.
Did Jesus live 2000 years ago, preach for a few years, and get executed?
This is NOT asking if you accept that he performed miracles or was supernatural " only that he existed, preached, was executed.
All are encouraged to explain why they do or do not accept
This thread / poll replaces an earlier one that was poorly worded.
Apologies to those who contributed to the previous thread (which is now in the Trash Can)
Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Moderator: Moderators
-
Zzyzx
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 25152
- Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 10:38 pm
- Location: Bible Belt USA
- Has thanked: 58 times
- Been thanked: 99 times
Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #1.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #181Neither does Talishi.Talishi wrote:I admitted voting that Jesus was real, and my argument was that there were at least five Jesus movements in existence after Jesus was executed. I can believe that Jesus was the imaginary friend of one Jesus movement, but not five different simultaneous ones. Therefore Jesus must have been a real fellow. However, this Jesus turned wine into water, like I do, not the other way around.Willum wrote: Hey Talishi: I told you he thought he tricked you into saying Jesus was real. Is that what you said? LOL.
"I can believe that Jesus was the imaginary friend of one Jesus movement"
What do you mean by that?
"this Jesus turned wine into water, like I do, not the other way around."
How do you know that?
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #182[Replying to MadeNew]
Odd, it seems like plain English to me:
Lazarus was raised from the dead, right?
Even if he was not, there were supposedly many people who claimed that he did, right?
So, even if only a few people believed it, Lazarus would be a person of immense notoriety, right?
Everyone would want to meet the man back from the dead, right?
Everyone would want to meet him, write about him, he would be famous, right?
He is not. There are no records of someone who should be almost as famous as Jesus.
Therefore Jesus didn't exist.
Or if he did, who cares? He was just another man, probably a mentally ill one.
On the other hand we have Jesus, alleged son of Yahweh, who, advocates that Jews touch coins that would make them ritually unclean, support the government of a false god (Rome) and indeed encourage them to commit blasphemy against his father.
Since no son of Yahweh would advocate breaking the commandments, Jesus as depicted must also be false.
Let me know if there is anything you don't understand.
Odd, it seems like plain English to me:
Lazarus was raised from the dead, right?
Even if he was not, there were supposedly many people who claimed that he did, right?
So, even if only a few people believed it, Lazarus would be a person of immense notoriety, right?
Everyone would want to meet the man back from the dead, right?
Everyone would want to meet him, write about him, he would be famous, right?
He is not. There are no records of someone who should be almost as famous as Jesus.
Therefore Jesus didn't exist.
Or if he did, who cares? He was just another man, probably a mentally ill one.
On the other hand we have Jesus, alleged son of Yahweh, who, advocates that Jews touch coins that would make them ritually unclean, support the government of a false god (Rome) and indeed encourage them to commit blasphemy against his father.
Since no son of Yahweh would advocate breaking the commandments, Jesus as depicted must also be false.
Let me know if there is anything you don't understand.
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #183Willum wrote: [Replying to MadeNew]
Odd, it seems like plain English to me:
Lazarus was raised from the dead, right?
Even if he was not, there were supposedly many people who claimed that he did, right?
So, even if only a few people believed it, Lazarus would be a person of immense notoriety, right?
Everyone would want to meet the man back from the dead, right?
Everyone would want to meet him, write about him, he would be famous, right?
He is not. There are no records of someone who should be almost as famous as Jesus.
Therefore Jesus didn't exist.
Or if he did, who cares? He was just another man, probably a mentally ill one.
On the other hand we have Jesus, alleged son of Yahweh, who, advocates that Jews touch coins that would make them ritually unclean, support the government of a false god (Rome) and indeed encourage them to commit blasphemy against his father.
Since no son of Yahweh would advocate breaking the commandments, Jesus as depicted must also be false.
Let me know if there is anything you don't understand.
Jesus also told Peter to "kill and eat" an unclean animal, that goes against Jewish law, and so does eating with Gentiles, or associating with Gentiles, that also went against Jewish standards, yet the fulfillment of the scripture broke down this separation between the Jewish culture and the nonjews.
"I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth."~Old Testament scripture.
Jesus was the fulfillment of the law, and brought on the New Covenant.
And you say Lazarus is proof that Jesus didn't exist? That because people didn't write about this miracle, that is proof Jesus wasn't real?
This is hardly any "proof" at all... The fact that you don't have MORE written records of this means nothing. Lazarus was wrote about, but you discredit those claims, what makes you think if someone else wrote about him being raised from the dead, that you wouldn't just discredit those claims as well? And even if no one wrote about him, that is nothing of a "proof" that this didn't happen.
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #184[Replying to MadeNew]
Absolutely.
Excellent point.
He can't be real at all then can he?
He wants you to blaspheme against Jehovah by violating commandment 1,2 and 4. He wants you to touch money that would defile your soul, eat unclean foods and pay tithes to false gods.
Explain to me how he could be real, if Jehovah is real. It is impossible and illogical.
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
While this is true, one does need to be sane about it. Being back from the dead is quite a large absence. If he were a historical figure, as is acclaimed in the Bible, with his pedigree, he would be acclaimed elsewhere, even if it were tabloids and nay-sayers.
But you have two compounded problems: Jesus is unrecorded except in one book, and Lazarus is also only referenced in that same book. The probability of both being included in one place, and excluded elsewhere is so small as to make an platypus laugh.
If I were to write a story about a man back from the dead, and the man who raised him, and someone 2000 years later claimed it was real - and they only found those characters in one book, what would a reasonable man think?
Absolutely.
Excellent point.
He can't be real at all then can he?
He wants you to blaspheme against Jehovah by violating commandment 1,2 and 4. He wants you to touch money that would defile your soul, eat unclean foods and pay tithes to false gods.
Explain to me how he could be real, if Jehovah is real. It is impossible and illogical.
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
While this is true, one does need to be sane about it. Being back from the dead is quite a large absence. If he were a historical figure, as is acclaimed in the Bible, with his pedigree, he would be acclaimed elsewhere, even if it were tabloids and nay-sayers.
But you have two compounded problems: Jesus is unrecorded except in one book, and Lazarus is also only referenced in that same book. The probability of both being included in one place, and excluded elsewhere is so small as to make an platypus laugh.
If I were to write a story about a man back from the dead, and the man who raised him, and someone 2000 years later claimed it was real - and they only found those characters in one book, what would a reasonable man think?
Last edited by Willum on Wed Sep 28, 2016 4:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
PghPanther
- Guru
- Posts: 1242
- Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 8:18 pm
- Location: Parts Unknown
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #185[Replying to post 2 by Divine Insight]
You might consider it this way............excluding any extraordinary live alien claims.....did a UFO/alien craft crash in the desert in the late 40's in Roswell, NM?
Well I can accept that something crashed in that report.......but a UFO is sure a stretch over something like a weather balloon that crashed there.
Accepting that a person named Jesus lived preached and was executed over 2,000 years ago could be far and away very different from the reports of what the Gospel accounts tell about him....even if you kick all the divine/supernatural stuff out.........just as a weather balloon is very different from a UFO craft......even if you kick out all the live aliens communicating with the government claims from that account.
You might consider it this way............excluding any extraordinary live alien claims.....did a UFO/alien craft crash in the desert in the late 40's in Roswell, NM?
Well I can accept that something crashed in that report.......but a UFO is sure a stretch over something like a weather balloon that crashed there.
Accepting that a person named Jesus lived preached and was executed over 2,000 years ago could be far and away very different from the reports of what the Gospel accounts tell about him....even if you kick all the divine/supernatural stuff out.........just as a weather balloon is very different from a UFO craft......even if you kick out all the live aliens communicating with the government claims from that account.
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #186Willum wrote: [Replying to MadeNew]
Absolutely.
Excellent point.
He can't be real at all then can he?
He wants you to blaspheme against Jehovah by violating commandment 1,2 and 4. He wants you to touch money that would defile your soul, eat unclean foods and pay tithes to false gods.
Explain to me how he could be real, if Jehovah is real. It is impossible and illogical.
"absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
While this is true, one does need to be sane about it. Being back from the dead is quite a large absence. If he were a historical figure, as is acclaimed in the Bible, with his pedigree, he would be acclaimed elsewhere, even if it were tabloids and nay-sayers.
But you have two compounded problems: Jesus is unrecorded except in one book, and Lazarus is also only referenced in that same book. The probability of both being included in one place, and excluded elsewhere is so small as to make an platypus laugh.
If I were to write a story about a man back from the dead, and the man who raised him, and someone 2000 years later claimed it was real - and they only found those characters in one book, what would a reasonable man think?
Its not in one book, its in a multitude of books... And what makes you think that if we had more sources then our multitudes of books we already have, that you would actually find it credible? If they confirmed the story is true, you would just discredit it too. I mean we even have historians that talk about Jesus, and you guys surely don't give credit to even them... Plus.. Do you think we have every thing written down in that time period, 2000 years ago, at our disposal right now? That would be just a foolish thing to think. You act like you have every peace of written document from that time, and you can't find these stories anywhere. Do we have every piece of evidence at our disposal from 2000 years ago... The answer is no... Hence "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence".... I mean there have been entire cities that are talked about in the Bible that we didn't even uncover tell recently (I'm spacing the specific name at the moment), but if we never discovered them, it certainly doesn't mean the Bible isn't true.
Also, i just reject your claim that Jesus teachings go against Jewish teachings. Jesus was so clearly the fulfillment of the Jewish scripture and brought on the New Covenant, which is what was expected to happen (hence the fulfillment of the prophesies and the fulfillment of the law which was expected)...
By you saying your opinion is different, you can have your opinion, but it is pretty clear that the scripture justifies Jesus coming, and his teachings. Your opinion of how you interpret Old Testament connecting with the New Testament isn't proof of anything for everyone who so clearly sees it differently.
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #187[Replying to MadeNew]
My sympathies madenew.
We have quite a lot of history from that time and earlier. Any important person, and many many unimportant ones. The internet is revealing more and more history. I have shown you "kooks and quacks of the Roman empire," which shows you just how unimportant people can be to be recorded in history.
Your fallacy is believing that 2000 years ago they didn't keep good track of history. Remember before Christianity plunged the Western word into the Dark Ages, mankind was, barring electronics, as advanced as we are now, maybe more so, in spots.
So, yeah, someone like Jesus or Lazarus would have been recorded quite a lot. You can look up far more obscure people from the same times on wikipedia easily.
So, Jesus came here to teach a new law, let's assume he existed:
There is no way he could advocate venerating a pagan god.
Which, as I can repeat endlessly, is exactly what he did with his "render speech," right outside a temple to the God Augusts, he said render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Romans saw Caesar as a God, Jews saw Augutus as a false god, yet Jesus said do what Caesar wants, instead of "if your eye offends your pluck it out," as he should have.
Conclusion, Jesus was false. Obfuscating about records 2000 years ago, can't change this. Jesus advocated obeying a pagan god and his vicar. There is no way around it, it is impossible for the son of Yahwey to advocate support for a pagan government - a pagan government empowered by a pagan god.
I can understand your rejecting these. However, I have not expressed an opinion anywhere. Just using history and the Bible, and facts from both.[/b]
My sympathies madenew.
We have quite a lot of history from that time and earlier. Any important person, and many many unimportant ones. The internet is revealing more and more history. I have shown you "kooks and quacks of the Roman empire," which shows you just how unimportant people can be to be recorded in history.
Your fallacy is believing that 2000 years ago they didn't keep good track of history. Remember before Christianity plunged the Western word into the Dark Ages, mankind was, barring electronics, as advanced as we are now, maybe more so, in spots.
So, yeah, someone like Jesus or Lazarus would have been recorded quite a lot. You can look up far more obscure people from the same times on wikipedia easily.
So, Jesus came here to teach a new law, let's assume he existed:
There is no way he could advocate venerating a pagan god.
Which, as I can repeat endlessly, is exactly what he did with his "render speech," right outside a temple to the God Augusts, he said render to Caesar what is Caesar's. Romans saw Caesar as a God, Jews saw Augutus as a false god, yet Jesus said do what Caesar wants, instead of "if your eye offends your pluck it out," as he should have.
Conclusion, Jesus was false. Obfuscating about records 2000 years ago, can't change this. Jesus advocated obeying a pagan god and his vicar. There is no way around it, it is impossible for the son of Yahwey to advocate support for a pagan government - a pagan government empowered by a pagan god.
I can understand your rejecting these. However, I have not expressed an opinion anywhere. Just using history and the Bible, and facts from both.[/b]
-
Willum
- Savant
- Posts: 9017
- Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2014 2:14 pm
- Location: Yahweh's Burial Place
- Has thanked: 35 times
- Been thanked: 82 times
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #189[Replying to post 186 by MadeNew]
You are kidding right?
What you can't use "google?"
All the people? There are hundreds of thousands, who have something written about them, and Rome took census, and that data is still kicking around somewhere, which is millions of people.
What will that prove? That I am dumb enough to list thousands of people on a religious site?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... ury_people
That took 30 seconds. How many do you think are out there for someone really insane enough to list all the people in 30 AD?
I warrant 99% of the folks you find are less significant than Jesus or Lazarus.
So Jesus and Lazarus should have been recorded voluminously. Stay on topic, which is demonstrating the existence of Jesus is illogical and impossible.
And continuing, Jesus would blaspheme against his father if he advocated Rome. Therefore it's a falsehood.
You are kidding right?
What you can't use "google?"
All the people? There are hundreds of thousands, who have something written about them, and Rome took census, and that data is still kicking around somewhere, which is millions of people.
What will that prove? That I am dumb enough to list thousands of people on a religious site?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... ury_people
That took 30 seconds. How many do you think are out there for someone really insane enough to list all the people in 30 AD?
I warrant 99% of the folks you find are less significant than Jesus or Lazarus.
So Jesus and Lazarus should have been recorded voluminously. Stay on topic, which is demonstrating the existence of Jesus is illogical and impossible.
And continuing, Jesus would blaspheme against his father if he advocated Rome. Therefore it's a falsehood.
Re: Did Jesus exist? (Replaces earlier poll)
Post #190Willum wrote: [Replying to post 186 by MadeNew]
You are kidding right?
What you can't use "google?"
All the people? There are hundreds of thousands, who have something written about them, and Rome took census, and that data is still kicking around somewhere, which is millions of people.
What will that prove? That I am dumb enough to list thousands of people on a religious site?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category: ... ury_people
That took 30 seconds. How many do you think are out there for someone really insane enough to list all the people in 30 AD?
I warrant 99% of the folks you find are less significant than Jesus or Lazarus.
So Jesus and Lazarus should have been recorded voluminously. Stay on topic, which is demonstrating the existence of Jesus is illogical and impossible.
And continuing, Jesus would blaspheme against his father if he advocated Rome. Therefore it's a falsehood.
No I'm not kidding, this is about your knowledge of people who were alive in 30AD. I doubt you can list more then 100. Give me a list... You think all these people should have been known, right?
How many people could you list? Give me a number
