Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

[Value Collector]

Jesus said, translate the Bible accurately,
and do not change or add anything,
do not use the Bible to build large religions,
and make money via the coming TV or internet.
noirua 1:2

We don't actually know what he said, or even if he existed.

I mean the bible stories are full of claims of things "Jesus" is said to have done, We would be silly to believe the claim extraordinary claims of walking on water etc, So that puts even the mediocre claims in doubt,

The earliest writings we have about him date to 100 years after he died, anyone that has played Chinese whispers, or seen rumours spread knows it takes less than 5 minutes for stories passed by word of mouth to change, So everything that "Jesus" said or did in the bible is unlikely to represent actual happenings, he might not have even existed at all as represented in the bible.

 

[Tisme]

We don't actually know what he said, or even if he existed.

I mean the bible stories are full of claims of things "Jesus" is said to have done, We would be silly to believe the claim extraordinary claims of walking on water etc, So that puts even the mediocre claims in doubt,

The earliest writings we have about him date to 100 years after he died, anyone that has played Chinese whispers, or seen rumours spread knows it takes less than 5 minutes for stories passed by word of mouth to change, So everything that "Jesus" said or did in the bible is unlikely to represent actual happenings, he might not have even existed at all as represented in the bible.

But then again he may well have existed and he may well have been a Richard Dawkins or Peterson of his time. He might even have been a dna descendant of David and he might actually have been an immaculate conception. That he is the one and only means we don't have any yardsticks to compare him with.

If we throw out any of the new testament as fallacious, the question becomes whose belief system is correct ; the advocates or the antagonists? Without absolute proofs each consider themselves righteous, except the advocates have the added advantage of consenting faith.

 

[SirRumpole]

We don't actually know what he said, or even if he existed.

It's accepted by most historians that Jesus was a historical person, not a myth or a legend like King Arthur, whatever else you choose to believe about him.

 

[cynic]

Jesus said, translate the Bible accurately,
and do not change or add anything,
do not use the Bible to build large religions,
and make money via the coming TV or internet.
noirua 1:2

But then, how are we to expand it to include the NEWER Testament, complete with the recently discovered gospel according to noirua?

 

[Wysiwyg]

I suppose another thing one might choose to consider, is that sometimes people are subconsciously seeking their own life lessons in order to catalyse the evolution of their consciousness. When somebody judges another's choices, as sufficiently lacking in wisdom, as to warrant intervention, there is the possibility, that the intervention itself is hampering the subject's progress in unforeseen ways.

And then there is also the possibility, that the judge might unknowingly be holding incorrect beliefs, rendering their judgment of others unsound and needlessly disruptive!

You're right. People should mind their own bees wax.

 

[Value Collector]

It's accepted by most historians that Jesus was a historical person, not a myth or a legend like King Arthur, whatever else you choose to believe about him.

Yes but the evidence is very, very weak, unbelieveably weak actually they just sort of accept for the sake of it, because they don't have any real evidence for or against. Try looking it up and see if you can find any evidence for him, out side the bible there is none.

and as I have said before, they don't accept the actual character from the bible, just that there may have been some guy that inspired the legend, the actually Jesus character from the bible is a myth.

I have used the example of St Nicholas vs Santa,

Santa (North Pole, reindeer etc) is a myth just like the Jesus character in the bible that Walks on water etc.

But was there a historical Jesus like there was a historical St Nicholas, who knows, but there is no real evidence for it, so why believe it? Not even the historians have evidence for it.

 

[SirRumpole]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...cal-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died

 

[Value Collector]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...cal-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died

If you actually looked up the claims you would see they are very weak.

For example where the article says this.

The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime,

Do you see any problem with that?

there is no evidence produced during his life,

eg. nothing written by him, nothing written about him, no artworks made, nothing from during his life, the earliest writings were written by people that were born after he died, decades after.

he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings.

I have read those writings from those historians and they are weak, go and read them and you will see.

Don't just post an article making a claim that evidence exists, look up the source material and you will see how weak it is.

 

[SirRumpole]

Don't just post an article making a claim that evidence exists, look up the source material and you will see how weak it is.

So you expect a band of itinerant tribesmen on the run from oppressors to maintain libraries of important historical information ?

The Roman historian Josephus referred to him in his writings. It would be unlikely that he wrote articles about a myth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

 

[Value Collector]

So you expect a band of itinerant tribesmen on the run from oppressors to maintain libraries of important historical information ?

I expect something to have survived, even something written by his enemies would be good, for such an important figure to not have anything appear for 60 years is crazy.

The Roman historian Josephus referred to him in his writings.

His writings were written 60 years after Jesus died, he wasn't even born when Jesus lived.

It would be unlikely that he wrote articles about a myth.

Why? 60 years is a long time, thats more than enough time for stories to be conflated and fabricated.

What did he write that is so convincing to you? can you provide a quote from him that you think is proof of Jesus?

why is Jesus missing from the historians writings of his day?

 

[grah33]

Deluded. Absolutely.

I don't think so. It's 'in my face' so to speak. Also, the NT has good accounts of the action of the Holy Spirit. It's the same today. You need to give it a go and then you can really see for yourself.

Don't be surprised that God should act in the Church and among ordinary people. The Church has a view that God acted in the past (Bible) and still acts today.

 

[grah33]

I might agree that, provided their claims are correct, their chosen religion is serving them well and could be considered a correct choice for themselves.

I believe that the passage you have quoted expresses a transcendant concept, rising above any of humankind's constructs.

Namely, that belief in truth ideally should be based upon the actuality of truth, rather than humanity's conceptions about what truth may or may not be.

Should one believe if they saw Paul work those wonders or Jesus rise from the dead, or should they just pick another religion?

 

[grah33]

I believe that the passage you have quoted expresses a transcendant concept, rising above any of humankind's constructs.

Namely, that belief in truth ideally should be based upon the actuality of truth, rather than humanity's conceptions about what truth may or may not be.

U got it man

 

[Value Collector]

Should one believe if they saw Paul work those wonders or Jesus rise from the dead, or should they just pick another religion?

There are people that claim to have seen aliens, some say they have been abducted by aliens, do you believe them?

Lots of religions make lots of claims, we don't know if anyone saw Jesus rise from the dead, as I said we have a hard enough time finding anything that was written during his life, let alone anything that would be considered evidence of that.

But even if we had an account of someone that saw Jesus turn water into wine, how do we know it wasn't a simple magicians trick, Travel through India and you will see lots of "Guru's" will big followings that use simple circus tricks to fool their followers.

these guys convince people they do bare hand surgery.



this is how its really done.

 

[Tisme]

I know people who worship exotic cars, they haven't driven one but they want one anyhow ...belief in the unknown right there.

 

[SirRumpole]

There are people that claim to have seen aliens, some say they have been abducted by aliens, do you believe them?

And you are prepared to say they are all lunatics ? What's your evidence for that ? Most of them have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by making those statements.

 

[Value Collector]

My point is that graph accepts the claims made by his religion, but probably rejects claims made by alot of religions and other groups, even though the other religions and groups use they same sort of anecdotal stories as evidence

eg, Graph might think that a bible story of some one claiming to see Jesus is evidence of Jesus, but he would probably reject a similar claim if it comes from outside his religion from another religion or alien abduction group.

And you are prepared to say they are all lunatics ? .

I am prepared to say none of them have ever provided enough evidence to allay reasonable doubts.

What's your evidence for that ?

The burden of proof is on the people making the claims.

Most of them have nothing to gain

Some just want attention, others book sales, speaking engagements, merchandise sales, tours etc

and a lot to lose by making those statements

also, some may genuinely believe it happened, but could be just mistaken due to hallucination or dreams etc

---------

 

[SirRumpole]

also, some may genuinely believe it happened, but could be just mistaken due to hallucination or dreams etc

So you are prepared to reject the whole subject on the grounds that it's too extraordinary to be true ?

 

[Value Collector]

So you are prepared to reject the whole subject on the grounds that it's too extraordinary to be true ?

I take the default position of unbelief eg. refraining from belief until there is sufficient evidence to allay my doubts.

I don't accept the claims as true, while I also don't claim that they are false, I simply don't believe them and move on.


--------------------------
I do believe there is a good chance that alien life exists, its just the specific claims of abductions and earth visits that I would want evidence for before accepting them as true.

 

[bellenuit]

You need to give it a go and then you can really see for yourself.

I did, for 2/3s of my life. Then I started to think critically about my experiences and beliefs and I realised it was all self delusion. The more I spoke with or read the writings of others who also believed they had been blessed by the Holy Spirit, I could also see that they were simply deluding themselves as well. Everything was filtered to confirm their belief. Something good happens, particularly in relation to health, and it was due to the Holy Spirit. But the preceding event that caused the health issue was somehow ignored. The more I observed them, the more gullible I realised them to be. A cloud that only vaguely resembles a cross was somehow a sign from God. Statues moved even though cameras showed they didn't and rational explanations of the occurrences were simply ignored and put down to "you must have faith to see it". I believe even one of your first posts on this thread related to some event in the Phillipines that was easily explicable with a modicum of science knowledge. And even one of the happenings in that video, the rainbow rising from the head of the statue, was quite obviously wrong. Even you acknowledged that "happening" was not important compared to the rest of the video, but it had to be pointed out to you before you acknowledged it.