Upon What Basis Do Atheists Claim that Jesus is a Myth?

[GodsGrace101]

The claims such as Jesus being the son of God, doing miracles, these claims have no evidence and are believed based of off faith.



Sorry but I am not going to buy into a false dichotomy no matter how many times you present it. There are more then just two possibilities here. Simply because the bible claims he said these things does not mean that he did so.



No thank you.

Oh. Look at mr. open minded science enthusiast or scientist! It's amazing how closed minded YOU people are....

You don't have to buy into anything.
You can think there are 20 possibilities.
I give you the permission to think what you want to think...especially since you have such a closed mind.

 

[Freodin]

Do you think I woke up yesterday and decided to become Christian?

There's nothing you can tell me I haven't considered.
There's no need for you to try to convince me God doesn't exist just like I don't try to convince you He does.

Unless, of course I'm answer to YOU.
I cannot make you a believer and you cannot make me an atheist.

I am not trying to deconvert you. I couldn't care less about what you believe or not.

But when you assert things that are not true, and these falsehoods can be used to attack others... well, I am known to get a little involved in these cases.

Again: I don't care what you believe. But if you go vocal to defend what you believe with something that isn't true... what does that say about your beliefs? What does it say about your justification for your beliefs?

I usually try and ask people to take a step back, and look at their claims and positions from a neutral point of view... how they would think their statements might sound to someone who doesn't accept everything they say as truth by default.

Sadly I have found only a handful of Christians who are able to do that. Most cannot accept it, or even attempt it... but they are quick to call others "close-minded".

Beam in your own eye. I read that somewhere once. But it is most likely irrelevant and just liberal claptrash.

 

[chilehed]

Don't you understand brother?
Atheists DO NOT accept the historical Jesus.

That has nothing to do with the fact that the correct answer to the question that you asked:

How would YOU prove Jesus really existed?

is the answer that I gave:

By evaluating the historical evidence. There's so much historical evidence for his existence that if you say it's not enough to prove it, you also need to say there's not enough evidence to prove the existence of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle ,Confucius, or Buddha (to start with). There are very few people of the ancient world for whom there is more historical evidence than Jesus of Nazareth - it has little do do with faith.

Someone who refuses, in the face of overwhelming evidence, to believe that something happened, is acting out of emotion rather than rationality.

 

[ananda]

There's so much historical evidence for his existence that if you say it's not enough to prove it, you also need to say there's not enough evidence to prove the existence of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle ,Confucius, or Buddha (to start with). There are very few people of the ancient world for whom there is more historical evidence than Jesus of Nazareth - it has little do do with faith.

But it has everything to do with faith.

The claims of Christianity and achievement of its goal is based on faith in the person, life, and accomplishments of Jesus. We do not need to prove the existence of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, or the Buddha because their respective philosophies and ideas are not based on faith in their persons.

 

[Freodin]

But it has everything to do with faith.

The claims of Christianity and achievement of its goal is based on faith in the person, life, and accomplishments of Jesus. We do not need to prove the existence of Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, or the Buddha because their respective philosophies and ideas are not based on faith in their persons.

That's an extremely good point.
Makes me wonder.
Some Christians assert that, without Jesus, his divinity and ressurection, the whole Bible would be worthless and a lie. We had one right here in this thread.

So if Jesus didn't exist, wasn't resurrected... these people would look at things like "love your neighbor", "treat people like you want to be treated", "be honest", "don't steal"... and a lot of other worthy ideas from this book and go: "All lies... let's hate, lie and plunder!"

This is what they like to accuse non-Christians of: Without a divine rule telling us not to go on a murderous rampage, we all would like to go and rape everyone and kill them... or the other way around. And only because "in our heart" we really believe in God, we don't do it.

I really wonder about - and am a little frightened by - these folks ideas about moral behaviour.

 

[Jamsie]

I am not trying to deconvert you. I couldn't care less about what you believe or not.

