Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 197 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters (30 Days)
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#13957 - 02/26/06 02:36 AM Existance of "Christ"
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hi all, Im currently in Secondary School, and one of our major assesments in SOR (Studies Of Religion) is to provide an essay on the "Existence of Jesus." Historical, Political, Archaeological, Scientific and Gospel proof is needed. If anybody could recomend some sites or list some points about this "existence", it would be a great help.
Many thanks, Shahn

Top
.
#13958 - 02/26/06 03:54 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Must be a religious school as what you wrote points to the conclusion being a foregone conclusion.

Historical evidence as in the kind of evidence that would meet the criterion of non-religious history is essentially non-existence.

Political? This isn't evidence ... except for gross human stupidity.

Archaeological ... as with historical ... essentially non-existent.

Scientific ... absolutely does not exist.

Gospel proof? As much as you want. Just as there is a ton of evidence that Tide detergent makes whites whiter and brights brighter.

The reality Shahn is that there is a reasonable amount of evidence that a trouble maker, possibly one with ties to a Jewis royal family, caused a bit of trouble and the Roman's promptly dispatched him as they would any other trouble maker.

Then, it appears, the record essentially disappears for around 200-300 years until the story is merged with a substantial amount of 100% heathen nonsense to create someting that has morphed into the imbecility we read about today.

Was Jesus born in December of the year 1? No! Absolutely No! You'll find essentially as much truth in the story of the tooth fairy or Santa Claus.

But if you really want to do a good job on the report, and I think you do, read the Quran, the holy book of Islam, and learn a bit of the truth.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13959 - 02/26/06 11:31 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
DA - "Then, it appears, the record essentially disappears for around 200-300 years until the story is merged with a substantial amount of 100% heathen nonsense to create something that has morphed into the imbecility we read about today."

REP: St Paul wrote his first letter about 25 years after Christ's death - as far as historians are concerned, this is not a significant gap. What you ignore is the massive growth of the early church that was happening from Christ's death onwards. There was something at the root of this - most likely the existence of Jesus.

The Acts of the Apostles was written by Luke (probably) just over 60 years after Christ's death - this is also not a significant gap for historians.

You still think that Muhammad?s writings are an authoritative source of information about Christ?s life? The Christian Church was saying that Christ was God?s final manifestation in history, and He would have nothing more to say until the ?End Days?. 600 years later Muhammad wished to add to God?s revelation ? and you still maintain he is a trustworthy source of information about Christ. I can?t see it myself.

DA ? ?Political? This isn't evidence ... except for gross human stupidity.?

REP: Rome?s very apparent persecution of Christians cannot be ignored and counts for political evidence of a sort. Again we have to ask where this Christian movement came from. The existence of Christ is more likely to be the answer than the idea that it was devised by St Paul or someone else and then propagated by him. There must have been something of substance behind it. Early Christians were the enemy of Rome ? and were regularly put to death ? it is reported, for example, that Nero used Christians as living candles in his garden. I can?t believe a religious movement flourishes under these conditions if it is completely devoid of any substance.

?"Nero punished a race of men who were hated for their evil practices. These men were called Christians. He got a number of people to confess. On their evidence a number of Christians were convicted and put to death with dreadful cruelty. Some were covered with the skins of wild beasts and left to be eaten by dogs. Others were nailed to the cross. Many were burned alive and set on fire to serve as torches at night."
Tacitus
For me, Christ?s existence and crucifixion is a reasonable conclusion when faced with the evidence.


Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
#13960 - 02/26/06 11:34 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
"It is also important to recognize that in 70 A.D., the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants. Entire cities were literally burned to the ground! We should not be surprised, then, if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. Many of the eye-witnesses of Jesus would have been killed. These facts likely limited the amount of eyewitness testimony of Jesus that survived."

Blacknad.

Top
#13961 - 02/26/06 11:40 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Shahn,

These pages look at some of the secular historical evidence for Christ's existence.

http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/

It is very important that you Google each point to get opposing views, as these are religious site. But it will start to point you towards an examination of the evidence.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
#13962 - 02/27/06 03:31 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Blacknad wrote:
"St Paul wrote his first letter about 25 years after Christ's death"

Can you point to any reputable link that this letter actually exists and has been dated? I've heard the story but I take it to be mythology.

Blacknad wrote:
"The Acts of the Apostles was written by Luke ... just over 60 years after Christ's death"

Your "just over 60" is highly questionable. It is easy to find reference to dates closer to 90AD and once again no actual document that can be dated exists. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/luke.html

Given that the lifespan back then was 1/2 of todays we are talking about a gap equal to more than two generations. The same as between you and the invention of the airplane.

Blacknad wrote:
"You still think that Muhammad?s writings are an authoritative source of information about Christ?s life?"

I think that they are all strongly supportive of Christianity given the very kind treatment of both Jesus and his mother and bear none of the more than adequate evidence of intentional tinkering that we all know exist in all Christian texts. In that sense, yes, I think they are far more likely to be accurate.

Blacknad wrote:
"Rome?s very apparent persecution of Christians cannot be ignored and counts for political evidence of a sort."

In the 1960s I was persecuted (not prosecuted) by the government of the United States. Trouble makers are always the subject of persecution. But other than that it has no meaning.

Blacknad wrote:
"For me, Christ?s existence and crucifixion is a reasonable conclusion when faced with the evidence."

I agree. I see no reason to doubt his existence. Whether he was crucified however is quite another matter as the Quran clearly states otherwise and the legends of the Knights Templar indicate he likely escaped to what is now Southern France.

Unfortunately for Christians evidence of being born and crucified is irrelevant as the entire religion is predicated on a virgin birth which is unprovable and I'd be more inclined to view it as rape and resurrection, equally unprovable, and more I'd be more inclined to view it as cheap stage magic. In short ... there is no evidence of any of the acts upon which the religion was founded. And a huge amount of evidence, the evidence of absence, to support the fact that it never happened.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13963 - 02/27/06 03:35 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Blacknad wrote:
"It is also important to recognize that in 70 A.D., the Romans invaded and destroyed Jerusalem and most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants. Entire cities were literally burned to the ground! We should not be surprised, then, if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. Many of the eye-witnesses of Jesus would have been killed. These facts likely limited the amount of eyewitness testimony of Jesus that survived."

This would make sense were it not for the fact that the Jews, themselves of which Jesus was one, have no lack of history from that period.

But if you are correct it only adds evidence to the fact that the religion was created at least a generations after all of the original players were dead from nothing of substance.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13964 - 02/27/06 03:48 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Your link:
http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

is pure nonsense. Nonsense easily identified by the following quote:

"Typically when this question is asked, the person asking qualifies the question with "outside of the Bible." We do not grant this idea that the Bible cannot be considered a source of evidence for the existence of Jesus."

This obvious use of self-referential logic invalidates the entire site.

The so-called evidence from the second link is equally obvious nonsense. Look at this quote:
"Evidence from Pliny the Younger ... In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112...."

A letter written ~100 years later is evidence of what? Suppose someone today, say the Governor of Vermont wrote an event that took place in 1906. Would you have the nerve to call it evidence? I think not.

And yet another from the same web site:
"Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace."

This is evidence that there were people identified as Christians ... it is not evidence that there was a virgin birth or a resurrection without which Jesus Christ is as meaningful to history as any one of a billion others that have lived on this planet and died.

I think your zeal to establish a foundation for your belief system is blinding you to the quality of evidence that you would use to make a far more mundane decision such as who to vote for for mayor.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13965 - 03/15/06 10:09 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
rlb60123 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 25
Dear DA

You say...Historical evidence as in the kind of evidence that would meet the criterion of non-religious history is essentially non-existence.

Political? This isn't evidence ... except for gross human stupidity.

Archaeological ... as with historical ... essentially non-existent.

Scientific ... absolutely does not exist.

Gospel proof? As much as you want. Just as there is a ton of evidence that Tide detergent makes whites whiter and brights brighter.

Read the works of the Jewdean Philosopher Josephus...
Josephus mentions Jesus in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 3, paragraph 3 (this paragraph is so phenomenal, that scholars now debate the authenticity of some of the more ?favorable? portions of this text):

?Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.?

Josephus mentions John the Baptist and Herod in Antiquities, Book 18, chapter 5, paragraph 2:

"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."

Josephus mentions James, the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities, Book 20, chapter 9, paragraph 1:

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."

Josephus mentions Ananias, the High Priest, who was mentioned in Acts 23:2:

?Now as soon as Albinus was come to the city of Jerusalem, he used all his endeavors and care that the country might be kept in peace, and this by destroying many of the Sicarii. But as for the high priest, Ananias he increased in glory every day, and this to a great degree, and had obtained the favor and esteem of the citizens in a signal manner; for he was a great hoarder up of money.?

Notice that authenticity is debated any time something unnerving is brought to light.

Top
#13966 - 03/15/06 10:31 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
rlb60123 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 25
Pliny the Younger (c. 62 - c.113 AD) was the Roman Governor of Bithynia (present-day northwestern Turkey). Around 111 or 112 AD, he wrote the following letter to Emperor Trajan of Rome asking for advice on how to deal with Christians.


It is a rule, Sir, which I inviolably observe, to refer myself to you in all my doubts; for who is more capable of guiding my uncertainty or informing my ignorance? Having never been present at any trials of the Christians, I am unacquainted with the method and limits to be observed either in examining or punishing them. Whether any difference is to be allowed between the youngest and the adult; whether repentance admits to a pardon, or if a man has been once a Christian it avails him nothing to recant; whether the mere profession of Christianity, albeit without crimes, or only the crimes associated therewith are punishable -- in all these points I am greatly doubtful.

In the meanwhile, the method I have observed towards those who have denounced to me as Christians is this: I interrogated them whether they were Christians; if they confessed it I repeated the question twice again, adding the threat of capital punishment; if they still persevered, I ordered them to be executed. For whatever the nature of their creed might be, I could at least feel not doubt that contumacy and inflexible obstinacy deserved chastisement. There were others also possessed with the same infatuation, but being citizens of Rome, I directed them to be carried thither.

These accusations spread (as is usually the case) from the mere fact of the matter being investigated and several forms of the mischief came to light. A placard was put up, without any signature, accusing a large number of persons by name. Those who denied they were, or had ever been, Christians, who repeated after me an invocation to the gods, and offered adoration, with wine and frankincense, to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for that purpose, together with those of the gods, and who finally cursed Christ -- none of which acts, it is into performing -- these I thought it proper to discharge. Others who were named by that informer at first confessed themselves Christians, and then denied it; true, they had been of that persuasion but they had quitted it, some three years, others many years, and a few as much as twenty-five years ago. They all worshipped your statue and the images of the gods, and cursed Christ.

They affirmed, however, the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food -- but food of an ordinary and innocent kind. Even this practice, however, they had abandoned after the publication of my edict, by which, according to your orders, I had forbidden political associations. I judged it so much the more necessary to extract the real truth, with the assistance of torture, from two female slaves, who were styled deaconesses: but I could discover nothing more than depraved and excessive superstition.

I therefore adjourned the proceedings, and betook myself at once to your counsel. For the matter seemed to me well worth referring to you, especially considering the numbers endangered. Persons of all ranks and ages, and of both sexes are, and will be, involved in the prosecution. For this contagious superstition is not confined to the cities only, but has spread through the villages and rural districts; it seems possible, however, to check and cure it. 1

Where did they come from DA? Nowhere?

Top
#13967 - 03/15/06 10:37 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
rlb60123 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 03/13/06
Posts: 25
Dear DA
When it comes right down to it, I dont care what is believed by others. I only have myself to account for.

You can probably find 20 or thirty sites saying Jesus didn't exist also, but why perpetuate an argument that is mute.

To seek God, or Not to seek God, either way we are all worm food in the end. Why be angry about it.
Why should how I believe make you angry? You can't make me angry, you can only hope to get an answer from me.

I think to much I think

Top
#13968 - 03/16/06 12:41 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Thanks rlb60123 (bit of a mouthful that),

Paul Winter argues that there are just three interpolations in the TF, and the rest is genuine. "He was the Messiah" and "if indeed he can be called a man" are considered most suspect, as is the latter section describing the resurrection and the prophecies. This identification of the interpolations becomes a popular view (reiterated by John Meier, 1991).

- This is now the consensus position on his particular Josephus passage. It is considered to be reliable evidence of Jesus' existence from a well respected non Christian historian close enough to the action to be as authoratitive. Certainly a lot closer than DA.

The title of the thread is 'Existence of Christ'

- I think we have now covered that.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
#13969 - 03/16/06 12:41 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Thanks rlb60123 (bit of a mouthful that),

Paul Winter argues that there are just three interpolations in the TF, and the rest is genuine. "He was the Messiah" and "if indeed he can be called a man" are considered most suspect, as is the latter section describing the resurrection and the prophecies. This identification of the interpolations becomes a popular view (reiterated by John Meier, 1991).

- This is now the consensus position on his particular Josephus passage. It is considered to be reliable evidence of Jesus' existence from a well respected non Christian historian close enough to the action to be as authoratitive as any modern day historian needs. Certainly a lot closer than DA.

