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.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,072,463 times
Reputation: 2158
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
They wrote their quotes generations after Jesus died. They got their information from Christians who believed in him. You're being silly.
A lot of people cite Josephus and Tacitus as evidence of Jesus, though. Presumably these were people who lived much closer to that time than you and I do and they looked into it and thought there was such a person based on what they found out.
I still haven't seen you explain the evidence for the existence of Socrates.
Correct. The words ascribed to him and the religion based on those ideas are more important to history.
Yep. In fact it is possible that his bones are in a vault somewhere of things that were dug up from some obscure place, but even if they are, how would you know they were his? Again, you don't have DNA to test. "Skeleton of John Doe 80,124" in some vault in the basement of the Louvre could be Jesus and how we would we know.
Exactly. Even if he didn't exist you're still left with a great work of literature, the Greek Gospel and the rest of the New Testament. You're still left with all the great things that were done the name of Jesus, and all the atrocities.
Somebody founded Christianity, and it had a profound effect on the world. Whether or not Jesus of Nazereth specifically existed may be lost to history but the effects of the concept of Jesus are still with us today.
So Christianity might not have been founded by Jesus but by another Jew of the same name?
Anyway, it is also true that we have just as much proof of Socrates as we do of Jesus, and no one doubts that there was a Socrates. At least, they don't doubt that there are books containing the philosophical positions of a man named Socrates. Just as there are books containing words supposedly uttered by Jesus of Nazereth.
Actually some people do think Socrates was a fictional character Plato made up to promote his theories, but considering other Greek historians wrote about him, and he never walked on water or fed thousands of people with 5 fish, Occam's Razor does apply.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,297 posts, read 14,169,902 times
Reputation: 8105
Quote:
Originally Posted by JrzDefector
I suspect it is largely irrelevant if Jesus actually did exist or not.......
It would matter a great deal to Christians, because their belief hinges on his actual existence. If it were somehow possible to disprove his existence as a unique person whom the NT referred to, there would no longer be any basis for anyone to believe or follow the highly improbable and difficult teachings of Jesus. It's the biggest religion in the world, and much of politics everywhere depends on the core beliefs of all those voters. Also charitable donations would be lower. If all Christians became non-believers within a short period of time, we would see a vastly different world evolving than if it continued to thrive.
In my opinion, things might change for the better if people accepted the world as it seems to be, or at least form their own spiritual beliefs based on experiences, rather than following primitive religions with ancient supposedly "inerrant" teachings ....... but I might be wrong about that. In some ways it's very comforting to believe that one's dead loved ones continue to exist, and he will eventually join them. It's nice to believe that there is a personal sort of God who loves everyone in between his killing sprees, but we really ought to face up to reality if we want the world to progress.
(I'm actually undecided about God because of my and other's experiences and certain facts about the Universe, but I know for sure that none of the primitive religions are true - the god(s) they depict and the tales about him are false.)
Look at the Date of the Quotes, look at the birth date of the Historians, they were contemporaries of the time. Josephus born AD 37, Tacitus born AD 56
I just can't take you seriously anymore. You have clearly offered nothing but argument for the sake of argument. I guess everybody who existed in ancient history was a myth and heresy. take care!
Not just ancient history either.
Just look at those ridiculous legends about "World War II". That great armada invading Normandy from England, under a man named Eisenhower - "iron hewer" in German. Clearly a borrowing from the 1066 myth of an invasion of England from Normandy, with a man named Taillefer - "iron hewer" in French - in the van.
The "iron" theme continues in the name they give the Russian leader - "Man of Steel" for Pete's sake. And then there's Churchill - "The church on the hill" clearly an English national myth, and De Gaulle - "of Gaul", clearly a French national myth. This stuff wouldn't fool a ten-year-old.
And don't get me started on the "Abraham Lincoln" mythos. Aside from being too good to be true, he goes on to have his moment of triumph on Palm Sunday, and then - surprise, surprise - is duly martyred on Good Friday. Well, perhaps we should be grateful for small mercies. At least those mythmakers didn't make him rise again in three days.
