The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Do you believe Jesus existed?

Apparently you can't do polls on here.... but

Do any of you think that Jesus actually existed? What do category do you fall into?

A. Believed he existed, claims are false

B. Believed he existed, claims are exaggerated

C. Don't believe he existed

D. Believe he existed, claims are true (sorry had to leave the idiot category open)

1 member likes this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Al-KADIM on September 20, 2010 at 5:46pm

It's no less rational than the Bar Kochba story, which no historian rejects. And the sources are far more reliable than Diana's historian du jour Berossus, none of whose work we even have, except for citations from second and third hand sources in Eusebius and Josephus via Polyhistor or Posidonius. You seem to pick what you want to believe rather than what the sources bear out.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 21, 2010 at 12:06am

You seem to pick what you want to believe rather than what the sources bear out.

No, what I have here in front of me are two voices on the internet who present themselves as well-versed on the subject.

One of those voices openly states that hers is a minority opinion and one hypothesis of many, but a solid one, and has addressed civil comments with a fair amount of civility (key phrase: "civil comments").

The other voice presents a hypothesis as proven fact, dismissing questions about the altruism and accuracy of religious fanatics writing scripture, which as an Atheist, I am instantly skeptical of. He has shown either an inability or unwillingness to comprehend a simple forum post and respond to the post specifically, causing me to wonder what else he is unable or unwilling to comprehend. He has also expressed that only a historian can contribute anything of value to a historical topic; that people in other fields such as psychology or evolutionary biology can not contribute to the discussion. This too makes me skeptical of the voice.

As I have time between other studies and life duties, I'll continue to read up on all sides of the debate. But all things being equal, the civil, open-door, I-encourage-you-to-look-at-all-sides approach fills me with a lot more confidence than the bullying, closed-door, don't-you-dare-read-anyone-but-these-few-scholars approach.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt VDB on September 21, 2010 at 3:57am

Hi Diana,

"The available material is very well studied and remains inconclusive."

Sorry, but considering that the evidence we have for Jesus is better than the kind we have for most other preachers of the time (like the Egyptian Prophet), the material is no more inconclusive than it is for any of those other preachers: in other words, anyone without an axe to grind is happy to accept their existence.

"The only thing achieved by trying to prove the existence of a real Jesus is to rationalize an otherwise irrational story."

That might be true, but it's not what's going on here, is it? What's happening here is that many people come in here maintaining that there's enough evidence to conclude that Jesus didn't exist. That's an untenable position and one that atheists shouldn't keep.

"As an anti-theist atheist, I find highlighting the irrational basis of the Jesus story more useful in debunking Christianity, rather than arguing with theists on their terms."

Same here; and I'm sure you would agree that that's more than enough to debunk Christianity. Yet for some reason many remain ardently convinced that they have to disprove the existence of Jesus before they can be satisfied, even if that means embracing crappy scholarship.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kiru on September 20, 2010 at 5:26pm

C. There were a ton of wannabe Messiahs at the time, many being mentioned somewhere by historians alive at that exact time period. Jesus receives no mention at all. Causes trouble in the temple, said to be healing the sick, bringing people back to life, yet no mention of this anywhere. It's not the first time people created a new cult based on myths said to have happened a decade or so earlier.

As for the comment I read about the Talmud mentioning him, the first part of it, the "Mishnah," was written in 200 CE. People believed in myths rather easily back then. A lot of people today still do, even against modern science. We've gone to the moon, we have internet, and we can use DNA to put someone at the scene of the crime. But I guess that's just not as good as having an old book saying stuff is true.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 20, 2010 at 11:53pm

It's not the first time people created a new cult based on myths said to have happened a decade or so earlier.

Speaking of which, I want you all to join my fabulous new religion. It's all based on the teachings of a farmer named Bob who lived in Greeley Colorado a decade ago. If anyone from Greeley tries to tell you there was no Bob living there, don't believe them. They're just jealous because they're still practicing the old, less awesome religion. Ask the people in Greeley who are practicing our new awesome religion; they'll be proud to claim that Bob came from their very own little burg, putting it squarely on the map.

;-)

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Diana Agorio on September 21, 2010 at 12:39am

I don't believe that Bob performed any miracles. But, there were some other guys named Robert who remind me of Bob's story. I think the real Bob was Robert Jones from Boulder. Can you prove that Bob was not Robert?

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Noah Petersen on September 21, 2010 at 12:44am

Bob was wise and a lot of his moral teachings are valid, but I wouldn't consider anything he did miraculous.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Diana Agorio on September 21, 2010 at 1:07am

Attend to the little one who holds onto your hand, Let a wife delight in your embrace. This is the true task of mankind said by Siduri in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

This is one of my favorite examples of ancient wise words; but, Siduri was a fictional character.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Noah Petersen on September 21, 2010 at 1:14am

Confucius was fictional too, didn't stop the Chinese from giving him a religion.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 21, 2010 at 2:07am

This is one of my favorite examples of ancient wise words; but, Siduri was a fictional character.

"Lasher, my Lasher, avenge me now!"

One of my favorite quotes, only the witches who said it were based on real people. We know because Anne Rice alludes to other, corroborated historical events in her books, so she can't possibly have made up any other part of it, such as the names of the protagonists.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jo Jerome on September 21, 2010 at 2:03am

I think the real Bob was Robert Jones from Boulder. Can you prove that Bob was not Robert?

Of course I can, because it says so in my holy text. My holy text says it's true, so it has to be true. And although we're capable of either misrepresenting or completely rewriting ideology and supernatural deeds, we are incapable of getting the name of the city wrong.

Some half-century from now, we'll finally get our first passing mention by a couple of historians who might or might not be using our sacred texts as references, because these days, a lot of stock is put into sacred texts.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Matt VDB on September 21, 2010 at 3:51am

"There were a ton of wannabe Messiahs at the time, many being mentioned somewhere by historians alive at that exact time period. Jesus receives no mention at all."

And which other Messiahs were mentioned by "historians alive at that exact time period"?
If you're going to make an argument from silence, then you have to demonstrate that we can't expect such silence if Jesus existed.Can you do that, yes or no?