Theos-Talk Archives (May 2009 Message tt00120)

But if the 12 apostles didn't exist, as maintained by Mr. Leadbeater, then why beleive Christ existed ?

Anand, I invite you to go through the gospels stories and mark out with a red pen all verses and all chapters that mention the apostles and what they were doing and saying to Jesus and what Jesus was doing and saying to the apostles. 

For example, the last supper didn't take place with Jesus and the apostles.  Remember the apostles didn't exist.  So I guess you think Jesus had supper by himself?

Or the resurrected Jesus didn't appear repeatedly to the apostles?

How could he have appeared to the disciples if they didn't even exist?

And after Jesus' supposed death, resurrection and ascension, if the apostles didn't exist, then who in the hell carried on the message and mission????  Remember Apostle Peter and the rest didn't exist.....

If the 12 apostles didn't really exist, then how do you know Jesus existed since they are all in the same story and gospels???

And I urge you to convey to your fellow Christians what C.W. Leadbeater says about the 12 apostles not existing and see how they respond to you?

The vast majority of Christians will reject these assertions of C.W. Leadbeater.  And since you apparently believe truth is determined by majority vote and belief, then it appears that Mr. Leadbeater's claim is definitely wrong.  Why?  Because the vast majority of Christians believe in the reality of these apostles.  Truth is whaever the majority says it is, right?

Daniel
http://hpb.cc

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "Anand" <AnandGholap@...> wrote:
>
> --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "danielhcaldwell" <danielhcaldwell@> wrote:
> >
> > Anand wrote in part:
> > 
> > ===================================================
> > Although story of Christ can be used as allegory to explain soul's
> > condition....If somebody is saying that Jesus did not exist
> > physically, AS WRITTEN IN THE GOSPELS, I DON'T agree with it. 
> 
> Daniel,
> My above sentence can be interpreted in two ways. According to Gospels Jesus existed physically. . 
> I was here talking about historical existence of Jesus, which Gospels agree with.
> I was not talking about historical accuracy of stories about Jesus. I was talking about whether or not Jesus existed in physical body.
> Do you understand the difference in two meanings? It is little hard, but try it. 
> "AS WRITTEN IN THE GOSPELS" has two meanings. One is as written in Gospels that historical Jesus existed.
> Another meaning of "AS WRITTEN IN THE GOSPELS" is stories about Jesus "AS WRITTEN IN THE GOSPELS".
> 
> Anand Gholap
>