A Question for the masses...

Which of the following was Jesus???

  • Liar

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Lunatic

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Lord

    Votes: 15 100.0%
  • Total voters
    15
  • Poll closed .
Because you're asking me which of the three I think the historical jesus was, and I don't really think it was one guy who was a nutcase, I think it was a bunch of different guys.

See, it was by way of a joke. I didn't vote because there's no option up there that adequately explains my opinion.
 
Which God are we talking about here? There a bunch of them extant in that part of the world at that particular time.

No, that's disingenous of me - I knew you meant Yahweh. The answer is, none of them and all of them. If you want my bare bones opinion, the God you think of as God is probably as different to the Yahweh that they thought of as God back then as the Jesus you think of as Jesus was to the many Christs that existed back then.

But there are strong arguments that Jesus may not have existed as Christian's believe him to have at all. After all, one of the most erroneous beliefs in Christianity is that after Jesus died the 12 apostles went their ways, sat down and, roughly within 10 or 30 or even 50 years of each other, wrote their gospels - which then formed the New Testament.

Here - this guys done his research. I'll just give you the link:

Did Jesus Really Live?
 
When the world shall have learned that the Christ of the Gospels is a myth, that Christianity is untrue, it will turn its attention from the religious fictions of the past to the vital problems of to-day, and endeavor to solve them for the improvement of the well-being of the real men and women whom we know, and whom we ought to help and love.
Click to expand...

I found this last paragraph of this guys essay very interesting. I bet, if you look into it, you'll find non-Christians about as disinterested in solving the vital problems of today as anybody, probably even more so. Those who are truly evolutionary should hold true to "survival of the fitest" underlying assumptions of their belief and allow those who can not feed themselves to day where they lay and to stop wasting resources on them.

Anybody who actually believes that once we get rid of Christianity (and by extension any religion that is based on a higher power) that those people will then devote their time to solving todays worlds epic problems is sadly dellusional. And I don't mean dellusional in that they won't work to solving those problems, dellisional in that he doesn't realize that they already are and are the most likely demographic to devote time to doing so.

Hard to put ones faith into his sayings when he blows his point so epically and noticably. I'd say, this person hasn't done any research at all.
 
It's a loaded question, so there's no point in treating it fairly.

It's like asking, "What is bread? White, wheat or sourdough."

EDITED to add:

This isn't so much a loaded question as it is a logical fallacy, namely Bifurcation. "Also referred to as the "black and white" fallacy, bifurcation is the presentation of a situation or condition with ONLY TWO alternatives, whereas
in fact other alternatives exist or can exist."
 
Last edited:
He obviously has an anti-Christian agenda, Peon, that much I will agree. As to whether Christian's are the demographic most likely to solve the worlds problems... Well, I think whether you agree with that or not probably depends on whether you think one of the world's biggest problems is that they aren't Christian. If you take away the missionary and prosletysing work then I think you'll probably find Christian's are no more helpful than any other demographic in society.

That said though, I do find your ability to shrug away some of the VERY real problems that his research has highlighted because an anecdotal and obviously personal belief of his clashes with an anecdotal and obviously personal belief of yours, quite disturbing.

Your stance on this seems to fall squarely under "I haven't listened to a single decent argument that disagrees with the idea of a historical Jesus."
 
This is far from a research paper Eon, and you know that.

Spurious or genuine, let us see what the Gospels can tell us about the life of Jesus. Matthew and Luke give us the story of his genealogy. How do they agree? Matthew says there were forty-one generations from Abraham to Jesus. Luke says there were fifty-six. Yet both pretend to give the genealogy of Joseph, and both count the generations! Nor is this all. The Evangelists disagree on all but two names between David and Christ. These worthless genealogies show how much the New Testament writers knew about the ancestors of their hero.
Click to expand...

I found this last paragraph of this guys essay very interesting. I bet, if you look into it, you'll find that non-Christians are about as disinterested in solving the vital problems of today as anybody, probably even more so. Those who are truly evolutionary should hold true to the "survival of the fitest" underlying assumptions of their belief and allow those who can not feed themselves to die where they lay and to stop wasting resources on them.

Anybody who actually believes that once we get rid of Christianity (and by extension any religion that is based on a higher power) that those people will then devote their time to solving todays worlds epic problems is sadly dillusional. And I don't mean dillusional in that they won't work to solving those problems, dillisional in that he doesn't realize that they already are and are the most likely demographic to devote time to doing so.

Hard to put ones faith into his writings when he blows his point so epically and noticably. I'd say, this person hasn't done any research at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose we need to go check his sources. My guess (spot the use of the term) is that they reference well known biblical fallacies that he felt he didn't have to detail. If the article doesn't have sources on it (and I can't remember) then it's my fault for presenting it as research and I apologise.

That said - if we check all those assertions he makes and they wind up being true...
 
ok got to this thread late i know, but how bout jesus being a witch? i know a couple pagans who hold with that theory :p (just throwing that out there :p :p)
 
Gods_Peon said:
Somebody has already looked into Marshall Gauvins work: Did Jesus Christ Really Live?

I found this site well after I read the link you provided, and the annotations and comments are dead on for what I was thinking when I read it.
Click to expand...


Ahhh, so being a carpenter isn't enough of a basis to CRITICISE Jesus, but it's enough of a basis to be him? ;)
 
Gods_Peon said:
Somebody has already looked into Marshall Gauvins work: Did Jesus Christ Really Live?

