Christianity Is Fiction

[mymistake]

A reasonable conclusion.

 

Right now in India there are hundreds of different men (and for all I know perhaps an occasional woman) who have followers and claim Christ-like powers.  These people are gurus and the popular ones will have plenty of Koolaid-drinking witnesses who will be happy to testify about seeing the magic powers first hand.  Today we have access to airplanes, cameras and all that science has to offer.  But most people don't jump on a plane to India.  The rest of the world ignores these gurus.  That is because Christ-like claims are ridiculous.  People who investigate are either disappointed or swindled.  Most of us couldn't be bothered and that is with flesh and blood religious leaders for whom we can verify they actually exist.

 

Why would such claims of magic become more believable if they came in an anonymous book?  It's a book that has been rewritten and reedited countless times.  It's a book for which we have no original copy so we have no idea what it originally said.  And the stories in the book do not square with each other.  This book is about a religious leader who is gone.  His deeds were witnessed by illiterate men called disciples.  Even the names of the disciples change from one story to the next.  And it spawned one of the most divided religions the world has ever seen.  Even Christians cannot agree about the core meaning of their own religion let alone all the lose ends.  None of these things adds credibility to the claim.

 

The Bible speaks of preposterous events.  The reasonable thing to do is to dismiss Christianity as fiction.

[Geezer]

The lack of a historical Jesus as well as the lack of any supporting evidence that indicate the gospels are historical events would lead a reasonable person to conclude Christianity is based on myths, legends, and folklore. 

 

Dr. Robert M Price writings reflect he has taken that position too.

[Orbit]

I have always understood the Bible as a highly biased Jewish history that reflected their culture and religious beliefs--of the Bronze Age. Aside from general ethics (thou shalt not kill, etc) it's just not useful in the modern world.

[Wololo]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

[Guest afireinside]

I have always understood the Bible as a highly biased Jewish history that reflected their culture and religious beliefs--of the Bronze Age. Aside from general ethics (thou shalt not kill, etc) it's just not useful in the modern world.

Orbit, even if there was compelling evidence that Jesus existed, he still solved nothing and only added another dimension of pain and hate to the world. Either way it's a stupid belief system.

[Overcame Faith]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

Then I suppose you are willing to concede that the perpetrators of 911 also have the truth about Allah since they were willing to die as they proclaimed, "Allah Akbar" as they flew the planes they stole in Allah's name into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon convinced they were doing their God's will. A willingness to die for a cause does not prove the righteousness of the cause, only the individual's belief in its truth.

[Deva]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

You don't really want to go there, do you?  9/11 ring any bells?

[Guest afireinside]

Jonestown??

[Guest afireinside]

World War 2 Germany?

[mymistake]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

 

 

You mean Christos?  It's not a name.  It is a title.  It takes a leap to assume that Christos is Jesus of Nazareth or Jesus Christ of Paul's stories.

 

 

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted.

 

Does religious tradition count as evidence?

 

 

 

Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

You have no objective evidence that they even existed.  Well obviously somebody had to join the cult first but you are talking about the mythical disciples.  You take it on faith that they never recanted because you have faith.

 

 

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

There have been millions of crazy religious nuts who died because of their beliefs or for their beliefs.  Terrorists do it all the time.  It doesn't add any credibility to Islam.  Christianity should be no different.

[Guest afireinside]

Dying for your beliefs is par for the course when it comes to people with unreasonable philosophies.

[Orbit]

 

I have always understood the Bible as a highly biased Jewish history that reflected their culture and religious beliefs--of the Bronze Age. Aside from general ethics (thou shalt not kill, etc) it's just not useful in the modern world.

Orbit, even if there was compelling evidence that Jesus existed, he still solved nothing and only added another dimension of pain and hate to the world. Either way it's a stupid belief system.

 

I wouldn't disagree with you

[Roz]

Take the exact opposite of what people would do in the name of religion.

 

Would you kill?  And who would you kill?  The OT and the NT provides us with the answers.

[HitchWithMe]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

Of course roman records retell stories of Greek gods under roman names...no one takes these seriously because they were just new twists on old myths. Jesus seems to have lived a life path strangely similar to Egyptian messiahs or dyonysus a Christ figure from Greek mythology. It's quite possible that Jesus was a 1st century radical who became intwined with the myth that was popular in the day...

 

Your account of apostles / believers being true to the death is not one I take lightly because it was something I came back to myself as a believer time and time again...and if it was historical it would have helped me stay there. However, if it's not possible to prove that Jesus ever lived (at least the Jesus described to us in the bible) - it's more difficult to take records of people dying on account of an ahistorical person seriously.

 

My heart goes out to you my friend because I know from where you are arguing and your are right to say that you're seeing the same old arguments - so am I. The problem was I didn't realize I'd only been reading half the story. If you're tired of hearing the same old arguments from us folks try Robert Price, Bart Erhman- and for your "to the death followers" quandary get Candida Moss's "the myth of persecution- how early Christians invented the story of martyrdom" - I wish that book had been around when I was still hanging on by the misconception which is anchoring you

 

Yours is the joy of knowledge - don't neglect the other side of the story like I did for so long

[DoubtingNate]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

From my understanding, we can infer from history that:

 

1. Someone named Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

2. This person created a disturbance in the Temple around the time of passover

3. He was executed under Pontius Pilate.

 

The other stuff, like turning water into wine or resurrected on the third day - is heresay, speculation, rumor, fabrication, whatever you want to call it.  But not historically verified by those sources; only by the texts selected for canonization by church leaders, and the church's self proclaimed authority.

[Blood]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

There are also "Roman records" of Romulus. 

 

People die for religious beliefs all the time. Nothing unusual about that, especially not for a death cult like Christianity -- a religion that specifically focuses on how great it is to die. 

 

You have no idea how many Christians recanted, given the choice between that or capital punishment. 

[Geezer]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

 

Apparently you are aware of writings that have eluded scholars for centuries. I would very much like to read those Roman records of Jesus. Please post links to these documents. The supposed references about Jesus found in some of Josephus writings have been proven to be forgeries, so Josephus and his writings have been eliminated as a reliable source. What else ya got? 

 

if you know who wrote the gospels that would apparently make you the only person on earth that does. Scholars know that nobody named Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John wrote them. Those names were added much later. If you are aware of any first hand eyewitness writing about Jesus or any of the apostles you are the only one on earth that has that information, Care to share? 

 

Many of the NT epistles attributed to Paul are proven forgeries. How did forged letters make it into an inerrant book? You should send copies of the documents you are aware of to Dr. Robert M. Price as proof that all of his years of study and research have been in vain. I'm sure he would appreciate the opportunity to correct his numerous books and the years of study that has apparently lead him to make erroneous conclusions. You might send a copy to Dr. Bart Ehrman too among many others. 

 

If your information is proven to be correct you will become famous overnight because you will have destroyed hundreds of years of research. 

[Blood]

 

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

From my understanding, we can infer from history that:

 

1. Someone named Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

2. This person created a disturbance in the Temple around the time of passover

3. He was executed under Pontius Pilate.

 

 

Nope, we cannot infer that. The anonymous authors responsible for that data were writing narrative theology, not history. Narrative theology is a poorly-understood genre in which fictional characters interact with historical, or historical-like figures, in historic time. Examples include the Book of Esther, the Book of Daniel, and all of the Gospels. Recording history was never the aim of any of the authors of these books.  

[Geezer]

 

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

From my understanding, we can infer from history that:

 

1. Someone named Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

2. This person created a disturbance in the Temple around the time of passover

3. He was executed under Pontius Pilate.

 

The other stuff, like turning water into wine or resurrected on the third day - is heresay, speculation, rumor, fabrication, whatever you want to call it.  But not historically verified by those sources; only by the texts selected for canonization by church leaders, and the church's self proclaimed authority.

 

 

 

I am unaware of any corroborated evidence that confirms any of the three incidents you noted. As far as I am aware those events are all based on tradition rather than historical fact, but I am always open to examine new information. What documentation has lead you to believe those were historical events rather than religious tradition? 

