What Would Evidence for God's Existence Be Like?

[Johnnz]

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Mohammed was a real person. Does this mean that the God really did dictate the Quran to Mohammed?

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Buddha was a real person.

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Haile Selassie was a real person. Does this mean that Haile Selassie really was God incarnate as the Rastafarians claim?

Here it is a matter of the reliability of the information given to us in the documents and the consequent 'worldview' that we can arrive at based on such texts. Christian faith stacks up pretty well on both counts. Using standard criteria f or evaluating historical texts neither Mohammed nor Haile Selassie claimed to be God, nor did they rise from the dead. Sellassie's followers claims must be assessed against what we know of the life, teachings and resurrection of Jesus as events within history.

First, nothing in the Bible was written by Jesus.

But by his followers, other eyewitnesses and contemporaries. Here historical criteria are the key factors to take into account.

Second, there are tons of written documents that are older than the gospels. The Enuma Elish from 1800 years before the gospels comes to mind.

As above. Plus, age does not automatically validate. A geocentric universe and a flat earth were views that long predated modernity.

John
NZ

 

[stevevw]

By thinking out of the box, do you mean how Ford engineers thought outside the box when they designed in the explosive nature of the Pinto?

No I was thinking of the brilliant design and of the Lada made by AutoVaz. Its a Russian classic.

 

[stevevw]

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Mohammed was a real person. Does this mean that the God really did dictate the Quran to Mohammed?

I havnt said anything about what Jesus did. I am saying that He was a real person. Some people dont even want to acknowledge that.

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Buddha was a real person.

Modern day historians also acknowledge that Haile Selassie was a real person. Does this mean that Haile Selassie really was God incarnate as the Rastafarians claim?

Yes all these people are real according to historians. The difference is with Jesus is that His life was not listed as normal compared to those others. They married, joined armies, were princes in Royal lines and had many of the worldly attributes. As far as I have heard Mohammad didn't even want to be a prophet at one stage and wanted to be a leader in the military. Even though you can say there is no evidence that Jesus was different to this it is still written and attributed to Him that He was God incarnate. He was born of a virgin and was the prophesied Messiah who would save mankind.

First, nothing in the Bible was written by Jesus.

But many wrote down what He said soon after He was gone. The other point is even though we can say that Plato wrote what he did there is no verification that he did. There are only 7 copies of something that he was suppose to have written that date to 900 years after he was around. The evidence is still not direct and verified. But it is totally accepted. So we still accept the things that these people wrote about as well.

Now if there were people like some of the disciples and the apostle Paul writing stuff down soon after Jesus's death what is the difference. Why do we question them. Paul has been verified as a real person. Some of the disciples have been verified even though I believe they are all true. Even Luke goes to the point of saying that he should write these things down to record a true account of what happened so that others may know of the events that took place. I have already gone into this many times. John the baptise is another.

Second, there are tons of written documents that are older than the gospels. The Enuma Elish from 1800 years before the gospels comes to mind.

Yes of course people were writing things down whether it be symbols like hieroglyphic or the Cuneiform system. People have always communicated. But just because somethings are written before the bible doesn't mean it invalidates the bible. The bible is still the greatest set of writings we have found. It is a book that is still in publication and is over 3500 years old in places. It is the most translated and read book in history and there are more copies than any other writing in history.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes all these people are real according to historians. The difference is with Jesus is that His life was not listed as normal compared to those others. They married, joined armies, were princes in Royal lines and had many of the worldly attributes. As far as I have heard Mohammad didn't even want to be a prophet at one stage and wanted to be a leader in the military. Even though you can say there is no evidence that Jesus was different to this it is still written and attributed to Him that He was God incarnate. He was born of a virgin and was the prophesied Messiah who would save mankind.

Haile Selassie is also said to be God incarnate, and he was a real person. Many of the pharaohs claimed to be gods, and they were real people. What you claim of Jesus is not special in any way.

But many wrote down what He said soon after He was gone.

We don't know that.

The other point is even though we can say that Plato wrote what he did there is no verification that he did.

It doesn't matter if Plato wrote it or not. No one is saying that those words are true simply because Plato said them.

