Not A Christian

[Lycorth]

None of those versus show Jesus in a negative light, the sites are just obviously very biased and created by people who want a reason to dislike the guy. He did more good...why ignore that?

 

What good did he do? The Golden Rule? Hardly unique, as this quote from Confucius, older than the Jebus myths by about 500 years, indicates:

 

"Do unto another what you would have him do unto you, and do not do unto another what you would not have him do unto you. Thou needest this law alone. It is the foundation of all the rest."

 

He's not my God.

 

Sure sounded like you were defending him, claiming it's unreasonable for God to be expected to move mountains for the "whims" of people. Are you dodging the question or did I honestly misunderstand you?

 

Actually I find Jesus to be quite different from the God portrayed in the OT. The OT God is a Jealous God and a God of war, Jesus is the opposite, the zealots asked him to join them but he would not. His followers tried to fight for him to save him but he would not allow the bloodshed. No, Jesus is no monster...he's far from it. I suggest trying a less biased site to get more information on Jesus.

 

I was a Xian for over 27 years. I don't need to go to any "less biased" websites or anywhere else for information, thank you. Perhaps you ought to try that.

 

Jebus is no different than the god of the OT. By his own words he condemns himself; in John 10:30 he plainly states that " I and the Father are one." He therefore claims to be the exact same being as the one who drowned the earth, burned innocent cities alive, ordered rape and murder and theft at the hands of his Israelite goons, and so on. According to Xian myth, Jebus is the same as Yahooweh.

 

Or how about Luke 19:27 - "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." Yeah, real nice guy you've got there - and no ordering of bloodshed either, huh? Bullshit. And don't try to say that that verse is just part of some parable, because it comes at the end of one and is clearly meant to clarify what the parable teaches.

 

No, Jebus is a monster - the true devil of Abrahamic mythology.

[Kirangel]

You do know that new cults and new made up ideas come into existence even today, and people fall for them. An oral tradition doesn't make made up stories more true. For instance, does Claude Vorilhon really tell the truth in his book The Book Which Tells the Truth? Did he really meet aliens? If he didn't, why does his followers, the Raelians believe him? It's after all a first hand account! Do you believe him, or his followers? I doubt that you do, and I wonder if you apply the same kind of skepticism to the Bible?

 

Thanks for the vote of confidence though, from you and Piprus too.

No problemo. I respect people that starts asking the hard questions.

 

I've questioned the bible a lot, have I extensively looked into the matter of whether or not Jesus existed? No. On and off over a few years so that I know some of the arguments for and against, but I have not devoted enough time to it. For me to adequately look into it I would have to read articles and books written from both perspectives. I've seen a few articles going both ways. Like I said before, I still come to the conclusion that Jesus existed, but over all it's the stories in his life that I believe contain many truths. There are tons of figures in history that we could question, but people single out Jesus because they want something against him. If there are any good books or sources that people can suggest then that would be great. I'll get to them eventually but right now I'm sort of in political mode, I've got to start brushing up for the presidential elections. I'm reading 'Where have all the leaders Gone?' by Lee Iacocca...I like the guy.

[Jun]

Actually I find Jesus to be quite different from the God portrayed in the OT. The OT God is a Jealous God and a God of war, Jesus is the opposite, the zealots asked him to join them but he would not. His followers tried to fight for him to save him but he would not allow the bloodshed.

 

Hang on there! But Jesus IS God right? And together with the ghost-guy they ARE a trinity right? So how can Jesus be the opposite of himself?

 

Would not allow the bloodshed or knew better than to take on the Romans?

 

No, Jesus is no monster...he's far from it.

 

Matthew 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.Luke 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.Sounds like a monster to me.

[Guest]

Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Philo the philosopher, Josephus, Lucian...

 

And, IIRC, none of those writers mention jesus specificly, except for Josephus, and we have all agreed he dosen't count.

 

And none of these writers, IIRC were contempory of jesus, and I thought that was your whole argument. I'm not suprised, your not the first person to make this claim and then provide the same old tired sources.

 

What would make an extra-biblical account of jesus credible? Well, it would have to be more than the mere mention of christians, that's for sure. To continue the analogy, just because there are rabid fans of Star Wars is no proof that Darth Vader ever was a real person.

 

How about someone documenting the 3 hour eclipse that happened when jesus was on the cross? I believe Pliny the Younger had published a book detailing all astronomical happenings of the first century, and he makes no mention of any eclipse that broke all records of time!

 

How about a contemperory historian detailing the day that the dead rose from their graves and walked around Jerusalem while jesus was on the cross?

