Prove Jesus Existed

MeatProduct

Dear Beth,

To be honest I had never heard of St. Veronica's cloth until you mentioned it. It seems rather interesting to me. I couldn't get much from the internet about this subject so I am wondering if you could recommend a book on the matter.

Thank you for not being aggressive like other members, as noted by Draupnir. It is only through a peaceful exchange of ideas that we can have this kind of contraversial discussion. It is is pity that the message of Christ is disregarded by many of his followers. I should think that love and tolerance are areas that people should be more concerned about.

Regards,

Nick

mr_angry

Geez NP! I go away for a day in the big smoke, and my fav thread of the moment has expanded by 400%!

edit by JustHalf: I think we should keep Gathering Cards out of this thread

Anyhoo, back on topic. As I pointed out in the first place, nobody here can categorically prove the existence or no-existence of Jesus. The Gospels could be a big conspiracy, or they could be real. I for one choose to believe they are real. That is what faith is.

I believe MeatProduct's real concern was with children in our school being fed potential lies. Fair enough, but consider it from a Christian's point of view:

If we were to stop teaching our children about Jesus from an early age, and not give them an impression of what faith really is, then we stand to lose belief as a society in THE most important issue imaginable, from a Christain point of view. As an agnostic, you can say "what does it matter if nobody believes - nothing will change anyway". But from a Christian point of view, everything will change - our society will no longer know true faith, save for the few people who go out and investigate the notion of religion for themselves. Again, from a Christian point of view, that is a disaster for the souls of the masses.

Since I am a Christian, and I believe that people's souls are important, I would be strongly in favour of teaching our children about Christ, and istilling at least a temporary faith in them. Without definitive proof that I am wrong, I could otherwise be supporting the biggest disaster of all time.

Can you categorically say that Jesus' teachings shouldn't be taught in schools? Who are you to decide that? HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU ARE RIGHT? Consider the implications if you are wrong.

MeatProduct

I would completely support the teaching to Jesus Christ in schools as well as Christianity. I would also completely support the teaching of every other religion in schools. Children should be presented will all religions and all facts so that they can decide for themselves if they are going to use faith or fact for their religious beliefs.

To the point of this thread, children should be told that there is doubt regarding the existence of Jesus Christ.

Nick

JustHalf

Draupnir, MeatProduct... keep your anti-Christian sentiment in check. You've crossed the line a few times already.

This is what I'm talking about.

Draupnir:

Has anyone else noticed how aggressive people can become when somebody tries to question the existence of Jesus?

Why is it that the people who question can remain calm, while the people whose believes are in question become insulting, defensive and attack the person making the point?
---
By the way, that was a rhetorical question and the answer is DOUBT

MeatProduct:

It is the classic case of the few controlling the many. People aren't willing to accept the simple logic that you outlined above. It is staring them in the face but they ignore it because that is the easy option.

I feel it comes down to a lack of imagination or a lack of free thought. It’s the attitude "well everyone else is doing it so it must be right". The blind following the blind.

Yes people do have access to this information but they choose not to access it because they trust their religious leaders to give them the information. The fact is that this information is withheld.

Do you guys realise where you are? You're on a Christian forum. Insulting the intelligence of Christians and implying their motives come from being afraid of the truth is not on. The latter is particularly ironic, as even a brief bit of research into Egyptian mythology (a topic I have a passing interest) will show that most of what you have said about Horus is false. I'm fairly certain the rest will fall apart to anyone who takes a look at them with a critical eye.

Do your insulting somewhere else. If you want to discuss the point at hand, stick to it.

JustHalf

Originally posted by MeatProduct
I would completely support the teaching to Jesus Christ in schools as well as Christianity. I would also completely support the teaching of every other religion in schools. Children should be presented will all religions and all facts so that they can decide for themselves if they are going to use faith or fact for their religious beliefs.

Because of the sheer amount of different religions in the world, that idea is impractical in the extreme. It would be better that no religion is taught in schools.

The teaching of Christianity in church-owned or church-associated schools is another topic entirely.

Originally posted by MeatProduct
To the point of this thread, children should be told that there is doubt regarding the existence of Jesus Christ.

