Did Jesus Really Existed?

~johanvaldemar

Mon, 05 Jun 2006 19:17:37 -0400

I dont like Jesus or his teachings. And he wanst a messiah or something he was just a really nice man.

!Sesshoumaru88

Fri, 02 Jun 2006 18:36:56 -0400

Well, I don't doubt that he was alive even thought it is imposible to prove the opposite. I don't believe he could do any od those things that are written about him, he was probably only a normal guy who made something that made the people believe he was something greater. And I don't like it when people says he existed because it's written in the bible. and hello, the bible has changed everytime it was rewritten. It may be just a story like Gilgamesh or other tales.

~papple

Mon, 29 May 2006 08:38:22 -0400

The vast majority of historians agree he existed, in fact, it's rare his existence is ever challenged. It's just what he did when he was alive. Jesus lives during the roman empire, and the amount of attention he attracted for his providence did allow his name to be recorded in several places. The problem I have with this is that the source of the question for this thread was posted on "ttp://atheists.org/" which does suggest bias.

`Omnidevil

Sun, 28 May 2006 22:30:47 -0400

gat

Miroku4444
lol Omnidevil. I wasn't talking about you. I was refering to those"Strong Atheism" people you mentioned. I know your not a heartless un-caring robot.

I don't know about heartless, but he is a robot. Just look at him! >.<

I have metalic tits if anyone wondered.
OH NOES!
Thread derailed. Hope a mod closes this before a spam fest from us begins. Many thanks to those who argued and came in with points of their own.

`gat

Sun, 28 May 2006 22:19:42 -0400

Miroku4444
lol Omnidevil. I wasn't talking about you. I was refering to those"Strong Atheism" people you mentioned. I know your not a heartless un-caring robot.

I don't know about heartless, but he is a robot. Just look at him! >.<

~Miroku4444

Sun, 28 May 2006 20:07:29 -0400

Lol Omnidevil. I wasn't talking about you. I was refering to those"Strong Atheism" people you mentioned. I know your not a heartless un-caring robot.

$sabella30

Sun, 28 May 2006 16:01:17 -0400

I think the more educated and more open minded one becomes the more they question things that are just believed with no proof. I think this is how our civilixation has advanced and shall continue to advance is because some educated people are asking for proof and are questioning the status quo. If everyone believed without question any religion that was handed down then we would not have made the adcances in other areas such as medicine and technology becuase we would have waited for God or the savior "whoever came along" to save us from disease and such. Questioning is how humans learn. Also having faith in something is human nature so that we arent "heartless un-caring robots", but you dont have to have faith in an organized religion to have faith is something. I think the person who started this thread, omni-devil isnt a heartless un-caring robot or he wouldnt be asking the questions and feeling so obviosly passionate about the topic.

°Shellova

Sun, 28 May 2006 14:23:08 -0400

This has been a really interesting discussion. Thanks Omnidevil for bringing this topic up :). People should dare to ask. They should dare to open their mind, not to limit their wisdom in mere fantasies and imaginations and be more acceptance to facts. Only by that they can find the true faith. This kind of discussion should be a really good mind opener.

`Omnidevil

Sun, 28 May 2006 14:03:45 -0400

Yes, but if you want to truely be wise you must have some imagination and a faith in something. If you dont all you have to keep you warm at night is your facts.

We as humans desire to know the facts and like to understand the world around us. Though we also need a little faith in our lives, or all well be is a heartless un-caring robot. We need a combonation of both to be a complete human being.

do I seem like that?
Perhaps then you should meet me in real life, perhaps after you see what I do, you might change your mind.
After all, I did have some faith before, since I was educated to believe, I grown tired of neverending questions that never get real answers that is why I changed. Of course, I believe deep down in there, if it wasn't for the fact that I did somewhat pray before, I would not have questioned his existence, or any other deities' existence before. Again, that is just faith, I believe in having faith with yourself, I guess one can always embrace other forms of faith. After all, as we know, we are only human.

