|
||||||||
Getting to Heaven |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#276 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: looking for tinned loganberrie
Posts: 17,496
|
Quote:
True, though it seemed as thought you were implying.
But we don't actually know much, do we? We can assume, or choose to believe, but we don't know, not for certain. I don't personally believe religious articles to be research; more the work of fiction. I'd be curious to know what sources you're using; if historical, then fair enough, but if religious, there's no decisive truth in that. Do feel free to list all of those that he missed. Lets take a look at the cold hard facts, shall we? Or at least the credible facts; they're a good place to start. Bolly seems to be a fan of Bart Ehrman - who is fairly dismissive of claims that Jesus did not exist. To be even handed, I would offer someone like Philip Davies (professor at Sheffield) who takes the view that some recognition that Jesus' existence is not entirely certain would give Jesus scholarship more academic respectability. But ... and it's a big but.... to seize on that 'not entirely certain' simply as an excuse to dismiss the Christian faith has no academic merit either. All kinds of heads can be in all kinds of sands - and sand is not the medium of choice for communication. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#277 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
We've had this debate before and, while I am personally convinced that Jesus existed and that there are many things we can conclude about his life and works, it does us no service to dismiss out of hand claims that Jesus did not exist at all.
Bolly seems to be a fan of Bart Ehrman - who is fairly dismissive of claims that Jesus did not exist. To be even handed, I would offer someone like Philip Davies (professor at Sheffield) who takes the view that some recognition that Jesus' existence is not entirely certain would give Jesus scholarship more academic respectability. But ... and it's a big but.... to seize on that 'not entirely certain' simply as an excuse to dismiss the Christian faith has no academic merit either. All kinds of heads can be in all kinds of sands - and sand is not the medium of choice for communication. Paul knew Peter, Jesus' closet disciple. We'd have to conclude that Paul was lying about that or about what he knew from him. I don't think it's a 50/50 thing that he did or didn't exist. Rather much more probable he did, than not. |
|
|
|
|
|
#278 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
Yes - maybe. I was happy to pick Vermes because I suspected he was closer to your position anyway.
I guess I've never really bottomed out your particular beliefs and faith. Do you, for instance, believe that the historical Jesus taught that he was to die to save the sins of all mankind? Or, less contentiously perhaps, do you believe the historical Jesus actively and knowingly inaugurated the sacrament? I don't think of Jesus as dying 'for' human sins (doesn't seem like a plan God would have) but 'because of' their sins. I can relate to the apocalyptic, 'end times are coming' Jesus that Ehrman writes about. |
|
|
|
|
|
#279 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
I didn't need to ask him, as I don't need evidence for that. The likelihood of a man, named Jesus, being born, living, and being crucified some 2000 years ago very much seems plausible to me. It's the alleged miracles that I'm calling bullshit on.
Quote:
We've had this debate before and, while I am personally convinced that Jesus existed and that there are many things we can conclude about his life and works, it does us no service to dismiss out of hand claims that Jesus did not exist at all.
But ... and it's a big but.... to seize on that 'not entirely certain' simply as an excuse to dismiss the Christian faith has no academic merit either. All kinds of heads can be in all kinds of sands - and sand is not the medium of choice for communication.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#280 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
Religious Articles are anything that was (supposedly) written during, or after Jesus, about anything to do with Jesus or religion.
You're right, no facts. I guess if there were we'd all have the same view. Why? I didn't need to ask him, as I don't need evidence for that. The likelihood of a man, named Jesus, being born, living, and being crucified some 2000 years ago very much seems plausible to me. It's the alleged miracles that I'm calling bullshit on. Your sentence doesn't quite read right. Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, I'm ignoring fiction. Doesn't mean to say I don't take some interest in it though if others wish to discuss it; that's what I'm doing here. That doesn't mean impossible. For one thing we lack the details. Maybe by 2116 we will know more about how the mind can affect the body. |
|
|
|
|
|
#281 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
Think I already said somewhere that the miracles are inexplicable. That doesn't mean impossible. For one thing we lack the details.