Now if there were people like some of the disciples and the apostle Paul writing stuff down soon after Jesus's death what is the difference. Why do we question them.

Why shouldn't we question them?

Paul has been verified as a real person. Some of the disciples have been verified even though I believe they are all true. Even Luke goes to the point of saying that he should write these things down to record a true account of what happened so that others may know of the events that took place. I have already gone into this many times. John the baptise is another.

Are you saying that real people are incapable of writing fictional stories?

Yes of course people were writing things down whether it be symbols like hieroglyphic or the Cuneiform system. People have always communicated. But just because somethings are written before the bible doesn't mean it invalidates the bible. The bible is still the greatest set of writings we have found. It is a book that is still in publication and is over 4000 years old in places. It is the most translated and read book in history and there are more copies than any other writing in history.

Popularity does not indicate truth.

 

[stevevw]

Copy of same post.

 

[Loudmouth]

No I was thinking of the brilliant design and of the Lada made by AutoVaz. Its a Russian classic.

So we can differentiate between bad and good design?

 

[Ana the Ist]

I havnt said anything about what Jesus did. I am saying that He was a real person. Some people dont even want to acknowledge that.

Yes all these people are real according to historians. The difference is with Jesus is that His life was not listed as normal compared to those others. They married, joined armies, were princes in Royal lines and had many of the worldly attributes. As far as I have heard Mohammad didn't even want to be a prophet at one stage and wanted to be a leader in the military. Even though you can say there is no evidence that Jesus was different to this it is still written and attributed to Him that He was God incarnate. He was born of a virgin and was the prophesied Messiah who would save mankind.[/SIZE]

When someone says that Jesus wasn't different... they could mean a couple things. The first is obvious, that the supernatural claims about Jesus cannot be confirmed in any way and someone writing about them from the viewpoint of a follower doesn't really add any credibility to such claims.

However, they could also be saying that there's really nothing all that unique about the supernatural claims in the story of Jesus either. Whether you're speaking about the virgin birth, healing the sick, or being persecuted by authorities...the "story of Jesus" actually follows an arc that wasn't at all uncommon for the time the story was created.

Ever hear of a book called "The Hero" by a guy named Lord Raglan? Raglan was something of a ancient mythology buff and having read a fair amount of mythological tales... he recognized a pattern that existed in many of the stories. The pattern was that of the central hero figure in many of the tales and it struck him as something necessary for mythology in ancient times. In other words, no one was going to listen to your story if it didn't contain a hero with some of these elements. Take a look and see if they are at all familiar...

Lord' Raglan's Hero Pattern

Now, Lord Raglan never actually went over the life of Jesus and determined how many of these "hero" elements the story of Jesus had... after all, he didn't want to stir up any trouble for himself. However, one doesn't need to hold a christian's hand and explain just how many of these elements are part and parcel to the story of Jesus... you know the story, take a look for yourself.

Now does this invalidate the story of Jesus Christ? Of course not. It's entirely possible that there once lived a Jew called Jesus who led a life that quite closely resembles the lives of many mythological figures that came before him. Then again, that isn't the most likely explanation, now is it? No...the most likely explanation is that these elements of popular mythological hero figures were interpolated into the story of Jesus' life and they never actually happened.

There's even a very old apologist (one of the first apologists... name escapes me, I'd have to look it up when less sleepy) who had written that the common man noticed the story of Christ very closely resembles that of the popular god Dionysus. Coincidence? Maybe... but I doubt it and it's not the most reasonable explanation.

 

[Smidlee]

Now does this invalidate the story of Jesus Christ? Of course not. It's entirely possible that there once lived a Jew called Jesus who led a life that quite closely resembles the lives of many mythological figures that came before him. Then again, that isn't the most likely explanation, now is it? No...the most likely explanation is that these elements of popular mythological hero figures were interpolated into the story of Jesus' life and they never actually happened.

There's even a very old apologist (one of the first apologists... name escapes me, I'd have to look it up when less sleepy) who had written that the common man noticed the story of Christ very closely resembles that of the popular god Dionysus. Coincidence? Maybe... but I doubt it and it's not the most reasonable explanation.

