News:

Welcome to our site!

Main Menu

Did Jesus ever exist?

Started by fencerider, November 17, 2016, 12:36:28 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

widdershins

Quote from: doorknob on November 17, 2016, 08:15:48 PM
I was gonna say it's news to me that historians believe jesus was a real person historically. I was informed that as mike says the serious historians do not believe he was based on a real man named jesus. Historically pretty much the whole bible is a fabrication.
From the Wikipedia page, the first line of the second paragraph reads "The vast majority of scholars who write on the subject agree that Jesus existed, although scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the biblical accounts, and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate."

That's the information I am going by, the same information I went by when debating Randy.  Big surprise, Christians are apparently all too happy to accept the consensus of a majority of historians when said historians are saying what they want to hear, but not so much when the majority of historians are saying that the gospels were written between about 40 and 100 years after the death of Jesus, literally 1 to 2 1/2 lifetimes in for the time.

Regardless what I would like, the information I have says a "vast majority", including secular historians, agree that he existed, so I accept it.  Unless someone has some information I do not that they would be willing to offer, I will continue to accept this as the historical consensus and, thus, the probable reality.
This sentence is a lie...

Mike Cl

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 11:43:45 AM
I said relevant.
And we are talking about a person not a tooth fairy.
What is relevant to you many not be relevant to me.  The jesus of the bible has as much actuality as the tooth fairy.  Both are fictional.
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 03:44:54 PM
What is relevant to you many not be relevant to me.  The jesus of the bible has as much actuality as the tooth fairy.  Both are fictional.
Obviously what is relevant or important to me may not be important to you. The teachings and example of the Christ are significant though seeing as how they are generally agreed upon and received in a positive manner by all societies.


Unbeliever

If the Jesus of the NT did exist, he wasn't such a great guy:


Realize that Jesus was a jerk
God Not Found
"There is a sucker born-again every minute." - C. Spellman

Mike Cl

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 05:33:19 PM
Obviously what is relevant or important to me may not be important to you. The teachings and example of the Christ are significant though seeing as how they are generally agreed upon and received in a positive manner by all societies.
That is only your opinion.  People cannot even agree what the teachings of your fictitious christ  are; nor if he is real or not.   
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 06:24:33 PM
That is only your opinion.  People cannot even agree what the teachings of your fictitious christ  are; nor if he is real or not.
Nonsense. I'm not speaking of an orthodox Christian's perspective or the division among those who claim to be Christian. I am speaking of the actual learned individuals of other faiths or schools of thought.

Mike Cl

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 07:19:25 PM
Nonsense. I'm not speaking of an orthodox Christian's perspective or the division among those who claim to be Christian. I am speaking of the actual learned individuals of other faiths or schools of thought.
I see.  Other faiths and schools of thought (whatever those and that is) are accurate whereas christanity is not.  Okay.  Let me see..............Bugs Bunny is not accurate, but Elmer Fudd and Daffy Duck are.  Gotcha. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 07:37:00 PM
I see.  Other faiths and schools of thought (whatever those and that is) are accurate whereas christanity is not.  Okay.  Let me see..............Bugs Bunny is not accurate, but Elmer Fudd and Daffy Duck are.  Gotcha.
All I'm saying is that the teachings and example of the man Jesus the Christ of GOD are generally accepted throughout the entire world and throughout time, atheists included. If you plainly deny this then I would say you are plainly being wilfully ignorant.

Peace

Baruch

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 07:41:17 PM
All I'm saying is that the teachings and example of the man Jesus the Christ of GOD are generally accepted throughout the entire world and throughout time, atheists included. If you plainly deny this then I would say you are plainly being wilfully ignorant.

Peace

In comparative religious terms, much of the ethical aspects of Jesus' mission are applauded ... in human terms (not divine terms).  What Jesus claimed to be, or what Paul claimed he was ... isn't very important to other religions ... though it is important within Christianity.  The Social Gospel of the 19th century is a bright light in human ethics.

In pre-Constantine times, even Jews applauded some Christian behavior (particularly compared to pagan behavior) ... that Christians not only provided social services for their own members, but for anyone in need.  This is more likely true, because Jews aren't in favor of Christianity.  Relations hardened after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 CE, then the destruction of Jerusalem again in 135 CE, then the rise of Orthodox Christianity under Constantine.  Christians were seen less and less Jewish over time, because they were.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Mike Cl

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 07:41:17 PM
All I'm saying is that the teachings and example of the man Jesus the Christ of GOD are generally accepted throughout the entire world and throughout time, atheists included. If you plainly deny this then I would say you are plainly being wilfully ignorant.

Peace
I am being willfully ignorant?  Well, as another fictional character said--Stupid is as stupid does.  The entire world knows of your fictional god and son????  Really???  And they have been known for the last several billion years as well????  Really????   Clearly empirical evidence does not enter into your world, does it.  And I am willfully ignorant.  :))))))
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 08:15:34 PM
I am being willfully ignorant?  Well, as another fictional character said--Stupid is as stupid does.  The entire world knows of your fictional god and son????  Really???  And they have been known for the last several billion years as well????  Really????   Clearly empirical evidence does not enter into your world, does it.  And I am willfully ignorant.  :))))))
Didn't say anything about people knowing of GOD since before written history. But now that you bring it up, yes.

Read the Zend Avesta then tell me that the fire of GOD isn't the son of GOD.

Humans would have had to have had been around in order to contemplate GOD. I don't think they were around billions of years ago though.


Mike Cl

Quote from: SGOS on November 18, 2016, 11:04:09 AM
As a religion, I'm not going to complain about that.  Metaphors are OK.  It's not a claim of literal reality.  As long as your interpretation isn't that it's also everybody else's interpretation, and that you realize that you're making a temporary interpretation based on an immediate need, that's cool.  I start getting skeptical when theists wander beyond the bounds of what they know, conflating what they know, with what they want.
What I found most attractive about Unity is what they call Christ Consciousness.  Which translates into self-talk of a positive type.  Each has the Christ inside.  And it can be tapped in each of us.  What that means is that if you think you can't do something, you will always be right.  The thrust of this teaching is to learn to train oneself to think in positive ways--to see the positive paths to gaining what one wants. 
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

Mike Cl

Quote from: popsthebuilder on November 18, 2016, 08:20:35 PM
Didn't say anything about people knowing of GOD since before written history. But now that you bring it up, yes.

Read the Zend Avesta then tell me that the fire of GOD isn't the son of GOD.

Humans would have had to have had been around in order to contemplate GOD. I don't think they were around billions of years ago though.
So, Pops, did you read the post I made about Unity?
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?<br />Then he is not omnipotent,<br />Is he able but not willing?<br />Then whence cometh evil?<br />Is he neither able or willing?<br />Then why call him god?

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 08:20:41 PM
What I found most attractive about Unity is what they call Christ Consciousness.  Which translates into self-talk of a positive type.  Each has the Christ inside.  And it can be tapped in each of us.  What that means is that if you think you can't do something, you will always be right.  The thrust of this teaching is to learn to train oneself to think in positive ways--to see the positive paths to gaining what one wants.
Christ consciousness has little to do with what one wants in terms of attainment.

popsthebuilder

Quote from: Mike Cl on November 18, 2016, 08:22:05 PM
So, Pops, did you read the post I made about Unity?
I did and though I haven't researched this group I do hold great reverence for the mere ideal of unity, and find the Christ consciousness or Krishna consciousness to be likened to the selfless conscience.

Peace