What evidence is there for a biblical jesus? (page 10)

peacefulpete

Atheist Song - First hymnal for Atheists (youtube.com)

TonusOH

FreeTheMasons: It is a flaw. It is a flaw in their thinking.

So, we have established that there is an explanation for the concept that someone would die for a lie. These men, with their flawed thinking, rejected an obvious truth and preferred to die for an obvious lie. I can apply this to the apostles, then. Why would they be willing to die for their belief? Because their thinking was flawed, messed up, not logical.

The pharisees saw Jesus as a man who claimed godhood, the apostles saw him as God made flesh. The former seems to be much more likely to be true. After all, even religious people reject every other such claim.

However, that wasn't what I was referring to when I spoke of a flaw. The flaw I refer to is the ambiguity of the Bible itself. A work so open to interpretation that even those who believe in it have spent centuries hopelessly divided in how to interpret it. These divisions have been significant enough to lead to mistreatment and even bloodshed. A book that is supposed to have been authored by an unmatched intellect who wants us all to achieve salvation and serve him as a unified group, yet so poorly written that even now we cannot come to a consensus on what it says, so that people accuse each other of being deranged or mislead or just evil. That's the flaw.

If it is the word of a divine being, we're in for a very unpleasant eternity.

ukpimo

We have entered a very deep and dark place, I don't think some here even want to attempt to investigate anything or to build faith in Jesus. Criticise, criticise, criticise. Playing with words constantly. For flip sake, just read the gospels objectively, study what bible scholars have committed on Jesus and you can see for yourself that this man did exist. For if a person called Jesus Christ didn't exist at one stage, then Christians made themselves up from some literary fandom they created, which doesn't give much credibility to the fact that they had enemies who actively opposed them in the first century, including the Romans, who alluded to the fact they were followers of Jesus. So if the Jews were lying and the Romans were lying, my God maybe we should question if the Romans and the Jews back then ever existed!

FreeTheMasons

The Bible is well written.

Only those who don't understand love cannot understand the Bible.

"God is love."

joey jojo

The Bible is well written.
Only those who don't understand love cannot understand the Bible.
"God is love."

Love: ' unselfish interest in another's welfare'.

Fundamental Christians:

'If someone doesn't believe what I believe they can burn in hell for all I care '.

'I can't wait for Armageddon when God kills everyone that doesn't agree with me'

FreeTheMasons

@joeyjojo -

Then obvious those you call "fundamental Christians" do not understand the Bible.

Jeffro

ukpimo:

Playing with words constantly.

Hmmm... ok...

For if a person called Jesus Christ didn't exist at one stage

So... smuggling in the superstitious concept of 'Christ' into the mundane fact that there was probably a Galilean preacher named Jesus (or at least an Aramaic form) isn't 'playing with words'?

Vidqun

What swayed me most about the authenticity of the Gospel accounts are their contents. I have read lots of books before, but they were special. Very few contradictions and some excellent advice and moral guidance in there. And as for the theory that a disciple or groups of disciples came together and sucked all of it out their thumbs is somewhat hard to swallow. And as already discussed, to be willing to die for a big lie is highly unlikely from a human standpoint.

joey jojo

FreeTheMasons
Thank you. I did enjoy it.🙂 Maybe sometime we'll all have one together - while hanging out with Jesus too.😉

Are you asking me to have a beer with you and some dude from Mexico?

Sounds good - I like Mexican beer.

TonusOH

ukpimo: [...]Christians made themselves up from some literary fandom they created

This would not be different from every other religion, would it? Those are, in the view of the Christian, invented. The Christian may accept that a man named Mohammad existed, but they do not believe that he was commissioned by God to write a final testament that superceded all others, or that he flew to heaven on a winged horse. We are confident that Joseph Smith existed and that he established a new branch of Christianity, but we do not believe that his addendum to the Bible is legitimate. Same for an endless list of religious figures across a multitude of religions, both current and forgotten.

The problem is not that I see Christianity through some deliberately warped lens (not anymore, at least). The problem is that when I apply that filter to any other religion, they are just as legitimate and 'true.' Religion relies heavily on presuppositions, which are things we believe without corroboration. It's how people with completely different beliefs can be just as certain that they are right and the other person is wrong. Remove the presupposition, and pretty much every religion ends up in the same place-- lacking any evidence.

What evidence is there for a biblical jesus?

Share this