U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-25-2019, 05:06 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,028 posts, read 932,188 times
Reputation: 713

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
just answer the question

is it more reasonable to claim a guy (certainly could have been named jesus) was going around teaching about the problem with literal religion and they killed him for it 2000 years ago.

or

it is more reasonable to say it never happened?
The post you responded to answered that question (unless one is a light weight). Perhaps you did not understand what I wrote?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
if you are a sciency as you claim (i doubt myself) just answer the question.
W = Fd.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-25-2019, 05:12 AM
 
13,457 posts, read 4,976,974 times
Reputation: 1363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
The post you responded to answered that question (unless one is a light weight). Perhaps you did not understand what I wrote?



W = Fd.
harry, yo didnt answer the question. You are avoiding it again. Just answer it for us regular people.


is it more reasonable to claim a guy named jesus lived 2000 years and taught against the evils of literal "laws"

or

is it more reasonable to claim a guy never existed named Jesus tht taught against evils of taking things literally?

You don't care about how the universe works, you are here for, yet another, European crusade, to save the people in a foreign land ... again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 07:13 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,028 posts, read 932,188 times
Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arach Angle View Post
harry, yo didnt answer the question. You are avoiding it again. Just answer it for us regular people.
OK, to answer your question once again, but in simple terms for the light weights.

From what evidence we have, the first 50-100 years of Christianity only had an angel or a divine Jesus revealed in scripture or seen in visions. This divine Jesus makes his sacrifice once only, in heaven, and according to scripture was never on earth. It is not until sometime after 80 AD that we get the gospel accounts of a 'historical' Jesus.

This is the evidence we have, which shows a non-existent man Jesus later evolving into a 'historical' Jesus. Which means the evidence is stronger for a non-existent mythical Jesus. But there may have been a historical Jesus who was mythologized within 10 years of his death, but the evidence for this man has since been lost. But as we do not have this evidence, it can not move the balance of probability.

Conclusion - the evidence is stronger for a non-existent mythical Jesus, but there may have been a historical Jesus.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 07:20 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
15,310 posts, read 10,332,182 times
Reputation: 2610
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Irrelevant. Christians are followers of a man referred to as Christ. It makes no sense to pretend there was no such man.
So Ganesh is real too?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 08:28 AM
 
Location: knoxville, Tn.
4,723 posts, read 1,215,461 times
Reputation: 179
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
OK, to answer your question once again, but in simple terms for the light weights.

From what evidence we have, the first 50-100 years of Christianity only had an angel or a divine Jesus revealed in scripture or seen in visions. This divine Jesus makes his sacrifice once only, in heaven, and according to scripture was never on earth. It is not until sometime after 80 AD that we get the gospel accounts of a 'historical' Jesus.

This is the evidence we have, which shows a non-existent man Jesus later evolving into a 'historical' Jesus. Which means the evidence is stronger for a non-existent mythical Jesus. But there may have been a historical Jesus who was mythologized within 10 years of his death, but the evidence for this man has since been lost. But as we do not have this evidence, it can not move the balance of probability.

Conclusion - the evidence is stronger for a non-existent mythical Jesus, but there may have been a historical Jesus.

I don' know where you get your information about Christianity, but since nothing your post is true, it is obvious you need a better one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 08:36 AM
Status: "Scarface IS fiction!" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Germany
5,028 posts, read 932,188 times
Reputation: 713
Quote:
Originally Posted by omega2xx View Post
I don' know where you get your information about Christianity, but since nothing your post is true, it is obvious you need a better one.
My information is from the NT itself. So we can not use the NT as evidence because the NT is not true?

Well done for finally admitting you have ZERO evidence.

Here is where you display the ignorance of your own instruction manual.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 10:59 AM
 
39,020 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Thanks folks. Harry gave us the Thallia -Phlegon passages and how the eclipse and dates were linked to the Crucifixion, Arach is talking hostile cobblers as usual and deserved no reply. Omega is doing his rote denial without any kind of case.

Mystic is the only one making some kind of point. And 'indirectly', I agree - though many won't - can the disciples follow a person who never existed?

The pivot in this case in Paul. If he was invented (by Marcion some say) then Christians can be a totally invented religion instead of an almost totally invented one. Because let me say that I believe that not a word of the sayings, parables and teachings ascribed to Jesus are sayings parables and teachings that he actually said but are invented by Christianity, and often demonstrably so.

On the other hand, I have reasons to believe that there was a real Jesus. And many of the deeds in the gospels really happened. And I know that because the Gospel writers (or editors, rather) did their best to cover - up, disguise and fiddle these doings because they did not like them.

I also hypothesise that the disciples did see a resurrected Jesus - but in their heads - not walking and talking.

That is demonstrated by:
(k) Paul's vision of Jesus was in his head. His reference to the sightings of Jesus so often trotted out as proof of a solid -body resurrection refers to an initial belief in a 'vision' of Jesus (by Cephus) was taken up by the others, despondent at Jesus' failure and death and only too willing to believe that he had gone back to heaven and would come again in their lifetimes, and this belief spread to the early converts (500 of them as a Pauline ballpark - estimate) and finally, Paul says, into his own head.

(l) the conflicting resurrection - stories is evidence - I'd say proof - that there was no walking visible resurrection story, as is the case with Mark (1), and Paul's 'resurrection' is nothing like the resurrection in the Gospels. Indeed Luke had to rewrite it to make it fit Paul, whose letters had evidently become available to Luke, by wangling in a first 'appearance to Simon', which isn't described, and isn't of course mentioned in Matthew or John.

Paul was a real person - as i say of the 'painted - over' Real Jesus - anyone making him up would not have created problems that had to be fiddled - like the nativities to have a Galilean born in Bethlehem, or, in Matthew, a Judean Born in Bethlehem being taken to Galilee. It would not be necessary to have an execution by the Romans fiddled to lay the blame on the Jews.

And the most fascinating fiddle - the Temple - cleansing preceded by a triumphal procession. The original form is in Luke, as it surprisingly often is. Because Luke is late enough that the messianic aspect of the act was no longer a problem. And Matthew also keeps the original form. This by the way - as if the need to write in a virgin birth and correct the failure of Jesus to be born in Bethlehem did not tip us off - shows that Matthew is actually as late as Luke.

Mark however, has the two events on separate days so as to disguise any connection between them. John goes even further and shifts the 'cleansing' to the start of Jesus' career.

Paul is a real person as is shown by his many flaws If Marcion had invented him, he wouldn't have caused him so many problems, nor would he have referenced the OT so often as it was Marcion's determination to rid the Christian scriptures of any Jewish material that prompted the compilation of the Bible by Rome.

So, if Paul was a real person, then the disciples that he mentions must also have been real people, not least because he disagrees and even quarrels with them. And real disciples do not follow someone who is not real.

Or do they? I don't doubt that Muhammad was real, though the angel that passed on the scripture is a myth. But, surely, none of the Hindu gods are real. And i have my doubts about Gotama (possibly invented by committee). Though I incline to a real figure, just as i incline to a real Jesus.

But to get to Mystic's point - and it is as irrelevant, crafty and and self - deceptive as his usual efforts - even if Jesus never existed, the teachings are followed. But why should they be? As has been pointed out, they are often not very good, in some cases positively harmful or at least ridiculous.

As always, the way we should be judging these exhortations and sayings is the way Christians judge the whole Bible - using humanist morality and ethics. Which is why we hear so bloody much about 'love your neighbour' but far less about cursing Chorazin or hating your parents.

Don't be fooled, friends, by this ongoing Christian Lie - this is not done to make humans better but to give a reason to keep Christianity relevant in the society of today, when it is really not relevant at all.

(1) there is of course still the empty tomb. We Atheist apologists could invent many excuses as to the significance of the empty tomb, but, unlike Christian apologists, we do not make stuff up. There are simply only guesses as to how the 'empty tomb' story got started.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 05-25-2019 at 11:27 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 11:26 AM
 
11,228 posts, read 11,251,267 times
Reputation: 3445
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishbrains View Post
Christians undoubtedly exist, but that does not mean that Christ actually existed, or if he existed, was divine.

It is similar to referencing voodoo. The religion and practice exists, that doesn’t mean that zombies are real.

If the mere existence of a religion was sufficient proof for its truth, we would have hundreds or thousands of God’s running around.

Fact: there isn't a single article in existence that proves Jesus was real. But we have come to believe he was real solely because of people who in the decades and centuries after 0 CE started calling themselves "Christians". Notice they didn't call themselves "Jesusians". That's a big differences. So these Christians could have have been following any one of dozens of Yesuahs who were self-styling themselves "Christ" (or "Messiah"). Paul separates one Jesus out of the pack. He never claims to have met this Jesus even though he was in Jerusalem at the same time Jesus was and as a Pharisee would have known all the trouble this Jesus fellow was causing in Judea and Jerusalem. Certainly he would have known of the crucifixion, the darkness, the earthquakes, the temple veil being torn in two, the infamous zombies parading through Jerusalem--maybe he was even visited by one or two of them. But Paul never gives us a single detail in his epistles about things he should have known about Jesus. Christians rationalize this by saying, "Well, Paul simply didn't feel a need to supply these details to his readers. Maybe so. Maybe God, even with His omniscience, simply couldn't see far enough into the future to know how helpful these details would have been to today's apologists trying to prove their case. Maybe Paul never was in Jerusalem during this time. Maybe Jesus was never there, never got crucified. Maybe Paul made the whole thing up--the vision, the revelations--everything. Maybe, maybe maybe. Since we have no proof for Jesus, the best we can say is that Jesus is an avatar--a mascot for early Christianity, the way Apollo is a mascot for the Greek religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 11:42 AM
 
39,020 posts, read 10,812,637 times
Reputation: 5080
Rather, Paul knew all about Jesus, who he was, what he had done and what it meant to be a messiah. But - just like the gospel - writers - he didn't like it. He didn't rewrite everything that Jesus had done to suit himself, no - his solution was simpler: say almost nothing about the Real Jesus, but say that the earthly Jesus doesn't matter; it is the Jesus in the head that matters.

This Jesus is a spirit in Heaven. Not God, but messiah, which is not only Davidic, but is also the spirit of Adam. Yes, Paul's thesis is that the spirit of Adam came to wipe out the sin of the original disobedience by Obedience (up to and including Crucifixion). You don't need to take my word for it - it's all set out fair and square in Romans, and you can bet the Church authorities know this very well.

They don't mention it and the many, many other problems that we we have because they never noticed. They know it isn't true and they keep quiet about it.

There's another one in plain sight. Have you never wondered, folks, why we are going to have a second coming, last Trump and graves opening with a resurrection, when the dead supposedly go to be with Jesusgod as soon as they die? I've asked the question several times and rather to my wonderment - not at Why, but at What (the problem is simply ignored) I have never had an answer.

I know why - the opening of the graves etc. is the Jewish (Pharisaical) resurrection in which Paul, the disciples and indeed Jesus believed. The immediate going up to heaven after death is a Christian invention.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-25-2019, 11:48 AM
 
Location: Western Washington
8,929 posts, read 8,390,690 times
Reputation: 15495
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Irrelevant. Christians are followers of a man referred to as Christ. It makes no sense to pretend there was no such man. Using all the beliefs about the man to dispute his existence or the validity of secular references to him is disingenuous.
You are focusing too much on one small portion of my post, specifically “but that does not mean he existed”, while you seem to be absolutely ignoring my next phrase, “or if he existed...”.

I honestly don’t know if there was a historical Jesus Christ or not. There very well may have been. I don’t really care.

My real point, which you have completely ignored, is that referencing Christians does not tell us anything about the truth of Biblical claims. It merely confirms, which nobody is disputing, that a sect that was identified as Christian existed in the 2nd century. That tells us almost nothing about whether a historical Christ existed, and exactly nothing about the nature of such a person if he did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top