Did Jesus ever exist?

[randomvim]

You

now who is being vague?

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

[randomvim]

Perhaps a Catholic apologist, only not as smart as Randy.  Sigh ... call the Pope, another inmate has escaped from the Roman asylum ;-)

It would probably blow his mind, if I repeated that in marriage, I deflowered a recently former nun ;-)  At least I didn't have to dress up as a priest ;-))

I am not an apologist.
But the candor of one:
https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/popular-news-site-claims-jesus-never-existed

As for your second paragraph, it does nothing but go off topic.

[Baruch]

You are clearly from the office of propaganda (Catholic church invented it).  Why not admit it, Father Guido Sarduchi?

You perhaps assume that atheists, seculars and heretics (me) eat little babies for breakfast, because the Pope says so ;-))

But as a theist, I am anything but ... anti-Catholic.  I am anti-authoritarian ... which pretty much makes the Catholic Church a no-go zone for me.

You have to refute me, thru your own experience and your own research.  The experience and research of others ... is irrelevant to me.  For the other regulars, your personal experience is also irrelevant.  You have to have done the research, critically but reasonably ... and you will find your own answers (I like the Buddha .. who said we are to work diligently to save ourselves, the opposite of Paul).  Nobody here is asking you to believe anything, you came here to get us to believe something ... it isn't clear what.

[Solomon Zorn]

It would probably blow his mind, if I repeated that in marriage, I deflowered a recently former nun ;-)  At least I didn't have to dress up as a priest ;-))

Have you ever heard the song, "Only the Good Die Young?" It's by Billy Joel. I think you will like it.

[Mike Cl]

now who is being vague?

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

You have not come to this forum and made your beliefs clear; how you come to form those beliefs; or what evidence you find compelling that lead you to those beliefs.  You make off the cuff remarks.  You came here to share/convert to your beliefs.  Clearly an atheist forum will not be swayed by vague god statements.  We need some facts to work with.  Do you have any????

[Solomon Zorn]

see. there are issues.
1. "well informed." from whom are you informed from?

With the above dismissal you are just trying to avoid admitting, that you really don't know as much about it, as you think you do. The man just gave you an obviously well researched overview of church history. If you are able to dispute any specific point, then please provide your own analysis for us to compare.

 2. you present the Christians of that time as a fleeting remaining of a forgotten cult. when in reality Christianity was growing despite decades of being outlawed.  so that doesnt match history.

That is an unwarranted inference, from what Baruch said.

3. after being hunted and killed. the oral tradition would not have changed at first glance at royalty. Christians died for their God's word at rejection of alterting their belief. wont happen over night as you suggest. thats not logical 

Early Christians were not some superhuman Holy Spirit filled martyrs. They were fallible people. Although, I have little doubt, some died for the name of Jesus Christ, I seriously doubt that any died for “God's word.” Even if they did, I see idiots martyr themselves for other gods all the time. Are their religions also true?

there is a whole tone of errors in this hypothesis for early Church history

Tone?
There is always a mix of fact and opinion, with Baruch's history lessons. But you are not educated enough on the topic to tell which is which, let alone call them errors.

[Baruch]

Father Guido ... have you ever been married to Catholic/Protestant clergy?  Have you ever been married to a valedictorian seminary student?  Then you don't know much about the Church.

The Catholic Church is the world's biggest and oldest bureaucracy.  The backbone of Western Civilization for the last 1500 years generally, and the last 500 years in particular (since the fall of Constantinople).  That by itself isn't a bad thing, but it is a weighty responsibility, that has been shouldered more or less well (most here would argue, not well at all).

While I have criticized abuses of authority, by anyone ... I have never been anti-Catholic.  I believe in the continuation, in some form, of my ancestors, a great many of whom were Catholic.  I believe in respecting my elders ;-)  I have a few Jewish ancestors, maybe some Muslims (Iberia).  And before that, they were all pagans.  I don't judge any of them as individuals.

There were non-Orthodox/Catholic martyrs before Constantine ... this was a PR problem for those promoting the "bishop" system that led to the uniformity necessary for the formation of organized church networks.  But the priests (Catholic/Orthodox) couldn't act legally against it, since all such groups were illegal.  Once they were civil servants of the Roman Empire, they could act against everyone else, including pagans, Jews and dissident Christians.

One of my ancestors was Emperor Magnus Maximus ... he was the first Christian Roman Emperor to execute other Christians for heresy.  I take a very deep view of personal history, going back almost 2000 years, genealogically.  Not everything was bad or insignificant with pre-Constantine Christians .. or any other folks alive back then.  They were a significant contributor to what we call Welfare now.  The Jewish community was jealous of that, the Christian Welfare system was even better than the Jewish one (in some respects).  The pagans had no proper welfare system (see orphans and widows in the Bible vs Pater Familias).  Congregational worship was in many respects, better than the temple worship humanity had before that.  Congregationalism started in Judaism, in Babylon, during the first Exile.  Gentile Christians and Muslims all found it .. progressive.

[randomvim]

You are clearly from the office of propaganda (Catholic church invented it).  Why not admit it, Father Guido Sarduchi?

You perhaps assume that atheists, seculars and heretics (me) eat little babies for breakfast, because the Pope says so ;-))

But as a theist, I am anything but ... anti-Catholic.  I am anti-authoritarian ... which pretty much makes the Catholic Church a no-go zone for me.

You have to refute me, thru your own experience and your own research.  The experience and research of others ... is irrelevant to me.  For the other regulars, your personal experience is also irrelevant.  You have to have done the research, critically but reasonably ... and you will find your own answers (I like the Buddha .. who said we are to work diligently to save ourselves, the opposite of Paul).  Nobody here is asking you to believe anything, you came here to get us to believe something ... it isn't clear what.

1. My presence is not planned and my posts habe been speratic.

2. Your concept of how a person refutes is incorrect. why would I not lean on those who came before me? How reliable is personal experience when I do not travel or read all books on such a topic?

some how I am not to rely on others (who are irrelevant) but your own statements/claims do not origionate from you!

that is backwards thinking.

[Baruch]

Ah ... so you are a human being then.  Well get to work.  Maybe you will know more in the future (based on your own experience and research).  Until then, if the Pope asks you to jump, are you going to ask "how high?".

[randomvim]

You have not come to this forum and made your beliefs clear; how you come to form those beliefs; or what evidence you find compelling that lead you to those beliefs.  You make off the cuff remarks.  You came here to share/convert to your beliefs.  Clearly an atheist forum will not be swayed by vague god statements.  We need some facts to work with.  Do you have any????

what are you talking about? I am merely disputing in my own words when and what I view is most important. Why must my beliefs be clear when it is clear that may subject me to more prejudice?

my first refute was to put into question source or content provided to develope rhetoric. Where oh where did information about Nicea and Constantine come from?

perhaps my manner in doing so was flawed as it were a statement instead of question but there goes the problems of today  - clear communication.

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

[randomvim]

With the above dismissal you are just trying to avoid admitting, that you really don't know as much about it, as you think you do. The man just gave you an obviously well researched overview of church history. If you are able to dispute any specific point, then please provide your own analysis for us to compare.

That is an unwarranted inference, from what Baruch said.

Early Christians were not some superhuman Holy Spirit filled martyrs. They were fallible people. Although, I have little doubt, some died for the name of Jesus Christ, I seriously doubt that any died for “God's word.” Even if they did, I see idiots martyr themselves for other gods all the time. Are their religions also true?

Tone?
There is always a mix of fact and opinion, with Baruch's history lessons. But you are not educated enough on the topic to tell which is which, let alone call them errors.

1. a warranted inference based on words used. if paul failed his goal of spreading Christianity then Christianity is not spreading.

as for information presented. how is it well researched when I dont know who Baruch is?!  some how skepticism isnt appriciated on an atheist forum...

2. I have yet to say any religion is true, so lets stay on topic. the purpose of the martyr earlier was to question the character of the bishops who turned their back on their own beliefs to change an entire religion to what that religion is not.  doesnt seem practical to me.

for example:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forty_Martyrs_of_Sebaste

3. Another poster just called me vague. how do you know how educated I am? I have not questioned anyones background here just infornation they present and where they get it.

please stay on topic though

[randomvim]

Father Guido ... have you ever been married to Catholic/Protestant clergy?  Have you ever been married to a valedictorian seminary student?  Then you don't know much about the Church.

The Catholic Church is the world's biggest and oldest bureaucracy.  The backbone of Western Civilization for the last 1500 years generally, and the last 500 years in particular (since the fall of Constantinople).  That by itself isn't a bad thing, but it is a weighty responsibility, that has been shouldered more or less well (most here would argue, not well at all).

While I have criticized abuses of authority, by anyone ... I have never been anti-Catholic.  I believe in the continuation, in some form, of my ancestors, a great many of whom were Catholic.  I believe in respecting my elders ;-)  I have a few Jewish ancestors, maybe some Muslims (Iberia).  And before that, they were all pagans.  I don't judge any of them as individuals.

There were non-Orthodox/Catholic martyrs before Constantine ... this was a PR problem for those promoting the "bishop" system that led to the uniformity necessary for the formation of organized church networks.  But the priests (Catholic/Orthodox) couldn't act legally against it, since all such groups were illegal.  Once they were civil servants of the Roman Empire, they could act against everyone else, including pagans, Jews and dissident Christians.

One of my ancestors was Emperor Magnus Maximus ... he was the first Christian Roman Emperor to execute other Christians for heresy.  I take a very deep view of personal history, going back almost 2000 years, genealogically.  Not everything was bad or insignificant with pre-Constantine Christians .. or any other folks alive back then.  They were a significant contributor to what we call Welfare now.  The Jewish community was jealous of that, the Christian Welfare system was even better than the Jewish one (in some respects).  The pagans had no proper welfare system (see orphans and widows in the Bible vs Pater Familias).  Congregational worship was in many respects, better than the temple worship humanity had before that.  Congregationalism started in Judaism, in Babylon, during the first Exile.  Gentile Christians and Muslims all found it .. progressive.

I dont know what this has to do with topic at hand. but lets shorten this. where did you get your information?

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

[Unbeliever]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6sz8D411kE

[Unbeliever]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAxgnd8mYr0

[Baruch]

what are you talking about? I am merely disputing in my own words when and what I view is most important. Why must my beliefs be clear when it is clear that may subject me to more prejudice?

my first refute was to put into question source or content provided to develope rhetoric. Where oh where did information about Nicea and Constantine come from?

perhaps my manner in doing so was flawed as it were a statement instead of question but there goes the problems of today  - clear communication.

Sent from my LG-K330 using Tapatalk

Get some balls.  This is Fight Club.  If you can't stand up for yourself, ask the Pope to do it for you ;-)  I don't have any problem with how you express yourself, do it anyway you can, it will be fine with me.  Manner is much less important than content.  Start by reading History of the Church by Eusebius .. he was there.  Then apply critical analysis to his claims, same as if he was a reporter for the National Inquirer.  Eusebius was a shill for the Emperor.  But in the end, it won't matter ... because you can't cross-examine dead people.  You either know G-d here and now, or you don't.

Bottom line with Nicea ... the Church had to organize into one or two massive organizations, civil service for the Roman Empire.  Greek speaking and Latin speaking.  Freedom of thought, faith, speech are gone ... in the Church.  The Holy Spirit is silenced (clergy had been working on that since Pentecost).  Christians have to give up their subversion of the Roman State (they were subversive before that, in spite of Paul's rhetoric about it).  Christians have to give up their pacifism (it subverts the Roman army).  So basically, Christians have to do a 180 about face, and the persecution stops, and then all the priests get on the government dole.  Oh, and no more Jewish practices (Shabbat Friday sundown to Saturday sundown) ... it is from midnight Sunday morning to midnight Monday morning.  No more Jewish festivals either, unless you are a licensed Jew (works for rabbis, who are there to keep the Jews in line for the Emperor).