By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior

JWeinCom said:
palou said:

The existence of a *historical person* Jesus *does* make a lot of sense, within the context, so I don't really see reason to deny that, either. Jerusalem was searching for godly intervention at the time, to repel the roman invaders. A lot of their collective history stems from stories about messiahs leading the Israelites to unlikely victories, so it's natural for them to seek another one, and equally natural for him to garner collective anger, by preaching peace (Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's...). Though, in this case, that was probably the right choice, as the revolt that followed shortly after was one of the most brutal massacres in Roman history.

There's no reason a person like Jesus couldn't exist (without the supernatural baggage).  I'm sure that today you can find people claiming to be the son of god or something like that.  But there is a big difference between something making sense, and something actually being confirmed.  

Considering the importance some people wish us to place on this figure, there needs to be something better than, "a guy like this could've existed".

Well, Christianity *did* take form at the time, I think there's really no good reason to doubt that there was an occurrence at least somewhat similar to the described by the earlier followers (and the earliest historians describing the events, the execution, specifically, was referenced in works 50-100 years after, in a timeframe where oral tradition still has some credibility.). That seems like the most likely origin for a religion. 

Last edited by palou - on 03 April 2018

Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

Around the Network
palou said:
JWeinCom said:

There's no reason a person like Jesus couldn't exist (without the supernatural baggage).  I'm sure that today you can find people claiming to be the son of god or something like that.  But there is a big difference between something making sense, and something actually being confirmed.  

Considering the importance some people wish us to place on this figure, there needs to be something better than, "a guy like this could've existed".

Well, Christianity *did* take form at the time, I think there's really no good reason to doubt that there was an occurrence at least somewhat similar to the described by the earlier followers (and the earliest historians describing the events, the execution, specifically, was referenced in works 50-100 years after, in a timeframe where oral tradition still has some credibility.). That seems like the most likely origin for a religion. 

Of course there is a good reason to doubt it.  That reason being a lack of evidence to confirm it.  



CrazyGamer2017 said:
roadkillers said:

What do you think when you hear this? Do you believe that God gave his only son to die on the cross for you?

Short answer? Nope.

Longer but not super long answer: It actually makes no sense. EVEN IF that Jesus guy actually did that 2000 years ago, or believed his death did that (which by the way has no historical ground) WTF did he save us from? Do you or anyone feel saved? Saved from what?

Diseases? Nope

Taxes? Nope

Wars? Nope

Death? Nope

Painful messy births? Nope

Rotting flesh after we die? Nope

A fat bank account for everybody on earth? Nope

I could go on forever and "Nope" would still be the answer.

More than "saving" you, it's more that he helped people to realize that we go on in our lives in sinful ways. As it happens, and as Jesus showed with his death, there's an opportunity to correct one's path. With his example, he presumably showed the real way to live in peace and harmony. Having faith is the way, in other words. Beyond that, he also showed that a holy realm is coming back. This salvation is not literal, it's a whole deal that I'm pretty sure you could get better informed on elsewhere. 

Now, that being said, nope, I don't believe. 



My bet with The_Liquid_Laser: I think the Switch won't surpass the PS2 as the best selling system of all time. If it does, I'll play a game of a list that The_Liquid_Laser will provide, I will have to play it for 50 hours or complete it, whatever comes first. 

roadkillers said:

What do you think when you hear this? Do you believe that God gave his only son to die on the cross for you?

No, I don't believe it.

What do I think when I hear this? Ignorance comes first to my mind followed by being a Lemming.



Intel Core i7 8700K | 32 GB DDR 4 PC 3200 | ROG STRIX Z370-F Gaming | RTX 3090 FE| Crappy Monitor| HTC Vive Pro :3

I do believe.



Around the Network

There is a whole ecosystem in the way of people conceiving culture, ignorance ,tradition, rationalism and folklore. So for some population sector who are pretty tied to tradition, ignorance and folklore. For this sector religion is as important as your diary needs, so as they’d been told whatever the source, family gossip, the bible, tv and media and so on is taken as a solid fact whatever the speculation involved around these tales. There also the neobelief like ufology and conspiracy with new interesting theories. For me is nothing that could be verified by the bible itself, so its just legend al folklore perfect fittable for the most ignorant population section. But that my opinion only and should be respected as well.



JWeinCom said:
palou said:

Well, Christianity *did* take form at the time, I think there's really no good reason to doubt that there was an occurrence at least somewhat similar to the described by the earlier followers (and the earliest historians describing the events, the execution, specifically, was referenced in works 50-100 years after, in a timeframe where oral tradition still has some credibility.). That seems like the most likely origin for a religion. 

Of course there is a good reason to doubt it.  That reason being a lack of evidence to confirm it.  

We know that there was oral tradition (or lost written tradition) confirming the existence of a religious figure that entered Jerusalem, around the time of Jesus, from 70 years after - that's evidence, even if not the strongest. It's strengthened by the fact that we don't have any information about *other* origins for the christian religion, which you could reasonably expect to leave some traces (since a religion usually starts from an event of some importance.) 

 

Yes, it's not confirmation, by any means - but I think, it is normal to take as fact whatever answer to a question has the highest probability - I think, to the question "what is the origin of Christianity?" supernatural aside, the persona of Jesus seems like the best we have. 



Bet with PeH: 

I win if Arms sells over 700 000 units worldwide by the end of 2017.

Bet with WagnerPaiva:

 

I win if Emmanuel Macron wins the french presidential election May 7th 2017.

palou said:
JWeinCom said:

Of course there is a good reason to doubt it.  That reason being a lack of evidence to confirm it.  

We know that there was oral tradition (or lost written tradition) confirming the existence of a religious figure that entered Jerusalem, around the time of Jesus, from 70 years after - that's evidence, even if not the strongest. It's strengthened by the fact that we don't have any information about *other* origins for the christian religion, which you could reasonably expect to leave some traces (since a religion usually starts from an event of some importance.) 

 

Yes, it's not confirmation, by any means - but I think, it is normal to take as fact whatever answer to a question has the highest probability - I think, to the question "what is the origin of Christianity?" supernatural aside, the persona of Jesus seems like the best we have. 

With Muhammad it's so much easier, there is a wealth of information on him that was much more contemporary.



I was raised to be Catholic, but I've been an atheist for a long time now. That said, I don't begrudge anyone their beliefs, as long as they don't try to force them on others.



palou said:
JWeinCom said:

Of course there is a good reason to doubt it.  That reason being a lack of evidence to confirm it.  

We know that there was oral tradition (or lost written tradition) confirming the existence of a religious figure that entered Jerusalem, around the time of Jesus, from 70 years after - that's evidence, even if not the strongest. It's strengthened by the fact that we don't have any information about *other* origins for the christian religion, which you could reasonably expect to leave some traces (since a religion usually starts from an event of some importance.) 

 

Yes, it's not confirmation, by any means - but I think, it is normal to take as fact whatever answer to a question has the highest probability - I think, to the question "what is the origin of Christianity?" supernatural aside, the persona of Jesus seems like the best we have. 

Oral tradition is incredibly weak evidence.  We know how unreliable eyewitness testimony is, even when it comes to something that occurred within several hours. 

As for probability.. it doesn't really work like that.  For two reasons.  Firstly, we can't always take probabilities as fact... That's actually contrary to the concept of probability.  Suppose I told you I flipped a coin three times and I told you it landed on heads three times.  If you were going to simply take the most likely outcome as fact, you'd have to conclude I'm lying.  The odds of the coin getting three heads(1/8) is less than the odds of of any other combination (7/8).  But obviously, it is possible to get three heads in a row, so calling me a liar wouldn't be justified.  Likewise, if it was a higher probability that Jesus existed, you couldn't take it as fact.  All you could say is that it's a higher probability.

More importantly though, probability requires some actual math.  A number of trials, and the likelihood of a particular outcome.  I have no idea how one would calculate the possibility of Jesus existing.  Maybe there is some formula historians can use, but I'm not aware of one.  

Until we have something like that, we can't even argue based on probability, and the best answer would be that we don't know.