Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Polycarp · 06-20-2002, 12:38 PM

All of this debate over studying documents written almost 2000 years ago in order to determine which events described in the documents are actually historical seems to often be a waste of time around here. Not always, but often, this is the case in this forum. I�d like to propose a hypothetical scenario to test my hypothesis. Let us say the following were to happen�

You have just been transported in time to the year 35 C.E. and you find yourself somewhere in Palestine. This is easily verified by you after a rather short period of investigation. You still possess all of the knowledge you had when you left the 21st century, but you�ve somehow been transported back in time. You hear someone speaking to a small crowd of people in the area (they�re speaking Greek, but you�ve somehow developed fluency in this language). You soon discover that the person speaking to the crowd is known as the apostle Paul. He talks about a man named Jesus who was crucified, but appeared to his followers two days later and eventually appeared to Paul himself.

After his brief speech, you approach him to question him on everything related to this Jesus. He�s a bit ornery, so he tells you to go see someone named Peter (some call him �Cephas�) because Peter was someone who actually knew this Jesus. You eventually find Peter and interrogate him on what you know about the gospel stories and Jesus. He affirms the main points of the gospels: Jesus healed people, told a lot of parables, angered religious authorities, was eventually crucified and buried in a tomb, and later appeared to Peter and some of the other followers. You question him on the details, some of them are fuzzy in Peter�s memory, but he insists the main events actually happened.

Just then you are transported back to the 21st century into the life as you had known it. Will any of your beliefs about Christianity change? What if you had spent several months living in the year 35 C.E. while interacting with Christians � would you become a Christian after being transported back to the 21st century?

My whole point in giving this hypothetical scenario is that I don�t think many (any?) skeptics would convert to Christianity even if they�d lived much, much closer to the time of Jesus. What does everyone else think?

katerina2 · 06-20-2002, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Polycarp:
<strong>You still possess all of the knowledge you had when you left the 21st century, but you’ve somehow been transported back in time.</strong>

Oops. Hermeneutic problem here. If you possess all the knowledge that you have from the 21C, it would be like trying to read a MS-DOS 5" disk on your 3" floppy.

Need a convertor.

Toto · 06-20-2002, 01:01 PM

It seems that you are assuming that anyone transported back to 35 CE would find history the way you think it happened. What if you were transported back to 29 CE and could find no trace of Jesus? Would you still be a Christian?

As for your hypothetical, simply knowing that Paul existed, and Peter existed and remembered the events of Jesus' life, and thought he saw Jesus after he died, is hardly enough to make one a Christian. Lots of secular unbelievers, deists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., believe that Jesus was a real person and a teacher with a following, but are not Christians because they do not accept Jesus' divinity, and have alternative explanations for any supposed miracles. They believe that Jesus' message was misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Do you think that the little bit of history you have given us would be enough to base your religious faith on?

madmax2976 · 06-20-2002, 01:09 PM

If your asking whether I, as I am now, would be convinced to be a Christian after this experience, the answer is emphatically "No".

If one of my best friends, that I had trusted for years, came to me and claimed to have seen someone perform a miracle or claimed to have seen someone alive after they had died, I would not believe them. It takes more than the unsupported assertions of even friends for me to believe fanatastic claims. It certainly would take more than the unsupported assertions of complete strangers. Anything else would be sheer gullibility to me.

Polycarp · 06-20-2002, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
It seems that you are assuming that anyone transported back to 35 CE would find history the way you think it happened. What if you were transported back to 29 CE and could find no trace of Jesus? Would you still be a Christian?

I would definitely not be a Christian if I were to undergo the same scenario and failed to find any evidence for the existence of Jesus. If I'd asked all around Jerusalem and came up empty, I'd give up Christianity forever.

Quote:

As for your hypothetical, simply knowing that Paul existed, and Peter existed and remembered the events of Jesus' life, and thought he saw Jesus after he died, is hardly enough to make one a Christian. Lots of secular unbelievers, deists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., believe that Jesus was a real person and a teacher with a following, but are not Christians because they do not accept Jesus' divinity, and have alternative explanations for any supposed miracles. They believe that Jesus' message was misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Do you think that the little bit of history you have given us would be enough to base your religious faith on?

Thanks for your input. You've affirmed my hypothesis.

Polycarp · 06-20-2002, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by madmax2976:
If your asking whether I, as I am now, would be convinced to be a Christian after this experience, the answer is emphatically "No".

If one of my best friends, that I had trusted for years, came to me and claimed to have seen someone perform a miracle or claimed to have seen someone alive after they had died, I would not believe them. It takes more than the unsupported assertions of even friends for me to believe fanatastic claims. It certainly would take more than the unsupported assertions of complete strangers. Anything else would be sheer gullibility to me.

I completely understand where you're coming from. This is exactly what I assumed most skeptics would say. If you had actually known Jesus, and he appeared to you after his death, would it change your mind at all?

Toto · 06-20-2002, 01:41 PM

You're saying that you base your religion on mere historical events that cannot be proven to have happened? Is that all?