Acknowledgements to the author of "Letter From a Higher Critic" read in Analog many decades ago.
A lot of people cite Josephus and Tacitus as evidence of Jesus, though. Presumably these were people who lived much closer to that time than you and I do and they looked into it and thought there was such a person based on what they found out.
I still haven't seen you explain the evidence for the existence of Socrates.
it is remarkable that mention of Jesus appears in Tacitus Annals despite the fact
that his account of the years 29-32 A.D. are lost manuscripts. I wouldn't doubt
some angry pagans tore those pages to shreds or burned them.
Last edited by Snowball7; 02-26-2015 at 07:35 AM..
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,072,463 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by valsteele
Actually some people do think Socrates was a fictional character Plato made up to promote his theories,
Some do, but to my knowledge that's not the prevalent theory.
Quote:
but considering other Greek historians wrote about him,
I thought you said that isn't sufficient, that there has to be actual scientific evidence such as bones or dried blood. Contemporaries writing about him is the evidence we have of Jesus. So if it is good enought for Socrates it should be good enough for Jesus.
Quote:
and he never walked on water or fed thousands of people with 5 fish, Occam's Razor does apply.
Again, no one is suggesting that the miracles are historical. What we are suggesting is that there was a normal human named Jesus of Nazereth. There would be more historical support for Socrates than Jesus because Jesus was just a common man and Plato and Socrates were rich.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,072,463 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
Short answer: historians deal in reality and actual people, places and events.
Mythology is a separate facet of study.
But Jesus of Nazereth, normal human who lived 2000 years ago, presumably was an actual person. There's a religion that was supposedly founded by him. The part where he walks on water and rose from the dead is faith/mythology (depending on your religious views), but SOMEBODY founded Christianity. So either he was a real person, and he is the founder, or there was no Jesus, and you have to tell us who else it was that founded Christianity.
Location: "Silicon Valley" (part of San Francisco Bay Area, California, USA)
4,375 posts, read 4,072,463 times
Reputation: 2158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woof
It would matter a great deal to Christians, because their belief hinges on his actual existence.
Not really. Christians worship God, sir, just like the Muslims and the Jews do. If Mohammed, peace be upon him, wasn't a real person, Islam would still be there. If Abraham wasn't real there would still be Judaism. The god that these people worship is God, not Jesus or Mohammed or Abraham.
A Roman Catholic Priest of the Jesuit Order would tell you that the Bible is allegory. Their faith isn't based on the idea that Christ turned water into wine. It is based on the idea that there is a God, and they have a personal relationship with God, and this helps them love their fellow man and do good things for their fellow man. So unless you can prove that there is no God, which you can't and never will be able to, Christianity will remain intact.
Finding that Jesus of Nazereth wasn't a real person would not destroy Christianity any more than did the discovery of evolution.
I hope you realize that the Roman Catholic Church fully embraces evolution. When the State of Kansas decided they would not teach evolution in public schools, guess who continued teaching it? The Roman Catholic Church. Most of their private schools are run by the Jesuits, the same order that does mainstream secular astronomy at the Vatican Observatory. For example they have discovered planets orbiting other stars at the Vatican Observatory.
Personally I'm a Deist. To me the Bible is just a great work of literature. I don't believe in divine intervention, revelation or life after death. I see God as a Watchmaker who wrote the laws of physics (or if there is a multiverse, the laws governing the appearance of new universes with their own physical laws). So to me Jesus being a myth would have nothing to do with anything. God is still there whether the doctrine of any organized religion is correct or not.
And that's true, if there is a God, it wouldn't cease to exist because you don't believe in it or because X or Y doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church was incorrect. That's like saying gravity ceased to exist because Newton was wrong about certain things.
Decided to snip the rest of my post because the subject is off topic for the thread and the history forum so I'll keep it short.
Last edited by neutrino78x; 02-26-2015 at 09:21 AM..
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.
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.
Look at the Date of the Quotes, look at the birth date of the Historians, they were contemporaries of the time. Josephus born AD 37, Tacitus born AD 56
Why are historians so anti Christ myth theory?