 

Or how about we just get a record of a Yeshoua being executed during the proper passover week? Again, I believe we have a record of a guy, but I think he was killed by the Romans either 100 years before or after the needed time frame. Someone like Han Solo can probally fill in some of these details I am forgetting here.

[Ouroboros]

 

Cornelius Tacitus: born 56, 26 years after Jesus supposed death, whatever he knew would have been hearsay

Suetonius: born 69, same thing

Pliny the Younger: 63, same thing

Philo the philosopher: contemporary to Jesus, but did he ever speak of Jesus? Can you point to which book and what he said?

Josephus: born 37, not contemporary either

Lucian: born 120! Well, that's a real stretch. (the "first sci-fi" author, a novelist?)

 

So I don't see the contemporary evidence we're looking for.

 

There are more, from later times so I'm assuming you don't want those listed. The two that I'm familiar with are Josephus and Tacitus. The Pauline epistles were mostly written before the gospels, just 25 years after the death of Jesus, their authenticity hasn't really been challenged.

Very true. Pauline letters, most of them (exception of a few) supposedly written by Paul. But notice something with Paul's writings? He claims that he never saw Jesus in person. No, he goes even further, he's proud that he never saw Jesus in real, but only saw Jesus in visions. That was his "big thing" that Jesus was not a physical person but a spiritual person. So how can Paul be any evidence of a physical person, when Paul never met the physical person???

 

What do you trust from history if characters mentioned could all be in a fiction?

You have to go on multiple accounts, and you do have to keep a certain level of doubt, for all historical characters. We have statues of Julius Caesar, and coins with his picture, and friends AND enemies writing about him. Where are the coins, pictures and non-Christian eye-witnesses???

 

Remember, it's not only eye witnesses to Jesus that is missing, but eye witnesses to the Pentecostal event, or the dead walking in the city, or the earthquake, or the 5000 listening to Jesus etc... No one have heard one single thing about this guy in the whole Roman empire, except for Paul's visions, and some 40 year later "Gospels". It's extremely scant for such a "larger-than-life" person.

 

No one lived back then, who knows how twisted our version of history really is. There is a vendetta against Christianity, people want to disprove him they want proof that it is all false, I cannot trust the few scholars out there today if I believe that their sole purpose is to go out and prove Jesus false. People will see what they want to see. Most scholars think that Jesus did exist, I believe that it is more likely that he did and stories grew around him. I wouldn't try to prove the bible with the bible, but no one here is trying to do that, you can use the bible to support the existence of Jesus along with other text, and the fact that information of him must have been circulating around by word of mouth.

Some scholars lose their faith when they discover how little evidence there is, and how weak it is. Look for Doc Robert Price.

 

The funny thing is that I'm not (and most atheists, or non-christians) out to "prove that Jesus did not exist", but we try to look for the evidence, and when we see how fragile it is, we keep an open mind that there is a huge possibility that this man never existed, or that he was just some teacher or maybe a terrorist that got more attention than he deserved.

[Ouroboros]

Actually I find Jesus to be quite different from the God portrayed in the OT. The OT God is a Jealous God and a God of war, Jesus is the opposite, the zealots asked him to join them but he would not. His followers tried to fight for him to save him but he would not allow the bloodshed. No, Jesus is no monster...he's far from it. I suggest trying a less biased site to get more information on Jesus.

I suggest that you start listening to Doc Bob Price. He's a Bible scholar, was part of the Jesus seminars, and is (what I would like to call) a spiritual atheist. (He's like a talking wikipedia on red-bull.)

[Ouroboros]

Or how about we just get a record of a Yeshoua being executed during the proper passover week? Again, I believe we have a record of a guy, but I think he was killed by the Romans either 100 years before or after the needed time frame. Someone like Han Solo can probally fill in some of these details I am forgetting here.

I think you and I and Varokhar are on the same level!

 

If we want more details we have to call in the big guns, like Antlerman or mwc, they know this stuff.

 

But you're absolutely right, it's not only secondary evidence for Jesus but for all the other things he supposedly did, or even more, what happened afterwards.

 

One thing that kind of concerned me a while back, was that when the 500 disciples got the Holy Spirit over them and they started to preach the gospel in all languages. Nothing came out of it. No records of the travelers from near and far, writing home about the miracle, or even writing about the gospel or even taking the gospel back home. Basically it was a quiet, non-explosive, big bang!? Jesus and Pentecost: The largest non-events in history.