I find it on occasion an interesting time to give listen to or to read debates between Atheists and Christians. Ultimately I have found such encounters though interesting to be rather tiring, and typically a stalemate in the overall scheme. (Often it comes down to the debate skill rather than the substance)

As some philosophers have noted the God/No God debate lies within the realm of metaphysics. However, it would seem that Christians should fully comprehend 1 Cor. 2:14 and Hebrews 11:1 as their foundation in such matters. It is simply that some arguments for God I find persuasive whereas others do not, and so it is preferable to discuss with respect and to give thought to the various perspectives from both sides.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I am not trying to deconvert you. I couldn't care less about what you believe or not.

But when you assert things that are not true, and these falsehoods can be used to attack others... well, I am known to get a little involved in these cases.

Again: I don't care what you believe. But if you go vocal to defend what you believe with something that isn't true... what does that say about your beliefs? What does it say about your justification for your beliefs?

I usually try and ask people to take a step back, and look at their claims and positions from a neutral point of view... how they would think their statements might sound to someone who doesn't accept everything they say as truth by default.

Sadly I have found only a handful of Christians who are able to do that. Most cannot accept it, or even attempt it... but they are quick to call others "close-minded".

Beam in your own eye. I read that somewhere once. But it is most likely irrelevant and just liberal claptrash.

What did I assert that is not true?

 

[Freodin]

What did I assert that is not true?

He was either the Messiah, or he was crazy.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I find it on occasion an interesting time to give listen to or to read debates between Atheists and Christians. Ultimately I have found such encounters though interesting to be rather tiring, and typically a stalemate in the overall scheme. (Often it comes down to the debate skill rather than the substance)

As some philosophers have noted the God/No God debate lies within the realm of metaphysics. However, it would seem that Christians should fully comprehend 1 Cor. 2:14 and Hebrews 11:1 as their foundation in such matters. It is simply that some arguments for God I find persuasive whereas others do not, and so it is preferable to discuss with respect and to give thought to the various perspectives from both sides.

I don't post scripture when speaking to agnostics/atheists...but of course I have 1 Cor in mind.

I also try to do what you say,,,but some are insulting. Actually, I find it a waste of time.

 

[Freodin]

I find it on occasion an interesting time to give listen to or to read debates between Atheists and Christians. Ultimately I have found such encounters though interesting to be rather tiring, and typically a stalemate in the overall scheme. (Often it comes down to the debate skill rather than the substance)

As some philosophers have noted the God/No God debate lies within the realm of metaphysics. However, it would seem that Christians should fully comprehend 1 Cor. 2:14 and Hebrews 11:1 as their foundation in such matters. It is simply that some arguments for God I find persuasive whereas others do not, and so it is preferable to discuss with respect and to give thought to the various perspectives from both sides.

Another of these things that I always found interesting in these conversations and discussions.

...atheists have more faith than Christians...

On the one hand, the Christians celebrate "faith", and tout "faith" as the main, the best, the only thing that their religion is based on.
But on the other hand, they deride atheists for having faith... even more faith than Christians.

I don't agree with Hebrew 11:1. But it's interesting to see how many Christians do not agree with it.

 

[GodsGrace101]

@Freodin

Oh. Well this IS true.

Jesus was either GOD
OR HE WAS A CRAZY MAN.

I even posted why.
You don't have to accept it.

You could accept that he was a mythological figure that never existed.

You could accept that he existed but was not God.

You could accept that the Apostles were crazy and died horrible deaths knowing they were living a lie.

I guess you could accept any of the above.

Me, personally, I like to think that if Jesus was not God,,,some would say a light from God,,,then he was definitely a crazy man.

 

[Freodin]

@Freodin

Oh. Well this IS true.

Jesus was either GOD
OR HE WAS A CRAZY MAN.

I even posted why.
You don't have to accept it.

You could accept that he was a mythological figure that never existed.

You could accept that he existed but was not God.

