Jesus: fiction or non

Actually, the Herod that beheaded John the B. was a tetrarch. This find is very interesting. I gather that the guy wo found the tomb has been poking around on the site since the seventies looking for it. It must be very gratifying for him to find it.
 
Thomas said:
So we're left with the interesting paradox. The absence of evidence is not evidence in itself, but somehow we have to explain the emergence of a cult within Judaism, and the origins of its beliefs ...

... and that's the point. The Jesus of History is not the Jesus of Faith ...

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", Donald Rumsfeld.

Yes, I understand what you're saying. But I think we should wonder whether there are enough trees to make a forest. Shrubery is a different thing. In any case, if you can imagine yourself outside the box looking in, do you think you would find the veracity of the Jesus "myth", as presented in the Gospels, any more compellingly literal than any other god-man myth? I don't discount that the phenomenon of Christianity suggests some genuine artifact somewhere, but where? It might not really matter in terms of one's predisposition toward faith, but if one is neutral on the matter, lacking faith yet not polemically opposed to it, but rather intellectually curious, then I submit that there isn't enough evidence to satisfy the basic need for facts in order to come to an objective conclusion. That's the rub.

Sunny
 
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence", Donald Rumsfeld.

Yes, I understand what you're saying. But I think we should wonder whether there are enough trees to make a forest. Shrubery is a different thing. In any case, if you can imagine yourself outside the box looking in, do you think you would find the veracity of the Jesus "myth", as presented in the Gospels, any more compellingly literal than any other god-man myth? I don't discount that the phenomenon of Christianity suggests some genuine artifact somewhere, but where? It might not really matter in terms of one's predisposition toward faith, but if one is neutral on the matter, lacking faith yet not polemically opposed to it, but rather intellectually curious, then I submit that there isn't enough evidence to satisfy the basic need for facts in order to come to an objective conclusion. That's the rub.

Sunny

(lol) five hundred cannisters of Sarin/Mustard gas discovered in a hidden stockpile buried in the Iraqi desert, right near where the fighter jets were originally buried, (enough to take out New York, Washington DC, Portsmouth, VA or 35 million people...not bad for a nation of 25 million people)...guess Rumsfield was right...:rolleyes:
Question is (biblically), how much of something must there be, before the world considers it "something"? Especially when we were told there is nothing to begin with?

I don't know your background on CBR. But I can assure you, a nerve agent or chemical agent, even if simply blown up with a grenade, would cause thousands of deaths in a major city, within minutes. How do I know? It one of my specific jobs in my occupation to protect against.

One pin drop of Sarin on skin, is lethal to a human.

Iraq is a very BIG desert (about the size of Texas)...with lot's of burying space...a terrorist's cornucopia...

YouTube - WMD's Found In Iraq=
 
Last edited:
In any case, if you can imagine yourself outside the box looking in, do you think you would find the veracity of the Jesus "myth", as presented in the Gospels, any more compellingly literal than any other god-man myth?

Yes and No. No, because it's a matter of faith, not reason, yes, because many people have found the Scriptures 'compelling'. The appeal of Scripture is to faith, not reason ... it appeals to what man is, not what man knows.

I don't discount that the phenomenon of Christianity suggests some genuine artifact somewhere, but where?

Not sure what you mean by 'genuine artifact'?

It might not really matter in terms of one's predisposition toward faith, but if one is neutral on the matter, lacking faith yet not polemically opposed to it, but rather intellectually curious, then I submit that there isn't enough evidence to satisfy the basic need for facts in order to come to an objective conclusion. That's the rub.

Agreed. The problem is people want the proof before they commit. They want the benefit/return before they make any outlay. Sadly, it doesn't work that way, not in Christianity, not in any field, secular as well as sacred.

An athlete doesn't get to be an athlete because he's half-way inclined, he has to go for it.

No-one gets anywhere by being neutral.

Thomas
 
No-one gets anywhere by being neutral.

Yeah, I understand. Eventually one has to choose what to believe. Everything flows from that. To be clear, I've chosen not to believe in Jesus. I don't find his mythos compelling enough to join your faction. But I enjoy talking about it.
 
Yeah, I understand. Eventually one has to choose what to believe. Everything flows from that. To be clear, I've chosen not to believe in Jesus. I don't find his mythos compelling enough to join your faction. But I enjoy talking about it.

