How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?

  • 74 Replies
  • 3257 Views
*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Jesus Christ is accepted as historical character by most historians. However the roundness of the earth is also accepted by most scientist and that's not good enough for flatearthers. If NASA pictures are so easy to fake, I think it's fair to consider that the gospels could be easy to fake as well. They were written almost 2000 years ago, if someone made it all up we wouldn't know. It could even be conspiracy.

I think it's very likely that JC was just fictitious character. For all I know his life as told in the gospels may just be made up.

So anyone has evidence t
hat JC existed? Like flatearthers like to say, if we cannot check that ourselves then why should we believe it?
« Last Edit: July 24, 2019, 04:50:36 PM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #1 on: July 24, 2019, 04:26:46 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17558
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #2 on: July 24, 2019, 04:44:06 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

If his existence has been widely verified, but he is not who he said he was, then why did so many people lie on his behalf and claim that he was able to cure a lot of people of disease, multiply bread and fish from a small bag to feed the poor, walk on water, and turn water into wine, etc? If that's a lie, then it follows that all of those writings of his existence would need to be a lie. It seems untenable that he existed, but that everyone just lied about what he did.

That would be like claiming that Abraham Lincoln existed, and his existence is widely chronicled, but he was never really a president of the United States, a freeer of the slaves, or a lawyer.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2019, 10:06:03 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Stash

  • 5746
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #3 on: July 24, 2019, 04:44:55 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

If his existence has been widely verified, but he is not who he said he was, then why did so many people lie on his behalf and claim that he was able to cure a lot of people of disease, multiply bread and fish from a small bag to feet the poor, walk on water, and turn water into wine, etc?

If that's a lie, then it follows that all of those writings of his existence would need to be a lie. It seems untenable that he existed, but that everyone just lied about what he did.

Compartmentalization. Exactly like how NASA faked the moon landings.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 42440
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #4 on: July 24, 2019, 04:50:45 PM »
Is this thread about Jesus or NASA?
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #5 on: July 24, 2019, 04:53:21 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

Thats good to know, could you please point at those records you mentioned?
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Stash

  • 5746
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2019, 05:09:20 PM »
Is this thread about Jesus or NASA?

Just pointing out, quite poorly, that just because many have written about his existence and miracles and such doesn't necessarily make any of it true. Much like the modern day argument that just because many people wrote about and worked on something doesn't necessarily make it true.

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 42440
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2019, 05:11:14 PM »
Is this thread about Jesus or NASA?

Just pointing out, quite poorly, that just because many have written about his existence and miracles and such doesn't necessarily make any of it true. Much like the modern day argument that just because many people wrote about and worked on something doesn't necessarily make it true.

I think you are almost FE.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2019, 05:23:30 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

If his existence has been widely verified, but he is not who he said he was, then why did so many people lie on his behalf and claim that he was able to cure a lot of people of disease, multiply bread and fish from a small bag to feet the poor, walk on water, and turn water into wine, etc?

I don't disagree. The reward for saying things like that about Him was death. So why would someone in their right mind still say all those things knowing it would equal the end of their lives.

Believe in something that will benefit you, meh, questionable at best. Something that will kill you, that is conviction right there

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #9 on: July 24, 2019, 05:25:32 PM »
Yehoshua was certainly a real person verified by many secular writers and record keepers of the time. Some even noted that he supposedly performed miracles and people followed him, they of course weighed no merit or witness of their own to this as they were simply keeping records.

Existence is not this issue, as that is easily proven. Being the Son of Yahweh, that is the issue....that is where faith is required.

If his existence has been widely verified, but he is not who he said he was, then why did so many people lie on his behalf and claim that he was able to cure a lot of people of disease, multiply bread and fish from a small bag to feet the poor, walk on water, and turn water into wine, etc? If that's a lie, then it follows that all of those writings of his existence would need to be a lie. It seems untenable that he existed, but that everyone just lied about what he did.

That would be like claiming that Abraham Lincoln existed, and his existence is widely chronicled, but he was never really a president of the United States, a freeer of the slaves, or a lawyer.

To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #10 on: July 24, 2019, 05:31:59 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #11 on: July 24, 2019, 05:59:10 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

Josephus was contemporary to JC but the manuscripts we have are copies from centuries later.  Many scholars argue that the sentence were he mentions JC is an insertion by a christian copist.

After all it was the christian monks copying the manuscripts. If all we have is a copy made in the middle ages how do we know it is not an insertion made by a monk at some point?

Its very late in switzerland,  i will go through the others tomorrow, but i think the other sources are even weaker than josephus.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #12 on: July 24, 2019, 06:19:26 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

Josephus was contemporary to JC but the manuscripts we have are copies from centuries later.  Many scholars argue that the sentence were he mentions JC is an insertion by a christian copist.

After all it was the christian monks copying the manuscripts. If all we have is a copy made in the middle ages how do we know it is not an insertion made by a monk at some point?

Its very late in switzerland,  i will go through the others tomorrow, but i think the other sources are even weaker than josephus.

I can add 10 more if you would like. I am keeping it as far away from non-secular as possible.

If you are looking for a post it note saying Jesus was here, then you will not find it. You have to compare it to all other proof of other people's existence that is excepted as accurate and compare during that time period.

His existence is proven easily and is much more documented than others from that period, yet is rejected by some simply for the other things he is claimed to be. It is a double standard unfortunately.

You can believe what you want about Him on any other thing. However, as a person on Earth, it is certainly accurate He existed

*

Stash

  • 5746
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #13 on: July 24, 2019, 07:18:22 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

Josephus was contemporary to JC but the manuscripts we have are copies from centuries later.  Many scholars argue that the sentence were he mentions JC is an insertion by a christian copist.

After all it was the christian monks copying the manuscripts. If all we have is a copy made in the middle ages how do we know it is not an insertion made by a monk at some point?

Its very late in switzerland,  i will go through the others tomorrow, but i think the other sources are even weaker than josephus.

I can add 10 more if you would like. I am keeping it as far away from non-secular as possible.

If you are looking for a post it note saying Jesus was here, then you will not find it. You have to compare it to all other proof of other people's existence that is excepted as accurate and compare during that time period.

His existence is proven easily and is much more documented than others from that period, yet is rejected by some simply for the other things he is claimed to be. It is a double standard unfortunately.

You can believe what you want about Him on any other thing. However, as a person on Earth, it is certainly accurate He existed

A post-it note would be awesome. In the absence of that I think it's hard to say. I looked into Pliny the Younger (granted, wikipedia research, so grain of salt):

A) 'Pliny the Younger' seems like an awesome post-punk, shoe-gazing, late 80's British band name
B) The historian jury is mixed on whether when he was referring to the death of the "King of the Jews" he was referring to JC. As well, the dating of his letter on the matter is subject to question.

Briefly looked at Mara bar-Serapion and the accounts there are from centuries later and sufficiently 'monk-ified'.

Then there's the whole Council of Nicea where a specific mythology was sculpted and decided upon as the unified "party" message going forward.

Every self respecting and lasting mythology seems to have an origin story that usually swirls around a man, his leadership and in some cases super hero powers. Whether JC actually existed as a human or is merely an amalgam of mythology we'll probably never know. To say his existence is proven easily I would say is patently not true. Nothing easy about it.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #14 on: July 24, 2019, 07:38:18 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

Josephus was contemporary to JC but the manuscripts we have are copies from centuries later.  Many scholars argue that the sentence were he mentions JC is an insertion by a christian copist.

After all it was the christian monks copying the manuscripts. If all we have is a copy made in the middle ages how do we know it is not an insertion made by a monk at some point?

Its very late in switzerland,  i will go through the others tomorrow, but i think the other sources are even weaker than josephus.

I can add 10 more if you would like. I am keeping it as far away from non-secular as possible.

If you are looking for a post it note saying Jesus was here, then you will not find it. You have to compare it to all other proof of other people's existence that is excepted as accurate and compare during that time period.

His existence is proven easily and is much more documented than others from that period, yet is rejected by some simply for the other things he is claimed to be. It is a double standard unfortunately.

You can believe what you want about Him on any other thing. However, as a person on Earth, it is certainly accurate He existed

A post-it note would be awesome. In the absence of that I think it's hard to say. I looked into Pliny the Younger (granted, wikipedia research, so grain of salt):

A) 'Pliny the Younger' seems like an awesome post-punk, shoe-gazing, late 80's British band name
B) The historian jury is mixed on whether when he was referring to the death of the "King of the Jews" he was referring to JC. As well, the dating of his letter on the matter is subject to question.

Briefly looked at Mara bar-Serapion and the accounts there are from centuries later and sufficiently 'monk-ified'.

Then there's the whole Council of Nicea where a specific mythology was sculpted and decided upon as the unified "party" message going forward.

Every self respecting and lasting mythology seems to have an origin story that usually swirls around a man, his leadership and in some cases super hero powers. Whether JC actually existed as a human or is merely an amalgam of mythology we'll probably never know. To say his existence is proven easily I would say is patently not true. Nothing easy about it.

Agreed on the name for a punk rock band lol, never clicked in my head.

As for easy, I certainly did not mean "easy" in an exact literal sense. Nothing is easy in that time period to figure out, hell it's hard to figure out things 50 years ago for accuracy at times.

I was simply saying for evidence of existence, He passes with flying colors and then some when held to the same standard as anyone else of that time period that is accepted for their actual existence. I was pointing out that He is held to a double standard because of the other claims about His reality.

If Yehoshua was just a man with no special claims or anything of the such, there would be no argument that he walked the earth during the time stated.

*

Stash

  • 5746
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2019, 08:49:47 PM »
To my knowdlge the existance of JC hasn't been verified, but if you know where the evidence is please let me know, I'm willing to look at it.

These are a few sources that are secular, non biblical. There are more of course.

Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

Josephus was contemporary to JC but the manuscripts we have are copies from centuries later.  Many scholars argue that the sentence were he mentions JC is an insertion by a christian copist.

After all it was the christian monks copying the manuscripts. If all we have is a copy made in the middle ages how do we know it is not an insertion made by a monk at some point?

Its very late in switzerland,  i will go through the others tomorrow, but i think the other sources are even weaker than josephus.

I can add 10 more if you would like. I am keeping it as far away from non-secular as possible.

If you are looking for a post it note saying Jesus was here, then you will not find it. You have to compare it to all other proof of other people's existence that is excepted as accurate and compare during that time period.

His existence is proven easily and is much more documented than others from that period, yet is rejected by some simply for the other things he is claimed to be. It is a double standard unfortunately.

You can believe what you want about Him on any other thing. However, as a person on Earth, it is certainly accurate He existed

A post-it note would be awesome. In the absence of that I think it's hard to say. I looked into Pliny the Younger (granted, wikipedia research, so grain of salt):

A) 'Pliny the Younger' seems like an awesome post-punk, shoe-gazing, late 80's British band name
B) The historian jury is mixed on whether when he was referring to the death of the "King of the Jews" he was referring to JC. As well, the dating of his letter on the matter is subject to question.

Briefly looked at Mara bar-Serapion and the accounts there are from centuries later and sufficiently 'monk-ified'.

Then there's the whole Council of Nicea where a specific mythology was sculpted and decided upon as the unified "party" message going forward.

Every self respecting and lasting mythology seems to have an origin story that usually swirls around a man, his leadership and in some cases super hero powers. Whether JC actually existed as a human or is merely an amalgam of mythology we'll probably never know. To say his existence is proven easily I would say is patently not true. Nothing easy about it.

Agreed on the name for a punk rock band lol, never clicked in my head.

As for easy, I certainly did not mean "easy" in an exact literal sense. Nothing is easy in that time period to figure out, hell it's hard to figure out things 50 years ago for accuracy at times.

I was simply saying for evidence of existence, He passes with flying colors and then some when held to the same standard as anyone else of that time period that is accepted for their actual existence. I was pointing out that He is held to a double standard because of the other claims about His reality.

If Yehoshua was just a man with no special claims or anything of the such, there would be no argument that he walked the earth during the time stated.

Fair point. Kind of betwixt and between. Without the special claims we wouldn't care and wouldn't question. With the special claims, we hold his existence to a higher standard.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #16 on: July 24, 2019, 09:41:32 PM »
Josephus
The Babylonian Talmud
Pliny the Younger
Mara bar-Serapion
Tacitus

The existence of JC is the mainstream position, but there is also number of scholars with serious doubts about it. We cannot know for sure because we cannot travel to the past. I think JC is a myth, that's just my personal opinion.

We are in a forum where photos and videos are not valid evidence because they can be manipulated. The shape of the earth is questioned and gravity is denied. In the context of this forum I would expect to treat evidence of the life of JC with the same level of skepticism.

If photos from space are not valid evidence of the shape of the earth, then we can hardly accept manuscripts dated centuries after the alleged dead of JC, with few exceptions written after the 2nd century AC or later or manuscripts with clear manipulations.

Stash already did Mara bar-Serapion and Pliny the younger.

Isn't the Talmud part of the bible? you are using the bible as evidence of the bible. All Jesus citations in the Talmud can be disputed as well. In many of them it's not even clear if they are really referring to Jesus.  Besides that the Babylonian Talmud was completed around 500 AC and edited for another two centuries. If you show me a manuscript contemporary to JC that mentions him then it will be a good evidence, but something written hundreds of years later is just too much. It's only people writing about things that happened centuries ago.

Tacitus was born in 56 ac, too late to witness anything, that's why it's also questioned by some scholars. He was just told something and he wrote it. Why should I believe that? The copy I have found is from the 11th century, but maybe you know of an earlier one?

