Did Jesus Ever Really Exist?

[Zordar]

But of course, you would probably prefer that they were left alone, rather than hear a "fairy tale."

Nonsense.

It's not like good things haven't come about in spite of Christianity, or even because of it. Ironically, Christianity has helped to save a lot of important intellectual documents over the years. I'd also argue that Christianity was a better philosophy than most of the alternatives at the time it was made up. In this case, if believing in some sort of skydaddy lowers murder rates within a population... sure, it's kinda pathetic, but at least they aren't killing anymore -- better than the alternative.

[jwreck]

Yes, you shouldn't fool yourself into thinking that you have ultimate control and no accountability.... although that is a nice thought, isn't it?

And you ignored everything I said, I was hoping you would at least try to refute the points I brought up.

Like what? That the truth of god is in the math? Because I actually believe that to a certain extent. However, its not as simple as saying 1+1=2. That demonstrable. God is not demonstrable. God can be hinted at, suggested, and even supported to some degree, but not proven. It just isn't going to happen unless you go in with a predetermined conclusion. If you look for something as proof of God, its pretty easy to find. Just like that retard who postulated that the banana is proof of God's existence. That is a far cry from objective proof.

[kellyb]

I loved the banana video.

[jwreck]

For those of you who missed it.

[lily]

Like what? That the truth of god is in the math? Because I actually believe that to a certain extent. However, its not as simple as saying 1+1=2. That demonstrable. God is not demonstrable. God can be hinted at, suggested, and even supported to some degree, but not proven. It just isn't going to happen unless you go in with a predetermined conclusion. If you look for something as proof of God, its pretty easy to find. Just like that retard who postulated that the banana is proof of God's existence. That is a far cry from objective proof.

The point about objective truth not having numerous conflicting answers, the point about us not having ultimate control, and the point that we, as the creation are not above certain laws or accountability, etc.

So, you're saying that because God cannot be observed physically, that means that there isn't a right answer? Or are you just saying that comparing God to something like gravity or math is a bad example, because it's easy to see those things are true?

There is still a right answer, whether it's easy to see at first or not.

I think the main problem is that atheists just can't accept anything that isn't discernible through our 5 senses. This actually is understandable, and is not surprising, since it's what the bible clearly states is the case.

"The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned." 1 Corinthians 2:14

God is discerned through our spirit. And when one's spirit is dormant or 'dead' , so to speak, of course even the idea of God seems silly or false.

It's kind of like a color blind person not understanding the color blue, or purple.... How could they? It is discerned through something they don't have.

It boils down to the fact that many atheists simply can't understand that ANYTHING that isn't material can be objectively true, in an external way.

That notion is simply false. Truth itself is objective (although there are, of course, many subjective truths as well). Logic is another example, that's something we talked about a few days ago. And there are other things as well. This all boils down to what that scripture says, when one is spiritually 'asleep' or unalive, anything that isn't discernible through their 5 senses doesn't exist to them.

[Šñøü†ê®]

The interesting thing about the banana concept is that a THOUGHT creates REALITY at a micro level. So take that to the macro level. Something beyond humanoids might just be cultivating this reality.

[jwreck]

I'm saying you cannot possibly know the right answer, which is why you rely on faith.You keep using the term objective truth as if you already have the objective truth, when we both know that is false. I believe in lots of things I can't see. I believe in atoms, electrons, etc. I believe in the IR spectrum of light. So its not the simple fact that you can't see it that means its not true. The FACT is that we don't know the truth. To claim you know the truth is arrogant and quite frankly false.You believe, you don't know. As I've said many times, religion is not multiple choice. Just because you've picked what you believe to be the best answer of those presented to you doesn't make it true.

[lily]

I'm saying you cannot possibly know the right answer, which is why you rely on faith.You keep using the term objective truth as if you already have the objective truth, when we both know that is false. I believe in lots of things I can't see. I believe in atoms, electrons, etc. I believe in the IR spectrum of light. So its not the simple fact that you can't see it that means its not true. The FACT is that we don't know the truth. To claim you know the truth is arrogant and quite frankly false.You believe, you don't know. As I've said many times, religion is not multiple choice. Just because you've picked what you believe to be the best answer of those presented to you doesn't make it true.

You ignored the point I just made, or maybe didn't get it. And it seems to be the same thing that we've (to some extent) gotten into on other threads.

Let me put it this way - there are other ways of knowing something or determining truth, apart from the scientific method or discerning it through our 5 senses.

That is what you can't accept. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to think philosophy is rubbish.... yet, as I was saying on a different thread, science itself is rooted in certain philosophical truths that aren't proveable through the scientific method. These are called a priori truths, or self-evident truths.

How does this relate to God? Well, you seem to be saying that because God can't be proven in a lab, he must not exist, or "Why believe in something I can't see/touch/feel/smell/etc"?

I fully understand your point of view, but again - there are other ways of knowing things, or determining truth. Once your spirit is made alive, your entire perspective on everything will change. You WILL see evidence for God and experience God in your life. And God will reveal His presence to you - I don't know how, because that's different for different people, but if you have a genuine, sincere desire to know if God exists, and you humble yourself, God WILL open your eyes.

And it just occurred to me (this is actually a cool revelation, although I did know this before, on some level) that it was set up this way for a reason. God proves Himself to people on an individual basis, as opposed to being obviously proveable on a larger level (to the world, at the same time.) Well, according to the bible, that day will come, but then it's too late. Why would it be this way? Probably because if God could be obviously proveable - in the way that anyone can see (through our 5 senses) then there is no seeking or a desire for truth....and there's little choice involved. I suppose one could still choose to reject God, but that would be like rejecting the existence of the sun or something that obvious. God gives us just enough evidence to intuitively know there is something more, but not obvious "proof" on a societal level. But as I said, God does reveal his presence to people on an individual basis. That, however, is unlikely to happen if someone is prideful, stubborn and hard-hearted.

[antiquity]

To summarize 368 posts in this thread, it all boils down to faith and not a one bit of evidence Jesus ever existed except what man wrote in a book two thousand years ago. Strange.....

[lily]

To summarize 368 posts in this thread, it all boils down to faith and not a one bit of evidence Jesus ever existed except what man wrote in a book two thousand years ago. Strange.....

That's a lie. The bible wouldn't be as strong as ever, still the most read/studied/quoted book 2000 years later if there was zero evidence for the historicity of the scriptures. Your problem is for some reason, you knee-jerkingly reject everything that doesn't go along with your pre-existing, hardcore atheistic views. That and your avatar, but I digress.

And I see you also ignored what I just said to jwreck - God proves himself on an individual basis. At that point, faith becomes about trusting in God's goodness and faithfulness, rather than his existence in the first place.

[optimus]

The interesting thing about the banana concept is that a THOUGHT creates REALITY at a micro level. So take that to the macro level. Something beyond humanoids might just be cultivating this reality.

Maybe reptilians?

[optimus]

To summarize 368 posts in this thread, it all boils down to faith and not a one bit of evidence Jesus ever existed except what man wrote in a book two thousand years ago. Strange.....

And that's really the bottom line. Everything else here is a red herring.

[kellyb]

I fully understand your point of view, but again - there are other ways of knowing things, or determining truth. Once your spirit is made alive, your entire perspective on everything will change. You WILL see evidence for God and experience God in your life.

See, what you're identifying as "spirit" I have identified as "the natural human propensity to become delusional (yet otherwise sane) out of a desire to believe in something."

Which is why Muslims believe in their religion every bit as much as you do. And New Agers their stuff, etc. It "works" like that no matter what you're convincing yourself is true.

[kellyb]

The interesting thing about the banana concept is that a THOUGHT creates REALITY at a micro level. So take that to the macro level. Something beyond humanoids might just be cultivating this reality.

Thought creates the perception of reality, which is a reality that only exists in our own heads and is only "real" in a pretty esoteric way.

[lily]

See, what you're identifying as "spirit" I have identified as "the natural human propensity to become delusional (yet otherwise sane) out of a desire to believe in something."

Apart from that being the height of arrogance and presumption, it goes along with the scripture I posted before - that the 'natural' man can't understand spiritual matters, to them it is foolishness.

I also think what you said is funny, considering my own experience and the experiences of numerous people I know. I could share tons of stories of people I know whose lives completely turned around for the better, yet atheists dismiss that as a "tumor" or some type of partial insanity.

But getting back to the topic of the spirit...I want to ask you a couple questions. Would you agree that intuition exists? I'm talking about something that is different than the mind/intellect. Also, do you believe that the human conscience exists? I do have a point, but I wanted to ask you that first.

[kellyb]

Would you agree that intuition exists? I'm talking about something that is different than the mind/intellect.

No, almost definitely not.

Also, do you believe that the human conscience exists? I do have a point, but I wanted to ask you that first.

I think we have altruistic instincts, if that's what you mean by conscience.

[lily]

No, almost definitely not.

You don't believe that intuition exists? Wow. I'm truly surprised to hear that. But I guess I shouldn't be surprised, because if you had intuitive experiences, you wouldn't be an atheist. Btw, have you ever taken the Myers/Briggs personality test?

I think we have altruistic instincts, if that's what you mean by conscience.

Hold on, I want to get back to this in a few minutes, but I have to do something else right now.

[kellyb]

Btw, have you ever taken the Myers/Briggs personality test?

Yes, I was an ENFP before I was a skeptic. I've retaken it sense, but I forget what I was. Something pretty different, though.

[lily]

Yes, I was an ENFP before I was a skeptic. I've retaken it sense, but I forget what I was. Something pretty different, though.

Hmm. It's interesting that your results changed so much. I thought it was kind of rare for a personality type to change signifcantly. Although I think people can work to develop certain areas and change slightly over time. Since my experience is pretty much the opposite of yours (I went from nonbeliever to believer) I wonder if my results would have been different, had I taken that test back in my non-believing days.