My argument (for lack of a better word) is that what is said to have happened, may not have actually happened at all. Lets say for argument sake that Jesus had a meal with him (bread and fish). Let us assume that it was quite a large portion. Now he supposedly fed 5000 people with that. Could it not be possible that he only fed 5 other people, but a witness decided it would seem more awesome if he (the witness/writer) added a few more 0's to the end of the number? Likewise, Jesus so say walked on water; what it he merely walked along the shoreline, or walked up a shallow river and the witness/author thought to himself "if I write that Jesus walked on the Sea of Galilee, that'll make for a more interesting story". See where I'm going with this? Quote:
Maybe by 2116 we will know more about how the mind can affect the body.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#282 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
You may have very well said that, yes, but then you (presumably) believe these miracles happened, even if we don't know the full details behind them?
My argument (for lack of a better word) is that what is said to have happened, may not have actually happened at all. Lets say for argument sake that Jesus had a meal with him (bread and fish). Let us assume that it was quite a large portion. Now he supposedly fed 5000 people with that. Could it not be possible that he only fed 5 other people, but a witness decided it would seem more awesome if he (the witness/writer) added a few more 0's to the end of the number? Likewise, Jesus so say walked on water; what it he merely walked along the shoreline, or walked up a shallow river and the witness/author thought to himself "if I write that Jesus walked on the Sea of Galilee, that'll make for a more interesting story". See where I'm going with this? By 2116, some clown will have invented artificial intelligence that'll want to kill us all. ![]() Without knowing the details behind the events, it would just be speculation to say. Not out of the realm of possibility that he healed people. |
|
|
|
|
|
#283 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
I think he did things that convinced people he wasn't an ordinary person.
Quote:
Without knowing the details behind the events, it would just be speculation to say.
Quote:
Not out of the realm of possibility that he healed people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#284 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
I guess that depends on the definition of ordinary.
That it would. True, but in the same breath, it's not out of the realm of possibility that he actually did nothing, and everything that is claimed to have happened didn't actually happen - it was only wrote about in fiction by a person (or group of) some 2000 years ago. Wouldn't that be a fair assessment? Might as well say it's not out of the realm of possibility that Sandy Hook was fiction. |
|
|
|
|
|
#285 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
No not as I see it. That sounds too much like a conspiracy theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#286 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
I knew you were going to shoot the concept down. Your reply is typical of someone devoted to their faith.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#287 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
Do you think your reaction is typical of someone devoted to anti faith?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#288 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
No, not really, because my reply (two above) offers up the possibility of both series of events. You are fixated on only one being possible. Evidently, I am more open minded than you.
That's what historians deal in. As I see it's more probable that Jesus' reputation spread because he actually did have a profound effect on others, and was similar to the man Josephus wrote about. That's sufficiently open minded. |
|
|
|
|
|
#289 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Is there life on Mars
Posts: 5,364
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#290 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Is there life on Mars
Posts: 5,364
|
Quote:
Pointing out the probable dates of the gospels, according to best expert opinion, isn't ''tosh''. Regardless of whether anyone thinks jesus is god, a mushoom, or just invented fantasy .......
|
|
|
|
|
|
#291 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,782
|
Quote:
As I see it's more probable that Jesus' reputation spread because he actually did have a profound effect on others, and was similar to the man Josephus wrote about.
I have provided a credible and realistic reason why his miracles may not have been miracles, and you've quite simply stated that my reasons aren't probable; that's a conclusion you've come too because of your devotion. You choose to believe that Jesus actually performed miracles, I prefer to look at a more credible likelihood that he didn't, and that the stories of him were exaggerated. It's quite simply a toss up between an exaggerated set of events (which happens all the time in the real world) or a miracle man (which I'm yet to see any evidence of there being, be that in the past, or present). One can conclude here that an exaggerated story is more likely, because we have everyday occurrences of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#292 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Is there life on Mars
Posts: 5,364
|
Quote:
We've had this debate before and, while I am personally convinced that Jesus existed and that there are many things we can conclude about his life and works, it does us no service to dismiss out of hand claims that Jesus did not exist at all.
Bolly seems to be a fan of Bart Ehrman - who is fairly dismissive of claims that Jesus did not exist. To be even handed, I would offer someone like Philip Davies (professor at Sheffield) who takes the view that some recognition that Jesus' existence is not entirely certain would give Jesus scholarship more academic respectability. But ... and it's a big but.... to seize on that 'not entirely certain' simply as an excuse to dismiss the Christian faith has no academic merit either. All kinds of heads can be in all kinds of sands - and sand is not the medium of choice for communication. Perhaps I'm being flippant ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#293 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 35,196
|
Quote:
We're not exactly disputing that though, are we? We're disputing the likelihood that the miracles he is said to have performed weren't actually miracles. In your mind, it seems, it's not possible to comprehend otherwise.
I have provided a credible and realistic reason why his miracles may not have been miracles, and you've quite simply stated that my reasons aren't probable; that's a conclusion you've come too because of your devotion. You choose to believe that Jesus actually performed miracles, I prefer to look at a more credible likelihood that he didn't, and that the stories of him were exaggerated. It's quite simply a toss up between an exaggerated set of events (which happens all the time in the real world) or a miracle man (which I'm yet to see any evidence of there being, be that in the past, or present). One can conclude here that an exaggerated story is more likely, because we have everyday occurrences of it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#294 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 24,095
|
Quote:
I wonder if people who feel so confident that Jesus existed feel the same about the existence of the Devil ? The Bible has quite a bit to say about 'Beelzebub' but many Christians dismiss his actual existence.
Perhaps I'm being flippant ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#295 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Is there life on Mars
Posts: 5,364
|
Quote:
the recent huge rise in christianity, is evangelicals, who are biblical literalists, and view both jesus and satan very seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#296 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: County Durham
Posts: 15,061
|
"The Sermon on the mount" not delivered in one speech is not a sermon.
|
|
|
|
|
#297 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ashtray City
Posts: 4,721
|
Quote:
I wonder if people who feel so confident that Jesus existed feel the same about the existence of the Devil ? The Bible has quite a bit to say about 'Beelzebub' but many Christians dismiss his actual existence.
Perhaps I'm being flippant ? The same way Christians will insist Jesus did all these things, but Mohammed didn't do all those things. Jesus walking on water? It happened! The Minotaur? Don't be silly, that's myth! Any skepticism on their belief is just Atheist rhetoric apparently. It can't be them who are the hypocrites, because their beliefs, they believe, are right. Skepticism doesn't say right or wrong, it just says plausible and implausible. If you ask any ex-theists about their lightbulb moment, there's some great insight there. People of faith don't like to hear them. It's like they're guilty of treason, or "don't understand" - when in fact, they understand better than most. |
|
|
|
|
|
#298 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Is there life on Mars
Posts: 5,364
|
Quote:
Well this is exactly right. Devout Faith is just a matter of picking up what you think happened. Which rather diminishes its credibility.
The same way Christians will insist Jesus did all these things, but Mohammed didn't do all those things. Jesus walking on water? It happened! The Minotaur? Don't be silly, that's myth! Any skepticism on their belief is just Atheist rhetoric apparently. It can't be them who are the hypocrites, because their beliefs, they believe, are right. Skepticism doesn't say right or wrong, it just says plausible and implausible. If you ask any ex-theists about their lightbulb moment, there's some great insight there. People of faith don't like to hear them. It's like they're guilty of treason, or "don't understand" - when in fact, they understand better than most. |
|
|
|
|
|
#299 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,029
|
Quote:
Your sentence doesn't quite read right. Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, I'm ignoring fiction. Doesn't mean to say I don't take some interest in it though if others wish to discuss it; that's what I'm doing here. Go into any library or bookshop and it will not be in the fiction section. |
|
|
|
|
|
#300 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ashtray City
Posts: 4,721
|
Quote:
Conversion stories either to or away from theism fascinate me . It seems such a radical change of mindset that up turns everything a person thinks about human existence that I can't imagine how it can come about .
I knew a few people from my days at University who lost their faith, or at least their devoutness, during their study. It seemed to be a "it just stopped making sense" moment. It's fascinating to think of that moment, although I expect it's a little like when you're learning a language and suddenly it 'clicks' - your mind has suddenly adapted. By far one of the most interesting people I've ever met was a Monk (he was based at the state's Catholic University in Fremantle where my friend worked), who was a gay man - quite flamboyant in demeanour, insanely witty and hilarious - who just decided midlife to become a Monk. He was really interesting to talk to, because it seemed like such a sudden departure from one life to another. Maybe not that unusual, Lily Savage left to become a Nun in a convent(!). |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:20.




Surely you do ??