I'm sure you can provide more sources, but they will all be copies possibly manipulated by the church, written way too late by people who never saw Jesus.

Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny are actually the best evidence you will find.

So if I apply flatearth skepticism, Why should I trust the church or the scholars?  Why should I accept some manuscript as evidence of events in the first century AC, when all I have is copies made by some monks hundreds of years later?
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2019, 09:43:58 PM »
Fair point. Kind of betwixt and between. Without the special claims we wouldn't care and wouldn't question. With the special claims, we hold his existence to a higher standard.

Yeah pretty much.

It is tough to confirm people from that long ago when you are dealing with a copy of a copy of a copy.

However, He does meet and exceed the criteria that scholars accept as proof of existence. Others are not questioned, but as I said earlier, it is all the other things that are implicated with Him that mucks of people's bias.

*

Bom Tishop

  • 10987
  • Official friend boy of the FES!!
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2019, 09:54:18 PM »
I think JC is a myth, that's just my personal opinion.

That is your opinion and entitled to it. The ONLY reason you have that opinion is because of other things He could stand for. As long as you know it is a biased opinion, that is fine.

But He certainly did exist, no order of biased denial will change that fact. The other implications with Him, that is where faith will lead one way or another.

Oh, correcting you though, the Babylonian Talmud was written by Jews around 40-150 A.D. If you recall Jews didn't quite care for Yehoshua lol.

I could keep listing sources such as Lucian of Samosata or archaeological finds, however, it wouldn't matter when someone has their mind made up.

You are certainly entitled to an opinion

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #19 on: July 24, 2019, 10:04:42 PM »
I think JC is a myth, that's just my personal opinion.

That is your opinion and entitled to it. The ONLY reason you have that opinion is because of other things He could stand for. As long as you know it is a biased opinion, that is fine.

But He certainly did exist, no order of biased denial will change that fact. The other implications with Him, that is where faith will lead one way or another.

Oh, correcting you though, the Babylonian Talmud was written by Jews around 40-150 A.D. If you recall Jews didn't quite care for Yehoshua lol.

I could keep listing sources such as Lucian of Samosata or archaeological finds, however, it wouldn't matter when someone has their mind made up.

You are certainly entitled to an opinion

Yes I'm entitled to my opinion and you to yours, all opinions are biased to a degree, yours as well.

According to the places where I checked (including wikipedia) the babylonian Talmud was written between the centuries III and VI. But if you have a better source please post the link.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talmud

Quote
The Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) consists of documents compiled over the period of late antiquity (3rd to 6th centuries).[11] During this time the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, a region called "Babylonia" in Jewish sources and later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis (modern Nusaybin), Mahoza (al-Mada'in, just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbedita (near present-day al Anbar Governorate), and the Sura Academy, probably located about 60 km south of Baghdad.[12]

The Babylonian Talmud comprises the Mishnah and the Babylonian Gemara, the latter representing the culmination of more than 300 years of analysis of the Mishnah in the Talmudic Academies in Babylonia. The foundations of this process of analysis were laid by Abba Arika (175–247 CE), a disciple of Judah ha-Nasi. Tradition ascribes the compilation of the Babylonian Talmud in its present form to two Babylonian sages, Rav Ashi and Ravina II.[13] Rav Ashi was president of the Sura Academy from 375–427. The work begun by Rav Ashi was completed by Ravina, who is traditionally regarded as the final Amoraic expounder. Accordingly, traditionalists argue that Ravina's death in 475 CE[14] is the latest possible date for the completion of the redaction of the Talmud. However, even on the most traditional view a few passages are regarded as the work of a group of rabbis who edited the Talmud after the end of the Amoraic period, known as the Savoraim or Rabbanan Savora'e (meaning "reasoners" or "considerers").


 
« Last Edit: July 24, 2019, 10:13:08 PM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 42440
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #20 on: July 25, 2019, 08:13:45 AM »
kopfverderber, you're not arguing with a flat earther. CFC is RE. Most Christians are RE. Also, this is the lower forums, you don't need to insert FE into topics down here.

We used to have a YEC round earther posting here... he made fun of flat earthers. lol
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #21 on: July 25, 2019, 09:12:57 AM »
Oh my, are back on CFC pretending he's an expert on Christian history?  I doubt he wants to revive some of the previous threads on the subject...


Oh, correcting you though, the Babylonian Talmud was written by Jews around 40-150 A.D.
Well, that is straight up incorrect.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #22 on: July 25, 2019, 09:27:30 AM »
kopfverderber, you're not arguing with a flat earther. CFC is RE. Most Christians are RE. Also, this is the lower forums, you don't need to insert FE into topics down here.

