PoodleLovinPessimist

No person named Jesus has said anything to me. Oh, you mean the fictional character in the Christian bible?

You can't slander a fictional character.

It's a fantasy novel. What else do you expect?

We don't curse fictional characters. We try not to mock the follower of fictional characters, but sometimes the temptation is strong.

As far as I know, there are not even any copies of documents that might have been written by anyone who might have known the character depicted in the fantasy novel ordinarily known as the Christian Bible.

It's been demonstrated time and again that you have zero expertise at scientific historical investigation.

Fictional characters neither require nor deserve legal protections.

Um... yes we do.

I didn't feel guilty in the first place. The supposed sacrifice of a fictional character doesn't much affect me one way or the other.

I have neither the desire nor the ability to do anything to a fictional character.

He didn't do anything. Jesus is a fictional character.

I don't believe that Zeus exists. And if the followers of Zeus were to claim the objective truth of Zeus's existence and berate me for not enslaving my will to his priests (i.e. if Zeus's followers were anything like you), yes, I would mock them mercilessly.

Ellis14

It's been said and said a million times:

Salieri, can you prove that Allah doesn't exist?

Can you prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist?

Can you prove that Zogblogawog doesn't exist?

No you can't. So perhaps you can see that you original question is irrelevant, and to be honest, somewhat philosophically and theologically naive.

Agnostic Theist

Non sequitur. If I believed his words, I wouldn't antagonise people who agree with me. Hence I'm mocking Jesus

P > Q
P
________
R

to put it in simple propositional logic terms.

Now, if we speak in the good old idiosyncratic english language that we're all used to (except Welsh - cos they don't speak any coherent language :Cheeky: )...

I have not heard Jesus' words. You are overlooking a myriad possibilities, viz.

He was mad

He lied

The accounts of his words are false

The accounts of his words are inaccurate

You're beating a strawman of what he preached

Salieri

Again, you have no proof that those words did not come from Jesus yet you do not hesitate to mock & judge him. This is definitely judging a man guilty before proving him guilty. Who are you to say he didn't exist when you weren't even there?! Just a guess? What has ever been proven false in the bible as to not take it seriously? Do you believe Buddha existed?

I used to have those same "critical thinking" skills which I was as proud of as you are now. Unfortunately that pride kept me from seeing many other sides of an issue which kept me from being objective. Now that I've been on both sides I can be objective. You, however, are still stuck on one side. That is called subjectivity. Again, if you don't understand your opponent, he will out wit you. I can assure you when you oppose God's words, He will out wit you! That is a guarantee, my friend. But you can't understand that because you don't understand your opponent.

graymouser

1. I have provided for you detailed accounts of why we cannot consider the words in the Gospels to be authentic words spoken by Jesus. You have done nothing whatsoever to cast doubt on these accounts; instead, you start new threads with the same old assertions.
2. I do not slander Jesus; I am an agnostic as to his existence as a historical human being.
3. I do not call Jesus' words lies; I have demonstrated to you that we cannot consider the words of the Gospels to be Jesus' words.
4. I do not call Jesus' words fantasies; I have demonstrated to you that we cannot consider the words of the Gospels to be Jesus' words.
5. I do not curse Jesus in this forum.
6. I do not mock Jesus in this forum.
7. I do not mock Jesus' "followers" in this forum.
8. No person who saw Jesus wrote about him; ergo, I do not make any claims about "knowing better" about his life or death than those who saw him.

That is jurisprudential; in a court of law, a man is innocent until proven guilty. However, in philosophy and history, a claim is not true until some proof is provided for it; this is called "burden of proof," and it rests upon the person making the positive assertion.

You provide, as proof of the existence of Jesus, the Gospels. You have been answered on this question quite thoroughly; there is plenty of reason to doubt the accounts given in the Gospels, from every angle. You simply shout that the Gospels are evidence even louder; yet when we look at them, they're not better supported than any of the myriad other accounts from the ancient world that proclaim miracles.

When it comes to miraculous claims, Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Were the Gospels the only books in the ancient world depicting miracles, the sole works of their time to indicate that anything supernatural had happened, or were there dozens of non-religious accounts to verify them and great amounts of archaeological evidence to verify them, perhaps we could give them the time of day; until then, they are on the pile with The Life of Apollonius of Tyana as unverified miracle-claims that we have no obligation to take seriously.

This is not true. I personally doubt in the existence of Siddhartha Gautama, at least as we know it from the Buddhist texts and scriptures, and this is part of the reason that I am not a Buddhist. I have seriously investigated the Buddhist religion, and found it emotionally quite compelling, but I cannot rationally accept its doctrine.

Do what things to Jesus? I wish to debunk the claims of Christians, because I believe that Christianity is an extremely harmful element of the society in which I live. I do nothing to Jesus.

I do not treat Jesus in any way; I do not act toward Jesus. I try to debunk the claims of Christians.

If Zeus-belief were pervasive in American society, and people wanted to pass legislation based on the will of Zeus, I would be one of those who tries to debunk the claims of Zeus-worshippers.

-Wayne

newtype_alpha

Again, Salieri, you have no proof that those words did come from Jesus yet you do not hesitate to advertist and defend him. This is definitely judging a man innocent without even giving him a trial. Who are you to say he existed when you weren't even there?! Just a guess? What has ever been proven true in the bible as to take it seriously? Do you believe Buddha didn't exist?

Unfortunately, by your own admission, you have just stated that you have abandoned all your critical thinking skills. You have, therefore, intentionally given yourself over to the cult mindset and knowingly, willingly, demoted yourself to a sheeple. Your arguments are lacking in coherence and substance because you simply have no idea what you are talking about and in fact you seem to have a strong phobia of knowing what you are talking about. Yet you continue talking. Why?

{Deleted}

Ellis14

The earth is not flat.

The sun cannot stop in the middle of the sky.

There is no dome of water above the earth.

There is no vault in the sky with windows in that open when it rains.

Life was not created suddenly 6000 years ago; it evolved over millions of years. (The order of lifeforms is also vastly in error in Genesis too).

The moon doesn't give out it's own light.

Animals were never all herbivores.

A global flood is impossible.

And these are just off the top of my head. Your question is answered. Case closed. The bible is erroneous and unreliable. It is a story book in which a character called Jesus is mentioned. If he existed then so does Gandalf and Frodo.

chapka

No. Not believing someone is not the same as mocking them.

Here, there's an additional layer of disconnect. Let's take this example:

A: I heard that Joe Lieberman said on an open mike that he eats Christian babies for breakfast every day with Marmite. I believe it, because I know that many Jews do eat Christian babies. Joe Lieberman must be a truly evil man.

B: Come on, A! You aren't dumb enough to believe that, are you?

Is B mocking Joe Lieberman?

In the example above, you have no proof that A is not telling the truth. If you demand proof of the assertion that Joe Lieberman eats babies, therefore, you commit just the error you accuse us of.

Have you read the Infancy Gospel of Thomas? Do you believe that it's true; that everything that is said to have happened in it happened? If not, how can you make such a judgment?

Have you read the Epic of Gilgamesh? Same questions.

Have you read the Iliad? Same questions.

If you want us to believe something, give us evidence that it's true, or give us a reason to privilege it over other things that haven't been definitively proven to be false.

For starters, the time, place, and mechanism of the census that begins the Christmas story. The Star of Bethlehem. The idea that the world would end while some of the Apostles were still alive. Then in the Old Testament there's the Noah story, the Tower of Babel, and a few others.

fjripit

The burden of proof is on those who assert that Jesus is who he says he is.

Until then, I for one do not acknowledge his existence and would appreciate that those who DO believe in the existence of Jesus, please stop trying to meddle in MY life and beliefs.

newtype_alpha

Are you implying that Gandalf and Frodo didn't exist???? :wide:

That simply cannot be! I've seen them, really! They're DEFINATELY real! Fifty thousand other people saw them too! Why would they lie? Some movies are based on true stories you know.