Who's brave enough to debate me on the gospels Jesus being a myth or not? (protestant, Commandment)
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.
All words are obviously the work of men. The message that comes through from those words is outstanding. Could they be inspired by divinity in a human sense? As an existential phenomenon, we can be pretty amazing. Let's not sell ourselves short, Thrill. I am going to pour myself a whiskey and drink to you this evening by the fireplace. Cheers.
Well, when Michael Way is willing to agree that the words of Jesus could be taken without really needing Jesus himself then you know you're on to something.
I agree that one can look to the words and find some inspiration without actually needing the Jesus character. Doesn't matter who spoke them as long as they got written down. That principle hold for every philosophy book out there. In a similar vein, it wouldn't matter who wrote The Power of Positive Thinking the important thing is that it got written and is out there for people to benefit.
The problem is a little thing called fanaticism. Some Christians are so fanatical about Jesus that they won't attribute the words to anyone except Jesus, even though as I have shown countless time the guy in the gospels was just a mythological figure whose avatar developed slowly over times as events in Israel along with syncretism slowly molded his persona into what the gospels eventually ended up with. It's a common story and can be found in nearly all god savior religions.
I had originally wanted to do a Part 2 on this but I'd like to present my additional evidence in the form of a discussion with Christians. The problem has been NO Christian has been willing to step forth and defend their savior god when I extend this invitation to them. So I figure the best way to approach the issue at this point is to just throw it out there as a new thread and see if anyone in the Christian camp is brave enough to take on a friendly debate.
My contention: the Jesus of the gospels is a mythical character pure and simple. History shows he never existed. Any Christians want to contest my claim? Step forth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell
How so?
Start with
There's no evidence Jesus ever existed outside the gospels. Then go to "Why did various factions of Christianity have to argue for a few centuries what kind of a nature Jesus had: was he a man? Was he a god? Was he part god, part man? Was he full god, full man? As yourself, "If Jesus had been real, wouldn't the world have known what Jesus was right from the very beginning in 30 CE"?
Then go to "Why did various factions of Christianity have to argue for a few centuries what kind of a nature Jesus had: was he a man? Was he a god? Was he part god, part man? Was he full god, full man? As yourself, "If Jesus had been real, wouldn't the world have known what Jesus was right from the very beginning in 30 CE"?
The Apostles knew these truths about Jesus, and they taught them to their own disciples. The truths about Jesus have always been preserved in the Catholic Church, whose hierarchy is composed of the direct successors to the Apostles.
That various sects have taught all kinds of falsehoods about Jesus over the centuries is to be expected, and is of no consequence; because it has been made clear to everyone where the Truth can be found.
Well, when Michael Way is willing to agree that the words of Jesus could be taken without really needing Jesus himself then you know you're on to something.
I agree that one can look to the words and find some inspiration without actually needing the Jesus character. Doesn't matter who spoke them as long as they got written down. That principle hold for every philosophy book out there. In a similar vein, it wouldn't matter who wrote The Power of Positive Thinking the important thing is that it got written and is out there for people to benefit.
The problem is a little thing called fanaticism. Some Christians are so fanatical about Jesus that they won't attribute the words to anyone except Jesus, even though as I have shown countless time the guy in the gospels was just a mythological figure whose avatar developed slowly over times as events in Israel along with syncretism slowly molded his persona into what the gospels eventually ended up with. It's a common story and can be found in nearly all god savior religions.
I never said or suggested that the words of Jesus could be taken without really needing Jesus himself. And the devil take you for saying that I did.
The Apostles knew these truths about Jesus, and they taught them to their own disciples. The truths about Jesus have always been preserved in the Catholic Church, whose hierarchy is composed of the direct successors to the Apostles.
That various sects have taught all kinds of falsehoods about Jesus over the centuries is to be expected, and is of no consequence; because it has been made clear to everyone where the Truth can be found.
The problem, Mike is that there isn't a single document outside the gospels that mentions Andrew, or Phillip, or Bartholomew, or Jude, or Simon, or James son of Alphaeus, or Matthias even in church literature. How do we know these men weren't fabricated? We have absolutely no historical proof they even existed. Now if you know of a single document outside the gospels that mentions them I'd love to read it.