We used to have a YEC round earther posting here... he made fun of flat earthers. lol

Thank you for the clarification.  I was not my intention to make fun of anyone and I'm sorry if I gave that impression.  Jesus myth is a fringe theory just like flat earth, so I started drawing parallelisms between the two and I thought it would be interesting to open a discussion in this way.  This subforum looked like the best option for the topic. Of course I'm aware  many RE in this forum might be christian as well. I had a catholic education myself.

I'm aware people with strong religious beliefs tend to get upset when their beliefs are questioned, but I think we should also be able to discuss and question religion.

EDIT: For clarification "jesus myth" = theory that the story of jesus is a piece of mythology, I'm ware that that this theory is generally rejected (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory)
« Last Edit: July 25, 2019, 11:23:48 AM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Pezevenk

  • 14483
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #23 on: July 25, 2019, 10:23:35 AM »
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #24 on: July 25, 2019, 10:57:39 AM »
Jesus myth is a fringe theory
what

:) Well of course unlike FE, Jesus myth is a feasible, but few bible scholars defend it, that's the truth. One could also argue that most bible scholars are Christians and thus not neutral.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Pezevenk

  • 14483
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #25 on: July 25, 2019, 11:03:39 AM »
Jesus myth is a fringe theory
what

:) Well of course unlike FE, Jesus myth is a feasible, but few bible scholars defend it, that's the truth. One could also argue that most bible scholars are Christians and thus not neutral.
"Fringe" does not mean what you think it means.

Also, I'm not Christian but lots of atheist scholars and historians believe Jesus may have existed as a historical person, if that's the question.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #26 on: July 25, 2019, 11:14:01 AM »
Jesus myth is a fringe theory
what

:) Well of course unlike FE, Jesus myth is a feasible, but few bible scholars defend it, that's the truth. One could also argue that most bible scholars are Christians and thus not neutral.
"Fringe" does not mean what you think it means.

Also, I'm not Christian but lots of atheist scholars and historians believe Jesus may have existed as a historical person, if that's the question.

Yes most scholars and historians accept JC as historical character, that's why I said "Jesus (as) myth" is a fringe theory (while historical jesus would be the generally accepted theory).

For clarification "jesus myth" = theory that the story of jesus is a piece of mithology
« Last Edit: July 25, 2019, 11:17:09 AM by kopfverderber »
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Space Cowgirl

  • MOM
  • Administrator
  • 42440
  • Official FE Recruiter
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #27 on: July 25, 2019, 11:51:08 AM »
Oh, it's cool. I think we were just having some misunderstandings about what the topic is.

I used to read a blog by someone who thinks Jesus was a myth, but I can't remember whose blog it was. It's interesting, because most of us are raised to believe that the man (divine or not) existed. The evidence he existed is sketchy, but I want to believe he did exist.
I'm sorry. Am I to understand that when you have a boner you like to imagine punching the shit out of Tom Bishop? That's disgusting.

*

kopfverderber

  • 440
  • Globularist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #28 on: July 25, 2019, 12:17:30 PM »
Oh, it's cool. I think we were just having some misunderstandings about what the topic is.

I used to read a blog by someone who thinks Jesus was a myth, but I can't remember whose blog it was. It's interesting, because most of us are raised to believe that the man (divine or not) existed. The evidence he existed is sketchy, but I want to believe he did exist.

E. Doherty gained some attention years ago with the book The Jesus Puzzle, thatīs what got me interested first.

I lean towards Jesus as myth, but itīs not all black or white, there are some in between positions. I think itīs also very possible that there was an historical jesus or even more than one loosely related to the jesus in the gospels.  However I consider the gospels to be mostly fiction and myth.
You must gather your party before venturing forth

*

Pezevenk

  • 14483
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: How do we know that Jesus Christ is not fictitious character?
« Reply #29 on: July 25, 2019, 12:22:41 PM »
Jesus myth is a fringe theory
what

:) Well of course unlike FE, Jesus myth is a feasible, but few bible scholars defend it, that's the truth. One could also argue that most bible scholars are Christians and thus not neutral.
"Fringe" does not mean what you think it means.

Also, I'm not Christian but lots of atheist scholars and historians believe Jesus may have existed as a historical person, if that's the question.

Yes most scholars and historians accept JC as historical character, that's why I said "Jesus (as) myth" is a fringe theory (while historical jesus would be the generally accepted theory).

For clarification "jesus myth" = theory that the story of jesus is a piece of mithology
But it's still not "fringe". Look at how many Christians there are in the world.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)