I found this site well after I read the link you provided, and the annotations and comments are dead on for what I was thinking when I read it.
Click to expand...

While I'm on the subject, I found much to object to in that critique. (I'll admit that I didn't spot the work was some 70 odd years old when I read it though).

For a start, how can it NOT be important that one of the Gospels that purports to tell the life of Jesus doesn't mention the manner of his birth?

How can it NOT be important that none of the gospels was written until AT LEAST 30 years after his supposed death/reincarnation and more likely between 60 and 80 years? Look at how the legend of Elvis has been twisted in the 30 years since his death - people are claiming he's STILL ALIVE!

Mark's gospel is rumoured to have been heavily expurgated - there is reference made in ancient letters to text that appears in none of the copies we have that could be considered ancient.

Matthew's gospel is actually anonymous. Nowhere does it state that he wrote it - the early church fathers all believed he did, but their reasons for so doing are lost to us. In addition it seems to be in the wrong language - why would Matthew write in Greek? Why not Aramaic? Rather worryingly, this would suggest that we do not have a copy of the source material - and speaking of source material, large parts of Matthew's gospel appear to have been cribbed from Mark's! Not withstanding the fact that the church fathers believe Matthew's to be the earlier work - a view not shared by the majority of scholars today.

Luke's gospel is another that does not claim to have been written by it's attributed author - in this case it does not even claim to have been written during the life of Jesus. It was written by a greek for his patron and claims only to be a study and critical examination of "things handed on from those who were eyewitnesses." It could well have been written a hundred years after the death of Jesus.

John's has similar issues. It was written in stages. It's author is called "The Beloved Disciple" and not John. The work is believed to have been completed in AD100 - and the last chapter concerns the death of the author. John would have been about 140 in AD100 - a somewhat unheard of age. It's far more likely that John was written by a disciple of a disciple.
 
Goose62 said:
Interesting read DV, everyone's got their opinions. I don't necissarily agree with everything John Clayton says, the part I was trying to bring into this thread was this: The Real History of Jesus
Thank you for that link though, I didn't read everything on the www.doesgodexist.org website, and it definitely shined some light on things I don't agree with.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the "real" history of Jesus doesn't use anything but the Bible to "prove" his existence.

Using the same logic, I can prove the existence of Allah by using the Koran or any other god with their corresponding literature.

So now what?
 
Dark Virtue said:
So now what?
Click to expand...
I don't know DV.

I don't even know why you're here. I don't think you're HERE (in these forums) to get questions answered; if that your true intent, why here on a GAMERS forum - instead on a real Christian debate forum? (not saying this really isn't, but most, if not all, are here because of online games).

I can't prove to you my God is the one true God. He is real to me. When I look at my unborn baby (ultrasound), I ask myself; how can anyone NOT believe there is a designer behind all of this. Yes, I was raised Christian, but everyone has to make up their minds what to follow (if anything) for themselves. I have concluded that there is a God. And I believe the God of Christianity is the one true God because He is an 'ING' God. What I mean by that is that any adjective describing Him, put an ING at the end of it. He is the one and only LIVING God.

I honestly think Christianity left a bitter taste in your mouth. Because God didn't show up on YOUR time ... according to how YOU wanted Him to. Call me crazy, but I believe there is a greater calling on your life than "atheist".

You have one life ... one chance. Not everything in this world requires an answer. I've got a billion of them waiting to ask Jesus once I get to heaven.
 
Goose62 said:
I don't know DV.

I don't even know why you're here. I don't think you're HERE (in these forums) to get questions answered; if that your true intent, why here on a GAMERS forum - instead on a real Christian debate forum? (not saying this really isn't, but most, if not all, are here because of online games).

I can't prove to you my God is the one true God. He is real to me. When I look at my unborn baby (ultrasound), I ask myself; how can anyone NOT believe there is a designer behind all of this. Yes, I was raised Christian, but everyone has to make up their minds what to follow (if anything) for themselves. I have concluded that there is a God. And I believe the God of Christianity is the one true God because He is an 'ING' God. What I mean by that is that any adjective describing Him, put an ING at the end of it. He is the one and only LIVING God.

I honestly think Christianity left a bitter taste in your mouth. Because God didn't show up on YOUR time ... according to how YOU wanted Him to. Call me crazy, but I believe there is a greater calling on your life than "atheist".

You have one life ... one chance. Not everything in this world requires an answer. I've got a billion of them waiting to ask Jesus once I get to heaven.
Click to expand...

Why does my presence here trouble you? Is it because I have asked questions that you can't answer?

I've stated many times why I am here. It's not for you to convince me there is a god. It's for me to understand why you have made the decisions that you have. Personally, I don't believe that belief in any god is reasonable. You do. I'd like to know why. As for the reason I came here in the first place, it was to discuss an incredibly hypocritical article on Doom 3. I just stuck around :)

You are taking the easy way out by believing that I am a jaded Christian. I say it's easy, because it is incredibly difficult for you to understand how a "true" Christian could ever turn his back on the things you believe in. If you were to accept that, then it would be possible for YOU to turn your back on your beliefs, and frankly that's a terrifying notion to many Christians. I'm sure you've read tons of conversion stories, right? How many deconversion stories have you read? If you'd like, PM me and I can give you a link.

I will agree with you on one point. There ARE greater things than calling me an "atheist". That is but one, small facet of my life. That just happens to be the only one you see. I don't walk around the office with a big "A" on my chest :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top