You could accept that the Apostles were crazy and died horrible deaths knowing they were living a lie.

I guess you could accept any of the above.

Me, personally, I like to think that if Jesus was not God,,,some would say a light from God,,,then he was definitely a crazy man.

Or the stories about him are not (completely) true. You keep ignoring this option, a valid option, that a lot of non-Christians accept.

And because you do not accept that this option even exists, you accuse - must accuse - unbeliever of holding to either of your options.

How are you ever going to have a real conversation with another person, if you cannot but see this person as a caricature and strawman?

 

[GodsGrace101]

I find it on occasion an interesting time to give listen to or to read debates between Atheists and Christians. Ultimately I have found such encounters though interesting to be rather tiring, and typically a stalemate in the overall scheme. (Often it comes down to the debate skill rather than the substance)

As some philosophers have noted the God/No God debate lies within the realm of metaphysics. However, it would seem that Christians should fully comprehend 1 Cor. 2:14 and Hebrews 11:1 as their foundation in such matters. It is simply that some arguments for God I find persuasive whereas others do not, and so it is preferable to discuss with respect and to give thought to the various perspectives from both sides.

LOL
At post 57 to @Belk, I posted this...
He refused to even look at it.

Give thoughts to various persepctives?
I interest myself in science and try to keep up.

So who is the dumb, closed minded person that can't even think straight enough to know there's no god?

Questions | Uncover

 

[GodsGrace101]

Or the stories about him are not (completely) true. You keep ignoring this option, a valid option, that a lot of non-Christians accept.

And because you do not accept that this option even exists, you accuse - must accuse - unbeliever of holding to either of your options.

How are you ever going to have a real conversation with another person, if you cannot but see this person as a caricature and strawman?

There we go:
the person is a caricature and a strawman.
Are you speaking about God?

Non Christians could accept what they want to accept...I've already given you permission to believe what you will...

Just because YOU believe it does not make it so.

The stories are either TRUE
OR
Not True.

He either IS GOD
or IS CRAZY.

I've been through the other hypothesis.
They don't work.

 

[Freodin]

There we go:
the person is a caricature and a strawman.
Are you speaking about God?

Non Christians could accept what they want to accept...I've already given you permission to believe what you will...

Just because YOU believe it does not make it so.

The stories are either TRUE
OR
Not True.

He either IS GOD
or IS CRAZY.

I've been through the other hypothesis.
They don't work.

To quote somethink I read here recently:
"Just because YOU believe it doesn't make it so."

But it is quite obvious that you are not interested in ideas that you have already discarder for your consideration.

I am grateful for your permission not to believe in your religion... I will certainly mention it if I ever meet God.

Thanks for your time.

 

[GodsGrace101]

To quote somethink I read here recently:
"Just because YOU believe it doesn't make it so."

But it is quite obvious that you are not interested in ideas that you have already discarder for your consideration.

I am grateful for your permission not to believe in your religion... I will certainly mention it if I ever meet God.

Thanks for your time.

Ah. But YOU believe something that cannot be.

You're welcome I'm sure.

 

[Jamsie]

LOL
At post 57 to @Belk, I posted this...
He refused to even look at it.

Give thoughts to various persepctives?
I interest myself in science and try to keep up.

So who is the dumb, closed minded person that can't even think straight enough to know there's no god?

Questions | Uncover

I think people are more often than not quite rigid in their beliefs, and I doubt are much given to persuasion. I believe this goes both ways, and admit it has been my experience to find many respectful Atheists and those who are not, but that is true of Christians as well. (I often must make an effort towards humility, kindness, and acceptance myself) Chesterton said that "“Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” It does seem that once we've shut it on something we consider solid it is not likely we would tend to open it again.

I think too that at times we don't really either listen attentively or read with full comprehension because we are too ready to "attack"... I've been so guilty. One of the arguments against Theism is God's hiddenness among others and I noted in a recent read of Plantinga that he acknowledges the difficulty in addressing many of the arguments against Theism. If all of the answers were available then of what value is faith? … and it does seem obvious that faith has a preeminent position in the Christian life.

