Toto

The interesting question is how Christianity started and rose to become a major world force. Did it start with a unique, self-sacrificing individual, or was it the product of earlier socio-political-religious forces?

The Jesus character is a major cultural icon, whether or not he existed, and can tell us a lot about the first century and ourselves. He might even be more interesting as a product of the Hellenistic-Judaic imagination than as history.

Not_Registered

With all due respect Toto I don't believe THE interesting question is "how Christianity started and rose to become a major world force?" I believe that is AN interesting question and it may be your main question, but for the bulk of people that came to oppose or are to be skeptical of a belief in Jesus, God, Christianity, and the like, I don't believe they came to their opinions because they were seeking "how Christianity started and rose to become a major world force." I believe some people get all the facts and knowledge they can gather because they want to prove to others and to themselves that Jesus, God, Christianity, etc. is erroneous. I believe a lot of people will latch on to any detail that "disproves" the bible or Jesus' existence or a belief in God. For any evidence that favors the bible they just shield themselves from it with all their gathered knowledge that "proves" them correct in other areas. I'm not saying the bible, Jesus, or a belief in God has all the clear and obvious necessary proof to back it up, but it isn't as falliable as some make it out to be. There are a lot of religions/beliefs that clearly are completely foolish, but in my opinion Christianty is not one of them. This all comes to my mind because I see so many knowledgeable about a subject and dedicated to proving it wrong when in their eyes, supposedly, it is clearly wrong and foolish in nature. I hate reading as it is. I know I wouldn't waste my time becoming painstakingly educated on an subject matter which is, not kinda wrong, but completely and utterly erroneous at is basis (given that Jesus never existed). That would be similar to me choosing to disprove mormonism to every mormon and studying diligently in the subject so as to show the error of the belief. I believe mormonism is clearly a foolish belief, and I'll say so, but I will not read all the mormon passages and learn the mormon history like the back of my hand to disprove it because that would be a waste for me to do so. This is just my opinion. Maybe people enjoy debating things they, not only don't believe in but think are completely foolish, more than I do.

Radcliffe Emerson

I'm still of the firm belief Paul invented Christ, for whatever purpose. His writings are the earliest historical writings to mention Jesus.
I don't exactly know what he wanted to gain, but I believe Paul invented him.
I think there is evidence John the Baptist existed. It's possible Paul or his followers took some of John's attributes and eventually turned them into a Christ. I don't know.
But I do think Paul is where Jesus begins. I don't think Jesus was a real person. Not the Jesus of the bible. I think at best the character was a combination of several people.

Toto

I think that this describes the attitude that Christian apologists take - try to marshall the facts in support of their beliefs. Of course, a lot of the atheists here started out as Christians, until they proved to themselves that Christianity was not true.

Is it just moderately fallible? Fallible 67% of the time?

I know that a lot of Christians would prefer that non-believers not be so much more knowledgable about the subject matter than they are, (and what does it tell you that one can study the Bible so long and come to the conclusion that it is false?) but that's the breaks.

CX

Hmmm...did you ever know anybody who was fascinated by Greek Mythology and thus reasonably well versed in it? Does one have to believe that Marduk actually slayed Tiamat to create the world in order to be fascinated by the study of ancient Mesopotamia?. In addition, those two examples have had far less impact on western culture and society than Abrahamic religion. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I've always been fascinated by comparitive religion. I started really studying Xianity and the bible to see if what I'd learned with respect to other ancients myths was different where Xianity was concerned. It was upon the discovery that it wasn't that I finally lost the last vestiges of Xian belief I had. At that point, however, I had developed a keen interest in the study of the Ancient Near East, and the religious systems in that environment. I also think that very often one of the products of learning a great deal about religion in general or Xianity specifically is a loss of faith. From that it's not hard to see why a community of nonbelievers might have a disproportionate number of people with a deep understanding and knowledge of the subject.

CX

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but my experience has been that those nonbelievers who are especially well-versed in Xianity and the Bible are because they originally sought to prove their theistic belief and nonbelief was the result.


Interestingly my own experience, again, differs considerably from yours. It has been my experience that this is the modus operandi of believers.