Since one of God's archangels rebelled and Christ was before Abraham then it would make sense this archangels would in fact build up false religions around the truths of the coming Messiah. The OT is loaded with "types" of Christ so that the Jews should have recognized him.
So even Christians believe that certain truths about God are build-in man so that these false religions had some characteristics of the True God.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Since one of God's archangels rebelled and Christ was before Abraham then it would make sense this archangels would in fact build up false religions around the truths of the coming Messiah. The OT is loaded with "types" of Christ so that the Jews should have recognized him.

I'm not sure what you're saying here...

Are you suggesting that Satan planted a bunch of mythological stories about heroes that share similarities to Jesus's story? For what purpose exactly?

IMO, even if you're a christian.... you should give the Jews of Jesus' time a little leeway regarding not recognizing Jesus as their messiah. There were so many people making that claim at that time... it's asking a lot to have them investigate every claim for authentication. Realistically, they just followed whatever messiah told the best story/message.

 

[Smidlee]

I'm not sure what you're saying here...

Are you suggesting that Satan planted a bunch of mythological stories about heroes that share similarities to Jesus's story? For what purpose exactly?

IMO, even if you're a christian.... you should give the Jews of Jesus' time a little leeway regarding not recognizing Jesus as their messiah. There were so many people making that claim at that time... it's asking a lot to have them investigate every claim for authentication. Realistically, they just followed whatever messiah told the best story/message.

Yet the wise men who weren't even Jews knew about his birth.
Your link was mistaken claiming Mary and Joseph were seen as royalty because they were not. The Jews were looking for Jesus (their Messiah) to come in as royalty and not a carpenters' son. (By the way those before Jesus claiming to be the Messiah were trying to play as a hero. When Jesus refused to play the hero part the people turn on him. Satan tried to get Jesus to play the hero as well)


If you want to deceive people you don't make up a complete lie but instead a lie mixed together with a lot of truth.

 

[stevevw]

When someone says that Jesus wasn't different... they could mean a couple things. The first is obvious, that the supernatural claims about Jesus cannot be confirmed in any way and someone writing about them from the viewpoint of a follower doesn't really add any credibility to such claims.

However, they could also be saying that there's really nothing all that unique about the supernatural claims in the story of Jesus either. Whether you're speaking about the virgin birth, healing the sick, or being persecuted by authorities...the "story of Jesus" actually follows an arc that wasn't at all uncommon for the time the story was created.

Ever hear of a book called "The Hero" by a guy named Lord Raglan? Raglan was something of a ancient mythology buff and having read a fair amount of mythological tales... he recognized a pattern that existed in many of the stories. The pattern was that of the central hero figure in many of the tales and it struck him as something necessary for mythology in ancient times. In other words, no one was going to listen to your story if it didn't contain a hero with some of these elements. Take a look and see if they are at all familiar...

Lord' Raglan's Hero Pattern

Now, Lord Raglan never actually went over the life of Jesus and determined how many of these "hero" elements the story of Jesus had... after all, he didn't want to stir up any trouble for himself. However, one doesn't need to hold a christian's hand and explain just how many of these elements are part and parcel to the story of Jesus... you know the story, take a look for yourself.

Now does this invalidate the story of Jesus Christ? Of course not. It's entirely possible that there once lived a Jew called Jesus who led a life that quite closely resembles the lives of many mythological figures that came before him. Then again, that isn't the most likely explanation, now is it? No...the most likely explanation is that these elements of popular mythological hero figures were interpolated into the story of Jesus' life and they never actually happened.

There's even a very old apologist (one of the first apologists... name escapes me, I'd have to look it up when less sleepy) who had written that the common man noticed the story of Christ very closely resembles that of the popular god Dionysus. Coincidence? Maybe... but I doubt it and it's not the most reasonable explanation.