On an extremely rare occasion I might be given to some launch into the metaphysical quicksand though understanding it is simply an exercise to raise what I consider a valid defense. Although I often fail I attempt to be more concerned with my conduct in a discussion … lot of work to be done in the political realm!

 

[GodsGrace101]

I think people are more often than not quite rigid in their beliefs, and I doubt are much given to persuasion. I believe this goes both ways, and admit it has been my experience to find many respectful Atheists and those who are not, but that is true of Christians as well. (I often must make an effort towards humility, kindness, and acceptance myself) Chesterton said that "“Merely having an open mind is nothing. The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.” It does seem that once we've shut it on something we consider solid it is not likely we would tend to open it again.

I think too that at times we don't really either listen attentively or read with full comprehension because we are too ready to "attack"... I've been so guilty. One of the arguments against Theism is God's hiddenness among others and I noted in a recent read of Plantinga that he acknowledges the difficulty in addressing many of the arguments against Theism. If all of the answers were available then of what value is faith? … and it does seem obvious that faith has a preeminent position in the Christian life.

On an extremely rare occasion I might be given to some launch into the metaphysical quicksand though understanding it is simply an exercise to raise what I consider a valid defense. Although I often fail I attempt to be more concerned with my conduct in a discussion … lot of work to be done in the political realm!

Depends who you're speaking to.
On another site I had a discussion with a philosopher type which lasted about two months. It was very interesting and hit a lot of points, faith, modern morals, objectivity/subjectivity, etc.

This is also true of another thread here..it went on for about 34 pages. I get rather defensive when I'm told, repeatedly, that Jesus could have been a real man but lies were told about Him. And no explanation by the other party is either asked or accepted. When I speak of science I don't pretend to know more than a scientists...when an atheist speaks about Jesus, they shouldn't pretend that they know more than I or You do.

I like GK Chesterton. Persons that know God just seem to be different to me. The work of the Holy Spirit is real...but it cannot be seen as real to someone that doesn't even believe He's real.

God has been trying to reveal Himself forever.
Romans 1:19-20

The American Indian believed in the Great Spirit; Buddha; Krishna, etc. Light sent to us at different times and to different people for those that can sense that there is surely a God that created everything...how He did that remains to be seen.

And when this is brought up, we're told there's something in our brain that makes us want a god...interesting..and what put that in our brain?

Unfathomable questions to which science is secure in their answers.

 

[ViaCrucis]

What evidence do Atheists believe exists to demonstrate that Jesus as depicted in the Bible was/is a mythological figure?

Very few people who are reasonably educated on the subject (i.e. historians, scholars of various sorts) subscribe to the idea that Jesus didn't exist and is "just a myth". Regardless of religion or lack thereof. But if one doesn't believe in God, or believe in the supernatural, then one isn't going to believe the theological faith claims about Jesus as made in the Gospels: that He is the Messiah, the Son of God, that His death was for the sins of the world, that He rose from the dead, His miracles, et al. Those are the unique faith claims of our religion as Christians.

If one believed that Jesus, as presented in the Gospels, is true and authentic to the historical Jesus--born of a virgin, performed miracles, is the resurrected Son of God, etc--then they wouldn't be atheists, they'd be Christians; since these are the specific faith claims of our religion.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

But since there is no compelling evidence for the non-existence of God, it is quite possible that Jesus as depicted in the Bible is a real, historical person.

Consider applying that reasoning to anything you don't believe in--unicorns, the various gods of the ancient world pantheons, ghosts, the flying spaghetti monster, anything--and you can see how that kind of reasoning doesn't hold up.

I don't believe in a lot of things, but I can't find "compelling evidence for the non-existence" of those things; because that's not how the burden of evidence works.

-CryptoLutheran