User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 11 to 20 of 45

  1. #11
    Senior Member Sanctus Iacobus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    MBTI
    STP
    Posts
    286

    Default

    why does anyone wish he didn't?

  2. #12
    Senior Member InTheFlesh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Enneagram
    CFV
    Posts
    276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beargryllz View Post
    Why does anything matter?
    Because individuals assign value, sometimes arbitrarily, based off either objective or subjective criterion.
    Silly nihilism

    I wanted to know his reason for asking.

  3. #13
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ginkgo View Post
    Jesus was just another number on Pilot's list. It's doubtful that Pilot would have even displaced the decision onto a crowd of Jews like the scripture suggests, as that would have compromised his authority.

    Apparently, Yeshua was a fairly common name at the time. So... yeah.
    Glad you got Jesus' name right.

    (Of course, then there's the vomitous misspelling of "[Pontius] Pilate" that concerns me...)
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  4. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sp/so
    Socionics
    IEI
    Posts
    2,841

    Default

    Without concrete evidence, the actuallity of the existence of Jesus Christ cannot be fully known, as we can only derive proof of his existence from the testimony of men during that time, who may have recorded false data as real. But even if the actual existence of Jesus Christ is unknown to us, what will it matter? Jesus Christ is but an image, a symbol, a figure, that has greatly infulenced the whole world we know it, and will continue to influence many with his supposed guidance and values. In that respect, Jesus Christ did exist.

  5. #15
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Thread reopened with almost half of its posts removed (due to being blatant derails).

    This is in the Philosophy/Religion section; please keep it on track, thanks.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  6. #16
    Senior Member Survive & Stay Free's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    ESTJ
    Enneagram
    9 so/sx
    Posts
    21,653

    Default

    Yes.

  7. #17
    Anew Leaf
    Guest

    Default

    *coughs politely*

    If anyone wants to read an interesting book on this subject, I recommend this one: http://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Legend-H...112701&sr=8-13

    It's written by the (ENTP yay) pastor of the church I enjoy listening to on podcast.

  8. #18
    Member amazingdatagirl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    95

    Default

    Matthew, Mark, and Luke are known as synoptic Gospels. Their text is structured very much like a modern biography - events are recounted in chronological order. Since these three documents roughly parallel each other, biblical scholars believe that they are based on the same source material. The Gospel of John is not chronological and includes events that are not recorded in the others.

    It is not entirely accurate to assert that none of the Gospels are written in the first person. The author of John's Gospel repeatedly uses the term "the disciple that Jesus loved" when referring to himself. It is a little silly to expect ancient manuscripts to adhere to modern literary conventions. Do you apply the same standards in discrediting other historical documents?

    I've always thought that textual criticism is of limited value in answering the question did Jesus exist. Even if the Gospels are complete fabrications, it does not discount the possibility that a first century rabbi named Jesus founded the messianic cult that evolved into modern day Christianity.

  9. #19
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amazingdatagirl View Post
    Matthew, Mark, and Luke are known as synoptic Gospels. Their text is structured very much like a modern biography - events are recounted in chronological order. Since these three documents roughly parallel each other, biblical scholars believe that they are based on the same source material. The Gospel of John is not chronological and includes events that are not recorded in the others.
    Yup, that seems to be a consensus opinion. Probably Mark was used as a core document for Matthew and Luke. This doesn't describe either way the veracity of the accounts in Matthew and Luke.

    To me, it's similar to a news article taking a shorter AP article as its source and fleshing it out with more detail; just because the longer article uses the AP article as a source does not mean the long article is false, it's just adding additional info that the AP article did not have.

    It is not entirely accurate to assert that none of the Gospels are written in the first person. The author of John's Gospel repeatedly uses the term "the disciple that Jesus loved" when referring to himself. It is a little silly to expect ancient manuscripts to adhere to modern literary conventions. Do you apply the same standards in discrediting other historical documents?
    Which doesn't prove anything. I can use the same phrasing in a fictional story I'm writing; I can also use the same phrasing in a factual story I'm writing. That's the main issue here. I think we can track the documents back to about 100-200 CE. So imagine a document passed orally and then patched together by hand in the 1810-1910. How close to historical events can we believe it is? The benefit of the latter example is that we have a lot of recorded history compared to what we have from 2000 years ago, to compare the narrative to; it's not much different than reading Charles Dickens and then saying, "Yes, his setting is plausible." We don't have nearly as much comparable material from 2000 years back.

    We also have seen how pervasive urban legends are in even today's modern culture. We still have people arguing even on this forum 2-3 months ago about whether Obama was a US citizen rather than born in Kenya, despite a wealth of evidence to the contrary. See the issues now in trusting a personal-style narrative that was pieced together from various bits of people's recollections of a particular chain of events? Misinformation abounds, that's why we have sites like Snopes.com that research all these stories and try to at least anchor them in fact if any exist. So many of these stories are either fraudulent or heavily embellished.

    Most documents do not make the same level of claims that the Gospels do, which is one significant difference. Think about a court of law and the judge giving an attorney a particular amount of leeway to make her case; well, the claims being made here are so significant that they are going to be scrutinized far more heavily.

    I've always thought that textual criticism is of limited value in answering the question did Jesus exist. Even if the Gospels are complete fabrications, it does not discount the possibility that a first century rabbi named Jesus founded the messianic cult that evolved into modern day Christianity.
    While that is true, what you've said is FAR more subjective a conclusion ("Well, it might have happened ANYWAY even if the Gospels are wrong!") than to use actual textual criticism to make what amounts to at least a presentable circumstantial case. Really... if the Gospels can't be trusted, we have NOTHING resembling Jesus as expressed in modern-day Christianity that we can describe him from -- it's completely built on air.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  10. #20
    Away with the fairies Southern Kross's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    4w5 so/sp
    Posts
    2,912

    Default

    I'm an agonostic atheist and believe Jesus existed. I think of him as a religious leader and great philosopher but not divine. I think the speed with which early Christianity was adopted (so shortly after the proposed time of Jesus's death) and the number and specificity of writings about him are enough to persuade me he isn't pure invention. Anyway, I don't know why a Jewish historian would write about a man who espoused beliefs that challenged his faith - ancient historians tended to write about what drew their interest and confirmed their own views.

    It is true that there is no clear evidence that verifies his existence but I expect that eventually there will be some discovery. After all, Pilate was considered fictional until they found the stone in Caeserea with his name inscribed upon it. And Troy was just a myth until Schliemann discovered it using details laid out in the Illiad. Like the New Testament, much of the Illiad is invention (obviously the inclusion of divine elements, for instance), it was written hundreds of years after the events it laid out and many of the specifics can't be verified but the fact there is some truth in it makes one inclined to believe in the possibility that more details may be accurate.
    INFP 4w5 so/sp

    I've dreamt in my life dreams that have stayed with me ever after, and changed my ideas;
    they've gone through and through me, like wine through water, and altered the colour of my mind.

    - Emily Bronte

Similar Threads

  1. How did you get the politics you did
    By Zergling in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 01-21-2016, 06:06 PM
  2. Why did Jesus have to die?
    By antireconciler in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 173
    Last Post: 02-06-2013, 08:36 PM
  3. How did you find out about MBTI?
    By Economica in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 06:30 AM
  4. I never did this...
    By Littlelostnf in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-23-2007, 05:35 AM
  5. Replies: 27
    Last Post: 05-20-2007, 03:18 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO