• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does belief in the Flood indicate intellectual incapacity?

outhouse

Atheistically
I have already shown proof of a flood.


.

YOU have not shown a shred of evidence for a global flood. Let alone proof of anything.


What happened to the people that created the pyramids

Pick up a history book please. One not written by biased apolgetically inclined people.

The bible is not a history book nor a science book.

could Atlantis be more then a myth?

As written no.

Could it have been an actual place? possible. But it would just be another ancient city typical of that time period.

If you ever studied you should look up the word rhetoric. Not just the word but how ancient authors used it in many ways to pursuade readers to keep flipping pages.

Our DNA proves we are all related.

Correct

But it does not prove we all came from a mythical family somehwere in Mesopotamia.

It factually shows just the opposite.


What about the pyramids?

There was factually no break in any aspect of Egyptian history from its beginnings.

The time the bible states, there was no break at all.



I have been studying the flood for one day


Its fun.

You will love history.

I have a passion for the bible so I take college clases when I can.

The first five books of the bible evolved over hundreds and hundreds of years. They were not written in one sitting and published. They were collections and compilations of many different traditions. What you will find true though, is that nothing described in the bible prior to 1000 BC is accurate less dead luck. Most of he first five books were literary products that relfect 5th,6th,and 7th century politics and theology. Much of the mythology was influenced from Mesopotamian mythology when the Israelites were exiled there. Its why israelites even tell you they used their version coming out of Mesopotamia where flood mythology had been used in theology for thousands of years, again based on a river flood.
 

Harold

Member
If this was meant to be a representation of abiogenesis, then you should probably learn what a straw-man is before continuing.

The Primordial Soup Theory suggest that life began in a pond or ocean as a result of the combination of chemicals from the atmosphere and some form of energy to make amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, which would then evolve into all the species.

The Primordial Soup Theory states that Life began in a warm pond/ocean from a combination of chemicals that forms amino acids, which then make proteins. This is suppose to happen at least 3.8 billion to 3.55 billion years ago.

I was being quite serious about it but thanks for the awesome information on the straw-man.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
The Primordial Soup Theory suggest that life began in a pond or ocean as a result of the combination of chemicals from the atmosphere and some form of energy to make amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, which would then evolve into all the species.

The Primordial Soup Theory states that Life began in a warm pond/ocean from a combination of chemicals that forms amino acids, which then make proteins. This is suppose to happen at least 3.8 billion to 3.55 billion years ago.

I was being quite serious about it but thanks for the awesome information on the straw-man.


I like that theory better then, mythology of ancient men.


The mythology as written is already wrong about every aspect of our origins, so why give credit to mythology just because science has a few unanswered questions regarding chemistry that had 400,000 ish year to cook?
 

Harold

Member
YOU have not shown a shred of evidence for a global flood. Let alone proof of anything.




Pick up a history book please. One not written by biased apolgetically inclined people.

Our history books are also written by biased people.

It factually shows just the opposite.

How?

The first five books of the bible evolved over hundreds and hundreds of years. They were not written in one sitting and published. They were collections and compilations of many different traditions. What you will find true though, is that nothing described in the bible prior to 1000 BC is accurate less dead luck. Most of he first five books were literary products that relfect 5th,6th,and 7th century politics and theology. Much of the mythology was influenced from Mesopotamian mythology when the Israelites were exiled there. Its why israelites even tell you they used their version coming out of Mesopotamia where flood mythology had been used in theology for thousands of years, again based on a river flood.

So then you do no believe Jesus existed?

Because there is a lot of evidence outside the Bible that proves he did.
 
Last edited:

Looncall

Well-Known Member
Your post are so enlightening and educational but despite your inability to see it I was asking an honest question.

What does the OP believe happens when we die?

OK, happy to oblige, though I did not that have question in mind.

My personal view is that the idea of a soul came from a category error that is understandable among people living in ignorance. It is like asking where the fire goes when the fuel runs out.

Given the notion of a soul, it is natural to entertain the idea of it persisting after death. It seems to me that that idea was taken up by clerics for their own benefit: "Do what I say or you will burn in hell.", for example.

Given the above, I do not think that anyone survives death.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Our history books are also written by biased people.

.

Sadly it is true.

And only by knowing the different opinions can one even begin to know the middle ground.


What you produced was no where near the middle of anything.



Take American Indians for example. They have them traced back to cultures that existed 55,000 years in parts of South America

The Clovis culture some 13000 years ago

They share little DNA from Israelites.


What were these people wiped out from a global flood and descendants of noah magically turn into Indians in the last few thousand years.

Aborigines in Au would also apply.


YOU cannot simply hand wave away all of the factual evidence that goes against a global flood.


So then you do no believe Jesus existed

I believe he did exist



Because there is a lot of evidence outside the Bible that proves he did


Actually your very wrong there.

There is very little that is actually traceable to a traveling Galilean teacher.

Almost none out of the bible that helps build historicity.

You have Josephus, and that is about it. He is also highly contested because the church has edited much of his work. Its 100% accepted that the church has done this. But we don't think they did all of what he wrote about Jesus.

There are 2 well known scholars that claim he is mythical. They build weak cases though and still have a following.

There is quite a few scholars that are very credible that take a middle of the road so to speak stance on his historicity due to the limited credible information we actually have.

I personally debate with these people, many are authors and a few well known scholars.
 

Harold

Member
My personal view is that the idea of a soul came from a category error that is understandable among people living in ignorance.

We have videos of something leaving the body when people die so how can it be ignorant to want a better understanding?

What is more ignorant?

To blindly accept there is no soul or to blindly accept that there is a soul?

It is my belief that something got lost along the way in our history.


Along the way we lost the true power of God. It is my opinion that a christian that preaches the power of God on Sunday makes his God look weak when he goes to the Dr. on Monday.


While on the one hand the atheist criticizes the Christians for clinging to their bible more than to their God, the atheist seem to cling to a blind obedience of hatred towards the Christian that equally mystifies me.


It seems that both dance a dance without meaning so I can only sit back and wonder and watch as both attack me for questioning their beliefs. One has to wonder if they are dancing with the same master.

On the one hand we have the christian.

They belief in God and they believe that His son came and died on the cross for our sins. I also believe this put when someone tells me that there is power in believing and no power comes from my believing or theirs...one has to look at the history to find the missing piece.

But in doing so the Christians accuse me of being a child of Satan, tell me I have denied the power of the Holy Spirit and nothing I do will prevent me from going to hell now. Not realizing that they didn't have the power to start with.

On the other hand the atheist is not much better.


Asking someone about the soul or what they believe happens after death causes them to make personal attacks and call me ignorant for even asking. While they poke holes in their own faith as they attack me.

For example I was told that the flood was impossible because there would not be that much diversity in civilizations after the flood. But this is untrue because people had already been exposed to an outside world that had differing believes.


When the printing press was invented nothing up until that point changed the way people think as much as the printing press had. The reason being is that it allowed us to get a new perspective on what we believed to be true.

For example if I was growing up on a farm I would have gotten all my understandings and beliefs from my family. My way of life would have been the only way I knew. I would have voted and thought like I had been told.

However if one day we started getting the news paper another way of thinking would have been introduced to me. I agree with what the atheist are saying. Basically that unless someone introduces us to a new way of thinking we will most likely not come up with it on our own.

Yet our own history tells a strange an bizarre story.


Around about 3,200 BC we can read, write, and have kings that wear crowns. We have a priest and beliefs that some still follow to this day. Someone had to have been introduced a new way of thinking for this to have happened yet while using it to argue their case on the one hand they totally ignore it on the other.


Or how about those pyramids?


  • If you take the perimeter of the pyramid and divide it by two times the height, you get a number that is exactly equivalent to the number pi (3.14159...) up to the fifteenth digit. The chances of this happening on accident would have to be pretty small. While it wasn't calculated accurately to the fourth digit until the 6th century, the pyramids calculate it to the fifteenth.
  • What about the fact that even though the sides of the base of the pyramid are some 757 feet long, it still forms an almost perfect square? Every angle in the base is exactly 90 degrees. In fact, the sides have a difference in length of something like two centimeters, which is an incredibly small amount.
  • What about the fact that although the Egyptians kept very careful records about everything they ever did; every king they had, every war they fought, and every structure they built, there were no records of them ever having built the pyramids
  • What about the fact that these guys were able to drag and place 4000 pound rocks in an estimated 22 years. That pretty much translates to cutting and setting a 4000 pound block every nine minutes. And that is impossible with today's technologies. Engineers can't do it. They used so much stone, that if you took all of the stone they used and cut it into 1 foot square blocks, it would extend 2/3 of the way around the earth.
  • The height of the pyramid (481 feet) is almost exactly 1/1,000,000,000 of the distance from the earth to the sun (480.6 billion feet).
  • The Pyramid of Menkaure, the Pyramid of Khafre and the Great Pyramid of Khufu are precisely aligned with the Constellation of Orion
  • The interior temperature is constant and equals the average temperature of the earth, 20 Degrees Celsius (68 Degrees Fahrenheit).
  • The outer mantle was composed of 144,000 casing stones, all of them highly polished and flat to an accuracy of 1/100th of an inch, about 100 inches thick and weighing approx. 15 tons each.
  • The cornerstone foundations of the pyramid have ball and socket construction capable of dealing with heat expansion and earthquakes.
  • The mortar used is of an unknown origin (Yes, no explanation given). It has been analyzed and its chemical composition is known but it can’t be reproduced. It is stronger than the stone and still holding up today.
I could keep going but the atheist will only find one thing I am wrong about, ignore the others and claim they have disproved everything...so sadly what is the use.