Do you believe that Buddha existed?

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

erm,.. jesus existed, I'm pretty sure most people are in agreement with that. the question to be asked is whether or not he was the son of god..

MeatProduct

I am not going to take part in this thread anymore as it is clear to anyone who reads the whole thread that its moderator JustHalf is bias in the extreme and only chooses to reprimand those that are interested in the sharing of information.

Emboss has made comments that he should have been banned for yet JustHalf let them slide by even though I sent him a private message about it.

People can make up their own minds about this, I don't think I need to state the obvious here.

Thank you to those who did show an interest in a friendly open debate on this topic.

Nick

Dr. Loon

Originally posted by MeatProduct
I am not going to take part in this thread anymore as it is clear to anyone who reads the whole thread that its moderator JustHalf is bias in the extreme and only chooses to reprimand those that are interested in the sharing of information.

Emboss has made comments that he should have been banned for yet JustHalf let them slide by even though I sent him a private message about it.

People can make up their own minds about this, I don't think I need to state the obvious here.

Thank you to those who did show an interest in a friendly open debate on this topic.

Nick

I agree entirely withi this post. I was actually enjoying reading this thread. Sorry, I'm not informed enough to discuss the topic, but Emboss, and JustHalf you really are destroying the topic of the thread yourselves. You're claiming free speech as insults when it's not. Getting defensive and aggressive when there's no need...

This is probably the most interesting thread this board has ever seen, and all you two can do is take away from it. Well done.

Draupnir

My apologies for any input I had in turning this into a heated argument. I never intended for that to happen. Isnt a Christianity forum for the discussion of Christianity, both for it and against it? Or is it a place where questions cant be asked.

I am actually someone who is actively seeking answers to many of my religious questions. I am not anti-Christian in the slightest. Fair from it. I have been to Lourdes on 4 occasions, Fatima, Megjugorje and the Holy Land itself. I was educated in a CBS and it is because of all my experiences that I do in fact question.

This topic has given me great interest and it is with great sadness that I see it dwindle. I have had experiences which make me both believe and disbelieve in Jesus Christ, Mary or even God and it is in topics such as this one that I enjoy conversing with like minded people and also finding differing views which may help me reach a conclusion.

Draupnir

Its back to discussing Stargate SG-1 for me so

neuro-praxis

I argued my case to a reasonably fine point. I couldn't do much more. MeatProduct's responses to my argument (and Excelsior's) were quickie one-liners just to remind us that we're wrong. "Good points, but, well, no."

He provided no counter-arguments.

If you may note Draupnir, it is not the questioning of MeatProduct that is the problem. It is the inane logic and ignorance of his points, regardless of how uncharacteristically and unnecessarily politely they were typed.

The author he cites is a tabloidy unreliable source. He is spamming politely all over the Christianity forum.

Please don't imply, Draupnir, that I can't handle a little challenge. I have argued clearly and concisely, to the point where I am banging my head against a brick wall. Christianity is logically defensible, but that is besides the point.

What is the point is that HISTORY (secular history) states that he existed.

QED.

Politeness cannot hide antagonism. I have tried to be humorous in my responses. Chill out.

And MeatProduct, a word of advice. The over-politeness doesn't go down too well. This is an informal debate.

Draupnir

Id say he was being polite cos it was a religious subject. I just happen to appreciate some of what he said. I didnt see a whole lot of concrete evidence or a single link from anyone else on the opposite of the argument. I would love to though.

Id love to enjoy a really healthy discussion on the subject to be honest. I cant see it happening though. It is a subject which could get a good debate going and Im sure a lot of people who have an input.

Cheers for the reply.

ecksor

Might I suggest that a purely historical discussion might live better on our history/heritige forum.

Excelsior

Originally posted by Mordeth
erm,.. jesus existed, I'm pretty sure most people are in agreement with that. the question to be asked is whether or not he was the son of god..

That is the important question.

Because whether or not he existed has been confirmed by any historian worth their salt.

The assumption that Christians don't question their faith is laughable. A typical church breaks up into small groups who study the bible on a weekly basis. Here, they battle, argue and work their way through difficult issues, truths and problems.