I will have to come back to this as I am a bit busy. But in the meantime you also have to consider that a lot of the things said about Jesus in the new testament were prophesies that He fulfilled that date back to before most of these so called copy cats. There are also about 300 prophesies mentioned about Jesus in which many of the other copy cats dont mention. The other thing is when you actually look into the stories of the copy cat ones they are not what they said originally and were change and added to and more than likely its the other way around and they have copied the biblical story. The biblical story of Jesus also has some real people, places and things intertwined throughout it as well. The copycat ones often do have an air of mysticism about them and are connected with unreal things sometimes not even of this world as far as the surroundings are concerned. I will post some evidence for this later but that is the general reply I wish to give at this point.[/quote]

 

[stevevw]

So we can differentiate between bad and good design?

Yes the Russian one wasnt the best in design but as far as some say it had a pretty go engine and could take a beating.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Yet the wise men who weren't even Jews knew about his birth.
Your link was mistaken claiming Mary and Joseph were seen as royalty because they were not. The Jews were looking for Jesus (their Messiah) to come in as royalty and not a carpenters' son. (By the way those before Jesus claiming to be the Messiah were trying to play as a hero. When Jesus refused to play the hero part the people turn on him. Satan tried to get Jesus to play the hero as well)


If you want to deceive people you don't make up a complete lie but instead a lie mixed together with a lot of truth.

I don't recall the link saying that Jesus's parents were royalty....it merely claims he fulfilled 18 of the 22 or so common plot devices. Which 18 it's referring to, I don't know. However, I have known many Christians who claimed that Jesus was of the line of king David (I think it was king David) though I don't recall the reasoning behind this or which parent this refers to.

The key thing to remember is that these plot devices are described in a generalized manner so they can express the sameness between mythologies. No one is saying that the story of Hercules and Jesus are exactly the same...just that they share several commonalities with each other and multiple other mythologies of ancient times.

I like this statement here...

"If you want to deceive people you don't make up a complete lie but instead a lie mixed together with a lot of truth.["

It reminds me of the interpolation of Josephus in his Antiquities by christian forgers. It's basically a lie about Jesus mixed into Josephus's larger work. You are wrong, however, in that you cannot create a lie whole-cloth...you certainly can. It just helps if you make it a very very big lie...this is essentially the principle behind bluffing in poker. Try to bluff too small and you'll almost certainly get called...there's no risk in challenging it. If you bluff big...you stand a chance of getting others to believe you simply because you have so much riding on the line.

 

[variant]

I don't recall the link saying that Jesus's parents were royalty....it merely claims he fulfilled 18 of the 22 or so common plot devices. Which 18 it's referring to, I don't know. However, I have known many Christians who claimed that Jesus was of the line of king David (I think it was king David) though I don't recall the reasoning behind this or which parent this refers to.

The Messiah needed to be of the line of David.

Jesus is the Messiah for Christianity so their texts claim he is of the line of David.

Through his father strangely enough who is also claimed to have had no part in his conception.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I will have to come back to this as I am a bit busy. But in the meantime you also have to consider that a lot of the things said about Jesus in the new testament were prophesies that He fulfilled that date back to before most of these so called copy cats. There are also about 300 prophesies mentioned about Jesus in which many of the other copy cats dont mention. The other thing is when you actually look into the stories of the copy cat ones they are not what they said originally and were change and added to and more than likely its the other way around and they have copied the biblical story. The biblical story of Jesus also has some real people, places and things intertwined throughout it as well. The copycat ones often do have an air of mysticism about them and are connected with unreal things sometimes not even of this world as far as the surroundings are concerned. I will post some evidence for this later but that is the general reply I wish to give at this point.

I'll wait for your full reply then.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The Messiah needed to be of the line of David.

Jesus is the Messiah for Christianity so their texts claim he is of the line of David.

Through his father strangely enough who is also claimed to have had no part in his conception.

Thank you Variant! It's been awhile since I've read over the messiah requirements, but I knew it was in there somewhere.

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes the Russian one wasnt the best in design but as far as some say it had a pretty go engine and could take a beating.

Then we can look at the design in organisms and determine if they are good or bad designs, correct?

 

[Tree of Life]

/resurrect

 

[terryjohn]

What evidence would an athiest accept?

 

[Jesse2014]

I wrote something. But you know what, I don't care any more. Screw it.