Did Jesus ever exist?

[Baruch]

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

Paul wasn't trying to create the Christian Church or the Roman Catholic Church as we know it.  The world would end shortly (it didn't) ... so Paul was a failed Jewish prophet.  Also as part of his version (but not other Jews) the apocalypse of John etc couldn't happen, unless certain Gentiles were brought into the Faith of Abraham, and certain Jews were kicked out.  Who would be saved would be a mystery, but Paul had to contact as many as possible, just in case.  Specifically he was trying to heal the rift between Palestinian Jews and Greek Jews ... and between Jews in general and Gentiles.  A mighty idealism, that failed.  There can be no eschaton without peace, and there can be no peace while division persists.  Of course anyone outside the "saved" would be destroyed, same as in any other apocalypse.

A religion based on subversion of the Roman Empire ... will get opposition.  And martyrdom isn't practical, particularly if the Romans are effective against all those false Jewish messiahs (they are all false, even the historical ones).

And no, I welcome your skepticism.  I am not trying to convert you ... that is un-Jewish.  Thru your skepticism and your own efforts you will grow, maybe even bigger than a mustard plant ;-)

[Baruch]

Unbeliever ... I appreciate the videos, but lets not try to scare this one off too easily ... I think he has potential to reject either pill (Matrix).

[Solomon Zorn]

Okay Baruch already beat me to the post, but here's my response:

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

I don't think that is what he meant by failed, but I will let him answer that.

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...

He obviously didn't just pull those events out of his ass, therefore he must have read it somewhere. Even if his take on it is skewed, it shows a great deal of background in the subject.

2. I have yet to say any religion is true,

You have yet to say much, at all. Mostly just asking leading questions. But it is clear from your focus, that you favor Christianity.

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.

I think what Baruch is saying, though, is that religion had no singular form, until then. And whatever competing versions previously existed mostly fell by the wayside.

3. ... how do you know how educated I am?

“A warranted inference based on words used.” Or better put, based on the lack of any verifiable knowledge of your own, in your responses.

I have not questioned anyones background here just infornation they present and where they get it.

I'm not asking your post graduate status, I'm just saying you have to have some knowledge of the subject if you expect to understand, or argue with the responses of someone who has done his homework, like Baruch.

[Baruch]

"fell by the wayside" ... or stabbed in the back ;-(  Holy Spirit ...dead from about 325 CE until about 1900 CE.  Smothered by the Church, but never quite dead.

[Unbeliever]

Unbeliever ... I appreciate the videos, but lets not try to scare this one off too easily ... I think he has potential to reject either pill (Matrix).

Well, if "this one" scares off that easily, then I doubt the faith is strong in "this one", anyway.

[Mike Cl]

Random has made it quite clear in his response to me that he does not have faith in his faith.  He is a theistic coward.  This is what he said: "Why must my beliefs be clear when it is clear that may subject me to more prejudice?"  He is simply scared that his beliefs are not based on facts--just thin air.

[randomvim]

Random has made it quite clear in his response to me that he does not have faith in his faith.  He is a theistic coward.  This is what he said: "Why must my beliefs be clear when it is clear that may subject me to more prejudice?"  He is simply scared that his beliefs are not based on facts--just thin air.

no. Just that in area or forum like this, descussions devolve into name calling, or  a genuine question or statement is ignored.

For example: if person a disgregards a logical referral from person b due to person b's ethnicity. quite illogical.

[randomvim]

Well, if "this one" scares off that easily, then I doubt the faith is strong in "this one", anyway.

accept some athiests/agnostics believe Jesus was a real person so how much does faith really have to do with this?

I provided a link fron a catholic source who referrence a couple/few of these individuals.

[Unbeliever]

You might want to try reading your posts before posting them to see if there are typos, it would be much easier for us to read them. Anyone can miss a typo here and there, but your posts seem to have a lot of them.


Thank you.

[randomvim]

Okay Baruch already beat me to the post, but here's my response:
I don't think that is what he meant by failed, but I will let him answer that.

He obviously didn't just pull those events out of his ass, therefore he must have read it somewhere. Even if his take on it is skewed, it shows a great deal of background in the subject.

You have yet to say much, at all. Mostly just asking leading questions. But it is clear from your focus, that you favor Christianity.
I think what Baruch is saying, though, is that religion had no singular form, until then. And whatever competing versions previously existed mostly fell by the wayside.
“A warranted inference based on words used.” Or better put, based on the lack of any verifiable knowledge of your own, in your responses.
I'm not asking your post graduate status, I'm just saying you have to have some knowledge of the subject if you expect to understand, or argue with the responses of someone who has done his homework, like Baruch.

4. yes yes. there was a good amount of information, but I can duplicate that same story in my own words. actually I'd be able to make one up to.

If I believed everything he said and duplicated that information, then Id still be quoting a guy from the internet. Now Im not asking for credentials either, but knowing where information comes from helps people understand that information.

[Mike Cl]

no. Just that in area or forum like this, descussions devolve into name calling, or  a genuine question or statement is ignored.

For example: if person a disgregards a logical referral from person b due to person b's ethnicity. quite illogical.

I could agree with this---but for two things.  If you think this forum will devolve into name calling, why come here at all?
And, when have you offered a 'genuine' question or make a reasonable statement?  You only refute--with little to no proof--or deny statements. 

