Dragon Ball Z Uncensored

Jason · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:42 pm)

Socrates wasn't magic.

Stupid Fucking Faggot · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:45 pm)

You can believe that Jesus existed without believing that he had magic powers, and became a zombie.

I mean, you don't have to doubt him COMPLETELY just because there were some tall tales about him!

That's the same as if a thousand years from now, everyone doubted John Edward existed, because of the thing about him talking to dead people. Rather than just doubt the power, doubt the whole person too? How does that make sense?

Jason · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:46 pm)

A thousand years from now there will still be video footage of John Edwards.

Stupid Fucking Faggot · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:46 pm)

Anyway, I can't believe we all ate into this troll.

Captain PUNisher · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:46 pm)

Jesus had a lot more to offer than his magic.

This is also a big problem I have with Christains.
_________________
Said the Captain PUNisher.

Stupid Fucking Faggot · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:49 pm)

I think I might actually be part alien.

My father was abducted a lot in the 70s, according to him.

So who knows.

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 4:59 pm)

If Jesus existed today he'd just be considered a hippy and be largely ignored.

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 5:06 pm)

The gospels weren't written contemporaneously with Jesus. So no, that's not like Plato writing about Socrates.

Plato was alive while Socrates was alive.

If the Gospel of Matthew, widely considered the earliest of the canonical gospels, was written around 70 AD like it is widely surmised, then that's well after Jesus' death (speculated to have died ~ 29AD).

If I wrote about WW2, that would be not contemporaneous. Similarly, the gospels are not contemporaneous to the alleged Jesus.

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 5:08 pm)

You don't really need a reason to disbelieve Jesus, Christopher. It's about the same as disbelieving that there was a fellow called Theldorrin who ruled over all of Mesopotamia around 400 BCE.

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:01 pm)

I thought there were some Roman documents that confirmed the existence of Jesus (they mentioned him in passing or made reference to him). I remember studying something like that in my one year at Catholic school.

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:05 pm)

No. There is no evidence in support of this.

Wikipedia has a nice page listing all of the sources, and they act like someone born 40 years after Jesus supposedly died would have any real basis for writing about him.

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:08 pm)

Admittedly it was Catholic school so it could all be bullshit.

That said, it seems hard to believe that the actual religion of Christianity would have taken off if there never was a Jesus considering by all accounts Paul was a cold ruthless asshole.

I have a feeling what's read in the bible might not necessarily be a representation of his real teachings, and that the whole divinity thing is a load of shit.

That said it's equally plausible that some savvy manipulative guys made him up to subvert and eventually gain significant power in the Roman empire.

Let My Love Open The Door · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:14 pm)

The thing about how flimsy attacks on Jesus's existence are, the best I've heard to support his existence, like Derek, have been vague references to "Roman documents."

Even when I wanted to believe in Jesus I had some curiosity about where those documents were currently stored or represented!

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:21 pm)

Well, one of the gospels is outright wrong in its historicity. Since they claimed the wrong ruler at the time or something like that.

And for the documents, there's nothing, really.

Josephus, who is widely cited isn't contemporary. And the author authors are later.

Also they don't say much, and their works were very likely edited by Christians.

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:24 pm)

It would be pretty awesome to completely disprove the existence of Jesus.

Of course religion survives on the principle that you can't prove a negative.

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:30 pm)

You can see all of the 'evidence' listed on the historocity of Jesus page.

They use a lot of 'scholars agree' without actual evidence, though.

I attribute it to the special position of Christianity in western culture, though. Same thing happens with a lot of 'historical' events from the Bible.

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:36 pm)

Actually the Old Testament has some value as a historical document. It's basically a history text with god and the supernatural used to fill in the blanks and provide an explanation for why some things happened as well as tossing in a few myths to explain what happened in the dawn of history. I think it's something that even atheists can appreciate to an extent (I know I do).

Theldorrin · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:40 pm)

Not really. Jews are only slightly more ancient than Christians.

Let My Love Open The Door · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:45 pm)

I wonder how much of Exodus is balogna!

Derek Payne · (Tue May 29, 2007 10:46 pm)

I don't know there's supposedly some evidence that a flood did occur in the Fertile Crescent I thought, and it does document some activities of ancient civilizations and tribes.

I was under the impression the old testament was written several hundred years before the new.