[Vigile]

The legacy the Jesus myth left in its wake should be enough to show that Jesus was not a positive, inspirational figure. Even if you can cherry pick a few nice sentiments, I'm curious why this figure so inspires you when there are so, so many other people and words of inspiration that completely dwarf the words attrtibuted to the Jesus figure.

 

If Jesus existed I don't see why he was any more an important inspirational figure than David Koresh. On the other hand, I can give you a list of works that are far more positive and inspirational. Pirsig, Marquez, Emerson, Thoreau, just to name a few, have positive legacies and their works are far more inspirational and profound than anything the bible has to offer.

[Grandpa Harley]

A few more of the reasons that there aren't more scholars questioning the existence of Jesus

 

1) Tradition - going back to when questioning the source of the faith was a good way of not dying of old age in bed, through to the present, where it could just cost you your career going against 'consensus'

 

2) Narrowing of disciplines: A Roman scholar wouldn't move into biblical scholarship since it's not his area of interest. A Biblical scholar isnlt likely to say 'Well, the whole Jesus thing was crap' since there goes their bread and butter... they become Classical literature scholars in one move (despite most having no idea of Grecian theatrical styles - Matthew being a prima facie Greek Play narrative... wholly alien to Aramaic thought that had no theatrical traditions)

[Taphophilia]

I think it's the cultural mindset that people buy into without questioning or researching. Just because untruths are propagated into a culture doesn't mean they are true.

 

Untruths:

 

1. There is plenty of evidence that Jeuss existed.

 

2. Jesus was unique and he brought a new message to the world.

 

3. The Bible is profound.

 

4. The Bible contains eyewitness accounts.

 

5. The gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, Jesus diciples.

 

6. The Bible contains all the answers to any and all problems anyone could ever have in life.

 

7. The US is a Christian nation founded by Christians.

[Jun]

Untruths:

 

8. Christianity is a peaceful religion.

 

9. Christianity respects the beliefs and religions of others.

[Ouroboros]

10. Christianity is the basis for morality

[♦ nivek ♦]

Kir,

 

A more modern idea to sink teeth into:

 

John F. Kennedy was shot and killed in front of hundreds, if not thousands of on-scene witnesses. Millions more have seen the murder via tape, TV, film footage, most notably the Zapruder digitized and cleaned film scenes. Even happened not quite a human generation ago, and yet there are those who do and do so well, argue what *really happened*.

 

Folks still living who were witnesses, people who gave volumes of testimony, goobermint investigation via the Warren Commission, page after page of real_life_real_time people then, still living.

 

Want to fire off a good argument? Get involved with some real_tinfoil_hatters and bring up JFK and see how many opinions from mild to wild exist about an incident that is still in the live_corporate_memories of Americans.

 

If JC did exist, the story was not documented at_that_time and moment by any known historian, the events and and surroundings of JC of bible fame are a seemingly after the fact tale woven to fit the *facts* the various sects needed to fit.

 

2k years prior things such as Roman laundry and shopping lists, guard rosters, civil texts, grafitti exist in quantity enough that we can postulate the Romans documented damn near everything in their Empire. Seems that the materials about JC have just gone *poof* when he supposedly did..

 

There are no as_yet_discovered or acknowledged texts from such an important time in the history of that part of world indicating that JC was more than a later construct.

 

If there is evidence that I am incorrect, would enjoy to have my knowledge expanded and proved to require rethinking my positions.

 

k, grassy knoll, FL

[Grandpa Harley]

Dammit, K, you're making me like you... stop it...

[DanInPA]

....but people single out Jesus because they want something against him.....

 

I think it would be more accurate to say that people single out Jesus (real or not) because the religion(s) inspired by belief in him have been detrimental to the human race for about 2000 years.

 

Dan

[Grandpa Harley]

One thing I like to piss Christians off with... Bob Geldof (of Live Aid fame) is an atheist...

[Lycorth]

....but people single out Jesus because they want something against him.....

 

I think it would be more accurate to say that people single out Jesus (real or not) because the religion(s) inspired by belief in him have been detrimental to the human race for about 2000 years.

 

Simple truth, simply stated

[Kirangel]

....but people single out Jesus because they want something against him.....

 

I think it would be more accurate to say that people single out Jesus (real or not) because the religion(s) inspired by belief in him have been detrimental to the human race for about 2000 years.

 

Simple truth, simply stated

 

eh, human beings have been detrimental to the human race. Christianity is just a tool that they have used.

[Legion]

eh, human beings have been detrimental to the human race. Christianity is just a tool that they have used.

I agree Kirangel.

[Kirangel]

Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Philo the philosopher, Josephus, Lucian...

 

Publius (or Gaius) Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56 – ca. 117)

 

Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, aka Pliny the Younger (63 - ca. 113)

 

Josephus, aka Flavius Josephus (37 – sometime after 100 AD/CE)

 

Lucian of Samosota (A.D. 120 - after A.D. 180)

 

In this number, there is not a single contemporary of this "Jesus of Nazareth" - not a one. Dude, you are accepting that a man named "Jesus of Nazareth" actually lived based on hearsay? Come on, now.

 

It's been documented, by other people then just Christians in the bible. Tacitus was both a historian and senator for the Romans, he recorded the existence of Jesus as history, others recorded the existence of Jesus as history. It's not like they waited 300 years or so, heard stories of this amazing man and then wrote it down. He died within 100 years of the death of Jesus. Stories of real events will travel by word of mouth through the generations, you can see this with the native populations in America, or maybe even your own family. I mean, I still hear stories of my great great great grandfather who fought in the civil war against the invading southern troops. It's much more likely that a man named Jesus actually existed and was recorded doing some of those things mentioned in the bible, and that some of the stories were exaggerated, or that rumors spread of greater things and people added that on to his life story.

[Vigile]

Christianity is just a tool that they have used.

 

Perhaps, but not all tools are made alike. Some, like chainsaws and blow torches, are much more dangerous.

[Lycorth]

It's been documented, by other people then just Christians in the bible. Tacitus was both a historian and senator for the Romans, he recorded the existence of Jesus as history, others recorded the existence of Jesus as history. It's not like they waited 300 years or so, heard stories of this amazing man and then wrote it down. He died within 100 years of the death of Jesus. Stories of real events will travel by word of mouth through the generations, you can see this with the native populations in America, or maybe even your own family. I mean, I still hear stories of my great great great grandfather who fought in the civil war against the invading southern troops. It's much more likely that a man named Jesus actually existed and was recorded doing some of those things mentioned in the bible, and that some of the stories were exaggerated, or that rumors spread of greater things and people added that on to his life story.

 

Nice tap dance around the hard facts I've offered. I expected no less from a defender of The Lord Enslaver

 

The difference between word-of-mouth stories about family members and the Jebus myths are that the family stories aren't used to make preposterous and illogical claims about life-forms for whom absolutely no evidence exists to verify their existence - or to terrorize people into believing them on pain of both earthly and eternal torture. For those, extraordinary proof is required to back up the extraordinary claims - and we're still waiting for the proof.

 

Yes, Tacitus wrote that people told him that a "man called Christus was crucified" - so what? We were all told that. The year matters not - all it is is hearsay, and even that passage by Tacitus is suspect. But whether or not it is true or an interpolation by Xian propagandists, the fact remains - it does no more to prove this Jesus of Nazareth character ever existed than the Santa stories prove a fat man flies from the North Pole every December 25th.

 

If this yahoo ever lived, then where are the artifacts? The personal effects? Things he made, if he was a carpenter? Didn't he write anything, or was the Scum of God an illiterate as well as a bastard?

 

If you want to insist that Jebus exists solely because people in ancient times spoke about and wrote about him, then fine - Odin exists as well. Do you agree?

[Kirangel]

Kir,

 

A more modern idea to sink teeth into:

 

John F. Kennedy was shot and killed in front of hundreds, if not thousands of on-scene witnesses. Millions more have seen the murder via tape, TV, film footage, most notably the Zapruder digitized and cleaned film scenes. Even happened not quite a human generation ago, and yet there are those who do and do so well, argue what *really happened*.

 

Folks still living who were witnesses, people who gave volumes of testimony, goobermint investigation via the Warren Commission, page after page of real_life_real_time people then, still living.

 

Want to fire off a good argument? Get involved with some real_tinfoil_hatters and bring up JFK and see how many opinions from mild to wild exist about an incident that is still in the live_corporate_memories of Americans.

 

If JC did exist, the story was not documented at_that_time and moment by any known historian, the events and and surroundings of JC of bible fame are a seemingly after the fact tale woven to fit the *facts* the various sects needed to fit.

 

2k years prior things such as Roman laundry and shopping lists, guard rosters, civil texts, grafitti exist in quantity enough that we can postulate the Romans documented damn near everything in their Empire. Seems that the materials about JC have just gone *poof* when he supposedly did..

 

There are no as_yet_discovered or acknowledged texts from such an important time in the history of that part of world indicating that JC was more than a later construct.

 

If there is evidence that I am incorrect, would enjoy to have my knowledge expanded and proved to require rethinking my positions.

 

k, grassy knoll, FL

 

 

Tell me something, how many executions did Romans document and keep and preserve, was it a common thing?

 

People like to make the assumption that because there have been no records found of Jesus during his life that that means that he did not exist. Most of the people did not like him or just did not believe in him, Romans would have regarded the ideas of the cult as superstitious. It’s more likely that stories of Jesus would have traveled by word of mouth instead of by being immediately documented.

 

I'm not saying that you fit into this category personally, but in my experience it seems like A LOT of people go after Christianity and Jesus because they have this sort of personal vendetta against the religion. They do not see the evidence because they expect the evidence to be clear and in the form of their choosing. Why do so many scholars accept Jesus as a historical figure? It’s because they see evidence for it, and not enough against.

 

I know many of you like to rule this out, I might put too much weight on it but do not overlook it so quickly. Oral tradition was something that was highly valued among ancient people, and in Judaism it is something that was highly respected. They have the written torah and the Oral torah, the latter was an oral explanation of the torah given to Moses by God. This is something that these people looked highly upon and really valued, Jewish law is based on both oral and written tradition. Just because events surrounding the life of Jesus were not written down during his actual lifetime, (or because we don’t have any surviving evidence of it) does not mean that he did not exist. Using that argument in itself is fallacious, events were recorded soon after.

 

It’s just simply much more plausible to conclude that there was an actual man whom the stories were based on rather then to believe that the elaborate stories were made up and spread as truth. People would most likely have retained knowledge of the original man. It's like with the stories of JFK, I can believe that there would be multiple stories, the history channel talked about some of them. But the fact that different theories were postulated doesn't take away from the actual event. I don't see how it fits as an analogy to whether or not Jesus actually existed.

 

 

People can deny it all they want, Jesus may not have existed, I’ll admit that but there is quite a bit of evidence in support of his historical existence. Since most historians and scholars do not support the theory of the Christ myth, the burden of proof lies upon the shoulders of those who claim otherwise. I have yet to see enough evidence to suggest that accepted history in this case is wrong.

 

Well, this isn’t exactly where I wanted the conversation to go, like I said before…the stories of Jesus are inspiring whether he existed or not.

[Kirangel]

Nice tap dance around the hard facts I've offered. I expected no less from a defender of The Lord Enslaver

 

The difference between word-of-mouth stories about family members and the Jebus myths are that the family stories aren't used to make preposterous and illogical claims about life-forms for whom absolutely no evidence exists to verify their existence - or to terrorize people into believing them on pain of both earthly and eternal torture. For those, extraordinary proof is required to back up the extraordinary claims - and we're still waiting for the proof.

 

Yes, Tacitus wrote that people told him that a "man called Christus was crucified" - so what? We were all told that. The year matters not - all it is is hearsay, and even that passage by Tacitus is suspect. But whether or not it is true or an interpolation by Xian propagandists, the fact remains - it does no more to prove this Jesus of Nazareth character ever existed than the Santa stories prove a fat man flies from the North Pole every December 25th.

 

If this yahoo ever lived, then where are the artifacts? The personal effects? Things he made, if he was a carpenter? Didn't he write anything, or was the Scum of God an illiterate as well as a bastard?

 

If you want to insist that Jebus exists solely because people in ancient times spoke about and wrote about him, then fine - Odin exists as well. Do you agree?

 

What hard facts? Why would there be artifacts of one man who was supposed to have lived 2,000 years ago?

 

The existence of Jesus is something that has been examined and accepted my the majority of historians and scholars. I will not assume their conclusions to be false simply because there is not every form of evidence known in existence to verify this. There is more support for his historical existence then not.

[Vigile]

People like to make the assumption that because there have been no records found of Jesus during his life that that means that he did not exist.

 

You are missing a huge and very important point here. You are correct that it is not valid to make the claim that he never existed. You can't prove a negative after all. But you are making the assumption that he did exist and you have absolutely no valid reason to do so. You obviously have an emotional attachment tied to whatever it is that Jesus means to you. This attachment is causing you to lose objectivity. The evidence you have provided is just the typical grasping at straws evidence that xians provide when backed into a corner.

 

With this utter lack of evidence for his existance, why would you make this statement?

 

It's much more likely that a man named Jesus actually existed and was recorded doing some of those things mentioned in the bible, and that some of the stories were exaggerated, or that rumors spread of greater things and people added that on to his life story.

.

 

So again, we can't make the negative claim that he didn't exist, but for you to claim that it is much more likely that he did exist is just pure and simple nonsense.

 

I'm simply asking you to be objective when you evaluate the claims, that's all.