Coach said: "The reason why Christians do not need history (like most pagans would) to trust the events surrounding our Lord and Saviour Jesus is that He lives in us today... and that is all the proof we need".

At last a Christian who acknowledges the lack of historical evidence to support Jesus' existence!

At least Coach has the courage of his convictions and recognizes that faith is belief without proof. Unlike Christians who resort to fraudulent 'historical' records such as Josephus' or Tacitus' to 'prove' Christ's historicity. Or the ridiculous attempts to try and prove biblical 'events' such as creation and the flood through scientific means.

The comment that Jesus lives in him does conjure up some interesting anatomical pictures but, hey, that's what delusion is all about.

Oliver and Netab,
Thanks for the lessons.
All that I am saying is that Flemming feels safe and secure in ridiculing the God of the Christians but hasn't the guts/fortitude/bravery (WHY) to have a go at the Prophet of the Muslims.
Perhaps he will, I may misjudge him but I'm not going to go without breakfast till he does a satire on Muhammad.

Shanno...

I serve a risen Savior, He's in the world today;
I know that He is living, whatever men may say;
I see His hand of mercy, I hear His voice of cheer
And just the time I need Him He's always near.

Refrain
He lives, He lives, Christ Jesus lives today!
He walks with me and talks with me
along life's narrow way.
He lives, He lives, salvation to impart!
You ask me how I know He lives?
He lives within my heart.

Focus on the last 2 lines from that popular Hymn of yesteryear.

But having said that, and agreeing with it, does not diminish the historical foundation for that faith. May I recommend a close look at the Gospel of Luke and the book of Acts, and an enquiry concerning the historical connections in those books. Have a look at Luke 3:1-2

Now..note particularly one tiny, but VERY significant phrase...

"in the highpriesthood of Annas and Caiaphas" to the biblically ignorant and historically challenged, this may not seem to be of great significance, but without answring the issue, I suggest you explore this with our good friend Dr Google.

On a scale of probability, netab's idea of 'invented story after his death' rates about -273 (which on the kelvin scale of temperature is the point where I think atoms stop moving)

At the end of your study, I believe you will have a much deeper appreciation for the historical accuracy and attention to detail of Luke (who was a doctor).

Then, we can come back to 'He lives within my heart' :)

David,

It's not uncommon for writers of fiction to place their fictional characters into a non-fictional context.

If Luke was really a doctor then he must have been a pretty bad one: how do you explain him believing

·Epilepsy is caused by devils. 9:39

·People who cannot speak are possessed with devils. 11:14

·Illnesses are caused by Satan. 13:11-16

·John the Baptist, while still a fetus, leaped for joy when he heard the voice of Mary. 1:44

You are obviously a fan of Luke so how do you deal with the conundrum of Luke 10:21 where Jesus thanks God that only the ignorant and foolish will listen to him. Hmmm.. is that why he lives in your heart?

[Thanks to skepticsannotatedbible.com for the biblical references]

David,
No one is denying that Joshua interacted with Caiaphas and his father in law, Annas or that it was Pilate who sentenced him to death. That proves that Joshua existed in this historical time frame and so we have agreement at long last. I'm glad to see you finally moving along the road of rational thinking and using it to establish some verifiable facts. Unlike the story teller who was struck off his horse on the road to Damascus, you seem to be sliding off but then enlightment comes in different ways to different people.
Now, if we could just get you out of the childish habit of attacking the messenger amd sticking with the issues; I would say we have come a long way.

Now that David is finally moving towards a rational perspective of the history of Joshua, the Jewish scholar; I think we should adavance the discussion to a issue that I raised in an earlier post. That issue is the qusetion of the two others who were crucified with him. If we hypothesis that these two were also executed for treason(assuming they existed)then we have three men executed for treason in and around 36 AD. The question is; were these two executed for the same act of sedition or treason as Joshua or a seperate act?

Firstly, I would place the time of execution as the feast of tabernacles / booths when it was required that adherents carried palm branch's and I support that by the NT account that Joshua entered Jerusalem to popular support and specifically that his supporters, lined the route of his entrance with palm branch's.

Back to the question of the two crucified with Joshua. It seems unlikely (but not impossible) that two insurrections occurred at the same time i.e. September / October 36 AD. Of course, it could be that these two had been languishing in dungeons waiting the arrival of Pilate for judgement and that their act of sedition had occurred some time before Joshua's entrance to Jerusalem.

I think these two are important because the NT is very short on detail and the clumsy business of identifying them as thieves etc, is clearly designed to cover up something of significance about these two. Any ideas?