Which hypothesis would Occam's Razor favor?

[Elijah John]

From the Wikipedia description of Occam's Razor:

the problem-solving principle that essentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones

In light of this principle, which of the following scenarios is most likely true?

a)That Jesus existed as a real, flesh and blood human being, but was mythologized after his death.

b)That Jesus is really God the Son, second person of a Divine Trinity.

c) That Jesus never existed at all, and is a literary and theological invention.

[1213]

From the Wikipedia description of Occam's Razor:

the problem-solving principle that essentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones

In light of this principle, which of the following scenarios is most likely true?

a)That Jesus existed as a real, flesh and blood human being, but was mythologized after his death.

b)That Jesus is really God the Son, second person of a Divine Trinity.

c) That Jesus never existed at all, and is a literary and theological invention.

I think none of those are accurate enough for me, but…

a) Needs much explanation
b) Needs as much explanation as a
c) Needs most explanation

Bible version requires the least explaining.

But I don’t think that “least explaining� is sufficient for deciding what is truth.

[Mithrae]

From the Wikipedia description of Occam's Razor:

the problem-solving principle that essentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones

In light of this principle, which of the following scenarios is most likely true?

a)That Jesus existed as a real, flesh and blood human being, but was mythologized after his death.

b)That Jesus is really God the Son, second person of a Divine Trinity.

c) That Jesus never existed at all, and is a literary and theological invention.

Simplistic speculation is worthless, so any given solution must first and foremost account for as much available data as possible and secondly - given the criterion of simplicity - go beyond the available data as little as possible.

Far as I can tell Occam's razor favours the view that Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead... whilst roundly rejecting biblical inerrancy or the notion that all the gospels are highly accurate reports, and having little to say about the divinity which one of his disciples clearly alleged of him.

Fortunately there's more to life than Occam's razor, such as the fact that we know miracles and resurrections are highly improbable. Perhaps more importantly, even if a given theory were the 'best' available, that needn't make it likely; if there were three or four others almost as plausible, the single best among them would still be quite improbable.

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 3 by Mithrae]

Far as I can tell Occam's razor favours the view that Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead... whilst roundly rejecting biblical inerrancy or the notion that all the gospels are highly accurate reports, and having little to say about the divinity which one of his disciples clearly alleged of him.

Please explain yourself here. If as you say, the razor actively rejects the notion the gospels are highly accurate reports, from where do you get that it would favour that Jesus rose from the dead?
Once one either ignores or rejects the Gospels, there is practically nothing on which the claim "Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead" to stand on. Paul makes no mention of miracles and what mention he does make of the resurrection is ambiguous at best as to what exactly he means.

[Mithrae]

[Replying to post 3 by Mithrae]

Far as I can tell Occam's razor favours the view that Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead... whilst roundly rejecting biblical inerrancy or the notion that all the gospels are highly accurate reports, and having little to say about the divinity which one of his disciples clearly alleged of him.

Please explain yourself here. If as you say, the razor actively rejects the notion the gospels are highly accurate reports, from where do you get that it would favour that Jesus rose from the dead?
Once one either ignores or rejects the Gospels, there is practically nothing on which the claim "Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead" to stand on. Paul makes no mention of miracles and what mention he does make of the resurrection is ambiguous at best as to what exactly he means.

Sad face. Do I really need to point out (for what seems like the dozenth time this year already) that it's not a zero or one hundred percent dichotomy... that reality is not black and white... that binary thinking almost inevitably produces bad conclusions? If it's not the case that all gospels are highly accurate reports it can still be the case either that all gospels are partly-accurate reports, or that one or two gospels are highly accurate reports, or both. The contradictions alone show that they can't all be highly accurate.

Memory is imperfect, and stories often change in the retelling. If Jesus performed miracles and was resurrected from the dead, all we could reasonably expect is something like 'Matthew,' Mark and Luke's accounts. John's highly theological account is unusual, particularly from a disciple/witness. But even so compared with the various other theories used as explanations for the available (Paul + gospels) data, the view that they're mostly based on a true story is clearly the most parsimonious.