I am an atheist turned Christian. Questioning our faith is something we do on a daily basis. For the last five years I have done nothing but question. It is unavoidable anyway, considering the hostility you meet at every corner. I have read extensively on the subject, the case both for and against Christianity, and this has only served to increase my strength of faith.

MeatProduct has cried off this thread because it is not "free and open" enough for him. But anyone who follows his work will notice that elsewhere he has definitively stated that Jesus never existed anyway, etc. He has chosen a position and sticks to it despite the evidence against his point. He would do best to concede.

Many people may believe that Jesus never existed and it's all a conspiracy. Others believe that eight foot lizards rule the world and that the Israeli's are behind the 9/11 bombings. People holding these beliefs does not make them plausible.

JustHalf

Hey MeatProduct. You're not banned yet. You can still participate in this discussion if you keep it on topic. And if I couldn't let you go on this long if I didn't do the same for Emboss.

Draupnir, one of the big problems is that to prove that a big pack of lies are false, you have to go through each and every one. I've linked to two articles, and the second does this. It is enormous.

Now, I've stated that I don't yet count these as being reliable, but certainly more reliable than MeatProduct's first post. I've done some research on Horus, and have been unable to verify nearly every single alleged similarity.

The big warning flag was the "December 25th" line. No Christian theologian worth their salt would claim that Jesus was born on December 25th. He may have been (we don't know), but the celebration of Christmas at that time is probably the co-option of a pagan solstice festival.

The problem is with insulting Christians. It's one thing trying to disprove Christianity. It is quite another to do so with constant jibes at Christians. If these have a place, it is certainly not the Christian forum.

Draupnir

I agree, hell, I definitely aint slagging Christians, my whole world is Christian and its the only religion I have any interest in being part of

DaithiSurfer

When i was 12 i asked my religion teacher why i should believe in Jesus with no proof.
I got a smack.
I said my prayers for the last time that night.
I said 'Jesus, God, whoever - If you are there then come and say hello'.
Now 20 years later he either doesn't exist or is ignoring me.
Either way, i'm not impressed.
Seems to me that the easiest proof is for God to appear to us all and say 'Howdy - I'm god'.
After all, if he's everywhere how hard can this be.
This to me is irrefutable proof that God doesn't exist.

JustHalf

DaithiSurfer, that question is more "Was Jesus God?" than "Did Jesus ever exist?".

DaithiSurfer

Well i asked God too.
So whether Jesus existed or not (and its been rammed down my throat all my life that he existed) if he was the son of God then God can still say 'Howdy - Jesus existed and he was my son.'

neuro-praxis

DaithiSurfer: you have moved onto new territory entirely.

You're talking about whether he was God or not - a new argument.

Again I reiterate: Jesus' historical existence is not really up for debate, unless you think historians in general are a pack of liars.

mr_angry

If I can just remind you of one of the commandments:

"You shall not put your lord God to the test".

You might see that as a cop-out, but I'm presuming God is a busy man, and doesn't have time to run around after every idealogically-challeneged person proving himself in fine detail. I apologise if that negatively affects your religious beliefs, but I assume even God has to deal with logistics...

GuanYin

Originally posted by neuro-praxis
Again I reiterate: Jesus' historical existence is not really up for debate, unless you think historians in general are a pack of liars.

It depends on what the original poster meant by "Jesus".

I would have taken "Jesus the Son of God" as intuitive.

I'm intrigued by this myself. Historical records are not in themselves proof of anything. You make several assumptions in their regard. The author was a reliable source, The author was unbiased etc etc.

There are a great many discrepencies in the historical records put forward regarding Jesus and his life. Many of the textx copied down through the ages have been altered (especially throughout the middle ages) so I would regard anything that is not original material as poor evidence. Unfortunately, many of the most relevent documents are not available for public consumption, which, I find disconcerting when, theorethically, an entire religious belief system hangs on thier detail..

Add to this the known tendancy of adaptation and assimilation of non christian folklore into the christian mythos (St. Brigid, St. Patrick et al) and one may cast serious doubt on the attribution of miracles and facts attributed to Jesus that are shared in other religions as mentioned above.

Was Jesus a man who tried to change the notions and attitudes of an empire for the better and martyred himself doing so? I would say very likely. Was he the son of god on earth, I don't think there is or will be anything to prove this. I don't think there is anything to disprove it either.

Incidently, I think several posters have been treated harshly on this thread and several have not been dealt with at all. Perhaps the mods may try to be more impartial in their responses, understandable with vested interests in the subject, but still, deconstructive to worthwhile debate.

Excelsior

Originally posted by syke


There are a great many discrepencies in the historical records put forward regarding Jesus and his life. Many of the textx copied down through the ages have been altered (especially throughout the middle ages) so I would regard anything that is not original material as poor evidence. Unfortunately, many of the most relevent documents are not available for public consumption...

Can you back that up? It is a common conception but I think it is based on classroom experiments with Chinese Whispers as oppossed to any research.

--

Jesus' divinity can't be proved. No Christian here claims it can be. But Christian and non-Christian scholars, experts and for want of a better word, enthusiasts alike, all massively agree on his existence.

That is the very basis for the huge amount of debate on him- his existence. Now, he may not have made the claims I believe him to have made. He may have made the claims and have been wrong- a loon or an evil manipulator. But he certainly did live.

The creator of this thread genuinely reminds me of a Young Earth Creationist. He is in an analogous position. He says in the face of a simple fact, "I disagree". He continues to say it in the face of challenge and offers defences like:
I have this book that says otherwise (For him AN Wilson, for the Creationist Genesis. But both are invalid sources of information for the debate we are having)

Or

You can't prove that 100% (Indeed, we can't get a flesh specimen of a dinosaur to prove evolution 100% or a flesh specimen of Jesus to prove whatever it is some people think that will prove. But it is fact due to the lack of reasonable doubt)

To DaithiSurfer: I am very sorry that a teacher ever treated you like that. The only things I can say to you are that the message of Christ and His character shouldn't be ignored because His followers are gimps. Or in the case of your teacher, because gimps pretend to be His followers. Also, He rarely actually comes and says hello in an audible way. And finally, in the words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, "A God who let us prove His existence would be nothing more than an idol".

Edited to include -- to distinguish between different points.

GuanYin

Originally posted by Excelsior
Can you back that up? It is a common conception but I think it is based on classroom experiments with Chinese Whispers as oppossed to any research.

Which part? If you mean the part about altered documentation, it is a generally accepted in all exegisis of the bible from the middle ages. there are many journal publications and reviews on the subject. I have a friend doing a master sin Trinity on the subject, when I see her next I'll ask her fro references if thats what you require.

Its most highlighted in the way phrases and passages common at times of translation but unheard of at the time of the bible make there way into the text. Other omissions and artistic licience have been noted in translation to translation over given time periods, usually from large collections.

As for the "withheld" documents well beyond what we have available there is an indication that much of what was preached around the time of christ would have been oral teachings, a less formal compliment to written scriptures. These oral teachings are alluded to in the bible itself, especially in references to the importance of scripture above other communications. The debate on the actual existence and/or release of these is a debate that has commonly occurs in discussion of sola scriptura.

The actual existence of withheld documents was confirmed by Father Malachi Martin, a Jesuit priest, and translator of ancient scriptures and books who had close ties with teh vatican and was a confidant of Pope John XXIII.

Originally posted by Excelsior
Jesus' divinity can't be proved. No Christian here claims it can be. But Christian and non-Christian scholars, experts and for want of a better word, enthusiasts alike, all massively agree on his existence.

I'm not sure why this is here, it doesn't seem to be arguing against anything I posted.

Originally posted by Excelsior
You can't prove that 100% (Indeed, we can't get a flesh specimen of a dinosaur to prove evolution 100% or a flesh specimen of Jesus to prove whatever it is some people think that will prove. But it is fact due to the lack of reasonable doubt)

No you can't can't get a flesh specimen of a dinosaur to prove evolution 100% for the simple reason that it wouldn't prove it, even if you did have Dinosaur DNA. As such I have no idea what sort of analogy you were trying to make, best say it out straight or use analogies of things you understand (or at least, I can understand that you understand)

Excelsior

Syke, not all of that was addressed to you and that is why it seemed out of place.
The analogy I was making was that MeatProduct is like a Young Earth Creationist who demands ridiculous "proof" to consider changing their position.

