Rome between the years 93 and 94 by the historian
Flavius Josephus,5 and especially in the Annals of Tacitus, written between
the years 115 and 120, where, reporting the burning of Rome in the year 64,
falsely attributed by Nero to the Christians, the historian makes an explicit
reference to Christ "executed by order of the procurator Pontius Pilate
during the reign of Tiberius."6 Suetonius, too, in his biography of the
emperor Claudius, written around 121, informs us that the Jews were expelled
from Rome because "under the instigation of a certain Christ's they stirred
up frequent riots."7 This passage is generally interpreted as referring to
Jesus Christ, who had become a source of contention within Jewish circles in
Rome. Also of importance as proof of the rapid spread of Christianity is the
testimony of Pliny the Younger, the Governor of Bithynia, who reported to the
Emperor Trajan, between the years 111 and 113, that a large number of people
were accustomed to gather "on a designated day, before dawn, to sing in
alternating choirs a hymn to Christ as to a God."8 But the great event which
non-Christian historians merely mention in passing takes on its full
significance in the writings of the New Testament. These writings, although
documents of faith, are no less reliable as historical testimonies, if we
consider their references as a whole. Christ, true God and true man, the Lord
of the cosmos, is also the Lord of history, of which he is "the Alpha and the
Omega" (Rev. 1:8; 21:6), "the beginning and the end" (Rev. 21:6). In him the
Father has spoken the definitive word about mankind and its history. This is
expressed in a concise and powerful way by the Letter to the Hebrews: "In
many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in
these last days he has spoken to us by a Son" (1:1-2).

[Uriah-]

I would help, but since you most likely then will brainwash this girl into a man-god belief, I won't help.

[Undomiel]

Today @ 09:28 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=125280#post125280)
Uriah-:

I would help, but since you most likely then will brainwash this girl into a man-god belief, I won't help.

:rofl: Freedom of the press, of thought, of religion, in action.

[doogieduff]

Today @ 02:28 AM post located here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&postid=125280#post125280)
Uriah-:

I would help, but since you most likely then will brainwash this girl into a man-god belief, I won't help.

What are you talking about?

[jpholding]

doogieduff,

Check here in Chr 101 and the thread started by Uriah called "The True Mashayich" to get an idea what funnel cloud he fell out of.

[FirstSunday33ad]

I would help, but since you most likely then will brainwash this girl into a man-god belief, I won't help.

:lol:

aahhhh...memories.

I remember the day they brain-washed me. Sitting tied to the chair, eyelids held open by clamps, "Greatest Story Ever Told" playing over and over while Rock of Ages blared out of loud speakers.

Yep, that's the standard conversion experience I imagine.

:eek:

[Peter Kirby]

I talk about Tacitus here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tacitus.html

I talk about Josephus here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html

Any comments? I think they could be revised, and I could use any insight.

best,
Peter Kirby

[hdsink]

If you want proof read this: http://www.ucgstp.org/lit/gn/gn044/proof.html

You do not need to prove that Jesus existed. A person comes to Jesus by faith. Without faith, how would you believe?

[mudcake]

Hi everyone. I'm in the process of trying to get a girl saved, and we've made excellent progress. She now wants proof of Jesus' existence as a man. Not that He's God, like every other thread, but plainly that Jesus Christ existed as man. So I'm looking for the best evidence, outside the Bible of course, that Jesus Christ existed as a man.

May Allah guide her to Islam and to accept the true identity of the historical man - Jesus Christ - as exemplified in the Quran - The human only prophet and Messiah of God.

"The similitude of Jesus before God is that of Adam; he created him from dust, then said to him: "BE": and he was." (3:59)

Jesus, the man was created by the Word (be)..he was not The Word.

The fallacious speculation and idea that The 'Word' of God existed as a divine 'person' was a conjectured falsehood that was postulated in the first/secondary century AD.

OT biblical history knows nothing about the myth that God's Word/debar/logos/memra existed as a distinct 'person' or a 'Son of God' as postulated according to trinitarian christology...

[barnasha]

Hi everyone. I'm in the process of trying to get a girl saved, and we've made excellent progress.


saved from what?

She now wants proof of Jesus' existence as a man. Not that He's God, like every other thread, but plainly that Jesus Christ existed as man. So I'm looking for the best evidence, outside the Bible of course, that Jesus Christ existed as a man.

Ask why.

is there proof he did not exist?

[Abelard]

"Git 'er saved!"

I just love Larry the Preacher Guy.

[carelinks]

Hi, here's my small summary of the historical evidence from http://www.aletheiacollege.net/dbb/1-9.htm

If, as some claim, there is no evidence that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed, then the very existence of Christianity is difficult to explain. It is asking an awful lot to expect anyone to believe that millions of people over the last 2,000 years have based their beliefs on someone who never existed, and to have such an intense faith in him that they were motivated to spread their faith in him world-wide, often at the risk of persecution and death. Christians and Jews generally have no difficulty accepting that Mohamed once lived, whilst rejecting his claims and teaching. Indeed we accept that most famous historical characters existed without demanding a critical review of the evidence. Frequently analyses have been made of widely accepted historical events, e.g. that the battle of Hastings took place in 1066, and have found the concrete evidence relatively hard to come by.

The fact that some so intensely deny the very existence of Jesus of Nazareth is surely indicative of an over reaction, a desire to find a convenient excuse not to face up to the reasons for accepting his Messiahship. This appears especially true when it is appreciated that the early Jews themselves accepted that a person called Jesus had existed in the first century. The following historical evidences for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth show that in no way can he be dismissed as a theological invention of men. Much helpful information in this section has been gleaned from Gary Habermas, ‘Ancient Evidence For The Life Of Jesus’.

1. Tacitus was a Roman historian whose two major books about the first century (“Annals” and the “Histories”) both mention Jesus and Christianity. He wrote in the “Annals” (about 115 AD):
“A class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate”.
The emperor Tiberius reigned from 14-37AD, during which period Christ was killed, according to this record. Tacitus also describes how the beliefs of this group “broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of (these ideas), but even in Rome”, and he goes on to describe how the Christians were widely hated, and many put to death in Rome. All this accords with the New Testament record of Jesus, the disciples and the apostles first spreading their teaching in Judaea, and then throughout the Roman world, including Rome, with great opposition to them.

2. Suetonius, another Roman historian, commented on the reign of Claudius (41-54 AD): “Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from the city”. “Chrestus” is another spelling of “Christ”. Incidentally, Acts 18:2 describes how a Jewish couple named Aquila and Priscilla had to leave Rome because of the persecution of the Jews.
Suetonius comments later about the persecution of Christians at the time of Nero: “After the great fire at Rome...Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief”. This reference to the existence of a group called “Christians” in the first century suggests that a person called “Christ” existed earlier in that century.

3. F.F.Bruce (“Christian Origins” pp.29,30) draws attention to the fact that there are references to a history of the Eastern Mediterranean written by a historian called Thallus about 52AD. Bruce shows elsewhere (“The New Testament Documents”, p.113) that a scholar named Julius Africanus quoted from Thallus, mocking his description of the darkness at the crucifixion of Jesus as due to the eclipse of the sun. This suggests that Thallus wrote an account of the crucifixion of Jesus which occurred some years before he wrote his history in 52AD.

4. Pliny, a Roman Government official, mentions at length the existence of a very active group of people called Christians in the latter years of the first century. Their keeping of the memorial service is referred to by him: “They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ” (“Letters of Pliny”, translated by W.Melmoth, Vol.2, X:96). The Roman emperors Trajan and Hadrian both mentioned the problem of dealing with Christians. For references to this, see “Letters of Pliny”, Vol.2, X:97 and Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History, IV:IX respectively. The existence of this group since the first century and their extraordinary tenacity during persecution would suggest that they were followers of a real historical character who lived in the first century.

5. The Talmud, a Jewish holy book, in Sanhedrin 43a refers to the death of Jesus. It is acknowledged that this part of the Talmud dates from the early period of that book’s compilation (i.e. 70-200AD).
“On the eve of the Passover Yeshu (Jesus) was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward in his behalf’. But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover”.
“Hanged” can be an idiom for crucifixion - it is used like that in the New Testament (Gal. 3:13; Lk. 23:39). This passage describes the Jews wanting Jesus stoned (in accordance with Mosaic law, presumably?), but mentions that actually he was hanged. The explanation for this is given by the New Testament description of how the Jews had to use Roman law to effect the death of Jesus - which would have been by hanging.
Sanhedrin 43a also describes how five disciples of Jesus were judged and sentenced to death, again showing that the Jews traditionally have believed in the existence of the historical Jesus. Sanhedrin 106b even says that Jesus was 33 years old when he died; exactly as required by the New Testament. Maier (“First Easter”, pp.117,118) quotes from the fifth century Jewish document “Toledoth Jesu”, which claims that the disciples tried to steal the body of Jesus after his death, but a gardener named Juda heard of their plans and removed the body of Jesus elsewhere, handing it over later to the Jews. Justin Martyr writing in 150AD records that the Jews sent out special messengers to claim that the body of Jesus had been stolen (“Dialogue with Trypho”, 108), and Tertullian (“On Spectacles”, 30) has a similar account when he wrote in 200AD.
Between them these strands of evidence show that the Jews of the early centuries AD believed in the existence and violent death of the historical Jesus.

6. The Greek playwright Lucian, writing in the second century, pokes fun at the Christians who “worship a man to this day (who) was crucified” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11-13, in “The Works of Lucian”, vol.4, translated by Fowler and Fowler).

7. Josephus is the most well known historian of the first century. In his “Antiquities”, written 90-95AD, he mentions James, “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ”. He also speaks in another section of the same book in terms which clearly corroborate the New Testament picture of Jesus.
“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man...For he was one who wrought surprising feats...He was Christ...he appeared to them alive the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him”.
So pointed is this passage that some have claimed that it is an interpolation. That there is still reason for using this passage to support the contention that there was a man called Jesus of Nazareth who lived in the first century is provided by the following considerations:
? Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History, 1:XI) quotes this section of Josephus.
? Respected scholars support this first reading as being original, and can show that this section is written in the same style as the rest of Josephus’ work (See Daniel Rops, “The Silence of Jesus’ Contemporaries”, p.21; J.N.D. Anderson, “Christianity: The Witness of History” p.20; F.F.Bruce, “The New Testament Documents” pp.108,109).
? There is no textual evidence for this being an interpolation.
? Professor Schlomo Pines claims that the Arabic edition of Josephus’ works had been discovered which was almost certain to be the original. The passage referred to above occurs there, but without the obvious doctrinal statements concerning the resurrection and Messiahship of Jesus which were made in the extract given above. This seems reasonable, seeing Josephus was a Jew. Pines first made his findings public in articles in “The New York Times”, Feb.12 1972, in which he quotes the debated passage of Josephus about Jesus from the Arabic version: “At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders”.
This account fits in admirably with that of the New Testament.

[smaneck]

I agree, but the same argument proves the existence of Krishna.


[QUOTE]1. Tacitus was a Roman historian whose two major books about the first century (“Annals” and the “Histories”) both mention Jesus and Christianity. He wrote in the “Annals” (about 115 AD):
“A class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate”.

Tacitus can be used to prove the existence of Christianity but not Jesus. What he knows about Jesus likely reflects what Christians themselves were saying not independent Roman sources. We have no record of Jesus trial, either from Sanhedrin or Roman records.


2. Suetonius, another Roman historian, commented on the reign of Claudius (41-54 AD): “Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he (Claudius) expelled them from the city”. “Chrestus” is another spelling of “Christ”. Incidentally,

That won't work. Christ simply means Messiah and there were many Jews claiming to be Messiahs at the time. This one appears to have been in Rome itself.

Suetonius comments later about the persecution of Christians at the time of Nero: “After the great fire at Rome...Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief”.

But he is not connecting the two groups, is he? Nero's persecution of Christians is an established fact that I don't think anyone questions.


3. F.F.Bruce (“Christian Origins” pp.29,30) draws attention to the fact that there are references to a history of the Eastern Mediterranean written by a historian called Thallus about 52AD. Bruce shows elsewhere (“The New Testament Documents”, p.113) that a scholar named Julius Africanus quoted from Thallus, mocking his description of the darkness at the crucifixion of Jesus as due to the eclipse of the sun. This suggests that Thallus wrote an account of the crucifixion of Jesus which occurred some years before he wrote his history in 52AD.

But the only evidence we have that Thallus made such a statement comes from Christian sources.

4. Pliny, a Roman Government official, mentions at length the existence of a very active group of people called Christians in the latter years of the first century. Their keeping of the memorial service is referred to by him: “They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ” (“Letters of Pliny”, translated by W.Melmoth, Vol.2, X:96).

Which proves there was obviously a church in the first century. We already know that. It doesn't tell us anything about Jesus, however.


5. The Talmud, a Jewish holy book, in Sanhedrin 43a to the death of Jesus. It is acknowledged that this part of the Talmud dates from the early period of that book’s compilation (i.e. 70-200AD).

That's not my understanding. The text in question is much later than that and it is in the Babylonian Talmud, not the Palestinian Talmud. The name of the person 'hung' in that text was Yeshu which is not the same as Jesus' name Yeshua.

“Hanged” can be an idiom for crucifixion - it is used like that in the New Testament (Gal. 3:13; Lk. 23:39).

Except this Yeshu was stoned and hanged, not simply hanged, and the hanging was done by the Sanhedrin, not the Romans.


Sanhedrin 43a also describes how five disciples of Jesus were judged and sentenced to death, again showing that the Jews traditionally have believed in the existence of the historical Jesus.

Once again, it says Yeshu, not Yeshua. And Yeshu is supposed to have five disciples, not twelve. So far as I know the Sanherdin never executed any disciples, unless you want to consider Stephen a disciple. His name is not mentioned.

6. The Greek playwright Lucian, writing in the second century, pokes fun at the Christians who “worship a man to this day (who) was crucified” (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine, 11-13, in “The Works of Lucian”, vol.4, translated by Fowler and Fowler).

Which only tell us what Christians believed in the second centruy.

Got to run to class, so I can't finish it now. But there are similar problems with the rest of your sources.

[carelinks]

Thanks Susan. I wrote that nearly 20 years ago and your points seem to me to hold water for the most part. However, I think it a hard job to prove 'Jesus did NOT exist' and I submit the evidence I present is reason to think He DID exist, however, for me [and you may consider this a get out- it certainly is in academic terms, but...] belief in Jesus, as belief in God, is a matter of faith. There is reason to believe, but in the end, the proof isn't out there in some Euclidean sense, otherwise faith wouldn't be faith. I'm sure some will have a ball with that statement... welcome:)

[Adrift]

I agree, but the same argument proves the existence of Krishna.

The difference is that Hinduism, as a religion one may follow, does not rely on the historical reality of Krishna. Christianity, by its very nature, necessarily relies in the historical reality of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.


Tacitus can be used to prove the existence of Christianity but not Jesus. What he knows about Jesus likely reflects what Christians themselves were saying not independent Roman sources. We have no record of Jesus trial, either from Sanhedrin or Roman records.

Where there are Christians there surely must have been a Christ. That there are no surviving records of any trial taking place 2000 years ago in a small province of the Roman empire is not at all surprising. That his trial was mentioned at all by a Roman historian, who surely had access to biographies, memoirs, Roman records (based on previous administrative positions within Rome) is mind blowing. Attempts at watering down this historical record is not convincing.

That won't work. Christ simply means Messiah and there were many Jews claiming to be Messiahs at the time. This one appears to have been in Rome itself.

Do you have a particular well known supposed Jewish messiah in mind other than Jesus who was known of in Rome that fits the bill as well? Indications that it was Jesus the Christ can be extrapolated when we read Acts 18:1-2 on the subject "After this Paul left Athens and went to Corinth. And he found a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had commanded all the Jews to leave Rome."

Sure it could be a coincidence that Priscilla and Aquila just happened to be Messianic Jews, followers of Jesus the Christ, and were kicked out of Rome because of disturbances caused by the instigation of another Chrestus, but boy, what a coincidence.

But he is not connecting the two groups, is he? Nero's persecution of Christians is an established fact that I don't think anyone questions.

There was no reason for him to connect the two groups. Suetonius was talking about two different administrations in separate books of a collective biography.

But the only evidence we have that Thallus made such a statement comes from Christian sources.

Secondary source doesn't make the claim any less true. Vast amounts of our knowledge of ancient historical events and persons comes from secondary sources. The only reason I can see that the historical record for Christianity is questioned as thoroughly as it is while other historical claims are not is because, as a religion, Christianity relies on the historical record for it to be factual and true. If Jesus did not rise literally from the dead then our faith is in vain. Christianity is the only major religion that I know of that puts it's neck on the chopping block for anyone to come along and take a swing at. All other major religions are based less on true historical events and more on either recognizing a set of religious principles or devoting oneself to religious duty.

Which proves there was obviously a church in the first century. We already know that. It doesn't tell us anything about Jesus, however.

But it does. It tells us that Jesus had a strong following that grew throughout the years and that his divinity was recognized and that he was praised and worshiped in song.

That's not my understanding. The text in question is much later than that and it is in the Babylonian Talmud, not the Palestinian Talmud. The name of the person 'hung' in that text was Yeshu which is not the same as Jesus' name Yeshua.

Yeshu is more likely than not an abbreviated form of the name Yeshua. Something that the majority of scholars the world over seem to recognize. The addition of ha'Notzri (of Nazareth) in some versions of the Talmud, though not conclusive, helps solidify the identity.

Except this Yeshu was stoned and hanged, not simply hanged, and the hanging was done by the Sanhedrin, not the Romans.

No, Sanhedrin 43a absolutely does not say that. It says the following (all of which accords pretty well with the Gospel account):

it was taught: On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, 'He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!

Once again, it says Yeshu, not Yeshua. And Yeshu is supposed to have five disciples, not twelve. So far as I know the Sanhedrin never executed any disciples, unless you want to consider Stephen a disciple. His name is not mentioned.