The title of the thread is 'Existence of Christ'

- I think we have now covered that.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
#13970 - 03/16/06 03:59 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Chaoslillith Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/05/06
Posts: 137
Blacknad,

Using the fact that the Romans persecuted Christians to prove that Christ did exist is a bit silly. Given that the Romans persecuted the Greeks, the Celts, the British and whoever else they picked that week to conquer. Using your train of thought that also proves the existence of the Greek gods, who the Romans stole, the existence of the Celtic Gods and any other deity from that time period.

As far as Christ being crucified, so were 1000s of others and I note the distinct lack of literature about them.

Just saying Blacknad that there is no real, verifiable proof of Christ's existence. Just as there is no proof of any other deity or Messiah (caveat, I know nothing of Islam so I could be wrong on that count.)

Top
#13971 - 03/16/06 07:17 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
rlb wrote:
"Read the works of the Jewdean Philosopher Josephus..."

I've read more on the subject than is required to know the full breathe of what is out there. So lets examine this without the benefit of brainwashing.

1. Josephus's wrote in what language?
2. Josephus's original text is precisely where?
3. The translations were all made from the original?
4. By who? When?
5. Do all translations agree precisely?
6. If not how do you know which one is authoritative?

The original of every work you mention has never seen the light of day. Has been mistranslated numerous times and most often intentionally for political purposes. If you had evidence as strong as this you couldn't get out of a parking ticket.

And continues:
"Where did they come from DA? Nowhere?"

Where did the Epic of Gilgamesh come from? Same place!

and you, like Blacknad quote Pliny the Younger around 111 or 112 AD. Lets get some dose of reality here. Someone 100 years after the fact is writing about events that happened before his children were born. If the current governor of Vermont wrote a letter about something that happened in 1906 would you have the nerve to stand up in public and hail it as evidence?

The hypocrisy of religious zealots knows no bounds.

and continues:
"either way we are all worm food in the end. Why be angry about it."

Because those that do not oppose lies are collaborators. Those that sanction the brain washing of children are abusing the next generation. Any more such questions?

Blacknad: Piggybacking if I may be permitted on Lillith's comment. No reasonable person is claiming that Jesus Christ whose mother was named Mary wasn't born in the Middle East. So were a lot of other misfits and nut cases. There are only two statements that make or break the Chrisitan religion.

1. Virgin birth
2. Resurrection

Take those two elements away and you have Mahatma Ghandi, Martin Luther King, Mohammed, or Moses. Another decent guy with followers but not the son of a god.

Islam is very clear on Jesus. He was a prophet. He is reveared. But his birth was nothing special and his neither was his death. World shaking events do not lead to totally different interpretations. You won't find people who will claim Vesuvius didn't erupt. You won't find people that will claim there was not tsunami in Indonesia a few years back. You will not find anyone denying the reality of WWI or WWII.

So prove to me the virgin birth ... and the only source you have is an authorless book. And I have a book, with author, that says otherwise. Same for the other end of his life.

If you want to engage in a search for truth. Start by reading the Epic of Gilgamesh. Jesus Christ received his virgin birth from the same source that Christmas received Santa Claus. Christians, trying to gain credibility, snagged engaging parts of someone else's mythology.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13972 - 03/16/06 09:57 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Regarding Josephus:

You seem to bring issues to the party that don't concern real scholars and seem to thing others are problematic, which in fact have been settled.

I don't think any serious scholar doubts the veracity of the Josephus passage.

An introductory history of the scholarly controversy over Josephus' Jesus account, from 93 CE to the present.

http://members.aol.com/FLJOSEPHUS/testhist.htm

Blacknad.

Top
#13973 - 03/16/06 10:41 AM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Blacknad Offline
Superstar

Registered: 10/05/05
Posts: 901
Loc: Coventry, England
Chaoslillith wrote - "Using the fact that the Romans persecuted Christians to prove that Christ did exist is a bit silly."

- Tacitus' writings prove the existence of Christians and the fact that they were being tortured and killed by Nero in 67 AD.

Christ was probably crucified between 30 and 33 AD.

The gap? 30 or so years.

I cannot believe that a movement that was growing so quickly (large enough for Nero to feel he had to launch a persecution) was utterly without basis, and that the founder who had supposedly been around just 30 years previous had, in fact, not existed.

Why is this silly?

Chaoslillith wrote ? ?Given that the Romans persecuted the Greeks, the Celts, the British and whoever else they picked that week to conquer.?

- There is a difference between persecuting and conquering. However, the fact that there are records showing that Romans attacked the groups you mention would leave me to believe that those groups actually existed. The same for Christians. I then go from there to say it is reasonable therefore that Christ existed 30 years earlier.

Chaoslillith wrote ? ?Using your train of thought that also proves the existence of the Greek gods, who the Romans stole, the existence of the Celtic Gods and any other deity from that time period.?

- If I was using the persecution as evidence that Christ was God, then you would be right. But I am only showing that it is unreasonable to doubt the existence of a historical Jesus figure. That is what this thread is about ? ?Existence of Christ?.

Chaoslillith wrote ? ?As far as Christ being crucified, so were 1000s of others and I note the distinct lack of literature about them.?

- I don?t understand your point here, but you seem to contribute to my argument. The fact that there is literature about Christ makes him distinct from the 1000s.

Chaoslillith wrote ? ?Just saying Blacknad that there is no real, verifiable proof of Christ's existence. Just as there is no proof of any other deity or Messiah?

- You are conflating two things here. We are simply talking of a historical figure called Jesus and whether he actually existed. We are not debating here whether he is a deity. Sorry Chaos, but from my perspective the atheist desire to deny the existence of Christ is where the atheist steps from sincere doubt to dishonesty.

Regards,

Blacknad.

Top
#13974 - 03/16/06 06:54 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Chaoslillith Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 03/05/06
Posts: 137
My apologies,

What I get for skimming threads at work. I will acknowledge the possibility that Christ as a person whose was a great storyteller and convinced some people that their prior system of belief was incorrect may have existed.

However, I continue to withold my belief in ONE GOD or ANY GOD. If nothing else, Scientology is proof that people can be made to believe anything as long as it makes them feel special. Ahh L.Ron Hubbard, Sci fi writer who as a joke created a religion and guess what, it got followers.

Top
#13975 - 03/16/06 07:00 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
DA Morgan Offline
Megastar

Registered: 10/17/04
Posts: 4136
Loc: Seattle, WA
Blacknad wrote:
"You seem to bring issues to the party that don't concern real scholars"

They may not concern self-annointed Christian scholars but they concern a whole lot of other people.

Blacknad wrote:
"I don't think any serious scholar doubts the veracity of the Josephus passage."

No serious scholar would make a determination about the veracity of something without knowing that it exists. Can you point me to Josephus's original written text? Of course not. Is what he wrote plausible? Quite another story. But it is not evidence of a virgin birth nor of a resurrection. Without those two elements you have no religion.

Blacknad wrote:
"- Tacitus' writings prove the existence of Christians and the fact that they were being tortured and killed by Nero in 67 AD."

Which in what way proves that a virgin birth and resurrection took place?

Blacknad wrote:
"Christ was probably crucified between 30 and 33 AD.
"

Which in what way proves that a virgin birth and resurrection took place?

Blacknad wrote:
"I cannot believe that a movement that was growing so quickly (large enough for Nero to feel he had to launch a persecution) was utterly without basis,"

Then apparently you've never heard of Scientology. Does Islam ring a bell? Ever here of Mahatma Ghandi or Martin Luther King? How about Moses or Mohammed? Your statement just impaled itself.

Blacknad wrote:
"Why is this silly?"

Now you have your answer.

Blacknad wrote:
"There is a difference between persecuting and conquering."

So the blacks in South Africa were persecuted or conquered? So the Moslems in Bosnia were persecuted or conquered? So the American Indians were persecuted or conquered? Shall I continue.

Blacknad wrote:
"But I am only showing that it is unreasonable to doubt the existence of a historical Jesus figure."

You are fighting the wrong battle. No one denies someone with that name existed at about the time in question. It is the question of "trouble maker" versus "son of god" that is the crux of the matter.

Blacknad wrote:
"We are not debating here whether he is a deity."

Why not? It is the only issue possible. Lets apply some Boolean logic. Which statements are impossible?

1. Jesus existed and was the son of god.
2. Jesus didn't exist and was the son of god.
3. Jesus existed and was a decent guy.
4. Jesus didn't exist and was a decent guy.

You are trying to argue against 2 and 4. Why? If you prove 1 then 3 is included by definition.
_________________________
DA Morgan

Top
#13976 - 03/17/06 05:02 PM Re: Existance of "Christ"
Justine Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 12/07/05
Posts: 191
Would it make a difference in the Christian Religion if Christ was proven mythical? Do you think he would still be worshiped as a symbolic figure?
_________________________
~Justine~

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.