[randomvim]

1. 5.
Paul wasn't trying to create the Christian Church or the Roman Catholic Church as we know it.  The world would end shortly (it didn't) ... so Paul was a failed Jewish prophet.  Also as part of his version (but not other Jews) the apocalypse of John etc couldn't happen, unless certain Gentiles were brought into the Faith of Abraham, and certain Jews were kicked out.  Who would be saved would be a mystery, but Paul had to contact as many as possible, just in case.  Specifically he was trying to heal the rift between Palestinian Jews and Greek Jews ... and between Jews in general and Gentiles.  A mighty idealism, that failed.


There can be no eschaton without peace, and there can be no peace while division persists.  Of course anyone outside the "saved" would be destroyed, same as in any other apocalypse.

2. A religion based on subversion of the Roman Empire ... will get opposition.  And martyrdom isn't practical, particularly if the Romans are effective against all those false Jewish messiahs (they are all false, even the historical ones).

And no, I welcome your skepticism.  I am not trying to convert you ... that is un-Jewish.  Thru your skepticism and your own efforts you will grow, maybe even bigger than a mustard plant ;-)

I contemplated on this. There are still parts that have not been explained and now more issues arrive. Thus I must reitterate the importance of sources.

1. where are you obtaining or have obtainned this information?

5. I forget what digit this was but lets cover Paul. you describe him as trying to get more gentiles in and kicking out more jews, like himself. then you say that while he is doing this to start the apocolypse(?) he is trying to fix a rift between gentiles and jews. beyond this contradiction, I am understanding that you are trying to say Paul's overall goal is to obtain more members. this is what you have been saying, yes?
Paul's overall goal is increase membership, yes?

2. okay, so I think you are trying to respond to the claim that bishops at Nicea pertain the same mentality as those who have accepted martyrdom (or being killed) for not compromising their beliefs.

You are addressing this point at this...point?

[randomvim]

I could agree with this---but for two things.  If you think this forum will devolve into name calling, why come here at all?
And, when have you offered a 'genuine' question or make a reasonable statement?  You only refute--with little to no proof--or deny statements.

I think this is getting too personal. but I'll humor it.

1. I come here to pass time. Work is almost here.I need food.

2. what points have I had little proof of or you have had issues with? 

[Baruch]

4. yes yes. there was a good amount of information, but I can dublicate that same story in my own words. actually I'd be able to make one up to.

If I believed everything he said and duplicated that information, then Id still be quoting a guy from the internet. Now Im not asking for credentials either, but knowing where information comes from helps people understand that information.

1. where are you obtaining or have obtainned this information?

40 years of study, including Hebrew, Greek, Latin, Persian, Arabic ... I just love history, love languages.  And I don't believe anything found on an ancient grocery checkout kiosk.  If you can't cross-examine person X, then you really don't know.  Historians are literature writers, except for contemporaries, they just don't know.  The good ones admit this.  Just ask Herodotus, the first Western historian.  This is why it is hard to convey ... where do I get X.  Can you prove to me what you had for breakfast a week ago?  Why should we believe you?

And no, I am not asking you to believe what I write, I am simply answering your question, in very condensed form, the only way I can.  And no, I am not just any guy on the Internet ... I am unique ... and in some areas I have actual expertise at high level (which can only be appreciated by other interested experts).

Yes, please tell us a story.  Make one up if you wish.  You could use the ... articulation ... practice.  But this is a tough crowd.  You will always have my sympathy however, even if you are Catholic, even if you are a priest.

5. I forget what digit this was but lets cover Paul. you describe him as trying to get more gentiles in and kicking out more jews, like himself. then you say that while he is doing this to start the apocolypse(?) he is trying to fix a rift between gentiles and jews. beyond this contradiction, I am understanding that you are trying to say Paul's overall goal is to obtain more members. this is what you have been saying, yes?
Paul's overall goal is increase membership, yes?"

Some miscommunication here.  Paul is trying to save those preordained for salvation (Jew and Gentile), not everyone.  It isn't a Walmart store trying to increase sales.  He isn't trying to start an apocalypse, but he isn't trying to prevent one either.  He is on the Titanic, he knows it has hit an iceberg (no prediction, it has already hit) and he is trying to get the most number of people (as selected by G-d) into the life boats.  This requires that the Jews and Gentiles who are in the life boats, don't try to kill each other.  Those who make it into the life boats win a free cruise to Fantasy Island ... but you can only get in, if you have a ticket from G-d.  Without the Holy Spirit, you will stay on the sinking ship listening to the band play on.

2. okay, so I think you are trying to respond to the claim that bishops at Nicea pertain the same mentality as those who have accepted martyrdom (or being killed) for not compromising their beliefs.  You are addressing this point at this...point?

Yes, the bishops at Nicea were total sellouts.  Like if a pacifist like Gandhi, invited the Brits to run his ashram.

[Baruch]

accept some athiests/agnostics believe Jesus was a real person so how much does faith really have to do with this?

I provided a link fron a catholic source who referrence a couple/few of these individuals.

You are correct.  More study!  Unfortunately in English, words have multiple meanings .. so there is faith and FAITH.  Usually people here attack the FAITH kind ... where you simply believe something that has no evidence in your life or anyone else's life.  I do support faith ... though it is very hard for me to do, with the hardened old heart I have.  I am a theist, but a heretical one (freethinker).  I have no problem with the existence of G-d at all ... I do have a problem with theodicy ... the evil in the world.  My answer is that life is supposed to be hard, and I don't think I can forgive G-d's cruelty.