I do not believe I lack imagination, otherwise, I would not have embraced in becoming an artist, or a waller, or even interested in anime for that matter, after all it is just fantasy, imagination is crucial to the development of nations, of its cities and great citadels, it is necessary to imagine what we can do, and then through logic, science and actual knowledge, define the limits of possiblity to make the imagination true or false or possible to complete.

Without imagination, one may collapse from lack of inspiration, that inspiration to learn to be smart, learn to be human, to learn morals and etc, are all based on imagination, in simple deduction wise, if you were a kid, and you learned that all around you lacks possibility to imagine, would you have inspired or be inspired to learn, knowing that everywhere around you, are concrete facts and factors that are the driving forces of rules and laws? You would not, that is why imagination is important, but I do not imagine or put my imagination to imaging a divine or superior being, rather, something else. Such as imagine myself, "I can do it" and usually, that alone is the more comforting thought.

If you define religion as something lucid, yet hard to understand, needed by everyone, and had grasped into the very fundamental of human life controlling and at some cases at some times gives hopes and miracles to the masses, then money and music is the best religion in the world. These past few years, I consider my belief not a part of the 'Christian' religion, but as a mere follower of God. Religion is what man told you to do. Whether it's inspired by God or not, is open for discussion.

quite true, religion was man-made in a sense, after all, only with followers and a guiding leader who is man (except for Jesus or Mohammed or whatever else since that is the issue being discussed), to begin.
Money may not be a religion, but well, who says you can't worship financial superiority? It is free world and free choices, I guess one can never find a true answer.

After all, the idea is not to prove if God exists since that is not provable, Strong Atheism (unlike me, which is nearer to soft Atheism and allows breathing space), is just like Extremist theory, the whole idea in denouncing God would seriously be a challenge in many areas. I certainly view it to be no more than another form of religion which imposes views there is NO GOD. Science and facts exists to prove if a hypothesis, a theory, or a certain formulae works or not, whether it be positive or negative, but in order to do that, one must first have testing data, in this case of religion, and many others of this examples, Science cannot explain since there is no data to form a hypothesis, beside qualitative data which is not applicable, as that will only form more theories, which cannot be proven.

Again, I think human compassion did need imagination, a simple "you can do it" would have been suffice in getting me through the days when things get tough, but I certainly do not need "God will help you do it" to encourage me. I hope people can see the way I think.

~Marujoreinu

Sun, 28 May 2006 13:47:18 -0400

Ouch Omnidevil, Shellova! battle of giants >_< .... this is statting to be a painfull matter...
I think it can't and won't be proven if Jezus did exist or not. There are people who have reasonable arguments to say he did existed and there are people wo have reasonable arguments to say he did not.
This wil always be a reason for argument no matter what.

Even if Jezus himself walks, in not everyone will be convinced.

For me that's end of story, and since non of us is a historicus or a religion specialist we won't come to an answer here either.

°Shellova

Sun, 28 May 2006 13:16:35 -0400

If you define religion as something lucid, yet hard to understand, needed by everyone, and had grasped into the very fundamental of human life controlling and at some cases at some times gives hopes and miracles to the masses, then money and music is the best religion in the world. These past few years, I consider my belief not a part of the 'Christian' religion, but as a mere follower of God. Religion is what man told you to do. Whether it's inspired by God or not, is open for discussion.

`gat

Sun, 28 May 2006 12:41:34 -0400

"We all must have imagination and not look at the facts" - Yes, religion is blind. Yes, all religions are false. Yes, there never be a true religion, only Politics. Can I prove it? No. Can you prove me wrong? No.

$sabella30

Sun, 28 May 2006 11:23:36 -0400

One thing I have alwasy hated about questioning the cristian belief is that the believers never want to really answer the questions with fact and they get offended if anyone asks. if the religion is not strong enough to handle questions and want proof then how will it be strong enough to save souls?? The point of belief should be to invite the questions and "doubters" and try to prove the point without being limited to "that is what the bible says and therefore it is true" Isnt that what the bible talks about in doubting thomas? It seems that a lot of believers in this religion want to quote scripture all day that isnt really pertinant and yet they wont admit that they just dont know. This is one of the reasons why I turned away from chritianity a long time ago because when I got old enough to questions, no one wanted to answer and they got angry that I asked like I was a sinner or something. Like I said it cant be that strong a faith if asking questions just leads to anger.

~Miroku4444

Sun, 28 May 2006 11:18:25 -0400

I must , cause it is my nature, logical thinking and my education demands that proof be given to maintain believe. I believe there are such things as Atoms, I believe in Humans having the power to evolve, over long periods of time, I believe there is such a thing called Chemical Reaction, which most of these, until shoved up the conservative christian face, it would have denounced as "Heresy", see the difference why I rather choose proof over imagination.

Imaginations only serve a primary purpose to endure when necessary, such as giving faith to those who need it, giving strength of the inner self, psychologically appealing, soothing of thoughts, they work, I did not denounce them, however, like all atheists, I must know the clear line in believing something that is quite possibly (QUITE) not there than believing something that can be proven.
Imagination is good, however it is not necessary, if you recall, I too worked with the RedCross similiar, The Red Cresent welfare home once, and I was compassionate as an atheist, I don't need the backgroun image of an imaginary God to guide my actions, my morals itself and those that I learned from my parents and just as every other education would have been enough to guide me to the correct choice

Yes, but if you want to truely be wise you must have some imagination and a faith in something. If you dont all you have to keep you warm at night is your facts.

We as humans desire to know the facts and like to understand the world around us. Though we also need a little faith in our lives, or all well be is a heartless un-caring robot. We need a combonation of both to be a complete human being.

`Omnidevil

Sun, 28 May 2006 10:04:46 -0400

Also this theory that jesus was a rumor is insulting to me. You have no proof of this, so why claim such non-sense. Stop with this cult crap too, my religion was no darn cult. I know you dont believe man, but respect others beliefs.

don't take offense on what I said about that, every religion must start as a small number of people who follow them, beginning it as a cult, before it is acknowledged and becomes a religion.
Paganism was just the same, the only difference is because no one agrees on them. The same would have applied to Judasism, Buddhism, Taoism, the fundamental difference is how far it goes and has came to convince its members and its members base.
Every other small belief, such as say Scientology is a cult, cause it is not officially like one, there is small memberbase, but like huge religions and mainstreamers, they have their set of rules like all of them, they have their own churches and gathering places of faith, they have all sorts of activities that mainstream religions have, and thus, they are no difference, whether or not they have been acknowledged as a cult or religion largely revolves around external influence and general acknowledgement.
I have no proof? I claim because I dare to ask questions, exactly why this thread would have been born in the first place, when I ask a question, one who believes in faith can only lean back on their faith, while it serves no useful purpose to question them, it would have been good for us, Who do not believe to look at facts over fiction.

Nonetheless, I apologize if I may have offended you in any way, likewise, i did not say in sure that he did not exists, he could have, but like all my other posts, a figurehead set forth by a pre-religion or a group of believers to guide those who wishes to enter the same religion/pre-religion. Possibly like said, I would not have agreed if he has Godly Attributes, however, he was most probably a good leader, hence the leadership he must have had possess and used would have granted those around his faith on him, and thus, with the help of his group, used the image of God and so on to begin his own large religion. This theory is NOT a rumor, it is a theory.

See thats why you dont like religion. You have to have everything proven to you. The whole point of religion is faith. Why must everything have to be proven, wheres you imagination?

I must , cause it is my nature, logical thinking and my education demands that proof be given to maintain believe. I believe there are such things as Atoms, I believe in Humans having the power to evolve, over long periods of time, I believe there is such a thing called Chemical Reaction, which most of these, until shoved up the conservative christian face, it would have denounced as "Heresy", see the difference why I rather choose proof over imagination.

Imaginations only serve a primary purpose to endure when necessary, such as giving faith to those who need it, giving strength of the inner self, psychologically appealing, soothing of thoughts, they work, I did not denounce them, however, like all atheists, I must know the clear line in believing something that is quite possibly (QUITE) not there than believing something that can be proven.
Imagination is good, however it is not necessary, if you recall, I too worked with the RedCross similiar, The Red Cresent welfare home once, and I was compassionate as an atheist, I don't need the backgroun image of an imaginary God to guide my actions, my morals itself and those that I learned from my parents and just as every other education would have been enough to guide me to the correct choice.

Not quite right, Omni.

Aye, I failed in the history lesson, my bad.
Your points have been valid, I just read through more accurate documents and yes indeed it was real.
Indeed, his divine attribute would have been a bigger arguent indeed. I find it often the argument drifts back to this part as well.
Nonetheless, due to the fragmented documentation and selective documentations, I guess one can never prove it. Granted, I guess it never will.

°Shellova

Sun, 28 May 2006 04:51:51 -0400

<quoting Omnidevil' post which is too long to quote so read for yourself>

Not quite right, Omni. The temple mound and Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans before the word 'Islam' is known to the world. The Templar Knights and the Rosicrucians are about the age of Crusade (middle age, 8-12th century). Well, at this time, the Pope commanded the European armies to gain control of Jerusalem. Well, they did managed to get it back from the moslems and the whole different story about the templars would start here. The temple mound was destroyed by Romans, the Jerusalem later by numerous people and groups including Arab.

Thanks for the info, but again, I cannot quite agree with it. The Catholics is not a religion. It's a country. And a country who took Christianity as its core. So, Catholics was not the original. The original of Christianity was not Jesus's group either. The original was a handful of people who gathered in Judea defending their belief that Jesus was the Son of God, the Messiah. And fyi, these people hadn't gathered until some years after the crucifixion of Jesus. And again, considering the danger of such masses gathering in the heart of Jewish and Roman rule, the only passable note about Jesus can be found in letters and journals of His apostles and disciples (more than 12 see..) These would later be collected and compiled into a book (selected ones, of course)...

There's only two possible reason for a great empire which conquered a large portion of Europe and Middle east to simply took a person from a Judean kingdom (under its imperialistic order) and bethroned him as a God replacing a line of lesser gods they had spent tons of golds building their temples: either insanity of its emperor, or simply a divine enlightment. We'll save the latter for later. It's still a question. Why would Roman empire took Jesus as a God and assuming the Roman Christian Empire? To win the heart of Judean people? Not in anyone's right mind.

As for the papers and documents. It's a great chance that those documents still intact in the library in Vatican or somewhere in this world. As I wrote before, the bible only comprises of selected few gathered by the Nicea council to support His Divine attribute. The original (and the rest of the) records including those possibly written by Jesus Himself (which later brought into controversy in books such as Da Vinci Code which I found quite non-fictional) could either be kept by vatican or destroyed along with the temple mound and the city (see, the Jerusalem is a war-magnet).

And, no. The Roman doesn' hate Jesus. Jewish does.

Side Note:
About 400 years after Jesus, a group of people led by a youth from Arab start spreading a religion in the middle east area (mostly the Arabian peninsula and the gulf). The birth of Islam is after the birth of Christianity (the Roman Catholic Empire). It would be veeery strange that this Religion also took the name Jesus; not as a God or Son-of-God, but as a prophet. Should Jesus a phony, then Islam is also a phony (double that cos no idiot is more idiot than an idiot who follows idiots). Let's leave the discussion of Islam low for now, cos this bears another significant ties with the Jesus-Christian-Catholic-Vatican relationship.

Oh yeah. I think aside from his existence, most people would argue over His "Divine Attribute": whether Jesus is God or not.