Strange. I thought you are Christian, based on your various contributions to the forum...maybe you better hold counsel with self, to find out what and who you are...:eek:
 
Strange. I thought you are Christian, based on your various contributions to the forum...maybe you better hold counsel with self, to find out what and who you are...:eek:

I'm not sure what you mean friend. Perhaps I merely defy stereotyping. I would prefer to keep my beliefs a personal matter. I enjoy the conversation, I'm polite, and I'm not grinding an axe. Surely that's enough.
 
I'm not sure what you mean friend. Perhaps I merely defy stereotyping. I would prefer to keep my beliefs a personal matter. I enjoy the conversation, I'm polite, and I'm not grinding an axe. Surely that's enough.

Indeed...spoken like a true man of God. :)
 
I believe that Jesus did exist but that what most people believe about him is fiction.
 
I find this conversation interesting, but I must confess that this just isn't something I go at scientifically or historically. I experience Christ, I find the gospels useful, and so it doesn't much matter to me whether or not people think Jesus existed as an actual person.

My own take on it is that it'd be pretty odd if this myth cropped up without at least some real, actual impetus. But it's irrelevant to me whether it did or not.

The whole point of the concept of Christ to me is faith in a meeting of divinity and humanity, of Divine Grace, of a gift of spiritual change and awakening within me. It isn't something I pick apart, neither to support a literalist interpretation of the gospels nor to attack it. The point of the gospels isn't the literal story- that isn't what changed my life. The point is in the meaning... in what the stories have done to my spirit as I've prayed over them, lived them as much as I could, taken them deep into my heart.

Yes, I believe in a literal Jesus. I also think, at best, we're missing information about most of His life. But that has very little to do with my "flavor" of Christianity. It's in experiencing the Christ and the changes wrought in my over time that I am saved. That aspect seems to take up all my time, thought, and effort spiritually, leaving little interest for investigating issues of historicity. The experience of Him is too real for me to ignore Him, and too immediate for the historical aspect to matter.

He isn't an historical figure. He's my living Lord. So maybe that's why all the historical stuff just seems like a moot point to me. :confused:

It's kind of like all the debates about whether a person could really survive in the belly of a whale for three days or if Moses could have literally parted the Red Sea. Since my spiritual experience is very here-and-now, and the meaning of the Biblical story so immediately deep for me-- I'm kind of left asking, "Who cares?" Real whale, fake whale. Parting the Red Sea due to a miracle, due to an earthquake or natural event, never doing it (just a myth). Is there any difference when it comes to the meaning of the story? Just my two cents...
 
While primarily for Sunny C. this is for all who are curious - as Sunny seems to be. Curiousity and a open mind are valuable assets we all should treasure.
So, what first peaked my interest in one of your posts Sunny were the references to the DaVinci Code, Knights Templar, and the like. I have an answer for you with regard to these popularized threads of history, which requires a little background.
My journey through this intrigue began in the early 1970's while spending many late nights discussing such topics with a dear friend who was and is a Greek and Hebrew scholar. He was a great teacher at a time when I was searching pretty hard for truth and religious direction.
Since those all nighters I've read volumes of stuff, including some modern works by Pagels, Erman, Prophet, and yes even Dan Brown. There are truths in all these works, so never be afraid of the search. But, take this advice from a former journalist - always ask questions and always look at the big picture. It will never serve you well to be either a complete skeptic or a true believer. Think like a cop and a journalist combined. Always look for Means, Motive, and Opportunity, and ALWAYS question authority.
With that in mind, there are are a series of books I cannot praise highly enough, written by a couple of guys who, like us, are searching for the truth. And, because these two approached their research as I described, they have uncovered some astonishing facts; not unlike what was revealed in All The President's Men, by Woodward and Bernstein.
Chris Knight & Robert Lomas give a much clearer picture of history than all the bogus specials on the History Channel, NGC, and the like; to include the movie suggested by Dan Brown's book. All those pseudo historical accounts are designed for one reason - to sell books and tickets. Knight and Lomas are selling only the truth, in The Hiram Key, The Book of Hiram, The Second Messiah, Uriel's Machine, and Turning The Hiram Key.
This endorsement is not meant to imply that these guys are right and everyone else is wrong (however, they are right), yet I will once again suggest that compared to all the others I've read, Knight and Lomas have far less to sell - other than their books - and those sales are hardly a path to riches. At least read The Hiram Key, cover to cover, and then tell me what you think - or not. Just check it out.
 
Back
Top