Leahbekah Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Not sure if this should be here, in life, or in the arena :/ But it's general, so I'm sticking with that... Does anyone ever watch or listen to debates (or have you in the past)? I thought it would be a good idea to watch a debate with Dan Barker, because I've enjoyed some of his work and youtube videos. I've never been the type to watch a debate. I usually gather the info myself from both sides, one at a time, and analyze it over time. I thought watching a debate would be easier/faster. WOW, I was so wrong. I'm actually struggling with the feeling of being self-deluded about this whole deconversion. I mean, don't get me wrong, I tell myself repeatedly that Jesus is the incarnate god of the OT, and that should be enough to send a person running..... but, I get really hung up on the "evidences" for the NT writings. I know there are supposedly parallel stories/myths/legends, but when I watched the debate and it was the Christian historian's turn...... he smoked Barker, and Barker made himself look like a complete fool. I was so embarrassed (luckily alone), and it really made me stop and think, "what if I'm wrong?" Not the condescending type of "what if" that Christians give, but.... the real one. What if I'm wrong? What if I'm listening to the wrong "experts"? Anyone got advice? Have you gone through this? How can you figure out what a "reputable" source is? I'm feeling very confused, and definitely humbled. Thanks all! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leahbekah Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 Btw, this is the debate I'm talking about. I got to the part where Barker cross exams the opponent... it's embarrassing as well. My internet went out at that point and I never finished it (yeah, I know, but I was watching it to begin with because I was struggling!) http://m.youtube.com/?#/watch?v=-XKOlOnRsD4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Jeff Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Sister Becky, I understand your questions and fears, but you can rest easy. The Gospels are myth! They were all written decades after the events they purport to describe by anonymous authors, and the Jesus of the Gospels (he is presented very differently in all four Gospels) is also a myth. Sorry Brother Barker got smoked publicly, but this glorious video by Dr. Richard Carrier should help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILldt2XHZw0 Check out these links also: http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/bibleanalysis.html http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/jesus.html Glory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Jeff Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Remember too that the basis of Christianity is the Genesis myth about two obviously mythical people (Adam & Eve), a talking snake, and magic inner-spook-killing fruit from a magic tree. If the first Adam is a myth, then the second Adam (Jesus) must be also. It's all ancient mythological nonsense with no basis in reality! Glory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EyesOpened Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Brother Jeff is very correct Becky. The Bible not only conflicts with history and science, it conflicts with itself. Read Genesis 32:24-30. Crazy stuff happens there where God has a physical wrestling match with Jacob and GOD CANT BREAK JACOBS HOLD!! Just ridiculous!! The Bible is chalked full of stuff like this. Do yourself a favor and download this app: The Skeptic's Annotated Bible. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hi Becky There is debate about whether the biblical Jesus was a myth, or a real person, or a composite of different people. To me it doesn't matter because even if he was a real person whose life approximated that told in the bible, I'm still not convinced he was god, or that there is a god. There are so many resources I would like to be able to point you to, that I don't know where to start. Stick around ex-c and you will learn a lot, use the search function, ask all the questions you want. Remember Dan Barker is a great speaker, author, foundation president, and musician, but I haven't seen any of his debates so I can't comment on whether he is good at that or not. However, there are plenty of atheists who are very good at it. BTW your link doesn't take us to the debate... can you try posting it again or saying who he was debating? I'm pretty sure I could take his opponent's arguments apart if I watched it. We can also give you some pointers on how to fact check what debaters claim, etc. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I was not able to get to the debate from the link. Please don't tell me that it was a debate with William Lane Craig. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VacuumFlux Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Debates are more about the charisma and skill of the speakers than the quality of the arguments. A rousing, passionate speech can, while it lasts, convince me of something I utterly disagree with. Once it's over and I come back to my senses, I wonder what just happened. A mediocre speech can still make me nod along with the speaker, feeling the human social desire to fit in and make other humans feel happy, and I can actually feel sad and slightly guilty when I don't agree with the content of their words. That was actually one of the big issues I had with deconverting. Christians were always so... sincere, so passionate. Right wing (religious and political) talk show host pour such certainty and occasionally vitriol into their words that I couldn't imagine them not having strong beliefs to back them up. The people on the other side that I first met (I have since learned there are passionate idiots of every viewpoint) didn't throw that much emotion into their words so for a while I had a hard time taking them seriously or even paying attention to the content of their words. I think... that's slightly intentional on the part of christians, and part of why (from the christian point of view) you're supposed to surround yourself with passionate people ("strong in their faith") who think just like you - it's hard to analyize the content of the words when they're always phrased in strong emotional language. That was just a long way of saying that I don't find debates particularly useful for determining truth. They can be entertaining, they can be a good display of public speaking skills, but at best they just give you a starting point for doing your own research. The truth of the claims isn't determined by the skills of the person presenting them. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GraphicsGuy Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 What if I'm wrong? What if I'm listening to the wrong "experts"? Okay. What if you are wrong? As for the "experts", their life is not your life. They don't know you, they have not experienced what you have experienced. You have not lived their lives. You have lived and must continue to live your own existence. It simply cannot be any other way. Those "experts" don't have all the answers for life either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leahbekah Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hm, if you go to YouTube the debate is Debate: Jesus: Myth or Messiah? (James White vs Dan Barker) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I started to look at the debate but couldn't stand watching very much -- poor sound quality and way too much verbiage! Dan Barker is not a trained historian. I don't think he has any business trying to defend the "Jesus was a myth" position in a debate. It sounds from the title of the debate as though there was sort of a false dichotomy. The choices are not merely between two possibilities, i.e that Jesus was a myth or that he was a real dude who was also the Messiah. There are many possibilities on the "real dude but not the Messiah" pole of what perhaps is best formed as a four-possibility choice: lunatic liar Lord myth (I.e. adding "myth" to C.S. Lewis' famous three poles.) I don't know whether "magos/magician" would count as a fifth possibility. That was Morton Smith's contention, and it was what we hear from the first Jews whose views are noted outside the NT. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sylensikeelyoo Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Everyone here is absolutely right. It is likely that Jesus was just a legend. He probably did exist, but was he really God? Well, what evidence did he leave us that he was God incarnate? A few magic tricks? And furthermore, why didn't Jesus stick around a little longer and show the politicians who had him executed that he was risen from the dead, and dictate to them specific things to write? why do all we have is four gospels written 70 to 100 years after his death by people who had never met him in real life? It seems that an event THIS HUGE for mankind would be a little more important to God and therefore he would take extra care to publicize this event a little better than secret appearances to his closest disciples. And so what if we are wrong? Does a little bit of scrutiny and utilization of the thinking and reasoning abilities God gave us justify him torturing us for eternity? If it does, then he is a very EVIL God, and is UNWORTHY of our devotion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hm, if you go to YouTube the debate is Debate: Jesus: Myth or Messiah? (James White vs Dan Barker) As a policy I don't watch youtube videos that are longer than 15 minutes. However I can't imagine a halfway competent atheist losing a debate about religion against a Bible believing Christian. The evidence is completely one sided. Was there something in particular that you could mention here so that we can go over it to your satisfaction? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burny Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I don't understand what Jesus existence has to do with anything. Joseph Smith existed. Why don't you feel compelled to be a Mormon? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