I am not saying man didn't create them but I am saying it is strange that a group of hunter gathers took of work for 22 years and became the best masons in history.

All with no outside influence.


While blindly accepting the outside evidence and only accepting what the historians tell them they accept man all of a sudden woke up and said I am going to create a pyramid today.


Yet when it comes to Jesus they ignore the historians and chose to believe he never existed.
 

Harold

Member
Were you also serious when you said it had morals? Or implying that it had to have morals in order for us to have morals?

Abraham was in Egypt. Egypt is where it all started. The gods they are talking about are the same gods Christians are talking about.

Abraham left Egypt after discovering the one true God which I believe (at this moment, it could change in another moment) Atum was that God.

Atum was self created.

However the funny part of it is the Christians would get upset if you said God was in that bowl of soup.
But this is exactly what the Egyptian's believed. They believed that Atom was a self-created deity. He emerged from the darkness and endless watery abyss that existed before creation.

He was a product of the energy and matter contained in the chaos, he created his children—the first deities, out of loneliness.



So in reality if the atheist and Christians were a little more open minded they might actually find out the truth. But since both sides have already made up their minds about what is happening it is doubtful that would ever happen.

And all I am doing is stumbling around in the dark looking for a light switch but hoping by the grace of God he will see my ignorance and give me a helping hand.
 

Harold

Member
Actually your very wrong there.

Myth vs. Reality

What distinguishes myth from reality? How do we know, for example, that Alexander the Great really existed?

Historians believe Alexander existed because of three primary reasons:

•written documentation from early historians
•historical impact
•other historical and archaeological evidence

The history of Alexander the Great and his military conquests is drawn from five ancient sources, none of whom were eyewitnesses. Although written 400 years after Alexanders death.

They based their information on prior accounts. Of these accounts not one survives and each presents a different "Alexander". Despite this historians are convinced that Alexander was a real man.

Now to Jesus.

We have the four gospels

As well as


  • Apocalypse of Peter
  • The Epistle of Barnabas
  • Infancy Gospel of James
  • Shepherd of Hermas
  • 1 Clement
  • Gospel of Thomas
  • Lost Epistle to the Corinthians
  • Third Letter to the Corinthians
  • The Didache

But to truly discover the truth we will use His enemies.

His Jewish opponents had the most to gain by denying Jesus' existence. But the evidence points in the opposite direction. "Several Jewish writings also tell of His flesh-and-blood existence.

Both Gemaras of the Jewish Talmud refer to Jesus. Although these consist of only a few brief, bitter passages intended to discount Jesus' deity, these very early Jewish writings don't begin to hint that he was not a historical person.

Flavius Josephus was a noted Jewish historian who began writing under Roman authority in a.d. 67. Josephus, who was born just a few years after Jesus died, would have been keenly aware of Jesus' reputation among both Romans and Jews. In his famous Antiquities of the Jews (a.d. 93), Josephus wrote of Jesus as a real person.

At that time lived Jesus, a holy man, if man he may be called, for he performed wonderful works, and taught men, and joyfully received the truth. And he was followed by many Jews and many Greeks. He was the Messiah.
What about secular historians—those who lived in ancient times but weren't religiously motivated? There is current confirmation of at least 19 early secular writers who made references to Jesus as a real person.

One of antiquity's greatest historians, Cornelius Tacitus, affirmed that Jesus had suffered under Pilate. Tacitus was born around 25 years after Jesus died, and he had seen the spread of Christianity begin to impact Rome.

The Roman historian wrote negatively of Christ and Christians, identifying them in a.d. 115 as
"a race of men detested for their evil practices, and commonly called Chrestiani. The name was derived from Chrestus, who, in the reign of Tiberius, suffered under Pontius Pilate, Procurator of Judea.
Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . .

What about the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.

And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned" that Josephus actually penned this passage.

As interesting as this brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the "Testimonium Flavianum," the relevant portion declares:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.

Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud

There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200. The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

Evidence from Lucian

Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:

The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.

The following facts about Jesus were written by early non-Christian sources:
•Jesus was from Nazareth.
•Jesus lived a wise and virtuous life.
•Jesus was crucified in Palestine under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius Caesar at Passover time, being considered the Jewish king.
•Jesus was believed by his disciples to have died and risen from the dead three days later.
•Jesus' enemies acknowledged that he performed unusual feats they called "sorcery."
•Jesus' small band of disciples multiplied rapidly, spreading as far as Rome.
•Jesus' disciples denied polytheism, lived moral lives, and worshiped Christ as God.

Theologian Norman Geisler remarked:

All of these independent accounts, religious and secular, speak of a real man who matches up well with the Jesus in the Gospels.

Encyclopedia Britannica cites these various secular accounts of Jesus' life as convincing proof of his existence. It states:

"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus.

Historical Impact

An important distinction between a myth and a real person is how the figure impacts history. For example, books have been written and movies produced about King Arthur of Camelot and his Knights of the Roundtable. These characters have become so notorious that many believe they were real people. But historians who have searched for clues to their existence have been unable to discover any impact they have had on laws, ethics, or religion. This lack of historical impact indicates King Arthur and his Knights of the Roundtable are simply mythical.

The historian Thomas Carlyle said, "No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men." As Carlyle notes, it is real people, not myths, who impact history.

What of Jesus Christ and his impact on our world?

Ancient Rome lies in ruins. Caesar's mighty legions and the Roman imperial power have faded into oblivion. Yet Jesus is remembered today? What is his enduring influence?

•More books have been written about Jesus than about any other person in history.
•Nations have used his words as the bedrock of their governments.
•His Sermon on the Mount established a new paradigm in ethics and morals.
•Schools, hospitals, and humanitarian works have been founded in his name.
•The elevated role of women in Western culture traces its roots back to Jesus.
•Slavery was abolished in Britain and America due to Jesus' teaching that each human life is valuable.
•Former drug and alcohol dependents, prostitutes, and others seeking purpose in life claim him as the explanation for their changed lives.
•Two billion people call themselves Christians.

Remarkably, Jesus made all of this impact as a result of just a three-year period of public ministry. When world historian H. G. Wells was asked who has left the greatest legacy on history, he replied, "By this test Jesus stands first.

One of the keys here for Durant and other scholars is the time factor. Myths and legends usually take hundreds of years to evolve. News of Christianity, on the other hand, spread too quickly to be attributed to a myth or legend. Had Jesus not existed, those who opposed Christianity would certainly have labeled him a myth from the outset. But they didn't.

Few if any serious historians would agree with you that Jesus didn't exist.
 

Looncall

Well-Known Member
Myth vs. Reality

What distinguishes myth from reality? How do we know, for example, that Alexander the Great really existed?

Historians believe Alexander existed because of three primary reasons:

•written documentation from early historians
•historical impact
•other historical and archaeological evidence

The history of Alexander the Great and his military conquests is drawn from five ancient sources, none of whom were eyewitnesses. Although written 400 years after Alexanders death.

They based their information on prior accounts. Of these accounts not one survives and each presents a different "Alexander". Despite this historians are convinced that Alexander was a real man.

Now to Jesus.

We have the four gospels

As well as


  • Apocalypse of Peter
  • The Epistle of Barnabas
  • Infancy Gospel of James
  • Shepherd of Hermas
  • 1 Clement
  • Gospel of Thomas
  • Lost Epistle to the Corinthians
  • Third Letter to the Corinthians
  • The Didache

But to truly discover the truth we will use His enemies.

His Jewish opponents had the most to gain by denying Jesus' existence. But the evidence points in the opposite direction. "Several Jewish writings also tell of His flesh-and-blood existence.

Both Gemaras of the Jewish Talmud refer to Jesus. Although these consist of only a few brief, bitter passages intended to discount Jesus' deity, these very early Jewish writings don't begin to hint that he was not a historical person.

Flavius Josephus was a noted Jewish historian who began writing under Roman authority in a.d. 67. Josephus, who was born just a few years after Jesus died, would have been keenly aware of Jesus' reputation among both Romans and Jews. In his famous Antiquities of the Jews (a.d. 93), Josephus wrote of Jesus as a real person.

What about secular historians—those who lived in ancient times but weren't religiously motivated? There is current confirmation of at least 19 early secular writers who made references to Jesus as a real person.

One of antiquity's greatest historians, Cornelius Tacitus, affirmed that Jesus had suffered under Pilate. Tacitus was born around 25 years after Jesus died, and he had seen the spread of Christianity begin to impact Rome.

The Roman historian wrote negatively of Christ and Christians, identifying them in a.d. 115 as Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . .

What about the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.

And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned" that Josephus actually penned this passage.

As interesting as this brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the "Testimonium Flavianum," the relevant portion declares:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.

Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud

There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200. The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

Evidence from Lucian

Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:

The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.

The following facts about Jesus were written by early non-Christian sources:
•Jesus was from Nazareth.
•Jesus lived a wise and virtuous life.
•Jesus was crucified in Palestine under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius Caesar at Passover time, being considered the Jewish king.
•Jesus was believed by his disciples to have died and risen from the dead three days later.
•Jesus' enemies acknowledged that he performed unusual feats they called "sorcery."
•Jesus' small band of disciples multiplied rapidly, spreading as far as Rome.
•Jesus' disciples denied polytheism, lived moral lives, and worshiped Christ as God.

Theologian Norman Geisler remarked:

All of these independent accounts, religious and secular, speak of a real man who matches up well with the Jesus in the Gospels.

Encyclopedia Britannica cites these various secular accounts of Jesus' life as convincing proof of his existence. It states:

"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus.

Historical Impact

An important distinction between a myth and a real person is how the figure impacts history. For example, books have been written and movies produced about King Arthur of Camelot and his Knights of the Roundtable. These characters have become so notorious that many believe they were real people. But historians who have searched for clues to their existence have been unable to discover any impact they have had on laws, ethics, or religion. This lack of historical impact indicates King Arthur and his Knights of the Roundtable are simply mythical.

The historian Thomas Carlyle said, "No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men." As Carlyle notes, it is real people, not myths, who impact history.

What of Jesus Christ and his impact on our world?

Ancient Rome lies in ruins. Caesar's mighty legions and the Roman imperial power have faded into oblivion. Yet Jesus is remembered today? What is his enduring influence?

•More books have been written about Jesus than about any other person in history.
•Nations have used his words as the bedrock of their governments.
•His Sermon on the Mount established a new paradigm in ethics and morals.
•Schools, hospitals, and humanitarian works have been founded in his name.
•The elevated role of women in Western culture traces its roots back to Jesus.
•Slavery was abolished in Britain and America due to Jesus' teaching that each human life is valuable.
•Former drug and alcohol dependents, prostitutes, and others seeking purpose in life claim him as the explanation for their changed lives.
•Two billion people call themselves Christians.

Remarkably, Jesus made all of this impact as a result of just a three-year period of public ministry. When world historian H. G. Wells was asked who has left the greatest legacy on history, he replied, "By this test Jesus stands first.

One of the keys here for Durant and other scholars is the time factor. Myths and legends usually take hundreds of years to evolve. News of Christianity, on the other hand, spread too quickly to be attributed to a myth or legend. Had Jesus not existed, those who opposed Christianity would certainly have labeled him a myth from the outset. But they didn't.

Few if any serious historians would agree with you that Jesus didn't exist.

You are neglecting the power of propaganda. First from the Roman government to buttress their power, then from organized clergy to sustain theirs. In addition there has been a robust self-sustaining meme, something like a chain letter, to keep it all going.

And none of this needs its subject matter to be true to keep it all rolling along.

In fact it has all the earmarks of a scam.
 

Harold

Member
You are neglecting the power of propaganda. First from the Roman government to buttress their power, then from organized clergy to sustain theirs. In addition there has been a robust self-sustaining meme, something like a chain letter, to keep it all going.

And none of this needs its subject matter to be true to keep it all rolling along.

In fact it has all the earmarks of a scam.

This is your opinion and lacks any evidence. In a debate people normally do not post opinion's as evidence.
 

outhouse

Atheistically
Myth vs. Reality

What distinguishes myth from reality? How do we know, for example, that Alexander the Great really existed?

Historians believe Alexander existed because of three primary reasons:

•written documentation from early historians
•historical impact
•other historical and archaeological evidence

The history of Alexander the Great and his military conquests is drawn from five ancient sources, none of whom were eyewitnesses. Although written 400 years after Alexanders death.

They based their information on prior accounts. Of these accounts not one survives and each presents a different "Alexander". Despite this historians are convinced that Alexander was a real man.

Now to Jesus.

We have the four gospels

As well as


  • Apocalypse of Peter
  • The Epistle of Barnabas
  • Infancy Gospel of James
  • Shepherd of Hermas
  • 1 Clement
  • Gospel of Thomas
  • Lost Epistle to the Corinthians
  • Third Letter to the Corinthians
  • The Didache
But to truly discover the truth we will use His enemies.

His Jewish opponents had the most to gain by denying Jesus' existence. But the evidence points in the opposite direction. "Several Jewish writings also tell of His flesh-and-blood existence.

Both Gemaras of the Jewish Talmud refer to Jesus. Although these consist of only a few brief, bitter passages intended to discount Jesus' deity, these very early Jewish writings don't begin to hint that he was not a historical person.

Flavius Josephus was a noted Jewish historian who began writing under Roman authority in a.d. 67. Josephus, who was born just a few years after Jesus died, would have been keenly aware of Jesus' reputation among both Romans and Jews. In his famous Antiquities of the Jews (a.d. 93), Josephus wrote of Jesus as a real person.

What about secular historians—those who lived in ancient times but weren't religiously motivated? There is current confirmation of at least 19 early secular writers who made references to Jesus as a real person.

One of antiquity's greatest historians, Cornelius Tacitus, affirmed that Jesus had suffered under Pilate. Tacitus was born around 25 years after Jesus died, and he had seen the spread of Christianity begin to impact Rome.

The Roman historian wrote negatively of Christ and Christians, identifying them in a.d. 115 as Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . .

What about the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.

And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned" that Josephus actually penned this passage.

As interesting as this brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the "Testimonium Flavianum," the relevant portion declares:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.

Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud

There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200. The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

Evidence from Lucian

Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:

The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.

The following facts about Jesus were written by early non-Christian sources:
•Jesus was from Nazareth.
•Jesus lived a wise and virtuous life.
•Jesus was crucified in Palestine under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius Caesar at Passover time, being considered the Jewish king.
•Jesus was believed by his disciples to have died and risen from the dead three days later.
•Jesus' enemies acknowledged that he performed unusual feats they called "sorcery."
•Jesus' small band of disciples multiplied rapidly, spreading as far as Rome.
•Jesus' disciples denied polytheism, lived moral lives, and worshiped Christ as God.

Theologian Norman Geisler remarked:

All of these independent accounts, religious and secular, speak of a real man who matches up well with the Jesus in the Gospels.

Encyclopedia Britannica cites these various secular accounts of Jesus' life as convincing proof of his existence. It states:

"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus.

Historical Impact

An important distinction between a myth and a real person is how the figure impacts history. For example, books have been written and movies produced about King Arthur of Camelot and his Knights of the Roundtable. These characters have become so notorious that many believe they were real people. But historians who have searched for clues to their existence have been unable to discover any impact they have had on laws, ethics, or religion. This lack of historical impact indicates King Arthur and his Knights of the Roundtable are simply mythical.

The historian Thomas Carlyle said, "No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men." As Carlyle notes, it is real people, not myths, who impact history.

What of Jesus Christ and his impact on our world?

Ancient Rome lies in ruins. Caesar's mighty legions and the Roman imperial power have faded into oblivion. Yet Jesus is remembered today? What is his enduring influence?

•More books have been written about Jesus than about any other person in history.
•Nations have used his words as the bedrock of their governments.
•His Sermon on the Mount established a new paradigm in ethics and morals.
•Schools, hospitals, and humanitarian works have been founded in his name.
•The elevated role of women in Western culture traces its roots back to Jesus.
•Slavery was abolished in Britain and America due to Jesus' teaching that each human life is valuable.
•Former drug and alcohol dependents, prostitutes, and others seeking purpose in life claim him as the explanation for their changed lives.
•Two billion people call themselves Christians.

Remarkably, Jesus made all of this impact as a result of just a three-year period of public ministry. When world historian H. G. Wells was asked who has left the greatest legacy on history, he replied, "By this test Jesus stands first.

One of the keys here for Durant and other scholars is the time factor. Myths and legends usually take hundreds of years to evolve. News of Christianity, on the other hand, spread too quickly to be attributed to a myth or legend. Had Jesus not existed, those who opposed Christianity would certainly have labeled him a myth from the outset. But they didn't.

Few if any serious historians would agree with you that Jesus didn't exist.

This is something I have a lot of time invested in.

Your are quoting apologist who have no credibility by modern standrads of scholarships.


I tried to give you a spectrum of ranges and what the middle of the road is.

One side is apologist like yours, the other claims he was all myth.


I prefer a middle road approach
 

Harold

Member
This is something I have a lot of time invested in.

Your are quoting apologist who have no credibility by modern standrads of scholarships.


I tried to give you a spectrum of ranges and what the middle of the road is.

One side is apologist like yours, the other claims he was all myth.


I prefer a middle road approach

I thought you were a big time debater, name calling and opinions are not what makes a debate. Everything I used was outside of the bible by people who did not like him.
 
Last edited:

outhouse

Atheistically
I thought you were a big time debater, name calling and opinions are not what makes a debate. Everything I used was outside of the bible by people who did not like him.

Nope.

You supplied an apologetic view of the evidence. Which is not entirely accurate.


I have debated on every person, and every angle and every source you supplied, for all the evidence over the last 3 years. It is not as clear cut as you make it sound.

Many of the people you listed used the scripture to make their cases.

Too date, there is not one piece of eye witness testimony anywhere.


There is only "first" Paul, who was a Roman citizen who was far removed from Galilean life. And would have been Jesus enemy by my opinion.

Next is Marks gospel written by a unknown author writing to Romans who would have been Jesus mortal enemy as a Galilean. This was written some 40 years after his death. He or they, we dont know, was also far removed from Galilean life.


WE have no one who knew him writing a thing about him.

What we do have is 400000 ish people in attendance at Passover who could have witnessed his death or martyrdom that generated oral tradition that grew in Hellenistic circles. He failed in Judaism with his death, and was not viewed as a messiah in Judaism.
 

Harold

Member
Nope.

You supplied an apologetic view of the evidence. Which is not entirely accurate.

Which parts are not accurate and where is your proof. I am supplying an historical view as well as that of an encyclopedia and several eye witness accounts.

I have more evidence to support Jesus then you have to support Alexander the great.

Do you believe in Alexander the great?

Do you understand that without proof it is only your opinion?


I have debated on every person, and every angle and every source you supplied, for all the evidence over the last 3 years. It is not as clear cut as you make it sound.

Then post the evidence you have been posting for the last 3 years otherwise it is only your opinion and you should stated as such.

Many of the people you listed used the scripture to make their cases.

No...I used people that were eye witness. I did not use the scriptures at all.

Too date, there is not one piece of eye witness testimony anywhere.

I will repost the information again but you do realize that you would have to get rid of a chunk of our history if each person has to have a report of an eye witness to prove they existed.

There is only "first" Paul, who was a Roman citizen who was far removed from Galilean life. And would have been Jesus enemy by my opinion.

Paul would not be an eye witness nor did I use him. But he never meet Jesus.

Next is Marks gospel written by a unknown author writing to Romans who would have been Jesus mortal enemy as a Galilean. This was written some 40 years after his death. He or they, we dont know, was also far removed from Galilean life.

There are a lot more then Mark. James is His brother but I didn't use any of them. Although by all rights they were eye witnesses.


WE have no one who knew him writing a thing about him.

:cover: Now we need a witness that witnesses the witness writing down the information.

:facepalm:

Here it is again and I will remove the gospels and even all the content that was collected by the Catholic Church that proved he existed.

I will only use what his enemies said about Him. And if you can post evidence but not opinions or name calling it would be much appreciated. I understood by your own word that you are a skilled debater and you have been debating this topic for three years.

You should have information from past debates ready to go. But please post opinions as opinions.

And you do realize that a lot of people died for what you call a myth?

But to truly discover the truth we will use His enemies.

His Jewish opponents had the most to gain by denying Jesus' existence. But the evidence points in the opposite direction. "Several Jewish writings also tell of His flesh-and-blood existence.

Both Gemaras of the Jewish Talmud refer to Jesus. Although these consist of only a few brief, bitter passages intended to discount Jesus' deity, these very early Jewish writings don't begin to hint that he was not a historical person.

Flavius Josephus was a noted Jewish historian who began writing under Roman authority in a.d. 67. Josephus, who was born just a few years after Jesus died, would have been keenly aware of Jesus' reputation among both Romans and Jews. In his famous Antiquities of the Jews (a.d. 93), Josephus wrote of Jesus as a real person.

What about secular historians—those who lived in ancient times but weren't religiously motivated? There is current confirmation of at least 19 early secular writers who made references to Jesus as a real person.

One of antiquity's greatest historians, Cornelius Tacitus, affirmed that Jesus had suffered under Pilate. Tacitus was born around 25 years after Jesus died, and he had seen the spread of Christianity begin to impact Rome.

The Roman historian wrote negatively of Christ and Christians, identifying them in a.d. 115 as Emperor Nero blamed the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:

Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . .

What about the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians. Pliny says that he needed to consult the emperor about this issue because a great multitude of every age, class, and sex stood accused of Christianity.

At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:

They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.

Josephus, a first century Jewish historian. On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.

And Edwin Yamauchi informs us that "few scholars have questioned" that Josephus actually penned this passage.

As interesting as this brief reference is, there is an earlier one, which is truly astonishing. Called the "Testimonium Flavianum," the relevant portion declares:

About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.

Evidence from the Babylonian Talmud

There are only a few clear references to Jesus in the Babylonian Talmud, a collection of Jewish rabbinical writings compiled between approximately A.D. 70-500. Given this time frame, it is naturally supposed that earlier references to Jesus are more likely to be historically reliable than later ones. In the case of the Talmud, the earliest period of compilation occurred between A.D. 70-200. The most significant reference to Jesus from this period states:

On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald . . . cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy."

Evidence from Lucian

Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:

The Christians . . . worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.

The following facts about Jesus were written by early non-Christian sources:
•Jesus was from Nazareth.
•Jesus lived a wise and virtuous life.
•Jesus was crucified in Palestine under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius Caesar at Passover time, being considered the Jewish king.
•Jesus was believed by his disciples to have died and risen from the dead three days later.
•Jesus' enemies acknowledged that he performed unusual feats they called "sorcery."
•Jesus' small band of disciples multiplied rapidly, spreading as far as Rome.
•Jesus' disciples denied polytheism, lived moral lives, and worshiped Christ as God.

Theologian Norman Geisler remarked:

All of these independent accounts, religious and secular, speak of a real man who matches up well with the Jesus in the Gospels.

Encyclopedia Britannica cites these various secular accounts of Jesus' life as convincing proof of his existence. It states:

"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus.
 

Harold

Member
I was talking earlier about DNA and here is some information on DNA and the flood.

This is the latest DNA SCIENCE and it supports NOAH'S FLOOD

Except for identical twins every single person, all 7 billion of us are uniquely different in DNA makeup.

The scientific observable variations can be specifically tracked across various global populations. The most recent research provides information into when these DNA differences had to have entered the human race.

A new study reported in the journal Science has advanced our knowledge of rare DNA variations associated with gene regions in the human genome.

By applying a demographics based model to the data researchers discovered that the human genome began to rapidly diversify about five thousand years ago. This data coincides closely with biblical models of a rapid diversification of humans after the global flood reported in Genesis.

The vast majority of DNA base sequences between any two humans are nearly identical, so the few observable differences are traceable among people groups.

The human genome project has continued to analyze thousands of humans throughout the world for various differences in their DNA sequences. The recent study in the journal Science analyze the DNA sequences of 15,585 protein-coding gene regions in the human genome.

For 1,351 European Americans and 1,088 African Americans. The results showed a very recent massive burst of human genetic diversification.

The authors wrote that the maximum-likelihood of time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago.

Can you explain why after so called millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans how human genome diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?

According to the science articles data it represents the maximum time the genome explosion could have occurred but the actual DNA diversification could have occurred even sooner.

The bible indicates that a global flood occurred about 4,500 years ago and this lines up with what science is showing.

It actually lines up almost perfectly with the researchers timescale. It would appear that the very latest scientific evidence using the very latest DNA and genomic research methods matches up squarely with the Bible account of the flood.

This is not my opinion but rather scientific research on DNA and here is a link to the article.

Genetics Research Confirms Biblical Timeline
 

Parsimony

Well-Known Member
Um, how exactly would a global flood cause humans to diversify more rapidly than in a non-flood scenario? If anything, you'd expect there to be less genetic variation due to the massive genetic bottleneck caused by such a flood.
 
Top