|
The Historicity Of Jesus: Does It Matter?
|
 RE: The Historicity Of Jesus: Does It Matter?
October 28, 2013 at 12:17 pm
(This post was last modified: October 28, 2013 at 12:18 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
Been called worse, mate.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
Looks like we're all pretty much in agreement about whether it matters or not if a person named Jesus existed historically or not.
But the simple fact that all evidence for that is nonexistent must be a constant thorn in the sides of Christians everywhere. Not only do they have a greater burden of proof claiming that he was the son of a god, but they also have problems showing that he actually existed in the first place and the gospel stories aren't just fabrications.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
I've used this analogy before but I see no harm in using it again.
We have one original story of the godboy: what is written in what later came to be known as the gospel of mark. We have two later fan fics in matty and luke that added on to it and which were later accepted by the powers-that-be and one piece of psychedelic nonsense (john.) We do not have any story which tells of a non-miracle working guy wandering around making a pain in the ass of himself in early first century Judaea by talking about silly shit to a bunch of peasants. This idea is wholly a creation of modern historians who understand that miracles are childish but cannot let go of the idea that there MUST be some kernel of historical truth to the story. This, in spite of the fact that most of these same historians would deny that there is any need for such a kernel in the tales of Osiris, Zeus, Marduk or Quetzlcoatl. In Star Trek Captain Kirk is commander of the Enterprise. He is not "merely" the guy who operates the transporter. No one tries to give him a demotion to make him "real."
I actually had a theist tell me once that there is more evidence for the historicity of Jesus than there is for Abraham Lincoln. When I gently pointed out that we have actual photographs of Lincoln as well as things in his own handwriting, she told me to '...stop making stuff up.'
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson
 (October 28, 2013 at 12:31 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I actually had a theist tell me once that there is more evidence for the historicity of Jesus than there is for Abraham Lincoln. When I gently pointed out that we have actual photographs of Lincoln as well as things in his own handwriting, she told me to '...stop making stuff up.'Kill it before it breeds. Quote:I actually had a theist tell me once that there is more evidence for the historicity of Jesus than there is for Abraham Lincoln. There is no dealing with people who are that stupid.  (October 28, 2013 at 12:31 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I actually had a theist tell me once that there is more evidence for the historicity of Jesus than there is for Abraham Lincoln. Two words: "Show me." - because anyone who is stupid enough to make such an absurd claim has no idea what evidence actually exists. RE: The Historicity Of Jesus: Does It Matter?
October 28, 2013 at 1:22 pm
(This post was last modified: October 28, 2013 at 1:23 pm by Doubting Thomas.)
(October 28, 2013 at 12:27 pm)Minimalist Wrote: In Star Trek Captain Kirk is commander of the Enterprise. He is not "merely" the guy who operates the transporter. No one tries to give him a demotion to make him "real." [nerd voice]Well duh! Captain Kirk never operated the transporter, that was Mr. Scott's job! Huhuhuhuh! Just imagine a starship captain having to operate the teleporter![/nerd voice] (October 28, 2013 at 1:02 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: Two words: "Show me." - because anyone who is stupid enough to make such an absurd claim has no idea what evidence actually exists. Yeah, that's when they just pull out the New Testament. Sorry, but I know all too well how Christians operate.
Christian apologetics is the art of rolling a dog turd in sugar and selling it as a donut.
 RE: The Historicity Of Jesus: Does It Matter?
October 28, 2013 at 3:34 pm
(This post was last modified: October 28, 2013 at 3:36 pm by Angrboda.)
Christians can acknowledge the lack of historicity to the Genesis account without acknowledging its relevance to their doctrines of sin and the justification for the life and death of Christ. Christians do not care about the truth. If the truth is inconvenient to Christianity, Christianity will simply rewite it. The only thing Christians truly care about is whether or not you are a member of their club. ![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg) Quote:Christians can acknowledge the lack of historicity to the Genesis account without acknowledging its relevance to their doctrines of sin and the justification for the life and death of Christ. Which is why I have a tad more respect for the fundies...even though they are batshit crazy...than the cherry-pickers who fail to grasp that without this foundational story there is nothing for their silly godboy to die for. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