For those who say "Christianity spread like wildfire, that's the evidence for the apostles" I'd say "Then that's evidence Mormonism is the one true religion, because it spread faster than Christianity--from 1820 or so till a hundred years later Mormonism spread around the world. So Christianity isn't the one true religion, Mormonism is."
Last edited by thrillobyte; 01-03-2023 at 10:33 AM..
Well, when Michael Way is willing to agree that the words of Jesus could be taken without really needing Jesus himself then you know you're on to something.
I agree that one can look to the words and find some inspiration without actually needing the Jesus character. Doesn't matter who spoke them as long as they got written down. That principle hold for every philosophy book out there. In a similar vein, it wouldn't matter who wrote The Power of Positive Thinking the important thing is that it got written and is out there for people to benefit.
The problem is a little thing called fanaticism. Some Christians are so fanatical about Jesus that they won't attribute the words to anyone except Jesus, even though as I have shown countless time the guy in the gospels was just a mythological figure whose avatar developed slowly over times as events in Israel along with syncretism slowly molded his persona into what the gospels eventually ended up with. It's a common story and can be found in nearly all god savior religions.
Wow, you are really smart, my friend. Those bolded words above redeems my faith in humanity. It's like finding a gold coin in a stinky rut.
No, you don't need the Jesus character. It's just a fathom long carcass as the Buddha put it. To grasp the teaching is to be Godlike. Jesus lived it, as the story went. This was how that carpenter from Nazareth blew the high priest of Jerusalem away. He was no carpenter, and that head ass of the temple blocking everybody's way to Heaven knew it.
It's the same today. If you've got it, someone will be out to get you. Mankind is being shackled by evil, my friend.
I once questioned a Buddhist abbot in Kuala Lumpur why he had that giant statue of Buddha in the grounds of his vihara. Didn't the Buddha teach that the self is an illusion? He told me, "Not everyone can grasp the teaching at that level."
You should also let Christians be if they need to practice their faith with the Bible and the Lord Jesus by their side. I loved my grandma. She was a wonderful person, a kind matriach, and a devout Catholic. She attended mass every morning, always with her rosary. She would make the sign of the cross by kissing her thumb and placing it on my forehead, right and left shoulder, and on my chest (heart) every time I visited her. I didn't tell her that she was being silly. I couldn't because her strength of character was impressive. She held the family together through tough times. Did her faith in Jesus and the story of his perseverance against injustice and pain inspire her? Who knows?
You should also let Christians be if they need to practice their faith with...
It would be good advice, as well, for christians to leave people of other faith alone, including stopping trying to force the christian religion on our political and legal system.
The problem, Mike is that there isn't a single document outside the gospels that mentions Andrew, or Phillip, or Bartholomew, or Jude, or Simon, or James son of Alphaeus, or Matthias even in church literature. How do we know these men weren't fabricated? We have absolutely no historical proof they even existed. Now if you know of a single document outside the gospels that mentions them I'd love to read it.
Church Fathers and church historians such as Eusebius do mention these men.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
For those who say "Christianity spread like wildfire, that's the evidence for the apostles" I'd say "Then that's evidence Mormonism is the one true religion, because it spread faster than Christianity--from 1820 or so till a hundred years later Mormonism spread around the world. So Christianity isn't the one true religion, Mormonism is."
You just moved the goalposts. Are we arguing that Christianity/Mormonism is the one true religion, or are we arguing that their founders were real people?
That Christianity spread rapidly is not evidence that it is true, but is rather evidence that its founders existed.
Similarly, that Mormonism spread rapidly is not evidence that it is true, but is rather evidence that its founders (Joseph Smith, Brigham Young) existed.
I never said or suggested that the words of Jesus could be taken without really needing Jesus himself. And the devil take you for saying that I did.
Semantics. Here's what you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
What you said in the first paragraph is true of course. One can agree with the principles espoused by Christianity whether or not one believes that there was a Jesus who taught them.
Semantics.
So if someone chooses to believe Jesus didn't exist then one doesn't need Jesus, correct?
So if someone chooses to believe Jesus didn't exist then one doesn't need Jesus, correct?
No, not correct. An unbeliever can believe that one should for instance 'do unto others what you would have others do to you,' but since he hasn't placed his faith in Christ he is still unsaved and separated from God.
Again, I never said nor implied that one doesn't need Jesus.
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.