Can you outline which beliefs you find completely foolish and why Xianity is not one of them?

funinspace

It's 72.5%. I counted it up last week

Well in my case, my knowledge came from first spending 20+ years as a comprehending believer, then a few years in confusion, while I desparately read a plethora of sources trying to figure out what was wrong. Since then, my learning curve has slowed down greatly. I also quickly found out how ignorant even the preachers were on history. Guess I don't fit too well into your stereo type... Oh, I view it more as a HJ, but mythisized as things went on. But that's just my SWAG.

DK

DK

diana

Hi, Not_Registered.

Y'know...until this post, I thought you were truly agnostic about the historicity of Jesus. I don't generally check profiles, or I guess I'd have had it figured out several posts back, huh?

In addition to The One Giant Paragraph (oddly, a notable Christian habit on this board) it was this bit that made it click in my brain:

As the mods have already pointed out, what you've described is something that is prominent, if not required, in Christianity.

If you have evidence that favors the bible, please point me to them. I can't learn enough about the subject.

I'm not sure what you mean by "they just shield themselves from it," but I suppose you mean we're critical of what we're told and question everything. This is true. Anything that does not hold up under scrutiny is discarded. Speaking only for myself, I've looked deeply into the bible from the viewpoint of a believer and a nonbeliever. I couldn't make sense of it as a believer. I've looked honestly into Jesus' existence--after I got over the contempt I initially felt for the mere suggestion that he may have never existed--and I discovered that the position that he never existed at all strikes me as more tenable. I've spent the most time discussing the EoG, and all the arguments for have been So Done...there is nothing new under the sun, truly. All of them, at some point, deny logic in order to continue--and I can't deny logic.

Why do I care? My world is suffused with Christianity. I'm estranged from my family (immediate, as well as extended on my Mother's side), not because I'm a criminal or unpleasant to be with or nasty to them, but because I refuse to pretend to believe in their God. Why do I care? I was raised Christian--Protestant, like you, only I was so fundamentalist I could never even bring myself to do what you did for the first page of this thread--but I couldn't bring myself to believe, so I did something unthinkable: my homework. I'm still doing it, but I must tell you...the more I learn about the world at that time, the bible itself, mythology, and ancient religions, the more convinced I am that the whole thing is myth. But it's a myth that my family believes and thus, ostracizes and condemns me. It's a myth that makes my coworkers feel "superior" to anyone who doesn't believe as they do. It's a myth that provokes people to be bigots and make laws against others who aren't hurting them or anyone else.

I study Christianity and everything about it, pro and con--and I've found the "pro" boils down to emotional drivel--because I believe in knowing my enemy. I have declared war on Christianity.

I only wish more Christians would put so much energy and time into reading the literature of their detractors, and "knowing their enemies." If we are to discuss, it would be a damn sight better if they at least knew what I stand for so they don't waste time arguing against what preachers have told them about athiests, which is invariably bullshit.

I'm a Jesus Myther, me. The lack of mention by contemporary historians is a bit of a clue. The fact that Paul didn't seem to know (or care) about any historical figure is another, quite telling. I've read in a couple of places (probably more, if we include internet sources) that Jesus was not depicted being literally nailed to the cross (as a man) until the 5th or 6th century, which at the very least suggests that part of the story evolved over time. His name means "Savior" (and Jesus Christ, "Anointed Savior"--how mythological). Almost every silly detail of the "gospels" correspond to prevalent mythical motifs that had been in place for centuries at the time the Jesus story came into being.

If you respond with, "But I mean, don't you think it's possible that a man named Jesus, which was a common name, preached in Jerusalem?" Well sure. Probably several Jesuses. Do I think someone picked out one of these well-meaning madmen and built all that myth around him? Nah. Not really. Could have happened, but I don't see any reason to believe the story was "based on a real figure" any more than I see a reason to believe there was a real Osirus or Mithras or Hercules.

I echo Sven's earlier question, that has thus far been overlooked: Let's say there was a real man that the myth was built around. So what?!

d

miata

"...thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe. " -- Exodus 21:23-25

"...ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." -- Matthew 5:39


See you can have it both ways.

"... I have seen God face to face ..." -- Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time..."-- John 1:18

Who can argue with the Bible??? The Bible will bebate it's self!!!!

Not_Registered

Ya'll are right. I was blind...but now I see. Hallelujah! I would say praise the Lord, but....you know.