Fortunately for you and I, simplest doesn't always mean best, and even best wouldn't necessarily mean probable.

[marco]

From the Wikipedia description of Occam's Razor:

the problem-solving principle that essentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones

In light of this principle, which of the following scenarios is most likely true?

a)That Jesus existed as a real, flesh and blood human being, but was mythologized after his death.

b)That Jesus is really God the Son, second person of a Divine Trinity.

c) That Jesus never existed at all, and is a literary and theological invention.

As a tool in making decisions about the human sphere, Occam's Razor is useful. When we pile on circumstances in our assessment, we are possibly multiplying probabilities, making the conclusion less likely.


In cases where we ignore rational considerations and admit the miraculous or where we are dealing with matters beyond human experience, I don't see that Occam has any application. We move purely into belief. The Trinity conclusion is best reached by a vote from clerics gathered in synod. The disappearance of a corpse admits of human explanation and so we need not move to the sphere of the divine.

[Divine Insight]

From the Wikipedia description of Occam's Razor:

the problem-solving principle that essentially states that simpler solutions are more likely to be correct than complex ones

In light of this principle, which of the following scenarios is most likely true?

a)That Jesus existed as a real, flesh and blood human being, but was mythologized after his death.

b)That Jesus is really God the Son, second person of a Divine Trinity.

c) That Jesus never existed at all, and is a literary and theological invention.

C is the simplest explanation. But then again the same is true of YHVH in general.

The entire Biblical saga is far simpler to explain as nothing more than very poorly made-up superstitious rumors. That explanation explains everything with nothing left unexplained.

Any attempt to argue that there is actually an intelligent God behind the Bible requires a lifetime of excuses (i.e. apologies) for why these fables don't make any sense as they are written.

So Occam's Razor definitely favors dismissal of the entire Hebrew mythology as nothing more than very poorly made-up nonsense.

Never mind Jesus. That's merely one offshoot of this entire mythology.

[StuartJ]

The Jesus character of the propaganda needs a much closer shave with a modern, rechargeable electric razor ...

In theology, Occam’s razor is used to prove or disprove the existence of God. William of Ockham, being a Christian friar, used his theory to defend religion. He regarded the scripture as true in the literal sense and therefore saw it as simple proof. To him, the bible was synonymous with reality and therefore to contradict it would conflict with established fact. Many religious people regard the existence of God as the simplest possible explanation for the creation of the universe.

In contrast, Thomas Aquinas used the concept in his radical 13th century work – The Summa Theologica. In it, he argued for atheism as a logical concept, not a contradiction of accepted beliefs. Aquinas wrote ‘it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many.’ He considered the existence of God to be a hypothesis which makes a huge number of assumptions, compared to scientific alternatives. Many modern atheists consider the existence of God to be unnecessarily complex, in particular, due to the lack of empirical evidence. https://fs.blog/2017/05/mental-model-occams-razor/

Jesus as "God" is a simple explanation for simple souls ...

Certain of whom inflate it into complex smokescreens to cover the lack of empirical evidence.

[Elijah John]

Isn't it more probable that Jesus existed as a man, than that he was invented for whatever reason?

Isn't the "Jesus-myth*" theory an unnecessary complexity, in effect, a conspiracy theory?

Far more simple (and in line with Occam's Razor) is to believe Jesus existed as a man, it seems to me.

---

*"Jesus Myth theory", that Jesus is purely a literary and theological invention, and never existed even as a flesh and blood man.

[2ndRateMind]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

It's a good question. But as I recall the Latin, Occam's razor is "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate", or, roughly translated, 'Thou shalt not multiply entities beyond necessity'.

Thus, if Jesus only was necessary to explain why the then state of the art Jewish theology was in error, and bring humanity closer to God's plan for us, I cannot conceive of a simpler solution to the problem.

Best wishes, 2RM.