Jackabo
Member
+127|7002|Dublin, Ireland
So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
syndicat111
Member
+39|7122|UK
At least he isnt blowing himself up 
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|7180|Salt Lake City

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
I also don't believe in God, but I do believe there is sufficient historical evidence that Jesus did exist.  Was he the son of God?  No, God doesn't exist.  Was he some one that seemed to have a pretty good message...I think he did for the most part.  But like many things, the message got distorted both in what he said, and what he really did.
SharkyMcshark
I'll take two
+132|7229|Perth, Western Australia
Another perfect example of extremists ruining the fun for everyone.
Mason4Assassin444
retired
+552|7106|USA
religion is a gateway drug.
OrangeHound
Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...
+1,335|7093|Washington DC

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
Three things ...

1.  In all fairness, when you answered in the way you did, you gave him permission to enter into a debate with you.  If you don't want to enter into such a debate, just dismiss him with "I'm not interested."

2.  The approach of the dude with the little Jesus sign is a horrible way to communicate, IMO.  It's called "street evangelism" and it frankly plays into a half dozen negative stereotypes

3.  My question:  you say "no one cares about anyone anymore" ... if you saw people actually caring, would that give you pause ... might you consider that God might be influencing them?
Villain{NY}
Banned
+44|6788|New York
Where I live they're constantly out in force at the local Planned Parenthood, or going door to door spreading their word.  I don't mind them so much except when they interrupt me during dinner time, other than that I'll hear them out and take their pamphlet and send them on their way.  I find that the majority of these people have fallen on hard times in their life and they use Religion and their fellow parishioners as a crutch to help them through their tough times.  By spreading the word of God and Jesus they feel they are making amends with themselves and the Lord for all the crappy things they've done.  As a confirmed Catholic I know where their coming from and I agree with many of their points but as a free thinking man I do not agree with anyone forcing their values on someone else.
topal63
. . .
+533|7162

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

... I do believe there is sufficient historical evidence that Jesus did exist.
Yep, that is exactly what it is - a belief.

I on the other hand have searched many ancient sources and can find no credible extra-Biblical verification of Jesus ever existing. Even the Biblical account (the Gospels) are later 2nd Century (CE) creations (amalgams of other sources and other god-man dying myths). Jesus isn't even a Jewish name - it is a name-mangle of multiple Jewish name forms - found in the Septuagint (Greek translations of Old Testament). Nazareth is a non-existent town before 135 CE (about); it is more correct to think of it as a Greek mistranslation of a Jewish word - that implies lineage (or branch, or sect); but not a town.

Go ahead and keep believing there is ample evidence to support the idea of a historical Jesus. I find that belief to be not-so unlike religious belief itself.

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
That guy sounds alright to me - in my book. I don't share his beliefs - but hey - he doesn't share mine either.

I sort-of like this idea: "the devil is the fear inside us." Maybe not that the "devil is fear" but rather that "devils and demons" are symptoms; allegorical; a mythological description for; of inner conflicts. That devils and demons are never without; but rather always within. The devil is not some out-there in some supernatural world entity, but a way of thinking about a psychological inner conflict.

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

Don't you just hate Christain Extremist?
No. And, I am not so sure your example could even remotely be considered an extremist.

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-10 08:15:12)

Mitch
16 more years
+877|6969|South Florida

topal63 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

... I do believe there is sufficient historical evidence that Jesus did exist.
Yep, that is exactly what it is - a belief.

I on the other hand have searched many ancient sources and can find no credible extra-Biblical verification of Jesus ever existing. Even the Biblical account (the Gospels) are later 2nd Century (CE) creations (amalgams of other sources and other god-man dying myths). Jesus isn't even a Jewish name - it is a name-mangle of multiple Jewish name forms - found in the Septuagint (Greek translations of Old Testament). Nazareth is a non-existent town before 135 CE (about); it is more correct to think of it as a Greek mistranslation of a Jewish word - that implies lineage (or branch, or sect); but not a town.

