|
The Death and Resurrection of Christ?
|
 (January 3, 2012 at 4:09 pm)Minimalist Wrote: But, hon, there is no indication that "Paul" of Tarsus was any more real than jesus..... or Batman. Really? Who wrote the Acts and the epistles? Whomever wrote those dreamed up Jesus. Is that a safe assumption? 42
"Acts" is usually attributed to whoever wrote "Luke" ( almost certainly not anyone named "Luke.") The epistles are written by different authors and pseudoepigraphically given names which make them seem important.
Quote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudepigraph And, no. I would not call that a safe assumption. The recently discovered Gabriel Revelation Stone suggests that the whole idea of a dead messiah coming back to life in 3 days was already known at the end of the first century BC. At some point it is necessary to understand that the temple controlled religious life in the country on an official basis. But unofficially there could have been any number of oddball beliefs in the countryside operating below the radar, so to speak. It's a complex issue.  (January 3, 2012 at 3:56 pm)Cinjin Wrote: Welcome noob. Thanks  Quote:Interesting questions. Are you being legitimate? We've seen MANY others come here wearing a "mask of doubt" only to grant themselves time to post ridiculous worn-out assertions we've heard a million times. I hope by my replies you will know I am legitimate. I'm pretty close to being able to call myself a non-believer, but I still have a number of questions which tie me to Christianity. I still have alot of love for Christianity though, so you will probably see me arguing for Christianity in this forum because I think many atheists have an unfair conception of it. (January 3, 2012 at 3:57 pm)frankiej Wrote: You won't really get a bigger fan of zombie films than me, but when people begin to actually believe a story about this zombie, I become worried. Well that may be so, but you have to understand that it is a huge thing for many people. (January 3, 2012 at 4:07 pm)Cinjin Wrote: There's dozens of possibilities. First you must prove that Christ even existed and the evidence of that is not near so solid as you probably think. Mind if we work on the assumption that Jesus did exist? Quote:Secondly, even if jesus did exist, who says the record of their actions is accurate? Well I definitely don't think they are fully accurate and possibly with some embellishment, such as possibly the virgin birth. Quote:What if the bible is made up and the entire story is fiction? Some may be complete fiction, but I think a good part of it is based on real things that happened. It is all to rather easy to deny that there was even a great preacher called Jesus at the time. Quote:What if jesus and his disciples were con men getting free food from gullible tent dwellers? I would discount that based on the quality of Christ's teachings. Quote:What if his disciples didn't see shit, but someone 100 years after the fact just wrote that they did? Possibly, and this is the way I hoped the thread would go. So how do you think Christianity started and people believed what was written? Quote:What if the Quran is true and jesus was just an ordinary prophet and Allah is the one you should be praying to? Yahweh, Allah, the prayers go to the same place. I've always found myself praying to the Father anyway and I don't find an exclusive, tribal god to be a reasonable belief. (January 3, 2012 at 4:07 pm)aleialoura Wrote: Paul of Tarsus was the person who dreamed up Jesus. No one ever heard of him until a few hundred years after he supposedly died. How do you know this? Quote:I'd like to add that the story of Jesus is plagiarized in parts. It's not even a 100% original story. Not gunna start talk about the Egyptian god are you?
"Thou believest in love as a divine attribute because thou thyself lovest; thou believest that God is a wise, benevolent being because thou knowest nothing better in thyself than benevolence and wisdom." - L.Feuerbach
Quote:Mind if we work on the assumption that Jesus did exist? Yes. In a court that would be called "assuming facts which are not in evidence."  (January 3, 2012 at 4:16 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: 1: A charismatic leader calling himself christ was executed by the romans and people made stuff up about him. I'm thinking of a David Koresh type character, (some branch davdians still think that david koresh was the 'lamb of god') Would it be naive for me to ask why people would make up that Christ rose from the dead and then make that the core of the religion when the original teachings wouldn't have included this? Quote:2: Saul of Tarsus made the whole thing up in much the same way as Joeseph Smith did with the mormans. Didn't Paul make up some rather good moral teachings for someone willing to lie about such things? Quote:3: There was a sect that later invented a figure that matched what they were thinking, a sort of mythalogical figure head. I think I am slowly realising how biased I am about this whole thing. I can't think of much to argue against your points, then then again I haven't read any apologetics in a long time now so I'm a bit rusty XD Quote:4: God sent himself down to earth to suffer so that he could be sacrificed to himself for a crime he invented, (only joking, this is not really an option) I would say that's a bit of a crude understanding of it. Quote:Are you seriously asking why some people would lie to support their faith position. Yup  Quote:And finally is that a picture of you in your avatar coz if it is you look just like my mates daughter, its uncanny. I'm gunna assume I'm probably not as thats highly unlikely (January 3, 2012 at 4:21 pm)passionatefool Wrote: Yes. In a court that would be called "assuming facts which are not in evidence." Get you Ok, got any reason to think Jesus didn't exist?
"Thou believest in love as a divine attribute because thou thyself lovest; thou believest that God is a wise, benevolent being because thou knowest nothing better in thyself than benevolence and wisdom." - L.Feuerbach
(January 3, 2012 at 5:06 pm)Paradoxum Wrote: Ok, got any reason to think Jesus didn't exist? Yes. There is no evidence he did. I don't think qua the divine twat existed either for the same reason. If I get 2 million fools to echo "qua the divine twat is the light, the peace, and the only salvation" would make no difference. (January 3, 2012 at 5:10 pm)Chuck Wrote: Yes. There is no evidence he did. I don't think qua the divine twat existed either for the same reason. Do you have issues with Christianity?
"Thou believest in love as a divine attribute because thou thyself lovest; thou believest that God is a wise, benevolent being because thou knowest nothing better in thyself than benevolence and wisdom." - L.Feuerbach
I think we all have issues with Christianity.
Cunt
RE: The Death and Resurrection of Christ?
January 3, 2012 at 5:23 pm
(This post was last modified: January 3, 2012 at 5:24 pm by Erinome.)
(January 3, 2012 at 5:06 pm)Paradoxum Wrote:(January 3, 2012 at 4:16 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote: 1: A charismatic leader calling himself christ was executed by the romans and people made stuff up about him. I'm thinking of a David Koresh type character, (some branch davdians still think that david koresh was the 'lamb of god') http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resurrection This isn't original. It's a powerful element to the myth because it makes it seem more miraculous. Why would people make up anything? They do. Quote:Didn't Paul make up some rather good moral teachings for someone willing to lie about such things? No, not really. These were moral teachings in the far east for centuries before anyone wrote them down and claimed Jesus said it. Quote:4: God sent himself down to earth to suffer so that he could be sacrificed to himself for a crime he invented, (only joking, this is not really an option) Quote:I would say that's a bit of a crude understanding of it. Why could he not just forgive? Why did he have to send his son as himself to be sacrificed so that he could forgive people for sins? I'm but a mortal, and all I have to do to forgive people is decide to forgive them. Quote:(January 3, 2012 at 4:21 pm)passionatefool Wrote: Yes. In a court that would be called "assuming facts which are not in evidence."  What reason is there to think that he did? Name one scrap of credible evidence. I'll wait.  Christianity is an infection, and must be treated as such. If you don't have a problem with it, you're probably either infected, or just don't give a shit. 42
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
