I am really sorry if this has been posted before.


If you knew me in person, you would know I love getting into discussions with people about religion. One of the questions that seems to keep coming into the discussion loop is Jesus.


So I was at a social gathering the other night at a restaurant and I dropped my silverware and out of habit I said "Jesus Christ!" And a random girl that was a friend of a friend said, "Don't use the Lords name in vain."


So obviously we got into a debate.


I brought up the point in the discussion that Jesus never existed. Well everyone looked at me like i was off the wall insane...


At that point the discussion just turned into incoherent ramblings and Grrrr... So frustrating that people base their whole life on hearsay! Simply dumbfounding!!!


Help me feel better... seriously.

Tags: jesus

Views: 287

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Also... why do people always say this line? "I believe he existed but I don't think he did all those magic tricks..." GRRRRR what do you base it on? The bible?

What do they base anything regarding their beliefs on? They have nothing to back them up anymore. El Zilcho, that's a better name for their Messiah.
This line often comes from more liberal believers.  They believe he existed, with or without divine qualities, and ultimately was a wise man/rabble-rouser who did not literally perform miracles.  They say this because they still believe he is a someone worthy of study, worship or respect beyond the miracles that supposedly proved his divinity.

I can go for that.  Jesus said many worthy things.


But the resurrection?  No way.

Now there are more people named Jesus, but I'm positive there was at least one even back then, after all they did use the name Jesus when they wrote all that crap.

It doesn't really matter the name if you think about the Jesus that supposedly did all those miracles and all that shit. I don't think that guy (Messiah or whatever he's called) ever existed or will ever exist. The son of something that doesn't exist, can't exist. It's that simple. A nut that called himself the son of god, and did some neat tricks could have existed, but that would be as far as it can go. We have even now people that call themselves Jesus the son of god, god himself, etc. ... but they're most likely in mental institutions getting help for that.
I know this is from a separate thread - but I tend to be one of those atheists who suspect Jesus very likely existed - in a much larger context than what the Bible allows - whether from ending up in Kashmir or ending up murdered outside Jerusalem... Lots of historical options to explore.
Thanks doone. I think i might have to close this thread if it gets out of control.

I dont see why it matters if he existed or not.


What if I told about a friend of my parents who is named Bob. Bob is awesome, he can defy gravity, walk on water, and he even went to a grave yard and broght back someone that was dead. Unfortunately Bob died right before I was born. But every morning I talk to him as if he were still here. He helps me cope and sometimes he even talks to me and tells me what to do.


I would be locked up in a psych unit for schitzophrenia.


So my point is that even if he did exist and start a religion, it doesn't make him god, and it doesn'mean that there were actual miracles that took place.

Well, a miracle is an event that appears inexplicable by the laws of nature. Religious people attributed everything they didn't understand back then to god, so they attributed the miracles, as described earlier, also to god. So, those may have been miracles, but not done by god, and most likely those would not be miracles now, as a more accurate explanation for them can be given.

Clarification-  meant miracle in the modern fundamentalist christian sense. Meaning that it can be explained by defying the laws of nature through supernatural means.


And since I didnt answer the original question. I think its possible that he existed as a man but there is no real proof. But that the events of his life are made up. More like a modern day cult leader. Possibly a con artist.

I would argue that his followers (certain ones) were more likely to be the con artists who took advantage of people in very deep mourning after the death/disappearance of a charismatic, wise man.
In his book 'Godless' which I highly recommend btw, Dan Barker writes that there is no external historical confirmation for the New Testament stories. The early years of the Roman Republic is one of the most historically documented times in history, yet not a single word about Jesus appears outside of the New Testament in the entire first century. Whether myth or legend, the life of Jesus is not corroborated.


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service