Kosh · 06-20-2002, 02:01 PM

How about this Polycarp:

You encounter someone who tells you that 3 years ago they were abducted by space aliens. The aliens told him humans should commit their life to following the code of behavior set forth by the aliens, and that the aliens have given to this person. He's a little fuzzy on details of how the abduction took place and all, but swears he was there.

Would you convert to Alienity? If not why?

Polycarp · 06-20-2002, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto:
You're saying that you base your religion on mere historical events that cannot be proven to have happened?

Yes. And so do you. Your religious beliefs (or lack thereof) cannot be proven.

Polycarp · 06-20-2002, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Kosh:
You encounter someone who tells you that 3 years ago they were abducted by space aliens. The aliens told him humans should commit their life to following the code of behavior set forth by the aliens, and that the aliens have given to this person. He's a little fuzzy on details of how the abduction took place and all, but swears he was there.

Would you convert to Alienity? If not why?

Excellent point. You've said exactly what I've been saying. Our background beliefs determine how we interpret history and other evidence. The truthfulness of a religious or philosophical claim can not be settled solely through historical argumentation. It's a confusion of categories to do so.

If a person believes in aliens, then they're more likely to believe the person in your hypothesis. It doesn't necessarily mean they WILL convert to alienity, but the odds are greater than for a person who does not believe in the existence of aliens. Such is also the case with Christianity. Why would Christians try to get skeptics to believe in Christianity when the skeptics don't even believe in the existence of god(s)? It seems to be putting the proverbial cart before the horse. I digress...

Is it safe for me to assume that you would answer the same as Toto and madmax? Namely, that you would not convert to Christianity after such an event.

06-20-2002, 12:38 PM	#1
Polycarp Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: USA Posts: 228	Is Christianity all about the evidence? All of this debate over studying documents written almost 2000 years ago in order to determine which events described in the documents are actually historical seems to often be a waste of time around here. Not always, but often, this is the case in this forum. I�d like to propose a hypothetical scenario to test my hypothesis. Let us say the following were to happen� You have just been transported in time to the year 35 C.E. and you find yourself somewhere in Palestine. This is easily verified by you after a rather short period of investigation. You still possess all of the knowledge you had when you left the 21st century, but you�ve somehow been transported back in time. You hear someone speaking to a small crowd of people in the area (they�re speaking Greek, but you�ve somehow developed fluency in this language). You soon discover that the person speaking to the crowd is known as the apostle Paul. He talks about a man named Jesus who was crucified, but appeared to his followers two days later and eventually appeared to Paul himself. After his brief speech, you approach him to question him on everything related to this Jesus. He�s a bit ornery, so he tells you to go see someone named Peter (some call him �Cephas�) because Peter was someone who actually knew this Jesus. You eventually find Peter and interrogate him on what you know about the gospel stories and Jesus. He affirms the main points of the gospels: Jesus healed people, told a lot of parables, angered religious authorities, was eventually crucified and buried in a tomb, and later appeared to Peter and some of the other followers. You question him on the details, some of them are fuzzy in Peter�s memory, but he insists the main events actually happened. Just then you are transported back to the 21st century into the life as you had known it. Will any of your beliefs about Christianity change? What if you had spent several months living in the year 35 C.E. while interacting with Christians � would you become a Christian after being transported back to the 21st century? My whole point in giving this hypothetical scenario is that I don�t think many (any?) skeptics would convert to Christianity even if they�d lived much, much closer to the time of Jesus. What does everyone else think?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-20-2002, 01:01 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	It seems that you are assuming that anyone transported back to 35 CE would find history the way you think it happened. What if you were transported back to 29 CE and could find no trace of Jesus? Would you still be a Christian? As for your hypothetical, simply knowing that Paul existed, and Peter existed and remembered the events of Jesus' life, and thought he saw Jesus after he died, is hardly enough to make one a Christian. Lots of secular unbelievers, deists, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, etc., believe that Jesus was a real person and a teacher with a following, but are not Christians because they do not accept Jesus' divinity, and have alternative explanations for any supposed miracles. They believe that Jesus' message was misunderstood or misinterpreted. Do you think that the little bit of history you have given us would be enough to base your religious faith on?

06-20-2002, 01:09 PM	#4
madmax2976 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: OK Posts: 1,806	If your asking whether I, as I am now, would be convinced to be a Christian after this experience, the answer is emphatically "No". If one of my best friends, that I had trusted for years, came to me and claimed to have seen someone perform a miracle or claimed to have seen someone alive after they had died, I would not believe them. It takes more than the unsupported assertions of even friends for me to believe fanatastic claims. It certainly would take more than the unsupported assertions of complete strangers. Anything else would be sheer gullibility to me.

06-20-2002, 01:41 PM	#7
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	You're saying that you base your religion on mere historical events that cannot be proven to have happened? Is that all?

06-20-2002, 02:01 PM	#8
Kosh Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Orions Belt Posts: 3,911	How about this Polycarp: You encounter someone who tells you that 3 years ago they were abducted by space aliens. The aliens told him humans should commit their life to following the code of behavior set forth by the aliens, and that the aliens have given to this person. He's a little fuzzy on details of how the abduction took place and all, but swears he was there. Would you convert to Alienity? If not why?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.