proving Jesus christ

92 posts / 0 new
Last post
Chica__2009's picture

Gen 3:22
Gen 6:14
Exodus 3:2
Numbers 21:8-9
Jonah 1:17
Malachi 3:1-4

There are more because I haven't even touched on the prophecies. While no where in the OT does it explicitly say "Jesus Christ", to exclude the OT is ridiculous as it's more than half of the bible and everything in the OT leads up to Jesus.

xenoview's picture

So the OT doesn't really have anything in it about jesus. How does the OT lead up to jesus?

jonthecatholic's picture
This is actually the story

This is actually the story called Salvation History. Which is pretty wild. I'm actually not experienced enough to talk on this but basically, you see a lot of parallelisms from the Old and the New. Basically, the Old is the New concealed and the New is the Old revealed.

So sometimes, you'd see some Old Testament tones that carry over to the New and some new testament events which fulfill old testament writings.

Burn Your Bible's picture
“Then the Lord God said,

“Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the tree of life and eat, and live forever—"”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭3:22‬ ‭ESV‬‬
“Make yourself an ark of gopher wood. Make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and out with pitch.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭6:14‬ ‭ESV‬‬
“And the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a flame of fire out of the midst of a bush. He looked, and behold, the bush was burning, yet it was not consumed.”
‭‭Exodus‬ ‭3:2‬ ‭ESV‬‬
“And the Lord said to Moses, "Make a fiery serpent and set it on a pole, and everyone who is bitten, when he sees it, shall live." So Moses made a bronze serpent and set it on a pole. And if a serpent bit anyone, he would look at the bronze serpent and live.”
‭‭Numbers‬ ‭21:8-9‬ ‭ESV‬‬
“And the Lord appointed a great fish to swallow up Jonah. And Jonah was in the belly of the fish three days and three nights.”
‭‭Jonah‬ ‭1:17‬ ‭ESV‬‬
“"Behold, I send my messenger, and he will prepare the way before me. And the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; and the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the Lord of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner's fire and like fullers' soap. He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness to the Lord. Then the offering of Judah and Jerusalem will be pleasing to the Lord as in the days of old and as in former years.”
‭‭Malachi‬ ‭3:1-4‬ ‭ESV‬‬
I believe that you sir are full of shit!!!
Please how does the above verses speak of Jesus?

Chica__2009's picture
In Gen 3:22, the tree of life

In Gen 3:22, the tree of life that God speaks about represents Jesus because Jesus is "the way, the truth and the life". In Gen 6:14, the ark symbolises Jesus because the flood or God's wrath but the ark but didn't hurt noah or anyone inside the ark. The instruction to "cover it inside and out with pitch.” means that Jesus bore our diseases and transgressions from the inside and out.
Exodus 3:2 the angel of the Lord is Jesus in his pre-incarnating stage before he was born as a human on earth.
Numbers 21:8-9 is referenced by Jesus himself in NT. John 3:14- "Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up"
Again, with the story of Jonah, Jesus referenced to him a lot. I.e. You want a sign, look at Jonah.
The last one is my mistake. I thought this was talking about John and Jesus but now upon reading again, seems it just about John.
These are brief answers. I can go further in detail if you want but wouldn't want to bore you.

Burn Your Bible's picture
Please show your evidence for

Please show your evidence for your assertions that these passages mean what you say the mean!
The tree is Jesus... oh give me a fucking break! How do you allow these thoughts to be typed down without throwing up???? You have me nothing but your interpretation of what YOU think those verses mean! You have related them to Jesus not the verses themselves! This is "context" bullshit!
You reply back to tell me that Jesus was a fucking boat????????? You say the boat didn't hurt Noah lol well good for him, what about the other newborns that this boat slowly passed over as their little lifeless bodies floated in the water?

If I were to make a monster that wanted nothing but attention, yet wanted to destroy his creations I would call him GOD

xenoview's picture

Where does it talk about jesus in the OT? Can you prove that god is real? Can you prove that jesus is real? Books and videos don't prove that god or jesus is real.

Sapporo's picture
The alleged miracles of

The alleged miracles of Christ are about as truthful as the supernatural claims of Mormonism.

Sky Pilot's picture
There was no one named "Jesus

There was no one named "Jesus" 2,000 years ago because the name didn't exist until 1630 A.D. And "Christ" isn't his surname; it's just a title.

jonthecatholic's picture
When people say "Jesus" we

When people say "Jesus" we understand exactly who that person is. It's a simple translation from Aramaic to English. We call him Hesu Kristo. But we mean the exact same person.

"And "Christ" isn't his surname; it's just a title." - Did anyone say that? I thought this was common knowledge. Like Pope Francis' first name isn't Pope.

xenoview's picture

Isn't hesu kristo a spanish word?


jonthecatholic's picture
I guess so. We use the

I guess so. We use the spelling Hesu Kristo in the Philippines as we don't have a J in the native language. And we were a spanish colony.

Sky Pilot's picture
Popes take aliases, just like

Popes take aliases, just like all of the biblical characters.

jonthecatholic's picture
Let me use another analogy

Let me use another analogy then. One can also claim that a Mao Zedong never existed as no one was named "Mao Zedong" in China. His name is actually, "毛泽东". But c'mon, no one is gonna write that down when talking about Mao. and when I say Mao Zedong, you know who I'm talking about.

LucyAustralopithecus's picture
i believe there was a jesus

i believe there was a jesus Christ, although i believe he may have had a far different name and this was simply attributed to him.

however, not for one minute do i believe in miracles attributed to him.

Cognostic's picture
"Senator Tacitus who was born

"Senator Tacitus who was born over 20 years after his apparent crucifixion and wrote about it in 116AD."

And if you look at the section mentioned about Jesus, it is inserted right in the middle of a description of a war and it totally unrelated to the section before it and the section after it. This fact leads nearly all biblical scholars to the fact that the Jesus insert in the writings of Tacitus is a forgery. It was placed there by Christians at a much later date that 116 AD. This is also attested to because of the fact that later writers who were trying to support the existence of Jesus, NEVER REFER TO TACITUS. If he had actually written about Jesus, other religious authors who came later would have quoted him. They didn't/ The reference to Jesus in Tacitus is a forgery.

jonthecatholic's picture
It's pretty easy to simply

It's pretty easy to simply say that a certain writing is a forgery but with no proof whatsoever, you're claim simply falls flat. Which Bible scholars are you talking about? As far as I know, all the reputable historians and bible scholars actually agree that a Jesus who was directly involved with the founding of Christianity, existed.

If not, you're going to have to put forth a theory which explains how Christianity started. Because without a Jesus, there would be no Christianity.

Sirkenstien's picture
"This fact leads nearly all

"This fact leads nearly all biblical scholars to the fact that the Jesus insert in the writings of Tacitus is a forgery"

Same with Joshepus "mention" of Jesus.

jonthecatholic's picture
I don't really know where to

I don't really know where to start with this. It seems to me that you simply don't want to believe that a man Jesus who was the founder of Christianity existed at all in the 1st century. I can't do much to persuade you otherwise. See Bart Ehrman. He's agnostic the last time I checked. He may be atheist now but he certainly doesn't say that the Jesus writings in Tacitus are a forgery. Neither with Josephus thought there is an interpolation there.

I'll also leave this here: I've posted it on these threads before but you're new. So, here.

The writer is an atheist as well. You may disagree with him but check out what he has to write on the topic.

Randomhero1982's picture
I would happily concede that

I would happily concede that it was very likely a Jesus Christ existed but would hope theists would also be honest and concede that experts in this particular field differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels.

jonthecatholic's picture
This is actually where I’d

This is actually where I’d disagree. When two or three accounts about Jesus Christ agree on everything, they’re said to be taken from a single account. When they disagree, they’re said to be contradictory and proof that it was all made up.

This rule however, only applies to Jesus Christ. No other person in history is put under this sort of scrutiny. Minor details that differ are usually taken as two separate accounts which simple record what the author knows while similarities simple bolster the historical precedence of the narrative.

Except for Jesus. Similiar stories simply mean it came from one source. And differing details means it was all made up.

Burn Your Bible's picture
Yes if you say that you are

Yes if you say that you are god and then you leave a book for all people for all of time to follow then you get a little more scrutiny!!! Wouldn't you say that the claims of a god human that sacrificed himself to himself to get a loophole in laws that he himself created deserves a little more evidence than hmmm let's say Napoleon?

Randomhero1982's picture
I think this because of one

I think this because of one particular reason, which Carl Sagan summed up beautifully, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".

And the case of Jesus Christ is a monumental claim.

Jared Alesi's picture
The fact of the matter

The fact of the matter remains, however, that even if a historical Jesus existed and began Christianity, this would in no way prove any aspect of Christianity. The fact that Siddartha Gautama existed doesn't make Buddhism true. The fact that L. Ron Hubbard exists doesn't make Scientology true.

jonthecatholic's picture
That’s true actually.

That’s true actually.

What follows however is that if Christ never existed then Christianity is false.

Which is why some atheists are going that approach to disprove Christianity. And I agree!

Jared Alesi's picture
The problem here is trying to

The problem here is trying to prove a negative. You could prove that Jesus existed, but not that he didn't. I personally doubt it, but like you said earlier, many figures have no contemporary record. However, the gravity of their existence is less than that of Jesus. People worship Jesus, kill in his name, and commit genocide over their interpretation of his teachings. I doubt anything unsubstantiated, and it's perfectly possible that, for example, Hannibal never existed. Perhaps it was simply a name put to the Carthaginians to fuel Roman ferocity. I don't know. I do know, however, that even if Jesus existed, he was probably just an idealistic beggar or commoner. Thousands of people claim to be God. Now, they go to asylums. Then, they got crucified.

Sky Pilot's picture
Jared Alesi,

Jared Alesi,

You know what would be cool? If the Jesus character was still wiggling on the cross after 2,000 years.

Jared Alesi's picture
I think if that were the case

I think if that were the case it would necessarily falsify the resurrection story. Not sure which is a more repulsive thought though; eternal crucifixion, or zombification?

David_Holloway's picture
Interesting Jesus is

Interesting Jesus is mentioned in the Qu'ran more than Muhammad.

Sapporo's picture
The thing with Jesus is that

The thing with Jesus is that his followers are extremely hagiographic about him to the extent that Jesus as we know him is essentially a complete myth. We cannot know anything about the historical Jesus for sure as a result, even if he actually existed.

We could assume that Jesus actually was crucified because his followers may reasonably be too embarrassed to invent a detail like that, and conclude that Jesus the myth was primarily an invention of Paul's. However, other religions have similar embarrassing details which are known to be fiction, so we cannot even assume that Jesus really was crucified.


Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.