Who do you think Jesus was

strobe

liamw wrote: »

Man alive Jakkass.

When did I say Christianity was about mass suicide?

The point is that people are willing to go as far as killing themselves under a delusion. Your argument was that followers of Jesus would be unlikely to risk their lives if Christianity wasn't true is clearly invalid, as is evident from the cases presented.

This one is a linchpin of Jakkass' faith I often get the feeling. He is certainly fond of bringing it up as some sort of (what I believe he sees as a), if not a check mate move then certainly a check one, in regards to the truth of Christianity.

'There is no possible way anyone would risk death for something that wasn't true'

=======================================================

I see you have conceded that they may have believed it was true but been wrong, which is a start I guess. So we have one other option there.

Another is that they knew it was not true but you are over estimating the risk. Maybe these lads they were telling stories to weren't as quick to stab holes into people as you presume they were.

Also maybe they believed in the message. Christians often argue that the Christian way of life is good for people and for society and for mankind irrespective of the supernatural components. You yourself often (try to) use non-supernatural arguments for marriage being between a man and a woman, for no sex before marriage, against abortion etc. I'm sure there are other examples. Maybe they were willing to risk (because it was only a risk of course, it wasn't certain they would die we will obviously agree) their lives for a 'good lie'.

I have another two or three of these but what do you reckon to the above? Possible?

===============================================

Just in regards Corinthians 15:6... seriously?

He doesn't claim to be able to ID these 500. So the whole 'the lads could have sent some chap from Greece to Israel to run around the place in the hope of running into some of the 500 that were still alive' thing, is a little weak, man.

Even if they asked him for names and he told them, "just ask Anto of Arimathea, Johnners cousin" it's not exactly the opportunity for certain confirmation you seem to be suggesting.

I slept with Jessica Alba and Avril Lavigne in the middle of a field in New Mexico last year. There were about 200 people that seen it. Go ask them if you don't believe me.

strobe

Anyways... back on topic.

I reckon there are three likely possibilities.

(I think that C.S Lewis guy could have been on to something)

1. He genuinely believed he was the son of god (then again he said we were all children of god), his Ma (who made up the story so Joey wouldn't know she cheated on him) and Da had told him he was immaculately conceived by god after all, probably since he was 5 or 6, and went around preaching what he believed he (god) thought was best for mankind. Just a deluded but pretty nice guy who happened to show up at the right place at the right time and it snowballed for him.

2. He, like a LOT of people have done over the years, used religion to further ideas he believed were in the best interest of people. He seen all these people fukking each other over, tried to lead by example and convince them that it was not on, and one day said "God doesn't want this" or something and a few of the God fearing people who had been ignoring him suddenly stopped and asked him how he knew what god wanted. He copped the power of the claim and just played it on the fly from there, sort of making it up as he went along.

3. He was the Creator of all things. The Alpha and Omega. God, innit... :cool:

philologos

I'm going to think about what you've all said and post again on this thread tomorrow. At a first glance the arguments aren't anything that I haven't seen before, but I want to try and give you the best answer I can due to the sheer volume of posts.

krudler

Jakkass wrote: »

robindch wants my answer:

No we don't have the originals, but we do have 40,000 manuscripts to compare. With this many manuscripts it would be nigh on impossible to make significant changes to the New Testament.

We do know who wrote most of the texts not all. Matthew, Mark do not explicitly mention who wrote each. There is evidence both in the text and in early church history that John wrote his Gospel, and Luke explicitly identifies himself in the text.

right, in that parchment, written nearly 2000 years ago, nobody could have possibly said they were Luke but Luke then?

"I'm Luke!"
"errr...alright then"

Terrlock

Well it's kinda like this

If Jesus is whom he says he is then we are laughing.

However if he is not, then what is the point to anything and we are all going to die and that's the end of everything. So what is the point on taking any action at all.


I'm just wondering how many of you have read the bible and studied it.

I think it must be one of the most difficult books in the world to read.

Atheism is probably the biggest growing religion in the world.

King Mob

krudler wrote: »

right, in that parchment, written nearly 2000 years ago, nobody could have possibly said they were Luke but Luke then?

"I'm Luke!"
"errr...alright then"

I'm Luke and so's my wife.

strobe

Terrlock wrote: »

Well it's kinda like this

If Jesus is whom he says he is then we are laughing.

I think you mean the Christians are laughing. The non-Christians are getting tortured for all eternity.

However if he is not, then what is the point to anything and we are all going to die and that's the end of everything. So what is the point on taking any action at all.

I'm sure there has been a thread or 90 started in here on this before.

Here are a couple if you are interested.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=53764773

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=51150821

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=62894964

( I really wasn't joking about the '90')

I'm just wondering how many of you have read the bible and studied it.

Well I have to some extent. I know a few others here have to. At a guess I'd say it's about the same as or slightly higher than the percentage of Christians that have read or studied it.

I think it must be one of the most difficult books in the world to read.

It's fairly sh1t alright. No plot consistency.

Atheism is probably the biggest growing religion in the world.

Atheism isn't a religion.

Glad to be of service.

Terrlock

The bible is only inconsistent when you take it out of context.

It's probably the most consistant book ever written considering it was written by so many different writers over the ages.

I mean if it's just made up it's some accomplisment in all fairness.

Here's an interesting diagram of the Ages according to the texts throughout the bible. Gives a general over view.

http://www.preservedwords.com/disptruth/images/1-ages.gif

Sorry this is off topic but maybe relevent all the same.

strobe

Terrlock wrote: »

The bible is only inconsistent when you take it out of context.

It's probably the most consistant book ever written considering it was written by so many different writers over the ages.

I mean if it's just made up it's some accomplisment in all fairness.

Here's an interesting diagram of the Ages according to the texts throughout the bible. Gives a general over view.

http://www.preservedwords.com/disptruth/images/1-ages.gif

Sorry this is off topic but maybe relevent all the same.

I meant 'plot consistency' in the way it is used in a creative writing context.

"It is imperative that the plot progress logically from point A to point B and beyond. Extraneous details should all be eliminated and all action should serve to move the plot - be it the main plot, or a sub plot - forward. When developing an effectively plotted novel or story, it is important to remember that the reader must understand how plot point B grew from plot point A; failure to do this results in a lack of continuity and a lack of consistency.

However, it is also important to remember that characters have a certain continuity as well – and this doesn't just refer to the characters' beliefs and behaviors."

etc... I think we can agree the bible is somewhat lacking in this when compared to The Godfather or 1984 or Catch-22 or Moby Dick.

I was being facetious I'm afraid. I do that sometimes.

liamw

Jakkass wrote: »

Your comparison to mass suicide is completely inadequate to back up this argument in this particular case. Yes people have mass suicided, but the intention of what they advocated didn't even encourage mass suicide. If it did we wouldn't be here, I wouldn't be on this forum right now if I genuinely believed in it.

For the third time - I AM NOT SAYING THAT CHRISTIANITY PROMOTES MASS SUICIDE.

I didn't even ask the question you think I did. I asked why would they die for what they clearly knew was a lie. I'm not closed to the possibility that they were full on deluded about whether or not Jesus rose from the dead. I am doubting heavily the possibility that people would die for a lie that they themselves concocted in the full knowledge that it was a lie.

We have hundreds if not thousands of examples where people join a cult group and become fully enveloped in the group often to the point of being willing to commit suicide. It's bizarre that you would have no problem identifying those as deluded groups.

But, for some reason, just for this story you side on the highly improbable option of a bizarre supernatural event actually happening rather than the obvious perpetration of a lie or a cult following. And you have not presented any sort of decent evidence for it at all. You're story doesn't even come close to checking out, so I can't help but think you've deluded yourself on this.

You will need to present some extraordinary evidence for this extraordinary claim. Go for it.

Terrlock

Well Jesus must have had some significance.

I mean if he was just like all the others that have come forward and claimed to be the messiah then why did we pick this guy too have time itself measured by.

Granted not every culture in the world measures time the same way but the majority of countries do measure time from the coming of Jesus.

Why did they pick him over others?

King Mob

Terrlock wrote: »

Why did they pick him over others?

Why did they pick Jim Jones? Why did they pick L. Ron Hubbard?

Why did the nations who don't use our dating system pick theirs?

Terrlock

why are there 7 days in a week?

King Mob

Terrlock wrote: »

why are there 7 days in a week?

Societal convention?
But I assure you it's not because of Jesus.

So why do people latch onto clearly false prophets like Jim Jones or L. Ron Hubbard or Joseph Smith?

krudler

King Mob wrote: »

So why do people latch onto clearly false prophets like Jim Jones or L. Ron Hubbard or Joseph Smith?

because people are stupid?

strobe

Terrlock wrote: »

Well Jesus must have had some significance.

I mean if he was just like all the others that have come forward and claimed to be the messiah then why did we pick this guy too have time itself measured by.

Granted not every culture in the world measures time the same way but the majority of countries do measure time from the coming of Jesus.

Why did they pick him over others?

Terrlock wrote: »

why are there 7 days in a week?

Why are there still 24 hours in a day?

Same deal.

dead one

Wicknight wrote:

Jesus was a cult leader who manipulated people into worshipping him, following him and providing for him through claims to supernatural ability. Like the thousands of cult leaders before and after him.

He eventually ran a foul of the authorities of the day and ended up being executed.

Unable to deal with the reality that their all powerful cult leader was executed a story that he had rising from the dead developed.
.

Wrong!!!!!!!

Thomas Paine wrote:

Jesus Christ wrote no account of himself, of his birth, parentage, or any thing else; not a line of what is called the New Testament is of his own writing. The history of him is altogether the work of other people; and as to the account given of his resurrection and ascension, it was the necessary counterpart to the story of his birth. His historians having brought him into the world in a supernatural manner, were obliged to take him out again in the same manner, or the first part of the story must have fallen to the ground.

That such a person as Jesus Christ existed, and that he was crucified, which was the mode of execution at that day, are historical relations strictly within the limits of probability. He preached most excellent morality and the equality of man; but he preached also against the corruptions and avarice of the Jewish priests, and this brought upon him the hatred and vengeance of the whole order of priesthood. The accusation which those priests brought against him was that of sedition and conspiracy against the Roman government, to which the Jews were then subject and tributary; and it is not improbable that the Roman government might have some secret apprehensions of the effects of his doctrine, as well as the Jewish priests; neither is it improbable that Jesus Christ had in contemplation the delivery of the Jewish nation from the bondage of the Romans. Between the two, however, this virtuous reformer and revolutionist lost his life.

Half True!!!!!

Quran wrote:

[Jesus] said, "Indeed, I am the servant of Allah . He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet.And He has made me blessed wherever I am and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I remain alive. And [made me] dutiful to my mother, and He has not made me a wretched tyrant.And peace is on me the day I was born and the day I will die and the day I am raised alive."That is Jesus, the son of Mary - the word of truth about which they are in dispute. It is not [befitting] for Allah to take a son; exalted is He! When He decrees an affair, He only says to it, "Be," and it is.
http://quran.com/19/30-35
And when Jesus brought clear proofs, he said, "I have come to you with wisdom and to make clear to you some of that over which you differ, so fear Allah and obey me. Indeed, Allah is my Lord and your Lord, so worship Him. This is a straight path." But the denominations from among them differed [and separated], so woe to those who have wronged from the punishment of a painful Day.
http://quran.com/43/63-65

The Truth!!!!!

Bible wrote:

"I cannot do anything of myself. I judge as I hear, and my judgment is honest because I am not seeking my own will but the will of him who sent me." [ John 5:30 ]

Jesus said: ``My doctrine is not my own; it comes from him who sent me.'' [ John 7:16 ]

"Men of Israel, listen to me! Jesus the Nazorean was a man whom God sent to you with miracles, wonders, and signs as his credentials. These God worked through him in your midst, as you well know."
[ Acts 2:22 ]

"Whoever welcomes me welcomes, not me, but him who sent me."
[ Matthew 10:40, Mark 9:37, Luke 9:48, & John 13:20 ]

``...I have not come of myself. I was sent by One who has the right to send, and him you do not know. I know him because it is from him I come; he sent me.'' [ John 7:28-29 ]

The Truth!!!

Bannasidhe

Terrlock wrote: »

Well Jesus must have had some significance.

I mean if he was just like all the others that have come forward and claimed to be the messiah then why did we pick this guy too have time itself measured by.

Granted not every culture in the world measures time the same way but the majority of countries do measure time from the coming of Jesus.

Why did they pick him over others?

No they don't - Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists and Jews for a start all have different origin dates - so that's India, Pakistan,the Middle East for a start...oh...and Asia.

Europeans brought their dating system with them when they tried to take over the world - In south America for example cultures such as the Inca,Aztec, etc were wiped out and the 'clock' re-set to European standard B.C/A.D. time. Nothing like the Inquisition backed up by a gang of heavily armed conquistadors to persuade the locals to agree that it is,indeed, absolutely the year 1500...sir,yer honour.

oldrnwisr

Terrlock wrote: »

why are there 7 days in a week?

There are 7 days in a week because of the 7 celestial objects which have been observable since antiquity. These have lead to the names of the weekdays as FISMA pointed out here.

There is evidence of the use of a seven day week as far back as the Babylonians. In fact, it was probably the Babylonian use of a 7-day week which influenced Jewish thought (as it did in many other ways) and later Christian thought. However, other cultures not associated with the Judeo-Christian tradition have used seven day weeks for quite a long time. Hinduism, for example, has been using seven day weeks since at least the 1st century BC while Chinese culture has been using it since the 4th century. There are also modern indigenous cultures such as the Igbo in Nigeria which use weeks other than seven days.

robindch

Jakkass wrote: »

but we do have 40,000 manuscripts to compare. With this many manuscripts it would be nigh on impossible to make significant changes to the New Testament.

I can't believe that people are still recycling this argument!

The figure of 40,000 manuscripts refers to everything that was produced up to perhaps the tenth century. The number of manuscripts BEFORE the fourth century is absolutely tiny, and the earliest fragment (perhaps two inches square) is dated to perhaps a century after Jesus is reported to have died.

When there is a tiny number of manuscripts -- as there certainly was, probably for several centuries -- it is trivially simple to:

(a) start off and write down complete nonsense and sell it using the same arguments that you've used here to people who never witnessed it.

(b) take a true story and edit it so that it is no longer true.

Jakkass wrote: »

3. Paul mentions explicitly in the New Testament that there were 500 witnesses of the Resurrected Jesus. Witnesses that people could have visited were they curious about the truth of the Gospel.

Trusting one person to report on 500 people's trust is the same as trusting one person. Not 500!

Jakkass wrote: »

it is incredibly unlikely that they would, or indeed even go out into the depths of the Roman Empire to risk their lives were it not true.

And I've met people in North Korea who told me that they were prepared to die to preserve the immortal Truths of the Great Leader.

Far as I'm concerned, I'd consider somebody insane if they told me that they were prepared to have themselves killed to preserve some ideology.

sensibleken

We believe he existed and that he was a well built robot, but he was not our messiah.

dead one

robindch wrote: »

Trusting one person to report on 500 people's trust is the same as trusting one person. Not 500!

Well, it is true, But what about trusting 500 Unknown Persons !!!!

Dades

Who do you think Jesus was?

I think given the lack of real data, the question should really be - who do you think Jesus wasn't?

This guy:

sensibleken

Dades wrote: »

I think given the lack of real data, the question should really be - who do you think Jesus wasn't?

This guy:

who are all those guys drinking yard glasses? hardcore!

Zombrex

dead one wrote: »

Wrong!!!!!!!

Good argument, the explanation marks are a nice touch, everyone knows the more explanation marks the more truthful you are being

Zombrex

Dades wrote: »

I think given the lack of real data, the question should really be - who do you think Jesus wasn't?

This guy:

Funny you mention that. Its a bit off topic, but I was thinking about this very recently. It seems quite trendy these days for Christians or Muslims to laugh at the idea of God being an old guy in the sky with a beard.

They say that this is clearly ridiculous. The irony of course is that we atheists look at God in the same way, but we don't stop just at the beard. The whole concept is clearly ridiculous, as ridiculous as a bearded old man in the sky.

krudler

dead one wrote: »

Wrong!!!!!!!

Half True!!!!!

The Truth!!!!!

The Truth!!!

Just because your ancient manuscript says so doesnt make it true.

krudler

Wicknight wrote: »

Funny you mention that. Its a bit off topic, but I was thinking about this very recently. It seems quite trendy these days for Christians or Muslims to laugh at the idea of God being an old guy in the sky with a beard.

They say that this is clearly ridiculous. The irony of course is that we atheists look at God in the same way, but we don't stop just at the beard. The whole concept is clearly ridiculous, as ridiculous as a bearded old man in the sky.

Also those same people probably have a picture of Jesus somewhere in their house, with clouds and rays of sunshine behind him and a big flaming heart like an end of level boss' weak point on a video game or something.

Zombrex

dead one wrote: »

Well, it is true, But what about trusting 500 Unknown Persons !!!!

Dun Dun Dun!

Zombrex

krudler wrote: »

Also those same people probably have a picture of Jesus somewhere in their house, with clouds and rays of sunshine behind him and a big flaming heart like an end of level boss' weak point on a video game or something.

The heart is exposed! Attack!



You have defeated Jesus. 400 points.