All in the title. I've decided that if Jesus existed, he most likely resurrected.
But did Jesus exist at all? Is the whole thing myth, or is it history? Share.
RELIGION POLL #2: Did Jesus exist?
Topic's posts
Posts in total:
62
-
-
they are a lot of theories on why jesus is a myth,some say the sun,some say a mushroom or a copetheres some truth to it but gods intentions is misunderstood with these peopleI think he existed -
Can neither confirm nor deny. No physical evidence of Jesus is available but there were tens of similar prophetic careers following the Roman takeover. Many Pharisaic and Essenic figures called for temple reform and preached of an eternal life and other similar claims to those ascribed to Jesus in the New Testament. Whether an actual Jesus lived as the New Testament documents or whether those works (and many others) are amalgams or cut and pastes of multiple popular prophets is probably unknowable. Michael Grant points out that we accept many other figures as historical without question based on the same degree of evidence as exists for Jesus. I see no reason not to give the benefit of the doubt that some real core personality existed. -
He did and does. -
--> @MisterChrisJesus of the biblical mythology, could easily have been based upon a real person.Though it's very unlikely that a real Jesus character was resurrected in the mythological biblical sense.The Biblical story is obviously a mythology, because the supernatural embellishments lack logical/common sense.
-
--> @MisterChrisHistory is rewritten every ten years. History is what ever you want to believe it is. The history I was taught in no way resembles what you were taught. Just look at all the versions available and pick one, that's your version of history. There is no right or wrong version of history. -
--> @MisterChrisI think the main question is... there are certain people that witness impossibilities, according to current science. Is it credible or not? Obviously, to any curious man, it is credible enough to be confused about the current state of reality. -
--> @MisterChrisJesus the person? Maybe.Jesus the character in the bible (the one that resurrected)? Probably not. -
--> @MisterChrisAll in the title. I've decided that if Jesus existed, he most likely resurrected.But did Jesus exist at all? Is the whole thing myth, or is it history? Share.From the annals of history, it is most reasonable to believe He existed. Something most definitely happened during the 1st-century to fuel the belief of the Messiah's coming and resurrecting. From the canonized gospels and epistles, we have reasonable evidence of this Person. From the OT Jewish Scriptures we know the Messiah was promised to an Old Covenant people. Those people do not exist in the covenant relationship after AD 70. We then also have the extra-biblical testament of His existence starting with Josephus and the early church fathers, then secular sources and historians who also mention His name or the movement. Some of these writings have multiple manuscripts preserved in history from a much earlier date than any other manuscripts from antiquity.What early evidence do you have to the contrary? -
--> @MisterChrisJesus or a jesus-like figure lived, some guy probably did go around during the ancient times telling people he was the son of God and started Christianity. He probably didn't resurrect though. -
--> @PGA2.0None contrary. Some would say the evidence against is the lack of evidence period.
-
--> @MisterChrisNone contrary. Some would say the evidence against is the lack of evidence period.So, I would argue your non-evidence gives less reason to believe His non-existence or non-resurrection. The evidence for His existence and resurrection is far greater and logical to believe. People in history are stating their eyewitness testimony. Something extraordinary happened that they want to share with the rest of the world.
-
--> @fauxlawHe did and does.He still does exist, does he?What, he's got a cigarette hanging out of his mouth and flipping burgers in a remote roadside truck-stop, is he?
-
--> @wlsw9If that's how you want to see him, that's your trip, bud. Milk it. Argue for your limitations; they're yours
-
--> @fauxlawHe still does exist, does he?What, he's got a cigarette hanging out of his mouth and flipping burgers in a remote roadside truck-stop, is he?If that's how you want to see him, that's your trip, bud. Milk it. Argue for your limitations; they're yoursLet's get back to the point.You said that Jesus Christ exists.Where is he then?Or are you lying?So far as Christ ever existing at all goes: if he did exist there is good reason to presume that he was no different to David Koresh and Jim Jones. That is they were charismatic leaders who sucked in gullible followers to believe a load of utter codswallop and proclaiming to be the son of god.The only difference is that Koresh was responsible for the deaths of more than 20 people, Jones; 900, Christ; 90,000 followers were killed last year alone.Oh, and the other difference is: Koresh and Jones actually existed.