As far as your friend who is doing a Masters in Trinity and a Jesuit priest who was friends with a Pope goes, it would be great if you could get that information fleshed out and start a thread here because it is something that badly needs to be discussed.

We accept that all of Jesus' teaching was oral. I don't quite understand how this can be construed as withheld information as it simply is information recorded in the formats of the Gospels.

A thread on the nature of Biblical veracity, particuarly the New Testament, would be great to have and if you can start that I think a lot of people would be fascinated.

GuanYin

Originally posted by Excelsior

We accept that all of Jesus' teaching was oral. I don't quite understand how this can be construed as withheld information as it simply is information recorded in the formats of the Gospels.

A thread on the nature of Biblical veracity, particuarly the New Testament, would be great to have and if you can start that I think a lot of people would be fascinated.

You mis-undertand. There was a tendancy to have an oral and written communication in "teaching" (preaching may be a better term). Less formal oral communications (stories passed down and around) accompanied by formal texts conveying a take home message. The scriptures are these take home messages.

Which means that either there were no oral communications or these people tried a very strange way of communicating with a largely uneducated population. So where are the details of these oral communications. They would have been documented. So they are either witheld or lost. Either way a vital segment of the teachings and stories of jesus are absent.

The debate on this topic is the sol scriptura that I mentioned before and is a topic of contention between catholics and protestants on whether the scriptures stand alone or not (its more complicated and subtle than that in reality, but its a take home message).

Paddy20

I have not read the posts on this thread, but as the question is very important may I suggest that the thread starter has a look at the answers section of the following website:- www.catholic.com/

It just might help.

P. :ninja:

Seaneh

I know this is offtopic, but I would just like to point out to all those claiming that the Mods are being one sides and unfair.
I find MP, and others on his side of the debate to have been extremly antagonistically-patronising.

"Oh thats all well and good, but you, and the vast majority of learned scholars before you, are wrong, however me and AN Wilson, and a minority of unqualified anti-christians are right" is about all I'm seeing in a lot of these replys.
But, hey, what would I know? I am after all an undeucated Christian fool.

Dont Ban Me

Again off-topic:
I would have to disagree with you, having just read the entire thread I found it very interesting and engrossing! But in my opinion I did find the Mods to be very agressive and on the 2nd or 3rd page everyone seemed to get aggressive!! But that is to be expected when on such a topic.

Back to the teaching of religion in schools, when kids reach a certain age they begin to question everything, and on of the main things they question is religion! But alas this is frowned upon in the class room and strongly discouraged by most teachers! Which I would see as an infringment on the kids rights to learn!!

Rabies

I read the start of this thread a few days ago and taught it had potential to be good. It started well and has now drifted to a slagging match between certain people.

No one knows whether Jesus existed or not.

Maybe he was someone with forward thinking and wanted to change the world for the better, got some followes that agreed with his teachings and ended up getting killed because his ideas stood against popular beliefs.

He could be the son of a god. Sent down for thirty odd years to spread the word of his father.

The bible was wrote after the time of this man. Not everyone could read/write 2000 years ago. First hand accounts may not have been wrote down. Stories are passed on.

Irish kids are taught only one religion in school until they reach at least primary school. Young minds are impressionable. There is a good chance that they will grow up having beliefs in what ever religion they were brought up on. Some will dispute it, others will follow it. If that same child was brought up in a house where Buddism was the main religion it would the same story.

The Irish education system needs to rethink it methods of teaching in Irish schools especailly since we are becoming a more multi-cultural society.

Years ago people believed the world was flat. This was fact until someone proved it was round. I am not religious. I don't believe there was/is a God. When there is proof , or if i ever see proof then i might belive. But that is only my opinion.

Let people believe what they want to believe.



Maybe the story of jesus is an urban legend of the time, i will go and check out www.snopes.com later