♦ ficino ♦ Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Was it that Barker tried and failed to demonstrate that Jesus was a myth and not a historical person, and the other guy sort of leaped to the conclusion that therefore the gospels are reliable and Jesus must have been the messiah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Was it that Barker tried and failed to demonstrate that Jesus was a myth and not a historical person, and the other guy sort of leaped to the conclusion that therefore the gospels are reliable and Jesus must have been the messiah? Ah yes, the old historical Jesus issue. Was he really the historical Jesus Christ if his last name wasn't Christ? How about if his first name wasn't Jesus? And then when we admit he was not popular? Does it change if he didn't do any miracles? And he didn't do most of the things or say most of the things attributed to him in the gospels. Is he still the historical Jesus if he was just some crazy homeless wantabe cult leader named Joshua? You probably passed a guy like that sitting on the sidewalk outside your local grocery store. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blood Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Hm, if you go to YouTube the debate is Debate: Jesus: Myth or Messiah? (James White vs Dan Barker) The problem starts with the false dichotomy of the debate title. There are more than two possibilities here, and I don't think the concept that Jesus is an entirely mythical literary creation is a tenet of Dan Barker's (correct me if I'm wrong). The "scholarly consensus" is that Jesus was a man who died by crucifixion, and did not come back from the dead. His followers then built a death cult around him. That isn't controversial or even debated in scholarship. Using an audience mic makes this thing sound like it was recorded in an empty tomb. So I'll pass on listening. Can you point out what you think are White's strongest points? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leahbekah Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 GAHH! Had a reply typed up and accidentally backed out of the page!To summarize what I tried to post.... it's not so much that White had such a strong argument, which he did, but that if Jesus was real then I'm *almost* back to square one. I don't know any reasons why the gospels aren't reliable, why the "evidences" for the resurrection aren't actually evidences. When I read an atheist's analyses of how a Christian apologist would build his case for the resurrection, I feel like all they're saying is, "Nu-uh!" Maybe it's just too ingrained in me that the "evidences" are strong. People like Lee Strobel, or the lawyer who analyzed the information and whether or not it would hold up in court (the book Jesus on Trial, I think)... that's what I was into as a Christian. So, I really have no where to go in my thoughts as to how this information is false, or doesn't make sense. Maybe I just need to be asking for references to what helped everyone else see that the Christian apologist doesn't really have a leg to stand on. To me, if Jesus is real and there's reason to believe he was resurrected..... well, I'm just confused. It's like.... those last big beliefs that keep hanging on. (prophecy, resurrection, etc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leahbekah Posted June 10, 2015 Author Share Posted June 10, 2015 Sister Becky, I understand your questions and fears, but you can rest easy. The Gospels are myth! They were all written decades after the events they purport to describe by anonymous authors, and the Jesus of the Gospels (he is presented very differently in all four Gospels) is also a myth. Sorry Brother Barker got smoked publicly, but this glorious video by Dr. Richard Carrier should help. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILldt2XHZw0 Check out these links also: http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/bibleanalysis.html http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/jesus.html Glory! I will be checking these out, Jeff --- thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 GAHH! Had a reply typed up and accidentally backed out of the page! To summarize what I tried to post.... it's not so much that White had such a strong argument, which he did, but that if Jesus was real then I'm *almost* back to square one. I don't know any reasons why the gospels aren't reliable, why the "evidences" for the resurrection aren't actually evidences. When I read an atheist's analyses of how a Christian apologist would build his case for the resurrection, I feel like all they're saying is, "Nu-uh!" Maybe it's just too ingrained in me that the "evidences" are strong. People like Lee Strobel, or the lawyer who analyzed the information and whether or not it would hold up in court (the book Jesus on Trial, I think)... that's what I was into as a Christian. So, I really have no where to go in my thoughts as to how this information is false, or doesn't make sense. Maybe I just need to be asking for references to what helped everyone else see that the Christian apologist doesn't really have a leg to stand on. To me, if Jesus is real and there's reason to believe he was resurrected..... well, I'm just confused. It's like.... those last big beliefs that keep hanging on. (prophecy, resurrection, etc) If it turns out that Muhammad was a real man would that make you think Islam is true? Maybe Muhammad made up a wild story just so that he would get rich and have lots of women. Now if you are with me so far why wouldn't a real Yesuah be some charismatic dude who noticed that preaching makes better money than working as a peasant? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FreeThinkerNZ Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 There is only one book/document that claims Jesus rose from the dead. There are no other documents claiming this. The gospels were written 70-100 years after the events they claim took place. Don't you think that if this really happened, proper records would have been kept? It would have been massive news. People would have recorded it at the time, and made sure that all those documents survived. The burden of proof rests with the ones making the claim that it happened. Their evidence has not been compelling enough for me to believe. I still have an open mind though, anytime biblegod wants to re-grow an amputee's limb, then I will carefully consider that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Jeff Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The Gospels are religious tracts, not history. For instance, Matthew 27 contains this very amusing passage: 50 Jesus, when he had cried again to the Sky Him with a loud voice, Croaked in the Spook. 51 And, behold, the veil of the temple was magically rent in twain from the top to the bottom; and the earth did magically quake, and the rocks magically rent; 52 And the graves were magically opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept magically arose, 53 And came out of the graves after his magical undeadening, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many and scared the shit out of them. Now, humor aside, do you really think this actually happened? The anonymous authors of the Gospels couldn't even agree on what happened at the most important event in the Christian religion, or in world history, if it were actually true. The resurrection accounts in the Gospels are hopelessly contradictory. And in addition to that, the empty tomb, also very important to the Christian story, is a myth. Dan Barker's Easter Challenge http://ffrf.org/legacy/books/lfif/stone.php The Empty Tomb myth http://www.rejectionofpascalswager.net/notomb.html According to the Gospels, mental illness is caused by demons. Of course, we know now that that is not the case. The Gospels contain several stories of Jesus performing miraculous healings and raising the dead. These stories were written decades after the alleged events. Why should we take them seriously as literal history? A couple of book recommendations: Gospel Fictions by Randel Helms http://www.amazon.com/Gospel-Fictions-Randel-Helms/dp/0879755725/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433905340&sr=8-1&keywords=gospel+fictions How Jesus Became God by Bart Ehrman http://www.amazon.com/How-Jesus-Became-God-Exaltation/dp/0061778192/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433905449&sr=8-1&keywords=bart+ehrman I read Gospel Fictions years ago. I have not yet read "How Jesus Became God", but I can recommend it on the strength of Bart Ehrman's reputation as a biblical and Jesus scholar. Hope all this helps. Glory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Castiel233 Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 No one really knows if Jesus is real or not. Jesus Himself as quoted in the Bible all but denies He is God. "Why do ye call me good, there is none good but God" Jesus prayed to God , as a human would do, making requests The Bible makes claims we know are false. Jesus said that His followers would be able to do all that He did and then some.....believers cannot even turn water into wine, let alone bring dead people back to life and fly If you never read the Bible or came into contact with Christianity would you "know" that God existed just by living a day to day life........of course not. The William lane Craigs,Lee Strobels and other published "warriors for Jesus" make a very nice living selling Christian doctrine while refusing to live up to Christian doctrine. Modern Christians are full of shit, far more concerned with what other people are doing, rather than doing what the Bible says they should be doing. What the Bile says Christians should do: Give up all their wealth Hate themselves Hate their families Be an enemy of the world Seek cures through prayer , not through medical advice Drink poison unharmed What Christians actually do Bitch about gays and abortion Rarely read the Bible To add, I would love to see a Christian (during a debate) be offered a poisonous drink to test his faith.......purely to hear the reasons of refusal. There was an issue recently of a product being discussed on TV. The product was claimed to be dangerous to humans (some sort of weed killer) Anyway , one of its defenders said it was so safe a human could drink it and not be harmed. The station then poured him a glass of it and asked him to drink it.....which he refused.......classic....people are so full of shit 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Furball Posted June 10, 2015 Share Posted June 10, 2015 The William lane Craigs,Lee Strobels and other published "warriors for Jesus" make a very nice living selling Christian doctrine while refusing to live up to Christian doctrine. Modern Christians are full of shit, far more concerned with what other people are doing, rather than doing what the Bible says they should be doing. That is so very, very accurately true. The hypocrisy just oozes out of all the churches and their leaders today. The puritans would have called today's christians pagans. Give it up for the christian authors though. They make millions per year selling a fictional myth to the masses. I wish i would have thought of it.... -Cat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leahbekah Posted June 11, 2015 Author Share Posted June 11, 2015 Busy week here, I'm sorry I haven't been able to reply like I want to, but I do want to say that I'm compiling a list of what has been suggested for reading, and I did watch Carrier's lecture (cool stuff there). I appreciate the thought provoking comments and help being steered in the right direction for this type of study 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts