French Prometheus

You don't get it. That "revolutionary movement" gained momentum and archeological visibility long after Jesus' supposed time of death. It can also be argued that whether Jesus existed or not, it really was Paul who actually allowed Christinanity to spread and eventually have a visible effect on the world (at a much later time). And Paul never met Jesus "physically" (i.e. in a way that's believable without resorting to faith).

Alexander completely changed the world in his lifetime. It's not reasonably possible to explain those changes without him. Even if you remove all the supernatural crap surrounding his birth or his life, you still have the conquest of a huge empire and the formation of powerful new kingdoms ruled by people who knew Alexander personally.

Whatever really happened in Judaea in the late 20's-early 30's of the first century CE, Christianity started to have a real impact on the world at a much later time. And this impact was the result of actions by people who were far removed in time and space from any HJ.

What's more, we have plenty of archeological artifacts dating back to Alexander's lifetime and testifying of his existence. Coins are the most obvious example.

I personally own coins minted during Alexander's lifetime, a few others made shortly after his death (e.g. bearing his brother's name) and yet others minted under the reign of his direct successors, the diadochi. I also have some of the very first Roman coins bearing Christian symbols (often mixed with pagan ones). Those were minted in the 4th century CE. Of course, there are Christian artifacts much older than that but they only testify of the existence of small communities with limited visibility and power (and no obvious direct link to HJ), nothing like the institutional upheaval of a powerful empire.

spamandham

To the extent this is true, it's just barely true. Whatever Christianity was prior to the 4th century, it didn't leave much of a trace.

rhutchin

Let us refresh those conditions. The allegation of a flying pig (in your example) is made by four independent and reliable witnesses. My response was that the witnesses saw something that they took to be a flying pig whether or not it actually was and that we could believe them when they said that they saw something resembling a flying pig. There is no basis to say that they are lying.

Nonetheless, no matter what they actually saw, the response should be, So what? Beyond being a nice story for the National Inquirer, should people care?

aa5874

So what?

Well there was no pig.

Perhaps it was a bird, a plane, a hot-air balloon or some non-pig entity that could fly.

Jesus if human was non-resurrectable, perhaps he was just HOT-AIR and that the NT and Church writings were regarded the same as the NATIONAL INQUIRER.

You must agree that the story of the resurrection and ascension of the offspring of Holy Ghost is not outside of the boundaries of the NAtional Inquirer.

rhutchin

Agreed. But do you dismiss it out of hand or after an investigation? Perhaps some physics students contrived a harness and sent a pig into the air. What we seem to easily acknowledge is that pigs cannot fly on their own. Thus, when confronted with the testimony of four independent, reliable witnesses, who presumably know what a pig looks like, we might surmise some shenanigans involving a pig.

Perhaps. However, if the Bible is true that there is a god who is the creator of the universe, then a resurrection is pretty easy to accomplish. So, show us that the Bible is not true and nothing more need be said. If all you have to offer are your opinions, then we can go on quite awhile.

spin

You tacitly assume what you need to demonstrate, ie the quality of the gospels as witnesses. You refused to do so earlier. That negates any argument you base on the assumption.


spin

aa5874

Well, once you agree that there was no pig then the four independent witnesses were not reliable after ALL.

But, you have made statements that you cannot even begin to prove.

1. PROVE THAT THERE IS ONE SINGLE GOD.

2. PROVE THAT IT IS PRETTY EASY FOR ANY GOD TO RESURRECT ANYONE.

3. PROVE THAT THE BIBLE IS TRUE.

Now, it can be shown through empiricism that the NT is fiction about Jesus and the disciples.

It is not biologically to produce babies from a Holy Ghost and a woman.

It is not physically possible for a Holy Ghost to have lived on earth and to have been of the pinnacle of the Temple. It is not medically possibly to talk to people that were born blind, deaf, dumb and with paralysis to be healed instantly.

There is no meteorological data that show a storm was downgraded by the words of a Ghost holy or evil.

The walking on water by Jesus with Peter in his arms defies Archimedes principles if he had human flesh.

It is not humanly possible to make a man face shine like the sun as was done in the transfiguration.

It is not biologically possible for a real dead person to regain life after three days since the internal destruction of the brain cells cannot be reversed.

There is no AVIATION data to show that the principles of flying can be achieved by a man or Ghost [ holy or evil] without external propulsion through clouds directly from earth except when you are on a mountain which has some cloud cover, but in any event, there has been no audio recordings of a cloud identifying a man as his beloved son.

I could go on and on but essentially it can be shown that the NT is false about Jesus and the disciples.

rhutchin

Hard to tell, because you don't seem to be able to explain what you mean.

rhutchin

I think what we both agree is that neither one of us has ever seen a pig fly nor are we aware that it is ever happened. So, given that we have four reliable, independent witnesses, we can ask what it was that they saw. Of course, maybe some physics students rigged a harness to make a pig fly and we are wrong.

The problem is that you cannot disprove those things. Thus, we deal with things that cannot be proved or disproved.

aa5874

You mean the four "reliable" witnesses rigged the story then.


So, you are just wasting time by telling people about YOUR GOD.

You cannot prove your God exist.

You cannot prove your God can see.

You cannot prove your God can hear.

You cannot prove your God can talk.

You cannot prove your God can help people.

Your prove that one single God exist.

You cannot prove it is rather easy for a God to raise people from the dead.

You cannot prove not one single thing about YOUR UNPROVABLE god.

Please, stop wasting time.

Now, I am dealing with sources of antiquity that clearly show that the NT as found canonised is TOTAL fiction with respect to Jesus from conception to ascension.

I have Matthew 1.18, Luke 1.35, and Acts 1.9 in front of me, and these passages are total fiction.