Again, Yeshu is more likely than not short for Yeshua. And yes, Jesus had 12 main disciples, but he had many disciples. He had 5 and then some. That some of them were martyred at the hands of the Sanhedrin seems not at all unexpected. Sanhedrin 43 even uses a couple names shared by the known disciples of Jesus, Matthai (Matthew) and Todah (Thaddeus).

Which only tell us what Christians believed in the second centruy.

Again, this is nothing that should be shrugged off, that non-christian sources cite examples of followers of a Jewish Messiah who they believed lived, died, and was resurrected from the dead is absolutely astonishing and tells us much about the followers as well as the one they followed.

carelinks don't let revisionists and skeptics water down what you've presented. If this were anyone else but the Christian Jesus that this historical evidence points to, the point would be moot. The record of a real historical Jesus, both internal and external is amazing, and is far better than many other ancient historical individuals... far better than probably most ancient religious figures. That anyone would even question the validity of a real historical Jesus is almost laughable especially when so many points in the historical record seem to converge on the same person in the same point in time.

[Bill the Cat]

May Allah guide her to Islam and to accept the true identity of the historical man - Jesus Christ - as exemplified in the Quran - The human only prophet and Messiah of God.

"The similitude of Jesus before God is that of Adam; he created him from dust, then said to him: "BE": and he was." (3:59)

Jesus, the man was created by the Word (be)..he was not The Word.

The fallacious speculation and idea that The 'Word' of God existed as a divine 'person' was a conjectured falsehood that was postulated in the first/secondary century AD.

OT biblical history knows nothing about the myth that God's Word/debar/logos/memra existed as a distinct 'person' or a 'Son of God' as postulated according to trinitarian christology...

Lesse... John the Beloved, who walked and talked with Jesus and witnessed His crucifixion... or Muhammed who lived hundreds of years later... :ponder:

:idea: I'll take the eye witness for 500 Alex!

[smaneck]

Thanks Susan. I wrote that nearly 20 years ago and your points seem to me to hold water for the most part. However, I think it a hard job to prove 'Jesus did NOT exist'

Of course not, but a non-event can never be proven.

and I submit the evidence I present is reason to think He DID exist,

The Gospel accounts and the existence of the church itself are evidence that He existed. My point is that there is very little evidence outside of Christian sources.

[LambofElohim]

Greetings,

Doogieduff, if you really want to be saved and have not accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior the first this is not to. Secondly if you have you must renounce him as your Lord and Savior. Third you must confess Elohim as "God" and "God" alone renouncing Yeheveh, Yahweh or Jehovah as your God. Thirdly repent for being guilty of the shed blood that Elohim Himself became flesh as His own Son that was murdered by the church. ALL are GUILTY of that SIN of MURDER of the Son of God. Pilate saw to that when he washed his hands and put then blood and murder back upon Israel and their children's children and their fathers to this day when they accepted it. WE are all nations that are built upon Israel and their beliefs. The church of Israel was too chicken to do it themselves, just in case these men were the Messiah; so instead they hired a hitman, the Roman church.

Once you just go for it and have the slightest inkling as you begin to shout, "Elohim you are "God" alone; you should begin to receive the Spirit of Truth as I have. Then you will know "God" and the "Jesus Christ" He hast sent will follow once you begin to read John 1:1, go back to Genesis 1:1 and read to see what The Word was and is...simply Elohim the Hebrew word which became "God" in the KJV bible and that He Himself is The Word that was made flesh and dwelt upon the earth as flesh among men.

One more thing; if you seek proof that "Jesus" existed dig up Jeremiah's Grotto where beneath is the empty garden tomb that is .375 miles from where Golgotha is believed to be.

The Brother of the Jesus Christ that the only true God hast sent
Reverend Carlton

[EphremHagos]

Hi everyone. I'm in the process of trying to get a girl saved, and we've made excellent progress. She now wants proof of Jesus' existence as a man. Not that He's God, like every other thread, but plainly that Jesus Christ existed as man. So I'm looking for the best evidence, outside the Bible of course, that Jesus Christ existed as a man.



To prove the existence of Jesus as a man, there is no better evidence “outside the Bible” than the two-edged work on the cross rising high above the written word. Jesus’ death on the cross, by his own free will and awesome power, can reveal over and over again both his humanity and immortality in the continuum of diacritical death between, on the one hand, death (humanity) and, on the other hand, eternal life (divinity)! Let the girl in question choose what she wants to see!

[gharfish]

saved from what?


penalty of sin.

>