Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Existence of Jesus Christ
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 166 of 378 (216530)
06-13-2005 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by lfen
06-13-2005 3:05 AM


Re: Jesus was real
Ifen writes:
What does knowing Jesus Christ have to do with knowing your Buddha nature? Or as the Advaitist put it, knowing the Self?
Speaking for myself, I found that once I encountered the Spirit of the living God, (or what I believed to be that) I found that just as iron sharpens iron, my own self and personality traits were often seen in a comparative or contrasting nature with the nature of Christ.
This gave(gives) me the opportunity to decide on changes and adjustments in my attitudes, feelings, and beliefs. My self is my self...it cannot be ignored any more than it can be mastered by trying. It can be understood much better, and thus kept in check, by knowing the nature and denying nothing.
Change is not about trying through self effort. Change is about trusting the Spirit to retrain, refresh, and renew the inner man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by lfen, posted 06-13-2005 3:05 AM lfen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by ramoss, posted 06-13-2005 2:43 PM Phat has replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 167 of 378 (216670)
06-13-2005 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Phat
06-13-2005 5:43 AM


Re: Jesus was real
If you attribute this spirit you thought you encountered with Jesus, why do you think other people in other cultures do not feel it is Jesus. If they believe they felt this spirit, and don't feel it is Jesus, why should you?
Why do you associate the belief you felt this spirit with the historical Jesus?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Phat, posted 06-13-2005 5:43 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Phat, posted 06-13-2005 2:54 PM ramoss has replied
 Message 169 by lfen, posted 06-13-2005 3:10 PM ramoss has not replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 168 of 378 (216671)
06-13-2005 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by ramoss
06-13-2005 2:43 PM


Re: Jesus was real
I must admit that much of my knowledge of this Spirit comes from what I have been taught. I will say, however, that within the context of Christian teaching, I have found much that corroborates my preconceptions. I don't just listen to one or two sources. I compare and contrast the teachings of many. Within this context, I find that
some christian teachers who are trustworthy (by my judgement) also correlate with each other.
Unless I were to question the entire validity of the foundations and fundamentals of Christian belief, I would have no reason to not trust my learning sources.
I believe, by contrast, that you and/or some others here at EvC DO question the validity of Christian belief in general. This is well and good, but it places us as diametric opposites. Many trust human wisdom and the sources that disprove Biblical beliefs. While the consensus has clout, it is far from a universal fact. There are many respected names/sources who validate and uphold Biblical source beliefs as a valid and secure foundation.
I am not sure why there are such controversial dichotomies.
I will not dismiss either side as ignorant.
as far as other cultures and belief systems go, I would think that many have in fact encountered Christ...though perhaps by another name. Were it possible to quantify the qualities of their subjective experience, I believe that we would be able to objectify One Spirit.
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 06-13-2005 12:57 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by ramoss, posted 06-13-2005 2:43 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 9:27 AM Phat has replied

lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 169 of 378 (216677)
06-13-2005 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 167 by ramoss
06-13-2005 2:43 PM


Re: Jesus was real
If you attribute this spirit you thought you encountered with Jesus, why do you think other people in other cultures do not feel it is Jesus. If they believe they felt this spirit, and don't feel it is Jesus, why should you?
I'm not attempting to answer for Phat but this is such a good question I wanted to add in my opinion as to how Hinduism sees this.
There are different types of people so different types of religious practise are better suited to some than to others. The path of devotion, bhakti, often begins with devotion to a Deity or image of the Deity. Hinduism is fine with this. It doesn't hold that the idol whether real or conceptual is the ultimate truth but that it can function to help an individual progress towards realization. When their understanding has matured they will surrender their idols or images and move to a more direct experience.
Some individuals will relate better to a feminine deity usually the Divine Mother archetype others may be attracted to Krishna, Vishnu, perhaps the Buddha of Compassion or Jesus.
I've little time and I need to be succinct. There are depths to consciousness, to our being. We experience these in various forms. As our experience deepens the forms change. The mystery of being, of AMNESS, or I AM can be related to as Jehovah, or Jesus, or Allah, or Siva, or Krishna but those are all concepts to address this "spirit". Following this "spirit", our beingness and I don't mean ego, to awakening leads beyond theologies, stories, concepts and images of deities to being itself.
Most people are sectarian in their religion. Lao Tzu knew that being in itself was nameless and someone in the Old testament may have known that when Yahweh says his name is "I Am That I AM". But most people get hung up on the name and on the external concepts. At least for a time they do.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by ramoss, posted 06-13-2005 2:43 PM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by hitchy, posted 06-13-2005 11:29 PM lfen has replied

hitchy
Member (Idle past 5117 days)
Posts: 215
From: Southern Maryland via Pittsburgh
Joined: 01-05-2004


Message 170 of 378 (216729)
06-13-2005 11:29 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by lfen
06-13-2005 3:10 PM


Re: Jesus was real
Hi! One question...
How can we not get hung up on external concepts if the external concepts are all we have? Thank you for your time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by lfen, posted 06-13-2005 3:10 PM lfen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by lfen, posted 06-14-2005 2:25 AM hitchy has not replied

lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 171 of 378 (216740)
06-14-2005 2:25 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by hitchy
06-13-2005 11:29 PM


Re: Jesus was real
How can we not get hung up on external concepts if the external concepts are all we have
Good point. If external concepts is all one has I'd say learn to meditate. I think that is one of the main functions of meditation at least in the beginning, that is to move from concepts to actual experience. I'm thinking primarily of vipassana meditation.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by hitchy, posted 06-13-2005 11:29 PM hitchy has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 172 of 378 (216778)
06-14-2005 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Phat
06-13-2005 2:54 PM


Re: Jesus was real
Actually, I question the validity of all beliefs equally, including, sometimes, the ones I own.
I am glad you admit you are filling in what you feel about the spirit with what you have been taught. However, if you are using the context
of christian teaching, isn't that 'corrobaration' circular, since you are using your preconceptions to form your intepretation of your experiances to begin with? And, since this is a subjective experiance, (in other words, it is entirely within you),how does this demonstrate the existance of Jesus Christ? Does this subjective experiance show you a Jesus Christ in the spritutal sense? Or do you feel it points to the physical existance of a Jesus? If so, how does it point to the literal truth of things?
In my opinion, your experiance was shaped by your expectations that you were taught, and then because it was shaped by what you were taught to expect, it reinforced what you were taught to expect. This is the same as the Hindu's, the Muslims, the Buddhists, and all the other religions in the world.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Phat, posted 06-13-2005 2:54 PM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by Phat, posted 06-14-2005 4:05 PM ramoss has replied

Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 173 of 378 (216842)
06-14-2005 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 172 by ramoss
06-14-2005 9:27 AM


Re: Jesus was real
ramoss writes:
In my opinion, your experiance was shaped by your expectations that you were taught, and then because it was shaped by what you were taught to expect, it reinforced what you were taught to expect. This is the same as the Hindu's, the Muslims, the Buddhists, and all the other religions in the world.
Well would that not explain why you are now an atheist? You have concluded that all belief is subjective. My experience was shaped largely through the times that I was changed. Perhaps your experience with christianity was concluded to have been entirely subjective (arising totally internally) by you. Once you believed that the Bible was conceived by man, you had no reason to entertain the idea that God could impart His Spirit. I am not as trusting in regards to human wisdom as are you.
if you are using the context
of christian teaching, isn't that 'corrobaration' circular, since you are using your preconceptions to form your intepretation of your experiances to begin with?
Yes, but I trust my belief. I do not question every little (or big) conclusion that I arrive at. I trust the Bible because it makes sense. For instance, this verse
NIV writes:
Matt 16:13-19-When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."
"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?"
Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.
Either you believe the fable or you do not.
I can tell the difference between one cult or one belief that is rigid and illogical vs these people . So, I will admit that I want to believe that my belief is valid. I think that this is a key reason why some stay with the faith and some do not. Did you WANT to question your belief?
It is because of my respect for you and others here at EvC that I even question my belief at all. It would be a virtual impossibility for me to deny that Christ is real, however. I am not looking to replace Him with human wisdom at this point.
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 06-14-2005 02:14 PM
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 06-14-2005 02:15 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 9:27 AM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 4:33 PM Phat has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 174 of 378 (216852)
06-14-2005 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by Phat
06-14-2005 4:05 PM


Re: Jesus was real
quote:
Well would that not explain why you are now an atheist? You have concluded that all belief is subjective. My experience was shaped largely through the times that I was changed. Perhaps your experience with christianity was concluded to have been entirely subjective (arising totally internally) by you. Once you believed that the Bible was conceived by man, you had no reason to entertain the idea that God could impart His Spirit. I am not as trusting in regards to human wisdom as are you.
Partly. My days as an atheist started long before I thought about belief being subjective. I became an atheist about the time I figured out the tooth fairy was my parents, and that the easter bunny and santa claus were just stories (that was prior to my going to kindergarden). At that time period, I really didn't have the intellectual maturity to think about belief from a philosphical point of view.
as for 'human wisdom'.. what does the subjective or objective belief in a supernatural diety have to do with 'human wisdom' at all? What does trust/suspection have to do with it at all? I am just saying that
your interpretation of your experiances is shaped by your beliefs, just as those of other religions interpret the same feelings otherwise as what they are trained to expect.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by Phat, posted 06-14-2005 4:05 PM Phat has not replied

CodeTrainer
Inactive Member


Message 175 of 378 (216921)
06-14-2005 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Kapyong
06-04-2005 9:27 PM


Re: Jesus was a myth
Iasion says: "__you can't come up with any evidence for your beliefs__"
because when he sees the evidence is ready to dismiss it no matter what.
For example, the claim there are no writings from the apostles who met Jesus is facetiously based on agressive disbelief.
Three books written by the hand of eyewitnesses--based on all objective criteria for research in ancient writings--and another by one who took lots of first-person testimony, which books are corroborated by other contemporary references to those times that followed almost immediately, relatve to historical time lines.
The evidence against these four books is given by people who approach the subject with agressive disbelief, many times even cloaked in the color of deceipt by virtue of a *nominal* belief in deities or persons vaguely resembling those referred to in said Scriptures. But not even the professional disbelievers in the "Jesus Seminar" pretend that he didn't exist.
HOMER'S "ILIAD": The earliest copies that we have in known existance today of Homer's "Iliad", dating to the thirteenth century. Iasion has possibly read the English translation of this book, and undoubtedly did not question his teacher as to whether this was an invention of some ninth-century fiction writer.
JULIUS CAESAR, "GALLIC WARS": The earliest copy of "Gallic Wars", written by Julius Caesar, dates to one thousand years later than the original. The only corroborating historical reference to his authorship that I was only able to find was one, Suetonius.
== COMPARE==> Until recently, the earliest known NT document is a fragment from the book of John, found in Egypt 1920, written on both sides, and dated to between AD 125 and AD 150, which would be 35 to 60 or 90 years after the original. Now come the Lukan papyrus, in a Paris library now, a fragment predating that one by 20-30 years, and now a fragment from the book of Mark found among the *Qumram scrolls* (7Q5), thus written sometime before 68 AD.
..This Suetonius, by the way, also refers to Nero's 64 AD persecution of Christians, as in, "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition." (__Someone had said that Tacitus was the only such reference__) Also, Suetonius makes reference to Claudius expelling the Jews out of Rome after a time of some agitation, an event also mentioned in Acts.
References to the four gospels abound also in the writings of the early church fathers from the second, third and fourth century, providing a massively better corroboration of the original authenticity of the actual NT manuscripts and codexes than for any other as to point to original authorship. These references include letters to the Roman rulers in letters pleading with them to check the official records from Palestine for corroboration. Known non-Biblical references date Christianity's spread to Nineveh to before the end of the first century, and the earliest known translation papyrus was found there recently, predating other NT copies.
To question them is to question the authorship of Julius' "Gallic Wars", and of "Iliad", and countless other ancient writings.
Of said other writings, by the way, many or maybe even most were saved from oblivion during the Visigoth and Vandals' sackings, et.al. by scribes and monks in Ireland, St. Patrick's legacy in Ireland, from the fourth and fifth centuries, furiously copying everything they could get ahold of.
==> There are 643 known manuscript copies of the Iliad. There are ten ancient copies of Julius Caesar's "Gallic Wars". The NT has over 5,640 Greek manusrcipts of substantial parts or of all of the NT. There are ten thousand manuscripts of the Vulgate.
The records of the martyrdoms of James in 62 AD, Paul in 64 with Nero, and Peter in 65 AD, and the other apostles, are only so easily dismissed if one has a very strong disbelief bias, for there is no other balanced way available to dispute them that does not also invalidate every other ancient record. For (1) there are manuscripts that date closer to the original dates than copies of other ancient documents *by centuries*, (2) these are more numerous and self-corroborating than any other ancient document copy set, and (3) there is more reference and corroboration to them from external documents than for any other, and (4) there are numerous historical references to Jesus Christ that date to his time, and this even allowing the exclusion of the entire New Testament and the testimony of the apostles, and their next-generation followers into the 2nd century AD, confirmed in the strongest possible terms, with their own lives, and that beginning under Nero's reign.
- Alan

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Kapyong, posted 06-04-2005 9:27 PM Kapyong has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 7:46 PM CodeTrainer has replied
 Message 179 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 8:58 PM CodeTrainer has replied
 Message 180 by purpledawn, posted 06-14-2005 9:40 PM CodeTrainer has replied
 Message 183 by Kapyong, posted 06-15-2005 6:18 AM CodeTrainer has replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 176 of 378 (216934)
06-14-2005 7:46 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by CodeTrainer
06-14-2005 7:11 PM


Re: Jesus was a myth
You certainly are full of misinformatin. According to mainstream modern biblical scholarship, none of the gospels were written by eye witnesses.. and there is plenty of evidence for that point of view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-14-2005 7:11 PM CodeTrainer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by randman, posted 06-14-2005 8:30 PM ramoss has replied
 Message 190 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-18-2005 12:31 PM ramoss has replied

randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4898 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 177 of 378 (216947)
06-14-2005 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by ramoss
06-14-2005 7:46 PM


Re: Jesus was a myth
Ramos, codetrainer just put a post out long on facts, and you dismiss it with that?
Geesh, man.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 7:46 PM ramoss has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by ramoss, posted 06-14-2005 8:39 PM randman has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 178 of 378 (216948)
06-14-2005 8:39 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by randman
06-14-2005 8:30 PM


Re: Jesus was a myth
They weren't really very good facts. They were the standard group of appolist claims that aren't evidence for the historical Jesus at all.
It looks like it was take straight from 'The case for Christ' or something.
However, if you really want, I can deconstruct each claim one at a time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by randman, posted 06-14-2005 8:30 PM randman has not replied

ramoss
Member (Idle past 611 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 179 of 378 (216954)
06-14-2005 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by CodeTrainer
06-14-2005 7:11 PM


Re: Jesus was a myth
Lets look at the claims one at a time.
quote:
three books written by the hand of eyewitnesses--based on all objective criteria for research in ancient writings--and another by one who took lots of first-person testimony, which books are corroborated by other contemporary references to those times that followed almost immediately, relatve to historical time lines.
There is no evidence any of the books were written by eye witnesses. The consenus of the majority of mainstream christian biblical scholars is that we don't KNOW who wrote the synoptic gospels for example.. and it is clear from the internals of them they were NOT written by eye witnesses.
quote:
HOMER'S "ILIAD": The earliest copies that we have in known existance today of Homer's "Iliad", dating to the thirteenth century. Iasion has possibly read the English translation of this book, and undoubtedly did not question his teacher as to whether this was an invention of some ninth-century fiction writer.
JULIUS CAESAR, "GALLIC WARS": The earliest copy of "Gallic Wars", written by Julius Caesar, dates to one thousand years later than the original. The only corroborating historical reference to his authorship that I was only able to find was one, Suetonius.
== COMPARE==> Until recently, the earliest known NT document is a fragment from the book of John, found in Egypt 1920, written on both sides, and dated to between AD 125 and AD 150, which would be 35 to 60 or 90 years after the original. Now come the Lukan papyrus, in a Paris library now, a fragment predating that one by 20-30 years, and now a fragment from the book of Mark found among the *Qumram scrolls* (7Q5), thus written sometime before 68 AD.
First when ti comes to the numbers of copies of various books. That does not mean anything. ALl it means is that the believers had more motivation to make lots and lots of copies. As for the DDS fram 7Q5,
it is certainly not believed by all, or even MOST scholars to be a fragment of mark. The fragment is so small, and in such poor condition
that many of the letters are disputed. Here is a small article that
discusses it.
http://encycl.opentopia.com/term/7Q5
quote:
This Suetonius, by the way, also refers to Nero's 64 AD persecution of Christians, as in, "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition." (__Someone had said that Tacitus was the only such reference__) Also, Suetonius makes reference to Claudius expelling the Jews out of Rome after a time of some agitation, an event also mentioned in Acts.
Let us look in Suetonisu 'Lives of the Ceasars', written in about
120 C.E.
quote:
"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Emperor Claudius in 49 CE] expelled them from Rome." (Claudius 5.25.4)
First of all, the name Chrestus is an actual Greek name, and not yeshua or jesus. It appears to be someone who was actually IN rome
at the time, doing the instigation, so that rules out it being Jesus.
Suetonius was talking about Jews. Even if he was talking about Christians, all that would mean that there were christians in rome in the latter half of the first century, not that there was a person named Jesus of Nazareth from the first half of the century.
So much for evidence. A bunch of assertions that are meaningless, the logial fallacy of numbers, and taking suetonius out of context.
{Fixed 1 quote box. - AM}
This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 06-15-2005 12:41 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-14-2005 7:11 PM CodeTrainer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by randman, posted 06-15-2005 12:41 AM ramoss has replied
 Message 191 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-18-2005 1:00 PM ramoss has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3456 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 180 of 378 (216971)
06-14-2005 9:40 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by CodeTrainer
06-14-2005 7:11 PM


Eyewitness Evidence
quote:
Three books written by the hand of eyewitnesses--based on all objective criteria for research in ancient writings--and another by one who took lots of first-person testimony, which books are corroborated by other contemporary references to those times that followed almost immediately, relatve to historical time lines.
In the book "The Case For Christ" by Lee Strobel, the interview with Dr. Craig L. Blomberg, who is, according to Strobel, widely considered to be one of the country's foremost authorities on the biographies of Jesus which are called the four gospels.
Blomberg states: "It's important to acknowledge that strictly speaking, the gospels are anonymous."
The writings don't identify the authors. Authorship is by tradition.

"The average man does not know what to do with this life, yet wants another one which lasts forever." --Anatole France

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-14-2005 7:11 PM CodeTrainer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by CodeTrainer, posted 06-18-2005 1:49 PM purpledawn has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024