[mymistake]

 

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

From my understanding, we can infer from history that:

 

1. Someone named Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist.

2. This person created a disturbance in the Temple around the time of passover

3. He was executed under Pontius Pilate.

 

The other stuff, like turning water into wine or resurrected on the third day - is heresay, speculation, rumor, fabrication, whatever you want to call it.  But not historically verified by those sources; only by the texts selected for canonization by church leaders, and the church's self proclaimed authority.

 

 

In ancient Palestine there were several historical men named Jesus.  None of them matched the stories from the gospels or Paul.  In my opinion the closest you can get is Rabi Jesus ben Sarach who lived a few centuries too soon.

[francesco]

i wonder about pntius pilate

He was roman official but chickened out by a group of civilians???

He had roman soldiers, the strongest soldier at that time, at his command but afraid of a group of unarmed people?

And he was fine, not fired or punished for his chickened out action

[Aries256]

yeah I dont believe one ounce of the whole jeebus story.

[◊ crazyguy123 ◊]

i wonder about pntius pilate

He was roman official but chickened out by a group of civilians???

He had roman soldiers, the strongest soldier at that time, at his command but afraid of a group of unarmed people?

And he was fine, not fired or punished for his chickened out action

 

Unarmed or not, a bunch of angry religious nut-jobs are always scary.

[Aries256]

 

i wonder about pntius pilate

He was roman official but chickened out by a group of civilians???

He had roman soldiers, the strongest soldier at that time, at his command but afraid of a group of unarmed people?

And he was fine, not fired or punished for his chickened out action

 

Unarmed or not, a bunch of angry religious nut-jobs are always scary.

 

just the level of stupidity alone is scary

[Aggie]

Except there are Roman records of Jesus. There are thousands of other texts. It's the same tired old arguments.

 

Except the followers (original witness) died horrible gruesome deaths, and none of them recanted. Who dies for something they have the remotest doubts about...or worse, something they know to be false? None of the original followers recanted. None.

 

I'd be interested in studying the claims of those people from other countries and cultures. I wonder how many of them died horrible deaths for their beliefs.

 

Wololo,

 

How many of the disciples died for their beliefs in the Scriptures exactly?  

 

I don't think the Gospels are reliable, but the traditions of what happened to the 12 disciples are really dubious.  There are traditions that they died in different places in different ways.  With the different lists of  the 12 disciples in the NT itself, it's hard to say if "the Twelve" wasn't just a construct to match the 12 tribes of Israel anyway.  Paul was apparently willing to die for Jesus-- but he had never met the guy and never saw a resurrected body.  Many early Jewish Christians (from Palestine especially) rejected Paul's writings as false.

 

There have been Catholic martyrs, Orthodox martyrs, Protestant martyrs, Cathari martyrs, Buddhist martyrs, Sufi martyrs, Sunni martyrs, Shi'a martyrs, Jewish martyrs, Zoroastrian martyrs, etc., etc.  Generally these folks thought that their faiths had been verified by amazing miracles.  

 

The early Catholics found it irksome that the heretics were martyred by the emperors too.  (Eusebius of Caesarea discusses this in his Ecclesiastical History if interested.)  Later Catholics were brutal towards all sorts of "heretics."

 

Religions encourage people not to doubt when, IMO, they really should.  Here's a quote from a Zoroastrian dogmatic text, for instance:

 

“And it should be said: ‘I am without doubt concerning the Good Religion which the Mazda-worshippers have accepted.  Not for the love of body or soul, not for better or longer life, not for threatened death, will I renounce the good religion of the Mazda-worshippers.  I am without doubt concerning it.  I do not praise other religions, nor honour them, not believe in them…’” From Selected Precepts of the Ancient Sages

 

A noble and rousing sentiment.  Encourages loyalty and bravery.  But, there's still no good reason to believe that Zoroastrianism is a revealed religion from the "Wise Lord" Ahura Mazda, IMO...