-
--> @wlws9Where is he then?As close as you allow him to be. It's on you, not him.
-
Jesus definitely exists, just as every other god every imagined, or Batman and Captain America and Darth Vader exist. It's a character in a story.
-
--> @fauxlawWhere is he then?As close as you allow him to be. It's on you, not him.You mean, as close as a deluded mind would want Him to be.For example, you may wish to comment on this video.....
-
--> @ludofl3xJesus definitely exists, just as every other god every imagined, or Batman and Captain America and Darth Vader exist. It's a character in a story.Exactly.Unfortunately, some people tend to stretch the metaphor a bit and actually convince themselves that Jesus exists literally means just that.
-
Just so everyone knows, all the wlw alts are fake accounts by the moron Willows who has again broken into the site to tell us how terrible Jesus is - as a public service, (not because he bitter and has OCD). -
--> @wlws9Yeah, yeah, Richard Dawkins. Let me tell you about Professor Richard DawkinsRichard Dawkins never met Christ. What Dawkins has decided concluded as has Christopher Hitchins: "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.’” This is a famously irrelevant argument since they both misunderstands the scope of evidence available. For the first clause, Dawkins is looking in a candy jar for a proper diet, and concludes that nutrition is a myth. Either nutrition is a proven necessity for sustenance of a meaningful and enduring life, or it must be acknowledged that candy is not nutritious. For the concluding clause, he is crying for evidence when laughing that evidence is immaterial if dismissal was always the intent. Either evidence, observation, and experimentation, elements my opponent suggested are revered as the proof of truth, or its dismissal without evidence, observation, or experimentation [all three must be applied, not just one, or two] is an act of ignorance.I conclude that Dawkins is either malnourished, at best, or starving, at worst.
-
Just so that everyone knows....The theist message is often just as belligerent and O.C. as the atheist message....it's just that theists likes to think that their O.C.D. is more righteous....And vice versa of course.And just for the record, I am merely a sceptic....Who accepts a GOD principle, but not all the piffle associated with the Jesus stories.....A liberal atheist if you like...Though not to be confused with a political liberal, as I am staunchly apolitical....A hard line moderate if you like......Labels, labels!Though if Willows weren't so obvious, then they might get away with it.... Though perhaps that is a symptom of O.C.D.....Or maybe just good fun....Sure as hell winds up conservatives though......LOL.
-
--> @fauxlawRichard Dawkins never met Christ.And nor have you or anybody else living, so, by your own admission (Jesus exists) and as is clearly shown in the video you are either lying, deluded.Or both.
-
--> @zedvictor4Though if Willows weren't so obvious, then they might get away with it.... Though perhaps that is a symptom of O.C.D.....Or maybe just good fun....Sure as hell winds up conservatives though......LOL.I'm sure that if you look closer at my posts you will find that there is no belligerence whatsoever.Remember, I am correctly, without exaggeration, exposing the sheer absurdity, hypocracy, bigotry, hatred and delusion that is religion and I have always used well researched facts and reason to back up my words.For example, if you were to deride Nazism and Holocaust denial as repulsive and ugly, would I have the right to call your views extreme or belligerant?No, I wouldn't because Nazism and Holocast denial are in fact repulsive and ugly.Religion is an extreme, anti-social belief founded on nothing more than wild speculation and outright lies. Is the act of exposing such extreme behaviour extreme in itself?No, it isn't.The truth hurts and religious zealots have always had a penchant for deflecting criticism of their absurd beliefs through vitriol. What else can they do....they have absolutely not one iota of evidence to support their craziness.It's a bit like road rage really, if you notice.....It is always the guilty party that is the loudest.
-
--> @WaterPhoenixJesus or a jesus-like figure lived, some guy probably did go around during the ancient times telling people he was the son of God and started Christianity. He probably didn't resurrect though.Yes, exactly and that is the only resonable conclusion that anyone can draw.Since time immemorial there have been charismatic charlatans popping up claiming to be the son of God and offering salvation to anyone gullible and naive enough to believe their lunacy.For example, in more recent times we have seen David Koresh and Jim Jones do exactly the same thing.The only difference in their cases is that we can confirm that they definitely did exist.
