Zeichman

15:8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

Kosh:I see what you mean. My language has been, at best, imprecise this thread. Paul claimed to have seen the risen Christ, as had those I mentioned before. Would you agree that is an accurate way of stating it?

Diogenes:I think for the most part I addressed your objection right here. I think, however, your assesment of miraculous material is a bit too Bultmann-esque / post-enlightenment. It's conceivable that there are naturalistic explanations for many of these events, or were greatly exaggerated after being transmitted through various sources. That said, I'm agnostic as to whether Jesus was regarded as a miracleworker during his life (beyond that of any other average Jew), and I certainly don't believe that the laws of nature have ever been broken.

Orthodox_Freethinker

The only legitimate objection to the Christian faith is the problem of evil, something which no Christian is ever fully able to solve.

Peace.

NZSkep

Assuming the historical Jesus existed. could you clarify please. Do you mean Jesus as described int he bible with all the miracles etc,
or just that there was a guy around that time called Jesus who believed himself to be the son of god and could do magic?
or some combination of the two?
or something compeltely different, maybe?

JEST2ASK

If Jesus was only a exceptional human .. would what remained bear any relation to the relgion we call Christianity ... NO second Adam ... No Redemption of Mankind No High priest sitting at the right hand ... etc ... etc ... It might bear some similarity to JW's as there would still be a god ... hmmmm perhaps Islam is right he was only one of many prophets ... interesting to speculate if we strip away the supernatural claims on his behalf what would the theology of Paul / Peter/John et-al have looked like ...

Mountain Man

No evidence the person called "Paul" was there. His writings were no earlier than 50 c.e.. But the thing is, I don't have to prove was not there, the believers have to prove he was.

Mountain Man

Biblical quotes are not proof.

Zeichman

Find me a scholar aside from those I mention it who contend that Paul did not see the Risen Christ. The stuff written in the first person, man. It's not like it's the book of Acts or some other dubious history.

Jayhawker Soule

And what do you suggest are the consequences of granting that Paul made such a claim?

Kosh

Back to the original topic...

I think this "approach" has problems and is disengenious. It assumes that the point and the argument are logicaly seperatable, which is not always the case. It would seem to me to be apologetic slight of hand trickery.

Case in point: let's disregard all the terrible things Hitler did to the Jews, all the attacks that he made on other countres, etc. Other than that, what do you really have against Hitler?

Most of the problems that skeptics have with Christianity revolve around the basis that it does not ring true. Existence of Jesus, ressurection, etc. No proof that it's true. Therefore you cannot seperate the two. She's making a appeal to your emotional side by saying "let's get past the details of facts, don't you think Xiantiy is a nice religion?".

See above.

Yahweh

I think the difference between what I asked in the opening post and the Hitler example is that there really are atheists who think Jesus is a historical figure. And of course, the question is actually pretty helpful, because so far in my discussions with Christians about Christianity, I tend to avoid the claim that Jesus never existed because I dont really find the material that good (i.e. Sixteen Crucified Saviors, Christ Conspiracy, the Jesus Mysteries, etc.); if it turns out to be the case "Jesus didnt exist" isnt a sound argument, then the robustness of atheism ought to be able to stand on its own two feet without that claim.

I ask the question in light of some of the articles being written at SkepticWiki, in which user jjramesey (who is not a Christian) is current writing articles arguing for a historical Jesus.

You presume too much. She's an atheist.