Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

How strong is the evidence that Jesus existed?

Page 14 of 22 [ 339 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 22  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

13 Dec 2011, 5:37 pm

Tadzio wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Tadzio wrote:
MCalavera wrote:

Why are you stuck on Meier? Other than that, I wish I could understand what you're saying exactly.

Anyway, there are other experts, nonChristian, who also accept the historical Jesus.

While it's always good to read books from various authors of various views, one must also learn to discern which view is more reasonable than the others.


Meier is the most solid presently. If you want softer versions, try:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/theories.html

A few steps further distant, and it's into loose wing-nut true-believer Land again.

If you want abuse of the word "reasonable" again, go back to WLC-Land.

Tadzio


Meier is a Christian. I don't believe Meier is the most solid. I believe Bart Ehrman has it more spot-on than he does.

Have you ever read any of his books?


Hi MCalavera,

I've read 4 of Bart Ehrman's books:

Lost Scriptures: Books that Did Not Make It into the New Testament (2003)

Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew (2003)

God's Problem

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why

I don't know the edition year of the last two (but they're paperbacks, and buried in stacks of other books).

From the interviews I've heard that included Ehrman, he mostly relies also on evidencies Paul recorded from other people about the "real" Jesus, versus just the "historical", and more "legendary", Jesus.

Tadzio


Read his book on the apocalypticist Jesus. He shows not only that Jesus was an apocalypticist preacher but he also indirectly shows that Jesus was historical.

And he doesn't even resort to Paul much for that.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

13 Dec 2011, 5:48 pm

Magnus_Rex wrote:
I think he was actually many people. From different spans of time, even. Jesus is probably some kind of amalgamation of early christians, from back when they were not even called christians.

Maybe there was a man named Yeshua, who gave his identity to this amalgamation, but the rumors of his life have been greatly exaggerated.


One historical character was more than enough based on the evidence we have. No need for multiple entities.



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

14 Dec 2011, 4:10 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Who is Peter?


Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.

But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.

So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.

From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.


I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Britain was pagan before the Romans turned up. The Romans converted us to christianity. There is speculation that the pagans initially resisted the conversion but later accepted jesus and included him as another god along with their existing gods. You mentioned Peter telling jesus that the pagans knew about his coming. If that is so, then what he may have meant was that the pagans already had a notion of the coming of a god (their solar god), which was born again after the winter solstice which was the main festival of Britain and other pagan communities for at least 3000 years prior to the Romans.



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

14 Dec 2011, 4:20 am

MCalavera wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
So no evidence (or lack of evidence) can convince you you're wrong. You're just like any religious person who clings to his faith regardless of what evidence contradicts it.

If your evidence for your Sun God Jesus is by questioning the Bible or that the requested documents have all been burnt to ashes or that the paintings on the cave walls are evidence, then all I can say is that either you're deluded and brainwashed or worse ... you're being intellectually dishonest.

I hope it's the former.


What am I wrong about and how can you prove that I am wrong? I am being intellectually speculative, something you seem incapable of.


Your speculation is without any real basis. It's influenced by Acharya S herself and because of this influence you now see a pattern related to the Sun that isn't really there. But your selective perception nevertheless sees it.


I think we established this a few posts ago. My speculation was not influenced by this woman you speak of. My speculation is based on the following:

We have a STORY of a man called jesus, who seems to have existed around 2000 years ago in the middle east. Somehow, this mortal has been venerated with the following:

He walked on water
He healed the blind
He was born of a virgin
He was prophesised to be the saviour of humanity
At his birthplace 3 kings followed a bright star in the east to locate this saviour
He was called the "light of the world"
He was crucified on a cross
He was dead for 3 days
After 3 days he was ressurected (born again)

I am unwilling to accept that this man was capable of the above, or that any of the above actually occurred to this man, whom we cannot say for sure existed anyway.
However, I am willing to accept that all of the above can be said about the sun, which we can very confidently say exists, both now and at all times since humans have walked the Earth.



WhiteWidow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Dec 2011
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 662
Location: Here

14 Dec 2011, 4:26 am

I agree that Jesus did exist and after reading some of the posts, I agree that statistically speaking, a real life historian such as Tactius authored these documents to support the evidence.

It's interesting however, that people would elevate his prowess in correlation with the actual sun itself. We give Hollywood celebrities more power than they have and are looked up to as gods of modern society. It's not surprising that an individual or a group of them would give Jesus these supernatural attributes.