Go ahead and keep believing there is ample evidence to support the idea of a historical Jesus. I find that belief to be not-so unlike religious belief itself.
yeah another thing that cracks me up is "Faith". Which they admit is a blind belief backed about for no other reason besides 'because i want it to be true'.

Yeah, well guess what???

It doesnt work that way!!! You can have all the faith you want, that doesnt make something real. And a book, written 2000 years ago, that contridicts itself multiple times, with insane stories you would find in the fiction section of the library, that have been prooven wrong scientificaly, should NOT be your fucking only supporting "fact".

Its just so rediculous that people will demand proof for everything else in the world, then go worship there magical superhero with magical powers.

Also, for the people who think prayer works.... roflwaffle at you! Prayer doesn't work. The only person that hears you are your walls. And your bed.... Wait untill you realize how stupid you've been, talking to yourself. hahaha.

**But like in the end of every religion post i make, i challenge you to give me persuasive information that may support your god**
15 more years! 15 more years!
sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7201|Argentina

topal63 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

... I do believe there is sufficient historical evidence that Jesus did exist.
Yep, that is exactly what it is - a belief.

I on the other hand have searched many ancient sources and can find no credible extra-Biblical verification of Jesus ever existing. Even the Biblical account (the Gospels) are later 2nd Century (CE) creations (amalgams of other sources and other god-man dying myths). Jesus isn't even a Jewish name - it is a name-mangle of multiple Jewish name forms - found in the Septuagint (Greek translations of Old Testament). Nazareth is a non-existent town before 135 CE (about); it is more correct to think of it as a Greek mistranslation of a Jewish word - that implies lineage (or branch, or sect); but not a town.

Go ahead and keep believing there is ample evidence to support the idea of a historical Jesus. I find that belief to be not-so unlike religious belief itself.
While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
topal63
. . .
+533|7162

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

... I do believe there is sufficient historical evidence that Jesus did exist.
Yep, that is exactly what it is - a belief.

I on the other hand have searched many ancient sources and can find no credible extra-Biblical verification of Jesus ever existing. Even the Biblical account (the Gospels) are later 2nd Century (CE) creations (amalgams of other sources and other god-man dying myths). Jesus isn't even a Jewish name - it is a name-mangle of multiple Jewish name forms - found in the Septuagint (Greek translations of Old Testament). Nazareth is a non-existent town before 135 CE (about); it is more correct to think of it as a Greek mistranslation of a Jewish word - that implies lineage (or branch, or sect); but not a town.

Go ahead and keep believing there is ample evidence to support the idea of a historical Jesus. I find that belief to be not-so unlike religious belief itself.
While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.

sergeriver wrote:

... there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars, not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.
There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-10 07:56:24)

sergeriver
Cowboy from Hell
+1,928|7201|Argentina

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:


Yep, that is exactly what it is - a belief.

I on the other hand have searched many ancient sources and can find no credible extra-Biblical verification of Jesus ever existing. Even the Biblical account (the Gospels) are later 2nd Century (CE) creations (amalgams of other sources and other god-man dying myths). Jesus isn't even a Jewish name - it is a name-mangle of multiple Jewish name forms - found in the Septuagint (Greek translations of Old Testament). Nazareth is a non-existent town before 135 CE (about); it is more correct to think of it as a Greek mistranslation of a Jewish word - that implies lineage (or branch, or sect); but not a town.

Go ahead and keep believing there is ample evidence to support the idea of a historical Jesus. I find that belief to be not-so unlike religious belief itself.
While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.

sergeriver wrote:

... there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars, not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.
There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
RDMC
Enemy Wheelbarrow Spotted..!!
+736|7009|Area 51
Can I say that I just hate all religions...? >.<
topal63
. . .
+533|7162

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.

sergeriver wrote:

... there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars, not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.
There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
Yes, I watched it, it is recycled old news. Nothing new actually.

Also saying a face-less, nameless person (as Jesus, the name, is not a Jewish name; it is a Greek name construct) who did not come from the non-existent town of Nazareth; that this mythical figure which is an amalgam/conflation of Greek mysticism, God-man dying myths, Jewish messianic thought - sprinkled with a few buddhistic & Greek philosophical ideas, but cannot be identified as a real person - is a historical person is an absurd opinion (IMO).

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-10 09:20:53)

ATG
Banned
+5,233|6973|Global Command

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:


While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.

sergeriver wrote:

... there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars, not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.
There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
For a great read on a possible historically realistic Jesus and some insight into Free Masonry ( which has everything to do with Jesus, btw ) I recommend a book called The Hyram Key.
Freezer7Pro
I don't come here a lot anymore.
+1,447|6641|Winland

Didn't read the whole page, but I agree. There is no god.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7044|132 and Bush

ATG wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.


There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
For a great read on a possible historically realistic Jesus and some insight into Free Masonry ( which has everything to do with Jesus, btw ) I recommend a book called The Hyram Key.
Napoleon said History is a myth men agree to believe. With religion even more so. Robert Wuhl did a special on HBO about this. It was great http://www.hbo.com/events/rwuhl/interviews/ (Preview on the right).
Xbone Stormsurgezz
imortal
Member
+240|7108|Austin, TX

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.


There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
Yes, I watched it, it is recycled old news. Nothing new actually.

Also saying a face-less, nameless person (as Jesus, the name, is not a Jewish name; it is a Greek name construct) who did not come from the non-existent town of Nazareth; that this mythical figure which is an amalgam/conflation of Greek mysticism, God-man dying myths, Jewish messianic thought - sprinkled with a little buddhistic & Greek philosophical ideas, but cannot be identified as real person - is a historical person is an absurd opinion (IMO).
It depends what you are attaching to the persona, is all.  Do I think that a person (and we will call him Jesus) existed?  Yes.  Do I think he travelled the land and delivered sermons?  Most likely.  Do I think he was born of a virgin birth?  No, that is a very common attribute given to most people that are thought to be divine at the time.  Do I think he rose from the dead?  No, I think his body was most likely stolen away by his diciples to add to his mystique.

The Gospels were not written until 20 years or so after the time he was to have died.  As such, there was planty of time for the myth to grow in the telling.  What do I think really happened?  I think a very charismatic Jewish man was baptised into a 'fringe cult' and adopted the attitudes, tried to reconcile them with his religion, came up with a new spin on things, and went forth to try to show others his 'truth.' Being very charismatic, he gathered many followers, and began to really convert people to his new faith.  I think that the local Jewish authorities found him a threat, and used the Romans to have him killed.  I think his followers kept spreading the message, mostly by word of mouth, and that the tales kept growing in the telling.  By the time they were written down, all sorts of new additions were made.  Also, some people made up moralty tales with Jesus as a main character, and used those to try to pass a message.  I think that at a gathering of leaders of this new 'faith,' they established a core system of beliefs and decided exactly what tales and what versions they would use in their teachings.  They called this collection the "Bible."

Now, does any of that seem particualary unreasonable?  Mystical?  Improbable?  I do not think so.

And so what?  Most of the purpose of a religion, after all, is a method of teaching us how to live together in peace, and to create a sense of self withing ones personal universe.  To create a sense of being and involvement.  These are basic human needs.  Religion fulfills those needs.  Other people can use other methods to fill those same needs, so everyone does not NEED a formalized religion.  However, everyone does have a system of core beliefs that occupies the same area of your psyche.

I, personally, am not concerned with whether Jesus actually existed.  It is the IDEA of him that is important.  It is the MESSAGE which should be listened to.  Pull apart all of the metaphysical nonsense, and there is a very simple core message that makes as much sense now as it did then.  It is a simple idea of how to get along with your neighbors, and how to live your life in a way you (and your family) can be proud of.

In that respect, I think nearly all religions are alike.  I hate to quote a movie, (and a +1 karma to everyone to PMs me with the source of the quote) but "I don't care what you believe, just BELIEVE in it."
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|7025|SE London

topal63 wrote:

There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.
That's not entirely true.

About the evidence for non-existence (although put like that it doesn't sound right). You could have evidence that something did not exist. For example if lots of credible ancient documents were found detailing a Roman plot in which Jesus was made us a a character - that would be evidence Jesus was not real.

Personally I think there probably was a person called Jesus, who was probably some sort of radical activist who gained notoriety by being executed for his radical and outspoken beliefs.

Whilst there are no writings about Jesus by people who met him, apart from dubious biblical sources, there are writings about him by historians such as Tacitus, not long after his death. This most likely explanation for this is that he was not well known until after his death.
stef10
Member
+173|6926|Denmark

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

topal63 wrote:

sergeriver wrote:

While there's not enough historical evidence to prove Jesus existence, there's not enough evidence to deny it.  Most scholars , not religious, will say that Jesus did exist.  A few historians reject this.  But, if you consider the Bible as a history book, with all its fairy tales and fables included, then you could think there was a Jewish guy called Jesus or whatever, who lived by that time.
I think you are misunderstanding the historical Jesus problem.


There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.

Also, I doubt you've actually examined the evidence as it is basically non-existent. The actual (Biblical scholarship) evidence amounts to argumentation and not actual evidence.
I'm not saying he existed, but I can't say he didn't.  Besides, it's not my job to examine the evidence, I'm not archaeologist.  Did you watch the documentary of Discovery Channel about The lost tomb of Jesus?  What I say is we don't know for sure he didn't exist.  Not as a guy who resucitated and walked over the water, but as a person who was involved into politics.
Yes, I watched it, it is recycled old news. Nothing new actually.

Also saying a face-less, nameless person (as Jesus, the name, is not a Jewish name; it is a Greek name construct) who did not come from the non-existent town of Nazareth; that this mythical figure which is an amalgam/conflation of Greek mysticism, God-man dying myths, Jewish messianic thought - sprinkled with a few buddhistic & Greek philosophical ideas, but cannot be identified as a real person - is a historical person is an absurd opinion (IMO).
You do know that his really name was Yehshua.
imortal
Member
+240|7108|Austin, TX

Bertster7 wrote:

topal63 wrote:

There is no such thing as evidence for non-existence. There is such a thing as evidence that implies existence, but not the converse. Also, you will find that the scholars (you're thinking of) will say they accept that Jesus proablably existed. And that is merely a belief.
That's not entirely true.

About the evidence for non-existence (although put like that it doesn't sound right). You could have evidence that something did not exist. For example if lots of credible ancient documents were found detailing a Roman plot in which Jesus was made us a a character - that would be evidence Jesus was not real.

Personally I think there probably was a person called Jesus, who was probably some sort of radical activist who gained notoriety by being executed for his radical and outspoken beliefs.

Whilst there are no writings about Jesus by people who met him, apart from dubious biblical sources, there are writings about him by historians such as Tacitus, not long after his death. This most likely explanation for this is that he was not well known until after his death.
Think about Martin Luther King for a moment.  If we did not have radio, newspapers, or televisions, and people had to spread the story around, How would he be perceived now, only 50 years after he died?  What kind of "Yeah, I was right there" stories people would make up to feed off his fame?  Give it a few hundred more years, and is it unreasonable to assume that a religion would blossom around his teachings?  And would that be a bad thing, considering what MLK was preaching?
topal63
. . .
+533|7162

imortal wrote:

(a.)It depends what you are attaching to the persona, is all.  (b.) Do I think that a person (and we will call him Jesus) existed?  Yes.  Do I think he travelled the land and delivered sermons?  Most likely.  Do I think he was born of a virgin birth?  No, that is a very common attribute given to most people that are thought to be divine at the time.  Do I think he rose from the dead?  No, I think his body was most likely stolen away by his diciples to add to his mystique.

(c.) The Gospels were not written until 20 years or so after the time he was to have died.  As such, there was planty of time for the myth to grow in the telling.  What do I think really happened?  I think a very charismatic Jewish man was baptised into a 'fringe cult' and adopted the attitudes, tried to reconcile them with his religion, came up with a new spin on things, and went forth to try to show others his 'truth.' Being very charismatic, he gathered many followers, and began to really convert people to his new faith.  I think that the local Jewish authorities found him a threat, and used the Romans to have him killed.  I think his followers kept spreading the message, mostly by word of mouth, and that the tales kept growing in the telling.  (d.) By the time they were written down, all sorts of new additions were made.  Also, some people made up moralty tales with Jesus as a main character, and used those to try to pass a message.  I think that at a gathering of leaders of this new 'faith,' they established a core system of beliefs and decided exactly what tales and what versions they would use in their teachings.  They called this collection the "Bible."

Now, does any of that seem particualary unreasonable?  Mystical?  Improbable?  I do not think so.

And so what?  Most of the purpose of a religion, after all, is a method of teaching us how to live together in peace, and to create a sense of self withing ones personal universe.  To create a sense of being and involvement.  These are basic human needs.  Religion fulfills those needs.  Other people can use other methods to fill those same needs, so everyone does not NEED a formalized religion.  However, everyone does have a system of core beliefs that occupies the same area of your psyche.

I, personally, am not concerned with whether Jesus actually existed.  It is the IDEA of him that is important.  It is the MESSAGE which should be listened to.  Pull apart all of the metaphysical nonsense, and there is a very simple core message that makes as much sense now as it did then.  It is a simple idea of how to get along with your neighbors, and how to live your life in a way you (and your family) can be proud of.

In that respect, I think nearly all religions are alike.  I hate to quote a movie, (and a +1 karma to everyone to PMs me with the source of the quote) but "I don't care what you believe, just BELIEVE in it."
(a.) A persona is not a person. It is something existing entirely “in-mind” and that is “in your mind.” Also, I don’t attach anything to the idea of Christ, in fact I refrain from it.

(b.) Do I think - is a synonym in this context for - “do I believe.”

(c.) No they were not. The epistles to the early Church occur (about) at this time (+/- 60CE); not the Gospels. They do not appear in the historical record (or rather they are not mentioned as existing) until after 100 CE (but more closely to 150 CE).

(d.) A reasonable assumption - and another way of saying it is not a historical record of a man (it is inaccurate; a distortion; or mythical; and/or an entirely fictional account).

Last edited by topal63 (2007-07-10 09:58:00)

topal63
. . .
+533|7162

stef10 wrote:

You do know that his really name was Yehshua.
You do know that - that is not true. That is an assumption working back from the name Iesous found in the Septuagint. Yehoshua and the variant Yeshua are both rendered as the same in the Greek writings.
AAFCptKabbom
Member
+127|7102|WPB, FL. USA

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
It sounds like an old joke in your statement:  "There were these two extremest walking down the street and..."

IMHO - Making your "views" known here on the forums is no different than the Christian making his views know to you - and in either case I would not dis either of you and call you extremest - just a believer and a non-believer - which are neither extremest views.

Last edited by AAFCptKabbom (2007-07-10 15:55:24)

weamo8
Member
+50|6886|USA

X-Ecuti0ner wrote:

So I was walking down the street the other day and some dude came up to me with a little Jesus sign in his hand. He asked me if I was a believer and I said 'no, to be honest I don't believe that there is some almight being living in some sort of parallel universe who crated the universe and everything in it'. After I said that he kept on talking about how Jesus is good and all that crap. He wouldn't stop talking about how the devil is the fear inside us.

I don't mean to be offensive to anyone but my views are as follows. THERE IS NO GOD. LOOK AROUND YOU, EARTH IS FULL OF ASSHOLES. No one cares about anyone anymore, and btw how are we suppoed to know that Jesus existed. It was 2,000 years ago and those people were fanatics and most likely not that intelligent. I don't believe in God but I do believe in morality (doing the right thing, even if it's at your own benefit).

Just thought I'd share my views
How ironic/hypocritical that you are doing exactly what that "dude" did.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard