Jesus existed therefore God

[FarWanderer]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

[Tcg]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

No. That fact alone wouldn't even establish that the more mundane claims about Jesus were true, much less the miraculous ones.

[William]

[Replying to post 1 by FarWanderer]

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

I do not see how it could.

For one, it is generally not argued that a person who had an effect on others which eventually came to the attention of Rome to the point where it is an historical fact that Rome first tried exterminating the members of the movement which grew from that, and having failed to do so, Rome eventually took over the whole shebang by adopting it and eventually making it the main religion.

But the stories about the Jesus which Rome created cannot be regarded as anything but myth - certainly myth necessitating faith from the followers and without which would not have grown into the colossal organised religion that it became. Those supporting that religion conflate this as evidence that such a person did in fact exist and what is told about him did in fact happen.

Whether this was done with in mind to promote the idea of establishing the idea of an all powerful, all knowing God as actually existing, and in that imagery, placing said idea of the GOD on a throne - coincidentally authorizing those in control over the masses - may be debatable, but the evidence strongly suggests that this was part of the plan.

Indeed, one could even argue that an all powerful all knowing GOD actually does exist, but this in itself does not prove Christianity and its mythology is therefore true. Perhaps such a GOD is more interested in how we would each react to such claims, from our perspectives, of course. Like how one might know exactly how an event will unfold but those who are not in the know, won't... but one would still get some pleasantness from it all in observing how the ignorant become knowledgeable...

[Tart]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

Sure, so the reason i said that is because Jesus's existence itself is in a fulfillment of prophecy... We have hundred of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man. Jesus... To His existence...

If we allow Jesus to exist, at all, that implies there is some kind of historical merit to Jesus's existing... He had to do something, he lived his life.. What did he do? Well we take the historical aspects of Jesus life (accepted by nearly every Biblical scholar), His Baptism, His Trial, His crucifixion, perhaps some other aspects of His life... These events of Jesus's existence, are a fulfillment of prophecy... Prophecy is converging to the life of Jesus... Hundreds of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man... Yes, so unless we have a valid explanation for this coincident, it is evidence of a divine plan...

[Tart]

[Replying to post 1 by FarWanderer]
But the stories about the Jesus which Rome created cannot be regarded as anything but myth

Do you have evidence Rome created the story about Jesus? What do you mean by that?

[Divine Insight]

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

As I had asked in the other thread, "What do we mean by Jesus?"

If by "Jesus" we mean the Jesus described by the Gospel rumors PRECISELY as described. Then, of course, we would need to conclude that the God referred to in those Gospel rumors must actually exist. And this is especially true if the "Jesus" we're talking about is the one where God spoke from a cloud proclaiming Jesus to be his Son, etc.

On the other hand, if what we mean by "Jesus", is simply some man who may have sparked the superstitious rumors that were detailed in the Gospel Rumors decades after he had DIED and STAYED DEAD, then this "Jesus" having existed would not mean anything at all. Other than perhaps explaining what sparked these outrageous religious superstitions.

So yes, of course if the Jesus described in detail by the Gospel Rumors had actually existed and done and said precisely all the things the Gospel Rumors claim, then it would be hard to see how he couldn't be evidence for a God. He certainly would have at least been evidence for the existence of evil demons since the Gospel Rumors have their "Jesus" casting demons out of humans and into pigs.

I mean, if that was a historically true event then there must be such a thing as demons that can be magically cast out of humans and into pigs right?

~~~~~

But no, the idea that some Jewish rebel apostate might have caused trouble and sparked rumors to be written about him decades after he had died would not be evidence for the existence of anything other than superstitious people who wrote outlandish rumors about the man decades after he had died.

A "historical Jesus" doesn't amount to evidence for much of anything at all.

I personally don't rule out the possibility of a historical "Jesus".

I wouldn't even be impressed at all if a historical "Jesus" could be verified to have existed, argued against his religious leasers, threw temper tantrums in the temple, ranted negatively about religious authorities publicly, was charged with apostasy, and ultimately crucified.

I wouldn't even be impressed if it could be established historically that after his crucifixion questions arose about what happened to his body, or that people claimed to have seen him or spoken with him after the crucifixion. I would see no reason at all to not simply conclude that he had survived the event. According to the Gospel Rumors when Jesus was seen after the crucifixion he was badly wounded. That's exactly what I would expect from someone who had survived the ordeal.

In fact, if Jesus would have been raised from the dead by an omnipotent God I would expect that God would have also healed Jesus' body to pristine health, far better than normal. But nope, even the Gospel Rumors have a wounded Jesus walking around after the crucifixion. So, as far as I can see some guy was crucified, thought to be dead, and then discovered to be alive after all. No biggie.

The tales that some God had purposefully orchestrated and planned this event simply makes no sense.

So even the existence of a "historical Jesus" would not be evidence for the "Jesus" described in the Gospel Rumors.

Far from it.

I would still have absolutely no reason to believe that the Gospels are nothing more than extreme exaggerations and/or outright fabrications of any actual events.

So the "Gospel Jesus" would still be a work of fiction anyway.

[FarWanderer]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

Sure, so the reason i said that is because Jesus's existence itself is in a fulfillment of prophecy... We have hundred of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man. Jesus... To His existence...

If we allow Jesus to exist, at all, that implies there is some kind of historical merit to Jesus's existing... He had to do something, he lived his life.. What did he do? Well we take the historical aspects of Jesus life (accepted by nearly every Biblical scholar), His Baptism, His Trial, His crucifixion, perhaps some other aspects of His life... These events of Jesus's existence, are a fulfillment of prophecy... Prophecy is converging to the life of Jesus... Hundreds of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man... Yes, so unless we have a valid explanation for this coincident, it is evidence of a divine plan...

The vast majority of these prophecies have nothing to do with his baptism, trial, crucifixion. Dont write to imply like they do.

The vast majority of these prophecies are said fulfilled by a small handful of anonymous authors decades after Jesus died. Painting a target around an arrow already shot is mere stage magic, requiring neither coincidence nor divine plan to explain.

Let us talk about the Old Testament prophecies for events that are widely agreed upon having actually occurred, such as the crucifixion. Those prophecies should be your strongest. Surely you can be specific then, right? It is impossible to address something as vague as hundreds of fulfilled prophecies.

[Goat]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

Sure, so the reason i said that is because Jesus's existence itself is in a fulfillment of prophecy... We have hundred of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man. Jesus... To His existence...

If we allow Jesus to exist, at all, that implies there is some kind of historical merit to Jesus's existing... He had to do something, he lived his life.. What did he do? Well we take the historical aspects of Jesus life (accepted by nearly every Biblical scholar), His Baptism, His Trial, His crucifixion, perhaps some other aspects of His life... These events of Jesus's existence, are a fulfillment of prophecy... Prophecy is converging to the life of Jesus... Hundreds of prophecies, from dozens of prophets, all converging to one man... Yes, so unless we have a valid explanation for this coincident, it is evidence of a divine plan...

How is the existance of Jesus part of propehcy? if you look at the passages that are claimed to be the propehcy for Jesus, it is no such thing. They are mistranslated, out of context, vague, or shoe horned into place and wiriten to. The NT writers took passages, and wrote to them. If you look at the passages in context, using proper translations, not one was about Jesus.

[rikuoamero]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

As I said in the other thread where this post comes from, one cannot use the resurrection to prove an all powerful God.
After all...an all powerful God is needed to prove the resurrection happened at all, since the resurrection is supposed to be a (THE) supernatural event. So are those of Tart's group going to prove their God first, and then use their God to prove the resurrection? Or prove the resurrection first, and then use that to prove their God?

Which comes first? Chicken or the egg? Resurrection or God?

[Elijah John]

Absolutely there is a lot hanging on whether Jesus existed or not... When studying the evidence, if they actually take the subject seriously, His existence itself is testimony to God... It is hard to get around it without seriously deluding yourself... This is probably why some people flat out deny His existence, like Dr. Richard Carrier for example. He is so convinced that the Gospels have such a deeper meaning then the surface, that it has to be a myth... He builds his entire argument on that focus... But that is the claim of the Gospels.. That the message Jesus brought indeed has a deeper message, that he fulfilled a destiny of God to establish that deeper message...

If we allow Jesus to be historical. His existence itself, his trail, his death, is a fulfillment of a divine plan... And being the fact that it is irrational to deny that there is a huge magnitude of historical evidence, so much so that no fictional person ever has had this amount of evidence. Period...

Jesus existence itself establishes an All Powerful, and All Knowing God exists. And therefor give evidence to the Resurrection.

Bold added by me.

Question for debate: If the statement Jesus existed is true, does that necessarily establish that an all powerful, all knowing God exists?

It does not. And conversely, if Jesus did not exist, that does not of necessity establish the non-existence of an omnipotent/omnicient Deity either.

Also, the resurrection if it happened, proves nothing but that something extraordinary happened. It would not prove that "Jesus is God" nor would it prove that Jesus died and rose in order to "pay for" our sins. At best, those conclusions are theological interpretations.