It's not to say that Jesus didn't perform miracles. It's not even moronic to think that maybe there was just one human being on this earth that had meant to give us the "manual" of life before we started living it. Perhaps we're in a dimension within a universe where Jesus did exist. And did perform miracles. And did and still does perhaps have the supernatural attributes of the actual sun.



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

14 Dec 2011, 4:37 am

WhiteWidow wrote:
I agree that Jesus did exist and after reading some of the posts, I agree that statistically speaking, a real life historian such as Tactius authored these documents to support the evidence.

It's interesting however, that people would elevate his prowess in correlation with the actual sun itself. We give Hollywood celebrities more power than they have and are looked up to as gods of modern society. It's not surprising that an individual or a group of them would give Jesus these supernatural attributes.

It's not to say that Jesus didn't perform miracles. It's not even moronic to think that maybe there was just one human being on this earth that had meant to give us the "manual" of life before we started living it. Perhaps we're in a dimension within a universe where Jesus did exist. And did perform miracles. And did and still does perhaps have the supernatural attributes of the actual sun.


Perhaps we are living in that universe :-)



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Dec 2011, 5:11 am

Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Who is Peter?


Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.

But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.

So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.

From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.


I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Britain was pagan before the Romans turned up. The Romans converted us to christianity. There is speculation that the pagans initially resisted the conversion but later accepted jesus and included him as another god along with their existing gods. You mentioned Peter telling jesus that the pagans knew about his coming. If that is so, then what he may have meant was that the pagans already had a notion of the coming of a god (their solar god), which was born again after the winter solstice which was the main festival of Britain and other pagan communities for at least 3000 years prior to the Romans.


I should have been more explanatory - Peter hadn't told Jesus that; rather Peter tells this to later followers.

And it is true, pagans didn't always conceive of Christ in the proper Christian sense. Case in point - when the Frankish King, Clovis, converted to Christianity after pledging his faith in Christ in return for victory against the Franks' enemies, the Alemanni, he saw Jesus as a new war god to replace Wodan. Proof that he didn't grasp Christian theology is revealed when he was told of the story of Christ's crucifixion, Clovis raised had raised his battle axe into the air, and declared, "Had I and my Franks been there, we would have saved him!" This paganized view of Christ was probably very common among the new Frankish converts in northern Gaul, the Rhineland, and Belgium, who still clung to their Germanic warrior culture.
A few centuries later, a half pagan, fictionalized "Gospel" was written in northern Germany among the Saxons, in which Jesus is portrayed as a war chief, and his twelve disciples are his retinue of warriors.
Doubtlessly, pagan Germanic gods became hidden in Christian saints during the Middle Ages. Saint Ursula of Cologne was very probably a Frankish bear totem in Pre-Christian times, who was turned into a Christian martyr in myth.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Robdemanc
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2010
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,872
Location: England

14 Dec 2011, 1:58 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Who is Peter?


Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.

But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.

So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.

From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.


I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Britain was pagan before the Romans turned up. The Romans converted us to christianity. There is speculation that the pagans initially resisted the conversion but later accepted jesus and included him as another god along with their existing gods. You mentioned Peter telling jesus that the pagans knew about his coming. If that is so, then what he may have meant was that the pagans already had a notion of the coming of a god (their solar god), which was born again after the winter solstice which was the main festival of Britain and other pagan communities for at least 3000 years prior to the Romans.


I should have been more explanatory - Peter hadn't told Jesus that; rather Peter tells this to later followers.

And it is true, pagans didn't always conceive of Christ in the proper Christian sense. Case in point - when the Frankish King, Clovis, converted to Christianity after pledging his faith in Christ in return for victory against the Franks' enemies, the Alemanni, he saw Jesus as a new war god to replace Wodan. Proof that he didn't grasp Christian theology is revealed when he was told of the story of Christ's crucifixion, Clovis raised had raised his battle axe into the air, and declared, "Had I and my Franks been there, we would have saved him!" This paganized view of Christ was probably very common among the new Frankish converts in northern Gaul, the Rhineland, and Belgium, who still clung to their Germanic warrior culture.
A few centuries later, a half pagan, fictionalized "Gospel" was written in northern Germany among the Saxons, in which Jesus is portrayed as a war chief, and his twelve disciples are his retinue of warriors.
Doubtlessly, pagan Germanic gods became hidden in Christian saints during the Middle Ages. Saint Ursula of Cologne was very probably a Frankish bear totem in Pre-Christian times, who was turned into a Christian martyr in myth.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Ok. I am not really sure why you have told me all this. Is it to imply that pagans knew nothing of christs death? Or that you think pagan myths were assimilated into christianity? Or that the pagans in Germany took on christ as a god of war?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 89
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

14 Dec 2011, 2:28 pm

Not very



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

14 Dec 2011, 3:29 pm

Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Robdemanc wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:

As I recall, Peter maintained Christ was alive in the pagan myths - that is, he seemed to believe that the pagans had a sense of Christ's coming, even though they didn't grasp it in its entirety.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Who is Peter?


Jesus' disciple, called the Rock. Catholicism claims him as their first Pope.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


The problem I have with religion is that it is confusing to say the least. Scholars disagree over what the events were and who said what to whom to a certain degree. When it comes to mythology there are numerous contradictions and/or apparent confusions over what things meant. So we living in the 21st century have little hope of getting to the bottom of it.

But I am placing credibility on the sun god worship as the root of all modern religion because as a human I can stand and watch the sunrise and feel what an incredible and dazzling event it is. And I can equally put myself in the position of a prehistoric man living a difficult life in a more natural state and feeling relief and joy at seeing the sunrise further north after the winter solstice because that would tell me that the all powerful sun that gives warmth and light was returning, or born again, and will feed the people for another year.

So that is why I place more credibility in ancient sun god worship and think it is the source of jesus birth and death story.

From reading the bible it sounds like jesus was a man who inspired many and wanted to seek a new way of life for people. But I don't think he was risen from the dead. And there is strong speculation that the pagans in britain accepted jesus as "just another god", they had many. But I think their one true god was the sun.


I'm a little lost. How did Britain come into the conversation?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Britain was pagan before the Romans turned up. The Romans converted us to christianity. There is speculation that the pagans initially resisted the conversion but later accepted jesus and included him as another god along with their existing gods. You mentioned Peter telling jesus that the pagans knew about his coming. If that is so, then what he may have meant was that the pagans already had a notion of the coming of a god (their solar god), which was born again after the winter solstice which was the main festival of Britain and other pagan communities for at least 3000 years prior to the Romans.


I should have been more explanatory - Peter hadn't told Jesus that; rather Peter tells this to later followers.

And it is true, pagans didn't always conceive of Christ in the proper Christian sense. Case in point - when the Frankish King, Clovis, converted to Christianity after pledging his faith in Christ in return for victory against the Franks' enemies, the Alemanni, he saw Jesus as a new war god to replace Wodan. Proof that he didn't grasp Christian theology is revealed when he was told of the story of Christ's crucifixion, Clovis raised had raised his battle axe into the air, and declared, "Had I and my Franks been there, we would have saved him!" This paganized view of Christ was probably very common among the new Frankish converts in northern Gaul, the Rhineland, and Belgium, who still clung to their Germanic warrior culture.
A few centuries later, a half pagan, fictionalized "Gospel" was written in northern Germany among the Saxons, in which Jesus is portrayed as a war chief, and his twelve disciples are his retinue of warriors.
Doubtlessly, pagan Germanic gods became hidden in Christian saints during the Middle Ages. Saint Ursula of Cologne was very probably a Frankish bear totem in Pre-Christian times, who was turned into a Christian martyr in myth.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Ok. I am not really sure why you have told me all this. Is it to imply that pagans knew nothing of christs death? Or that you think pagan myths were assimilated into christianity? Or that the pagans in Germany took on christ as a god of war?


You had mentioned pagan assimilation of Christ in Britain, and I was simply agreeing that pagans elsewhere had done the same, not really understanding Christian theology.
I thought it was, if not totally relevant, at least of interest.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

14 Dec 2011, 9:34 pm

Robdemanc wrote:
I think we established this a few posts ago. My speculation was not influenced by this woman you speak of.


Maybe not directly. But the origin of your belief is in her writings. So you may have got this set of beliefs of yours directly from someone else who was, in turn, directly influenced by Acharya's writings.

Quote:
My speculation is based on the following:

We have a STORY of a man called jesus, who seems to have existed around 2000 years ago in the middle east. Somehow, this mortal has been venerated with the following:

He walked on water
He healed the blind
He was born of a virgin
He was prophesised to be the saviour of humanity
At his birthplace 3 kings followed a bright star in the east to locate this saviour
He was called the "light of the world"
He was crucified on a cross
He was dead for 3 days
After 3 days he was ressurected (born again)

I am unwilling to accept that this man was capable of the above, or that any of the above actually occurred to this man, whom we cannot say for sure existed anyway.


So why not just stick to that instead of adding unnecessary extraneous claims that lack evidence?

Quote:
However, I am willing to accept that all of the above can be said about the sun, which we can very confidently say exists, both now and at all times since humans have walked the Earth.


Again, you have no evidence the ancients thought the sun was collectively born of a virgin, had twelve apostles, was crucified and then later rose from the dead.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

14 Dec 2011, 9:37 pm

WhiteWidow wrote:
I agree that Jesus did exist and after reading some of the posts, I agree that statistically speaking, a real life historian such as Tactius authored these documents to support the evidence.

It's interesting however, that people would elevate his prowess in correlation with the actual sun itself. We give Hollywood celebrities more power than they have and are looked up to as gods of modern society. It's not surprising that an individual or a group of them would give Jesus these supernatural attributes.

It's not to say that Jesus didn't perform miracles. It's not even moronic to think that maybe there was just one human being on this earth that had meant to give us the "manual" of life before we started living it. Perhaps we're in a dimension within a universe where Jesus did exist. And did perform miracles. And did and still does perhaps have the supernatural attributes of the actual sun.


Tacitus is a very bad evidence for Jesus' existence. If anything, it just shows that Christians existed at his own time.

And as for the sun bit, again we have no evidence for such "Jesus sun god" claims.

And no, Jesus most likely didn't do miracles. Think Benny Hinn.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Dec 2011, 12:12 am

MCalavera wrote:
WhiteWidow wrote:
I agree that Jesus did exist and after reading some of the posts, I agree that statistically speaking, a real life historian such as Tactius authored these documents to support the evidence.

It's interesting however, that people would elevate his prowess in correlation with the actual sun itself. We give Hollywood celebrities more power than they have and are looked up to as gods of modern society. It's not surprising that an individual or a group of them would give Jesus these supernatural attributes.

It's not to say that Jesus didn't perform miracles. It's not even moronic to think that maybe there was just one human being on this earth that had meant to give us the "manual" of life before we started living it. Perhaps we're in a dimension within a universe where Jesus did exist. And did perform miracles. And did and still does perhaps have the supernatural attributes of the actual sun.


Tacitus is a very bad evidence for Jesus' existence. If anything, it just shows that Christians existed at his own time.

And as for the sun bit, again we have no evidence for such "Jesus sun god" claims.

And no, Jesus most likely didn't do miracles. Think Benny Hinn.


I dunno... Just seems reasonable that for there to have been Christians, there probably would have been a Christ. Especially since this was still early enough for people who had known him who were still living during Tacitus' lifetime.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

15 Dec 2011, 12:17 am

Honestly, the best evidence that I can think of for the historical Jesus are the questions proposed for the historical Jesus that cannot be better answered collectively by any coherent mythicist answer.

Tacitus' report shows evidence that Christians existed as early as the time reported, but how can we know with such evidence that these Christians didn't just make up a figure called Christ?



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

15 Dec 2011, 12:20 am

MCalavera wrote:
Honestly, the best evidence that I can think of for the historical Jesus are the questions proposed for the historical Jesus that cannot be better answered collectively by any coherent mythicist answer.

Tacitus' report shows evidence that Christians existed as early as the time reported, but how can we know with such evidence that these Christians didn't just make up a figure called Christ?


Just made him up out of thin air, then laid down their lives for him? Sounds pretty unlikely to me.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,442

15 Dec 2011, 12:26 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
MCalavera wrote:
Honestly, the best evidence that I can think of for the historical Jesus are the questions proposed for the historical Jesus that cannot be better answered collectively by any coherent mythicist answer.

Tacitus' report shows evidence that Christians existed as early as the time reported, but how can we know with such evidence that these Christians didn't just make up a figure called Christ?


Just made him up out of thin air, then laid down their lives for him? Sounds pretty unlikely to me.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Well, ok, but if they strongly believed in something that's made up, it could still have led to basically the same effects.

When I say "made up", I don't necessarily mean they did it with deceit. They might've been affected so much by the continual oppression that kept going on with the Jews that their long dearly held desire for a Messiah to arrive and save them from the evils of the world was so psychologically great the originators came up with such a figure that would meet their psychological and emotional needs and had slightly later believers who truly believed Jesus was real die for the faith.