|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member Posts: 3941 From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior) Joined: Member Rating: 10.0 |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Existence of Jesus Christ | |||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Who says anybody is actually answering your prayers? What objective evidence do you have that shows your prayers are answered, and if they are answered, that they are answered by 'Jesus Christ'?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
How far does the stories about someone have to diviate from reality for it to be a legend based on someone, rather than that person?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
My personal opinion, is that Jesus, as described in the gospels, is a myth.
That does not include the possiblity of there being a person or persons that have done some of the things attributed , and inspired the concepts. This message has been edited by ramoss, 05-29-2005 07:14 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
One problem with the claim about Nero, is the writing was NOT from Nero's time, but from much later. Tacitus was writing in 115 C.E, which is 51 years after the event. There is no way to tell what Tacitus's source was. What is known is that Tacitus was high critical of Nero in many of his writings. Another thing, it is known that Tactitus has
reported a report or rumor that he knew was false (Mellor, 1993, page). Because of the vaguness of his sources, the fact that Tacitus was known to have reported rumor or reports he knew as false, and because of the fact that Tacitus also had a large contempt, and poor knowledge of anything Jewish/Christian or Egyptian, using Tactitus as evidence is desperate at the very best.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
You are making several invalid assumptions. First of all, the Temple based Judaism was not the only one. There was the rabbitical based version, which became dominate when the temple was destroyed by the Romans.
The synoguoge based Judaism would not be using any Greek terminolgoy for their messiah. That indicates that those who started the Jesus cult wereHellenistic based, and probably gentile converts. Paul appears to have gone after the Gentiles after the native born Jewish people rejected him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
One point.
You have paul making claims about Jesus natural brothers. So? We have Rowling makign claims about Harry Potters natural parents. What external source are you using to confirm the letters? For that matter, 1 Cor 9:5 , we have in the KJV9:5 Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? doesn't look like he is mentioning the natural syblings of Jesus at all. This message has been edited by ramoss, 06-05-2005 09:24 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
1) There are no historians from before 93 C.E. that mentioned Jesus. The major reference in antiquities seems to be a much later interpolition, and not from that time period. One historian that should have written about Jesus if he existed as described in the New testament would have been Philo of Alexandria, who wrote about conditoins in Jerusalum at the time, and actually wrote a letter highly critical of Pontious Pilate.
2) It is possible that an interrent preacher named Y'shua got executed .. lots of people were. However, the events surounding that event would not have matched the description of things in the New testament. How far to stories have to deviate from reality to have it legend and myth, and not history?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
The Case for Christ is a bunch of second rate poorly written drivel who took all the appoligist arguements that have been rightfully demolished by others, and put them in one book without any kind of balanced viewpoint on them. If you looked at the evidence as presented, you will see, amoung other things, items that are strongly indicated to be forgeries being presented as real (such as antiquities 18), and items taken out of context. It never presented the opposite point of view in any valid way.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
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 contextof 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
quote: 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 thatyour 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Lets look at the claims one at a time.
quote: 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: 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: Let us look in Suetonisu 'Lives of the Ceasars', written in about120 C.E. quote: 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 romeat 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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ramoss Member (Idle past 612 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
The point is that this phrase is taking a Greek name 'chretus', and assuming it is 'christ'. It is taking a similar name, and assuming a typo. That is why the 'evidence' for a historical Jesus in Suetonius is not 'evidence' for a historical Jesus.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024