Anyway, back to the conversation about the spirit...The topic of the spirit/soul is very interesting to me.

Obviously, the idea of a spirit is going to be something atheists reject, for the reasons I brought up before. But I wonder if many atheists have put much thought into this.

First of all, not even a retarded child would deny that we are more than just flesh and blood. I think everyone agrees that we have a non-physical aspect to our being (A mind, will, emotions and personality or individuality) That is what a soul is. To deny a soul exists, is to deny those things I just mentioned... which I'm pretty sure no one would do.

I believe the spirit is something different than the soul. The spirit is the life force, or animating principle that brings our physical bodies to life. You would agree, would you not, that we have - regardless of what you call it - a certain energy that differentiates a living human being from a corpse? Alrighty then.

Now, here is where I'm sure you will disagree. I believe that the human spirit has certain functions. It is the part of our being that connects us to God (who is Spirit). Also, unlike our physical body, our spirit is eternal.

Here are some graphics:



In addition to being the part that connects us to God, the spirit has other functions as well. I'm going to post an excerpt from a book called The Spiritual Man by Watchman Nee - a very interesting book.

According to the teaching of the Bible and the experience of believers, the human spirit can be said to comprise three parts; or, to put it another way, one can say it has three main functions. These are conscience, intuition and communion.

The conscience is the discerning organ, which distinguishes, right and wrong; not, however, through the influence of knowledge stored in the mind but rather by a spontaneous direct judgment. Often reasoning will justify things, which our conscience judges. The work of the conscience is independent and direct; it does not bend to outside opinions. If man should do wrong it will raise its voice of accusation.

Intuition is the sensing organ of the human spirit. It is so diametrically different from physical sense and soulical sense that it is called intuition. Intuition involves a direct sensing independent of any outside influence. That knowledge which comes to us without any help from the mind, emotion or volition comes intuitively. We really "know" through our intuition; our mind merely helps us to "understand." The revelations of God and all the movements of the Holy Spirit are known to the believer through his intuition. A believer must therefore heed these two elements: the voice of conscience and the teaching of intuition.

Communion is worshiping God. The organs of the soul are incompetent to worship God. God is not apprehended by our thoughts, feelings or intentions, for He can only be known directly in our spirits. Our worship of God and God's communications with us are directly in the spirit. They take place in "the inner man," not in the soul or outward man.

And to sum that up, here is another excerpt from the same book:

It is through the corporal body that man comes into contact with the material world. Hence we may label the body as that part which gives us world-consciousness. The soul comprises the intellect which aids us in the present state of existence and the emotions which proceed from the senses. Since the soul belongs to man’s own self and reveals his personality, it is termed the part of self-consciousness. The spirit is that part by which we commune with God and by which alone we are able to apprehend and worship Him. Because it tells us of our relationship with God, the spirit is called the element of God-consciousness. God dwells in the spirit, self dwells in the soul, while senses dwell in the body.

Sorry if that was too lengthy, or boring to you. Again, to me this topic is very interesting. Btw, I wrote a blog post on this once.

[jwreck]

You ignored the point I just made, or maybe didn't get it. And it seems to be the same thing that we've (to some extent) gotten into on other threads.

Let me put it this way - there are other ways of knowing something or determining truth, apart from the scientific method or discerning it through our 5 senses.

That is what you can't accept. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to think philosophy is rubbish.... yet, as I was saying on a different thread, science itself is rooted in certain philosophical truths that aren't proveable through the scientific method. These are called a priori truths, or self-evident truths.

How does this relate to God? Well, you seem to be saying that because God can't be proven in a lab, he must not exist, or "Why believe in something I can't see/touch/feel/smell/etc"?

I fully understand your point of view, but again - there are other ways of knowing things, or determining truth. Once your spirit is made alive, your entire perspective on everything will change. You WILL see evidence for God and experience God in your life. And God will reveal His presence to you - I don't know how, because that's different for different people, but if you have a genuine, sincere desire to know if God exists, and you humble yourself, God WILL open your eyes.

And it just occurred to me (this is actually a cool revelation, although I did know this before, on some level) that it was set up this way for a reason. God proves Himself to people on an individual basis, as opposed to being obviously proveable on a larger level (to the world, at the same time.) Well, according to the bible, that day will come, but then it's too late. Why would it be this way? Probably because if God could be obviously proveable - in the way that anyone can see (through our 5 senses) then there is no seeking or a desire for truth....and there's little choice involved. I suppose one could still choose to reject God, but that would be like rejecting the existence of the sun or something that obvious. God gives us just enough evidence to intuitively know there is something more, but not obvious "proof" on a societal level. But as I said, God does reveal his presence to people on an individual basis. That, however, is unlikely to happen if someone is prideful, stubborn and hard-hearted.

So the bottom line in all this is that God aparently likes you more than he likes me, which is why he hasn't proven his existence to me?