qadeshet Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 This probably belongs in the other thread, but I will state it here since this is currently where all the action is. I am but a casual observer who periodically reads articles and opinions on whether or not Jesus existed and I seem to notice one thing that I have yet to see bear any actual truth. I keep seeing people say that there is a plethora of evidence that proves that Jesus existed, yet I have yet to actually see any of this actual proof. What am I missing? As Ficino (and others) have regularly pointed out, the bible is propaganda. It even says it is. So, to me, the onus rests on the ones who believe the bible to have any validity to show that what it says is even partially true. We cannot verify the authors, so it is very difficult to know their intent. I have yet to see any non-christian, non-Jewish early source that isn't heavily disputed. Several posters in this forum have presented what I consider to be significant obstacles for those who think he was real. If the evidence was so solid and plentiful, where is it? It just seems that if it was so clear cut and easy to see, why do I not see it? I study and change human behavior for a living. People act much the same now as they did then. I know what people say and do now and I see how words get twisted and how interpretations are peddled and thrown around. There is no doubt in my mind that this also happened in biblical NT times. This behavior likely shaped the books and beliefs of those people, much as it still does today. This gets lost in the shuffle of historicity and literary scholarship. Human behavior shapes the world more than most people give it credit for. The power of acceptance and inclusion is very strong and to buck the norm, especially in academia, can have grave, career killing consequences. This clearly takes an even higher risk when faith and emotions are involved. I know how much I struggled with losing my faith, I could only imagine how much more difficult it would be as an expert in this field to deconvert and switch sides. I also am aware that, for some disciplines, it isn't really important to go against the flow and, because of that, there is simply no need to make waves and to study or put any effort into refuting the main belief system. It might be a bum wheel in their particular discipline, but the wheel works and there isn't any reason to get dirty trying to fix something that works for now. I also understand that people like me often want things to be true simply because, in some ways, it validates how we feel about having left our faith. It would be a significant "victory" for me to know that Jesus wasn't real, simply because it would ultimately validate my deconversion. I will be the first to admit bias in that regard. However, I still have to say that, as objectively as I try to look at this topic, I have not seen what I consider to be conclusive evidence that Jesus was a real person, let alone the son of god. I am open to change my mind, but at this point, I am leaning towards myth. Yoy don't see this "evidence" because it isn't there. And, unlike TrueScotsman, you don't put your faith in the Bible Scholars magical "concensus". This mighty "consensus" doesn't raise my own estimate by even 1%. But don't you think that, if Joseph of Arimathea had really buried Jesus, then isn't it likely that he would also have left, maybe, some kind if inscription? " Here lies Jesus of "Timbuktu", the famous miracle worker." They even made a movie about such a find. If not proven to be a fraud, then this would be significant. According to Bible Scholars, this is the question that must not be asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qadeshet Posted June 22, 2016 Share Posted June 22, 2016 This probably belongs in the other thread, but I will state it here since this is currently where all the action is. I am but a casual observer who periodically reads articles and opinions on whether or not Jesus existed and I seem to notice one thing that I have yet to see bear any actual truth. I keep seeing people say that there is a plethora of evidence that proves that Jesus existed, yet I have yet to actually see any of this actual proof. What am I missing? As Ficino (and others) have regularly pointed out, the bible is propaganda. It even says it is. So, to me, the onus rests on the ones who believe the bible to have any validity to show that what it says is even partially true. We cannot verify the authors, so it is very difficult to know their intent. I have yet to see any non-christian, non-Jewish early source that isn't heavily disputed. Several posters in this forum have presented what I consider to be significant obstacles for those who think he was real. If the evidence was so solid and plentiful, where is it? It just seems that if it was so clear cut and easy to see, why do I not see it? I study and change human behavior for a living. People act much the same now as they did then. I know what people say and do now and I see how words get twisted and how interpretations are peddled and thrown around. There is no doubt in my mind that this also happened in biblical NT times. This behavior likely shaped the books and beliefs of those people, much as it still does today. This gets lost in the shuffle of historicity and literary scholarship. Human behavior shapes the world more than most people give it credit for. The power of acceptance and inclusion is very strong and to buck the norm, especially in academia, can have grave, career killing consequences. This clearly takes an even higher risk when faith and emotions are involved. I know how much I struggled with losing my faith, I could only imagine how much more difficult it would be as an expert in this field to deconvert and switch sides. I also am aware that, for some disciplines, it isn't really important to go against the flow and, because of that, there is simply no need to make waves and to study or put any effort into refuting the main belief system. It might be a bum wheel in their particular discipline, but the wheel works and there isn't any reason to get dirty trying to fix something that works for now. I also understand that people like me often want things to be true simply because, in some ways, it validates how we feel about having left our faith. It would be a significant "victory" for me to know that Jesus wasn't real, simply because it would ultimately validate my deconversion. I will be the first to admit bias in that regard. However, I still have to say that, as objectively as I try to look at this topic, I have not seen what I consider to be conclusive evidence that Jesus was a real person, let alone the son of god. I am open to change my mind, but at this point, I am leaning towards myth. Jesus' existence should have no bearing on your deconversion. A man existed who said a bunch of false things, or he was a myth. It's bullshit regardless. We're waiting for you to make your case in the other thread. Remember, we put no faith in Bible Scholars. Hope you remember that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkepticalDaniel Posted July 7, 2016 Share Posted July 7, 2016 If it's the historical Jesus, I don't know. Because know one knows what he actually said or did. But if we're talking about the Jesus of the Gospels, yes! That figure IS evil? Why? Well just look at this little gem: Luke 19:27 "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerranceG Posted July 9, 2016 Share Posted July 9, 2016 "Good" is completely subjective. But all we really know for sure is that he was a Jewish apocoliptic prophet who was executed for claiming to be the king of the Jews. The modern interpolation of thousands of years of evolving dogma doesn't give an accurate picture of him. Even if it was accurate in every detail, is it good to claim to be God and sacrifice yourself to yourself so you will forgive the people that you created fucked up in the first place. Hmmm...I'm not seeing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quinntar Posted July 12, 2016 Author Share Posted July 12, 2016 "Good" is completely subjective. But all we really know for sure is that he was a Jewish apocoliptic prophet who was executed for claiming to be the king of the Jews. The modern interpolation of thousands of years of evolving dogma doesn't give an accurate picture of him. Even if it was accurate in every detail, is it good to claim to be God and sacrifice yourself to yourself so you will forgive the people that you created fucked up in the first place. Hmmm...I'm not seeing it. lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts