Was Jesus even here?

[seeker]

I keep reading little snippets from people here saying that there is alot of evidence that Jesus wasn't even a real person...let alone God. I wish I had time to search this site and others on the internet for that information but unfortunatly I only have internet access here at work for now. So if anyone could just post up some links, or just point me in the direction of some of this "proof" I would appreciate it. From what I have gathered so far on this site it seems the only written text about a man named Jesus is from the Bible. Outside of that there were no other written documents about him. Interesting if true.

 

I also read a bunch on the Gnostic Bibles (the lost Gospels) last night at Barnes and Noble. At first they seemed credible. But then I read some rebuttles from Christian's about these "lost gospels" and they did have some great points. So once again I'm lost. :>(

[Checkmate]

I keep reading little snippets from people here saying that there is alot of evidence that Jesus wasn't even a real person...let alone God. I wish I had time to search this site and others on the internet for that information but unfortunatly I only have internet access here at work for now. So if anyone could just post up some links, or just point me in the direction of some of this "proof" I would appreciate it. 

Jesus Never Existed is a good start.

[Amethyst]

Read "The Jesus Mysteries" and "the Book Your Church Doesn't Want You to Read" (yes, those are actual titles).

[Guest Iconoclastic1]

There's a documentary called The God Who Wasn't There about this very subject.

 

If you're really interested you can buy a copy online by clicking the link. It might also be on torrent sites if you happen to, uh, roll that way. I've watched it, I think it's very good and certainly entertaining but certain points aren't examined as closely as I would have liked.

 

An aquaintance from another board also did a great deal of work on this subject, here are the fruits of his labor: An Examination of the "Evidence" for Jesus

[Brother Jeff]

Brother Earl Doherty is one of the better known and respected proponents of the Mythicist viewpoint. His site is here:

 

http://www.jesuspuzzle.com/

 

This Wiki page on the subject is great too:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus-Myth

[Antlerman]

I keep reading little snippets from people here saying that there is alot of evidence that Jesus wasn't even a real person...let alone God.

Another way to put it is there is really no credible evidence "for" Jesus existing, either as just some unremarkable person that was later deified, or especially as some supernatural god/man who walked the earth raising the dead, healing the blind, and making a big stir throughout all of Jerusalem. My favorite axiom is: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof”. This is where believing the Bible literally about Jesus meets its biggest failure. It only has itself and later sympathetic believers who make the claims.

 

I agree with Brother Jeff in referring Doherty's research on this subject. It has some real merit to explaining some of those major discrepancies in early Christian writings, but it is not the end all argument on the subject. Historicists have some points too, but that certainly doesn't make a possible historical Jesus, the Jesus of the later gospels, walking on water and whatnot. Evangelicals can only legitimately point to faith in the Bible and sympathizers for support.

 

Good luck. It's a fascinating subject!

[Fweethawt]

I found this site to be pretty fascinating. ---> The Unspoken Bible

 

Scroll down where it says Astrology—The Real Bible Code. The author of that site goes into great detail showing how a lot of the stories in the bible "evolved" over the years into what we have today from stories about the stars (constellations) thousands of years ago.

 

It makes more sense to me than anything I've ever found.

[Mythra]

Hi Seeker

 

When I first started to examine christianity critically, I assumed that Jesus had really been a man physically on this earth. I just figured that his story was embellished over many generations of telling until the gospel story ended up as we know it today.

 

After a little bit of studying and investigation, I no longer see it that way. The evidence led me to believe beyond all doubt that Jesus began as a concept of theology, mythology if you will, and later developed into a historical character. I am thoroughly convinced of it today, and it was a life-changing realization for me.

 

Another fine resource that I haven't seen listed yet is "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man" by Robert M. Price. This book reveals a look at the gospels and reveals things that no christians are aware of.

[Guest Joseph]

Hi Seeker

 

When I first started to examine christianity critically, I assumed that Jesus had really been a man physically on this earth.  I just figured that his story was embellished over many generations of telling until the gospel story ended up as we know it today.

 

Much akin to the various figures in our history who have been given an almost god-like appearance by followers. Look at the mythos surrounding the cherry tree and almost god-like respect that most Americans given to Washington, when the cherry tree event is KNOWN to be a fabrication. God forbid that in a few hundred years we forget it is a fake and it is accepted as history, heh.

 

That a man is far removed from his historical setting, his historical attitude, and his historical teachings (first hand) and into a book which is written by those that did not even know him personally...and mostly influenced by a man (Paul) who never even met him and who then placed him equal to God against Jewish tradition, and Christianity is born.

 

I have no problem when a Jewish Rabbinical scholar who claimed that God is One and that we are to call no man our "Father" for we have one Father in Heaven. In fact the majority of teachings which are attributed to Jesus actually come from well known sources such as Hillel's teachings, especially the golden rule and the summation of the scripture (love thy brother as thyself...all else is commentary). That a paganesque version syncretized to accept godman ideas of the day developed within the pagan masses and was then adopted by the rulers of that ancient time is not without merit. There are various groups which claim that the Church's version is nothing more than a bastardized understanding of what the historical Jewish Jesus (Yehshua) would have taught if existing.

 

After a little bit of studying and investigation, I no longer see it that way.  The evidence led me to believe beyond all doubt that Jesus began as a concept of theology, mythology if you will,  and later developed into a historical character.

 

I have no problem with a rabbi walking around during the first century trying to setup a messianic following. Such is rationally possible.

 

I have a huge problem with the demi-godmanism found represented in the NT which is nothing more than a corruption of Judaism toward a roman/persian influence of dualism and which elevates a man to God status against what all Jewish scripture teach, like the YHVH God of the Jews just "forgot" that He didn't share His glory with another or some other bad joke played upon mankind's unquestioning minds.

 

I am thoroughly convinced of it today, and it was a life-changing realization for me.

 

Another fine resource that I haven't seen listed yet  is "The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man"  by Robert M. Price.  This book reveals a look at the gospels and reveals things that no christians are aware of.

 

One site that really got me thinking was what Jewish Rabbi's have to say about the Christian godman:

 

http://www.messiahtruth.com/response.html#mythos

 

Another one is the paganism found within Christian history, rites, and traditions:

 

http://www.medmalexperts.com/POCM/index.html

[BLACKGRAVITY]

good links all... thx.

[dario]

I keep reading little snippets from people here saying that there is alot of evidence that Jesus wasn't even a real person...let alone God. I wish I had time to search this site and others on the internet for that information but unfortunatly I only have internet access here at work for now. So if anyone could just post up some links, or just point me in the direction of some of this "proof" I would appreciate it. From what I have gathered so far on this site it seems the only written text about a man named Jesus is from the Bible. Outside of that there were no other written documents about him. Interesting if true.

 

I also read a bunch on the Gnostic Bibles (the lost Gospels) last night at Barnes and Noble. At first they seemed credible. But then I read some rebuttles from Christian's about these "lost gospels" and they did have some great points. So once again I'm lost. :>(

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

First off, I see that you are getting a lot of links and information that deal with Jesus' inexistence. But you also need to look at the information that prove in Jesus' existence. In the end, it will be your decision whether or not Jesus really lived. There will always be back-and-forth arguements for the proof, or disproof, of Jesus. One side gives "proof" into why Jesus was real. The other side then gives their "proof" into why your "proof" is not credible. This occurs on both sides and seems to never end. I could give you proof into why Jesus lived. Someone then will disprove my proof by providing proof of their own. I then check out their proof, and find out that their "proof" isn't really proof at all, but rather a weak attempt to discredit Jesus. This always occurs on both sides, so remember that in your search.

 

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus. I then read essays written by atheists that dissect this book down to nothing. Of course, in my mind, a lot of their "proof" into why certain things never happened, were very weak arguements. So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal. (I think thats the word I want to use) Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

[Amethyst]

There is nothing that definitively proves his existence. You are kidding yourself if you think there is.

[Vixentrox]

And even if there was evidence, so what? Doesn't mean he was a god anymore than David Koresh or any other nutcase was.

[Amethyst]

Well, true. Look at Jim Jones or any other cult leader. They may claim to be god, or a "prophet" of god, or whatever, but that doesn't mean they are.

[seeker]

First off, I see that you are getting a lot of links and information that deal with Jesus' inexistence.  But you also need to look at the information that prove in Jesus' existence.  In the end, it will be your decision whether or not Jesus really lived.  There will always be back-and-forth arguements for the proof, or disproof, of Jesus.  One side gives "proof" into why Jesus was real.  The other side then gives their "proof" into why your "proof" is not credible.  This occurs on both sides and seems to never end.  I could give you proof into why Jesus lived.  Someone then will disprove my proof by providing proof of their own.  I then check out their proof, and find out that their "proof" isn't really proof at all, but rather a weak attempt to discredit Jesus.  This always occurs on both sides, so remember that in your search. 

 

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus.  I then read essays written by atheists that dissect this book down to nothing.  Of course, in my mind, a lot of their "proof" into why certain things never happened, were very weak arguements.  So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal.  (I think thats the word I want to use)  Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Yea I've read The Case For Christ also. I was told by a Christian (he's in his 50's) that this book would answer all my "scientific/historic" questions about Jesus. After I read the book I felt even stronger that this faith is made up and is given so much merit only because of human beings NEED to believe in SOMETHING other then what we are shown here on earth. The author in my opinon was not trying to DISprove Jesus like he said he was. From the way he described himself and the way in which he "received christ" it appeared to me that he was searching and hoping to find that Jesus was who he says he was. Not the opposite. The questions he asked that were "answered" to me were NOT answered like he claims they were. The explanations....sucked for lack of a better term. I had more questions after reading that book then I did before I read it! I've been dating a Born Again girl for the past 5 months which is what led me into this whole topic.

 

I've gone to Bible Studys' with her, church, met with Pastors, you name it. I've heard their side and all I see are desperate people who fear questioning anything in life. I'm not trying to talk shit, or judge (even thougth I'am) but case by case, every Christian I meet I can almost imediatly tell WHY they believe. No parental figure, boyfriend converted them, girlfriend converted them, and honeslty here in SoCal it seems like the "cool" thing to do. (I recently moved here from NY where I don't EVER remember hearing about Born Again's). None of them have even thought of the questions that I'll raise up. Not even the Pastors. They look at me like I have 3 heads. I've said it before and I'll say it again. The ONLY REASON ANY religion (or non-religion's...the Christian's say they aren't a religion because they don't follow any rules.....another crock of shit if you ask me) is because I'AM AFRAID OF WHAT HAPPENS WHEN I DIE!!!! Plain and simple. I admit if fully.

 

I'm scared shitless that when I die there is NOTHING, just black, empty nothingness (funny how I describe NOTHING....like I know its black and empty... haha). Or that I'm going to burn in a fire for eternity. That scares me. ALOT. So how could I ever accept a faith that scares me? And one that tells people that the earth is 6000 years old? That people speak different languages because God broke a tower that was being built and threw the people around the world? Are you kidding me?

[white_raven23]

First off, I see that you are getting a lot of links and information that deal with Jesus' inexistence.  But you also need to look at the information that prove in Jesus' existence.  In the end, it will be your decision whether or not Jesus really lived. 

<snip>

 

Brian Dario

 

 

Really?

 

So.....the whole "you could be hellbound for eternity for not believing" thing rests entirely on whether or not we "DECIDE" to believe Jesus really lived?

 

Is truth and fact really so wonderfully arbitrary?

 

Having a "well belief is entirely up to you" attitude is a touch apathetic considering the ultimate outcome that is supposedly at stake.

 

You don't seem particularly worried, which tells me you don't really buy into it either. No Christian really does. If they truly did.....they wouldn't be sleeping very well. Fear for everyone's souls would keep them up at night.

[Guest Joseph]

First off, I see that you are getting a lot of links and information that deal with Jesus' inexistence.

 

Since that is what he was asking for, it makes sense that such information is what would be provided.

 

But you also need to look at the information that prove in Jesus' existence.

 

There is none.

There are mystical and mythical texts written by indirect non-personal followers of him and/or the majority of text which was written by a man who never met him at all (Paul). The majority of claims made by Christianity are not even spoken of by Paul who taught his followers to simply ignore evidence which conflicts their world view from being truthful (such as when he says to ignore the facts that the genealogies of Jesus invalidate him as messiah).

 

In the end, it will be your decision whether or not Jesus really lived.

 

Actually, not really. You see there is "reality" and then there is "pretend world."

 

Just because you think Santa is real as a child doesn't make him real.

Just because you might think (without any rational evidence) that a demi-mangod existed doesn't mean he did.

 

Outside the very corrupted, manipulated, mistranslated, and added to New Testament record, there is little to no evidence of this man's existence from others. That is the number one reason that Christianity must first setup the claim of faith because it is an unseen and undemonstrated irrational claim outright.

 

There will always be back-and-forth arguements for the proof, or disproof, of Jesus.

 

There will always be back-and-forth arguments for the proof, or disproof, of Santa.

 

The problem is that some people lack the rational ability to understand what is "actual" evidence and what is merely based upon assumption and faith alone. Mythological stories which include fantastical happenings do NOT lend themselves to rational believeability any more so than you would accept the stories of Hercules as literal and historical.

 

One side gives "proof" into why Jesus was real.

 

You just showed your hand, but it is to be expected as your entire argument was an argument from ignorance from the get go.

 

Anyways, it is not "one side gives "proof" into why Jesus was real." It is "one side provides a very corrupted, manipulated, fantastical, and mistranslated textual reference of a man who within it may have claimed to be god under some translations while at the very same instance offering zero, nada, NO evidence other than their text."

 

They then use circular logic to "prove" anything about this man. "This text claims to be written by God, the book claims this precept, therefore it is true because it claims it." Outside this world view, the entire thing is utter stupidity. Of course the three bears existed if you only hold to the story of the three bears as being true.

 

The other side then gives their "proof" into why your "proof" is not credible.

 

While silence from history can lead to bad conclusions, it is very much an incredible problem for the Christian that there is no evidence outside of contrivances and false additions to the records. (Such as the blantant addition by a Christian follower into Josephus.)

 

This occurs on both sides and seems to never end.

 

Sure it does.

When a person stops their blind following of creeds due to enculturation and looks at the evidence alone, then there is little rational reason to follow the claims of the New Testament record especially in light of how that record has been manipulated up through the ages.

 

I could give you proof into why Jesus lived.

 

False claim outright.

Since you can not even give evidence beyond the NT record that he even existed, then to extrapolate that you could offer evidence beyond conjecture and personal biased enculturated nonsense as to the "why" of a man's existence is utter crap. And in light that you might actually try to say that a human life can be used to pay for the sins of mankind I'd just like you to know that such a premise is in totality against every single law that the Jewish God gave to mankind, it takes an exceptional amount of cognitive dissoance to remain a Christian in today's world.

 

(snip utter lunacy)

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus.

 

One of the most laughable appologet works ever written. It bascially goes down to "the bible says it so it happened." Laughable. Does not even go into historical evidence at all, relies greatly on the remarks of CHRISTIAN scholars (auto-bias anyone?) and such utter drivel. Does not ask a single hard question: Why do no contemporaries of his generation speak of him except/unless you take into account blantant manipulations/additions to text by followers?

 

(snip)

So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal.  (I think thats the word I want to use)  Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

 

Just because there exists a claim about a given topic does not remove the utter lunacy of taking something without evidence. Neither does it invent a "proof" for the existence of the demi-god found within the NT record. In fact, it speaks toward the idea that this story was nothing more than adopted from various other stories which were given down through time about "god men."

[Checkmate]

You don't seem particularly worried, which tells me you don't really buy into it either. No Christian really does. If they truly did.....they wouldn't be sleeping very well. Fear for everyone's souls would keep them up at night.

White_raven23, thanks for the awesome set-up. The following is a post on RepentAmerica.com. A Letter From An Atheist (to Christians just like dario) --

 

"You are really convinced that you've got all the answers. You've really got yourself tricked into believing that you're 100% right. Well, let me tell you just one thing. Do you consider yourself to be compassionate of other humans? If you're right, as you say you are, and you believe that, then how can you sleep at night? When you speak with me, you are speaking with someone who you believe is walking directly into eternal damnation, into an endless onslaught of horrendous pain which your 'loving' god created, yet you stand by and do nothing.

 

If you believed one bit that thousands every day were falling into an eternal and unchangeable fate, you should be running the streets mad with rage at their blindness. That's equivalent to standing on a street corner and watching every person that passes you walk blindly directly into the path of a bus and die, yet you stand idly by and do nothing. You're just twiddling your thumbs, happy in the knowledge that one day that 'walk' signal will shine your way across the road.

 

Think about it. Imagine the horrors Hell must have in store if the Bible is true. You're just going to allow that to happen and not care about saving anyone but yourself? If you're right then you're an uncaring, unemotional and purely selfish (expletive) that has no right to talk about subjects such as love and caring."

 

This is an excerpt from an e-mail sent to Evangelist Ray Comfort of Living Waters.

 

Repent America

 

It never ceases to amaze me how Christians can simultaneously claim that "these are the end times", and yet they don't appear to be TRULY concerned with the fate of sinners. (Not unless ARGUING with EX-Xians counts as "concern".) In fact, they appear to be even MORE invested in worldly riches and power than are atheists. If this is The End, then why keep storing up goods? Why keep working? Why not sell all, take up your cross and follow Jesus?

 

Answer: They don't REALLY believe this "gospel" either.

[Lunar Shadow]

QUOTE

(snip utter lunacy)

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus.

One of the most laughable appologet works ever written. It bascially goes down to "the bible says it so it happened." Laughable. Does not even go into historical evidence at all, relies greatly on the remarks of CHRISTIAN scholars (auto-bias anyone?) and such utter drivel. Does not ask a single hard question: Why do no contemporaries of his generation speak of him except/unless you take into account blantant manipulations/additions to text by followers?

 

 

Wasn't "A case for Christ" debunked anyway it was called "Challenging the Verdict: A Cross-Examination of Lee Strobel's "The Case for Christ" by Earl Doherty

 

ref here

 

The funny thing is that Xtians are saying "look at both side of the argument you need to consider carfully but when it comes to they themselves don't. and not only that but they get their panties up in a bunch when you call them on it IMHO

[Mythra]

Yea I've read The Case For Christ also. I was told by a Christian (he's in his 50's) that this book would answer all my "scientific/historic" questions about Jesus. After I read the book I felt even stronger that this faith is made up and is given so much merit only because of human beings NEED to believe in SOMETHING other then what we are shown here on earth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I read that book too, and found it weak and contrived. Only difference is, I read it as a christian.

 

Dario makes it sound like the things leading a person to believe Jesus was real and the things that lead a person to believe otherwise are all equal. Not so.

 

Mythicists can answer any "proofs" that historicists can come up with. Just recently Amanda referenced a site that had lots of quotes from non-biblical sources. The site quoted Flavius Josephus, Tacitus, Origen, and several others as proof for Jesus having existed. Every one of these quotes is either a huge stretch or (in a few of the cases) outright deceit that any scholar worth his salt is aware of.

 

If Dario has "proof" of Jesus having been a man, bring it on. One "proof" at a time. Start a new thread if you like, dario. Convince us Jesus was a man.

 

Jesus is a religion based on a big (a REALLY BIG) lie.

[SkepticOfBible]

First off, I see that you are getting a lot of links and information that deal with Jesus' inexistence.  But you also need to look at the information that prove in Jesus' existence.  In the end, it will be your decision whether or not Jesus really lived.  There will always be back-and-forth arguements for the proof, or disproof, of Jesus.  One side gives "proof" into why Jesus was real.  The other side then gives their "proof" into why your "proof" is not credible.  This occurs on both sides and seems to never end.  I could give you proof into why Jesus lived.  Someone then will disprove my proof by providing proof of their own.  I then check out their proof, and find out that their "proof" isn't really proof at all, but rather a weak attempt to discredit Jesus.  This always occurs on both sides, so remember that in your search. 

 

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus.  I then read essays written by atheists that dissect this book down to nothing.  Of course, in my mind, a lot of their "proof" into why certain things never happened, were very weak arguements.  So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal.  (I think thats the word I want to use)  Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Well, let's suppose Jesus did exist. But as one studies the bible, it is clearly shows that Jesus was not the messiah because he failed to fulfill major prophecies regarding the messiah

 

1)The Messiah's arrival will be a final, one-time event. (Jer 23:5-6) There is nothing in the OT about a Messiah requiring two trips to do complete the job

2)Israel will never again be oppressed. (Is 11:9)

3)The Messiah's arrival will be known by all and will not need evangelists (Zechariah 14:9. Jeremiah 31:34)

4)Building the Third Temple in Jerusalem (e.g., Ezek 37:26-28)

5)Bring Everlasting World PieceWorld peace (e.g., Is 2:4)

6) In the messianic age, the Law would be followed completely(Ezek 37:24).

 

MessiaH Wanted(Jewish Website)

 

 

Here is what the Bible says about the new covenant which is promised by God to his people.

 

Jer 31:27-36

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast.

And it shall come to pass, that like as I have watched over them, to pluck up, and to break down, and to throw down, and to destroy, and to afflict; so will I watch over them, to build, and to plant, saith the LORD.

In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge.

But every one shall die for his own iniquity: every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the LORD:

But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.

Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is his name:

If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever.

 

Note the key items of the new covenant:

** A covenant is a contract.

Under the new covenant, God will reaffirm his existing laws with the people under a new contract.

 

** In the days of the new covenant, each person will die for their own sin.

This is confirmed by Ezek 18:20-28, where God declares that each man will die for his own sin and will redeem himself through his own actions and faithful obedience to God's Law.

 

** Unlike the old covenant, God will put his existing Law directly inside people and will write it on their hearts so that they follow it without fail. Each person will be in direct contact with God's will.

 

** No longer will people need to be taught by others about God, for each person will know God personally and directly without the need for any intermediary.

 

** God will remember the people's sin no more, as their sins will be forgiven.

 

Also note the following:

There is no mention of any type of human sacrifice needed to die for the sins of others.

There is no mention of God's existing laws being replaced, canceled, or done away with.

 

New Revised Covenat of Chrisitianity

 

So as I said Jesus may have existed but he certainly was not the messiah as christians want him to be. Atmost christianity is a fairly poor ripoff of Judaism.

 

Pritish

[Vigile]

I've read The Case for Christ, which gave very convincing proof into the realization of Jesus.  I then read essays written by atheists that dissect this book down to nothing.  Of course, in my mind, a lot of their "proof" into why certain things never happened, were very weak arguements.  So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal.  (I think thats the word I want to use)  Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

 

If he was god, the most powerful being in the universe; if he actually did rise from the dead; if etc... etc... shouldn't it be much, much more obvious that he did in fact exist? In other words, if all these things were true, why is the case for either side equally strong to the point one must shrug his/her shoulders as you suggest? Such is not the case with numerous historical figures who sported far less claimed credentials.

[Vigile]

Answer:  They don't REALLY believe this "gospel" either.

 

That's right. They only claim to believe. Not a damn one of them, save for those who are brain damaged or otherwise mentally incapacitated, truly believes. If they were honest with themselves and others they would admit that they don't believe that limbs can grow back, that the dead can still be raised, that their friends and relatives truly are going to burn in hell, and countless other tenets of their supposed faith.

 

When it comes right down to it, the only thing that any of them truly do believe in are the things that can't be tested. They believe in things like Jonah, christ's resurrection, and other fairy tales that can't be repeated. Faith is merely a mental exercise. When it comes time to put some legs on it, hardly a one of them really believes.

 

Why? Because it's just not possible. Common sense and reality stop faith dead in its tracks.

[Mythra]

If he was god, the most powerful being in the universe; if he actually did rise from the dead; if etc... etc...  shouldn't it be much, much more obvious that he did in fact exist?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's just like thumpers who were claiming that Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment for New Orlean's promotion of sinful behavior. I saw footage of a christian church there that was completely obliterated. If god was real and really wanted to convince anyone, why not wipe out the city, but leave the christian churches unscathed? Maybe they should have smeared blood on their doors ahead of time, just in case.

 

If god does exist, he's a weird some-bitch.

[Antlerman]

<snip>

So whatever the case, just realize that this will be an endless debate, and that for every arguement made by Christians or non-Christians, their will be a re-buttal.  (I think thats the word I want to use)  Search with an open heart.

 

Brian Dario

Let me attempt to rephrase your argument for Seeker: "There's lots of information that goes back and forth, and back and forth, and it's really, really hard to sort it all out because it just makes your head hurt, and what's more it's all so confusing you just can't tell what's true! So I guess you just have to believe what feels good to you."

 

How's that? Sound about right?

 

Ok, I think Seeker was asking for information because he wanted to study, not feel his way to objective truth through subjective emotions. There is no point to study if you do that, now is there? You need to do a study on how we arrive at reliable information. Once you do that, it because quite easy to see how weak all the "evidences" are for fantastical tales of the supernatural - whether it's crop circles, alien abductions, Jesus walking on water, invaders from outer space, a God who burns his creation with vengeful fires, or scarey ghosts who live your closet.

 

Yep. Go ahead and feel your way to an informed decision. Even so, it's pretty easy to dismiss your beliefs through just intuition, without even really needing to use your mind. Either way, you're clinging to primitive superstitions that just don't fit reality anymore.