Christians, would you have saved Jesus, if you had he chance?

[madog]

 In other words, is a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews making up a fantastical theological story more plausible than a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews accurately recording true fantastical theological events which they witnessed?  

The thing is it wasn't made up but plagiarized or at least adapted from earlier religions ....Rather than me explaining watch this video ... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzbp8ZiXpnc

[Ignorant]

1) I am getting at the fact that |a misinterpretation of a misunderstood experience of normal psychiatric phenomena which follow after the death of a loved one| is more plausible than somebody making up the story. I'm trying to give you a more defensible position with which to deny the claims of the apostles as a demonstration that your criteria for judging plausibility are inadequate/incomplete.

2) Of course they had intentions and were capable of deceit. It IS unscientific, however, to assign to them the intention to deceive/invent based on the events being extraordinary which they record. There are other hypotheses which stand up to more scientific scrutiny than does the invention hypothesis, but which also deny the theological nature of the narrative and letters. Your dichotomy "either its true OR they made it up", is a false one. In other words, is a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews making up a fantastical theological story more plausible than a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews accurately recording true fantastical theological events which they witnessed? Maybe so. BUT THEN there are ALSO more plausible non-Christian/non-theist explanations than "they made it up".

All I said was someone making up a resurrection story is more plausible than someone actually rising from the dead. Im not sure that someone hallucinating a resurrection would be more plausible than someone making up a resurrection, it would depend on the circumstances. A hallucination would however be more plausible than an actual resurrection, since hallucinations, just like lies, are known to also occur.

Did you know, that if one of your loved ones dies, and within 6 months, you have a "vision" of them and interact with that vision, that is not considered pathological? Instead, it is considered a normal human response? There is no treatment or medication recommended in that situation.

[Ignorant]

 In other words, is a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews making up a fantastical theological story more plausible than a bunch of ancient illiterate Jews accurately recording true fantastical theological events which they witnessed?  

The thing is it wasn't made up but plagiarized or at least adapted from earlier religions ....Rather than me explaining watch this video ... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzbp8ZiXpnc

Huh... so you retract all of your previous claims its having been invented? Even if it were plagiarized... it was told within a certain understanding, or at least an intended understanding of a world-view. Until you try to engage with the understanding of the authors, you aren't seriously dealing with the text.

[madog]

The thing is it wasn't made up but plagiarized or at least adapted from earlier religions ....Rather than me explaining watch this video ... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gzbp8ZiXpnc

Huh... so you retract all of your previous claims its having been invented? Even if it were plagiarized... it was told within a certain understanding, or at least an intended understanding of a world-view. Until you try to engage with the understanding of the authors, you aren't seriously dealing with the text.

They invented/created a new church. The fact that it is very similar to other religions, available to them, begs the question was God and Jesus a coincidence or an easy way to forge a new church?

In modern days, if the New Testament was written while the texts of those other religions shown by Richard Carrier were still copyrighted the authors of the New Testament could have been sued for copyright infringement ....

[Mr.wizard]

All I said was someone making up a resurrection story is more plausible than someone actually rising from the dead. Im not sure that someone hallucinating a resurrection would be more plausible than someone making up a resurrection, it would depend on the circumstances. A hallucination would however be more plausible than an actual resurrection, since hallucinations, just like lies, are known to also occur.

Did you know, that if one of your loved ones dies, and within 6 months, you have a "vision" of them and interact with that vision, that is not considered pathological? Instead, it is considered a normal human response? There is no treatment or medication recommended in that situation.

Did you know if you eat two bananas really fast and chug a Sprite, you will vomit? I like sharing random information too.

[Ignorant]

Did you know if you eat two bananas really fast and chug a Sprite, you will vomit? I like sharing random information too.

I never knew that.

[Esiar]

It depends on if Christianity is true in this theoretical situation. If it isn't I'd save him, if it is I wouldn't.

[Darwins Disciple]

If I believed in the crap and I had the chance yes ... Not for his sake but to stop a crappy religion ....

I hear you, however, the death of Jesus is irrelevant to the spread of Christianity. Now if you killed Paul (Saul), the would never have been Christianity.

I once saw a listing of most influential people in history. Paul was ranked higher then Jesus, for that very reason.

[robvalue]

It depends on if Christianity is true in this theoretical situation. If it isn't I'd save him, if it is I wouldn't.

Why wouldn't you? You figure the main God-being might now allow itself to change its mind if something goes wrong with the plan of sacrificing an avatar of itself?

Maybe it's the wake up call he bloody well needs, to see that the whole thing is a load of self-serving drama with no point to it at all.

Of course, even if Christianity is true, that doesn't tell us which particular brand is true. If it's one of the really nutty ones we aren't at liberty to make our own choices anyway.

[dyresand]

It depends on if Christianity is true in this theoretical situation. If it isn't I'd save him, if it is I wouldn't.

Why wouldn't you? You figure the main God-being might now allow itself to change its mind if something goes wrong with the plan of sacrificing an avatar of itself?

Maybe it's the wake up call he bloody well needs, to see that the whole thing is a load of self-serving drama with no point to it at all.

Of course, even if Christianity is true, that doesn't tell us which particular brand is true. If it's one of the really nutty ones we aren't at liberty to make our own choices anyway.

All this question serves to do is point out if someone was getting beating and tortured and it was jesus
they simply wouldn't take the time or effort to save said person and would rather let them die for their own selfish needs.
This is why if christianity were true i would take punishment rather than putting my own "sins" onto some guy who supposedly died for me.
It is selfish and wrong to put the blame onto someone else that is what this religion teaches you fucked up in life put it all on jesus that is the
part where it sounds so wrong.