If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well, atheists are wrong, because if you are an American, in America, people have the right to believe in any religion they want. You can choose to not believe in religion. You can say you don’t believe in the supernatural.

Yep! And I think the world would be better if they chose that. Maybe if we discussed it more and people looked at the evidence for themselves, they would.

But you can’t make thar choice for everyone. Your idea of right for yourself isn’t right for everyone else.

We agree on this principle. But then why are religious people trying to legislate what a woman can do with her body?

You should move to a country with state mandated atheism and enjoy life with like minded individuals.

Now you can F-off, this is my country too. And I love it.

If you think denying the historical man named Jesus is honest, truthful, and factual, you aren’t going to where the evidence goes.

I don't deny historical man Jesus. I have seen scholarship that I accept because I am logical. But when I ask you for similar evidence of his divinity or the supernatural, suddenly, the rules are different. It's hypocrisy.

You are pushing lies and mistruth, something atheists supposedly pride themselves on…being truthful, considering facts, examining evidence.

I am doing nothing of the sort. This is a lie. You are lying.

You are a hypocrite and no better than people you make fun of for believing in “the supernatural.” Plus, you don’t believe in freedom of religion, a core belief and right all Americans are entitled to under the law.

Lies again. I do believe in freedom of religion. I want people to choose it based on facts and evidence. Many religious people want to TAKE AWAY people's right to choose.

See the difference?

Apparently, your facts and evidence are the only valid ones. And that's a problem because you are far from being an authority on anything.

Again, this is entirely off topic in this thread. You have created a strawman so you can knock it down. We are discussing Jesus' existence not his divinity or the "evils" of religion.

It's entirely relevant and on-topic. Why would Jesus' existence matter if he was not divine?

The rest of your answer is non-sequitur .

Because someone who exists in the historical record is considered historical.

Historians are concerned with history.

There’s more evidence for Jesus as a historical person than 99.9% of the people who lived during his time period.

Does it matter if a guy named Howard lived in St. Louis in 1941?

Would it matter if evidence was shown he was a supernatural god with the power to raise the dead and turn water into wine?

Answers: No and Yes.

You can argue uselessly about your uneducated opinion daily for the rest of your life. The scholars, academics, professors, and professionally trained historians think you look and sound foolish.

What scholars disagree with me? I stated I fully accept the scholarship on existence. Pretty sure you’re confusing posters. Maybe you should slow down and think about who you’re responding to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Certainly Paul was be-bopping all over Ancient Rome writing letters and starting churches within 50 years of his death. And his writings and behavior are much too organized to believe he was schizophrenic. So, where did this theology come from? Was there some group of crazy people who made it all up, including a central figure who never existed?

The answer to your question is the First Council of Nicaea.

Thread closed.

You’re welcome.

Wow. You bumped my post from 25 pages ago. Then you took an event ventures after Paul and pretended they, not Paul, made it all up. Proud of yourself?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Perrin: Perrin earned a Bachelor of Arts in English literature from Johns Hopkins University and Master of Divinity from Covenant Theological Seminary. He then earned a Ph.D. in Biblical Studies from Marquette University.

McClymond: Michael McClymond is Professor of Modern Christianity at Saint Louis University. He was educated at Northwestern University (B.A.), Yale University (M.Div.), and the University of Chicago (M.A., Ph.D.), and has held teaching or research appointments at Wheaton College (IL), Westmont College, the University of California–San Diego, Emory University, Yale University, and University of Birmingham (UK).

Ehrman: He began studying the Bible, biblical theology, and biblical languages at Moody Bible Institute,[1] where he earned the school's three-year diploma in 1976.[2] He is a 1978 graduate of Wheaton College in Illinois, where he received his bachelor's degree. He received his PhD (in 1985) and MDiv from Princeton Theological Seminary, where he studied textual criticism of the Bible, development of the New Testament canon and New Testament apocrypha under Bruce Metzger. Both baccalaureate and doctorate were conferred magna cum laude.

He subsequently left evangelicalism and returned to the Episcopal Church, where he remained a liberal Christian for 15 years, but later became an agnostic atheist after struggling with the philosophical problems of evil and suffering.[1][2][6]

Ehrman has taught at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since 1988, after four years of teaching at Rutgers University. At UNC he has served as both the director of graduate studies and the chair of the Department of Religious Studies. He was the recipient of the 2009 J. W. Pope "Spirit of Inquiry" Teaching Award, the 1993 UNC Undergraduate Student Teaching Award, the 1994 Phillip and Ruth Hettleman Prize for Artistic and Scholarly Achievement, and the Bowman and Gordon Gray Award for excellence in teaching.

Piper: He attended Wheaton College between 1964 and 1968, majoring in literature and minoring in philosophy. Studying romantic literature with Clyde Kilby led him to take particular interest in poetry,[17] Piper has published several books of poetry,[18] and continues to pursue, with his poetry, the deeper reality of personal,[19] theological [20] and social [21] reality.

Piper received his Doctor of Theology degree in New Testament studies at the University of Munich, Germany (1971–1974) under Leonhard Goppelt. His dissertation, Love Your Enemies, was published by Cambridge University Press and Baker Book House. Upon completion of his doctorate, Piper taught biblical studies at Bethel University in Saint Paul, Minnesota, for six years between 1974 and 1980.[31]

Nope, they are all scholars. What is your degree in?

Thanks for proving my point. They are evangelical theologians, not historians.

You’ve got no degree, and are disparaging actual scholars, academics, professors, authors, etc. Grow up.

I’m saying the people quoted above are theologians, not historians as claimed above. There is a big difference.

They are theologists with deep religious beliefs (one formerly). Mostly evangelicals.

And comparing modern events with ancient history is not valid. When you look at the level of available evidence it’s really a false equivalency.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:John, the author of the gospel of that name never met Jesus. That assertion made here is unsupported. None of the writers of the gospels or Paul ever met Jesus.

However, Paul met Jesus' brother, an eyewitness.

I guess that's true. I can't dispute that. There is no gospel of James though.

And neither of them are independent/unbiased sources.

We have those too.

There are no independent eyewitnesses.

Other than Jesus' brother and the apostles?

Keyword: independent

And claiming supernatural events lowers confidence in a source.

So if Jesus' brother, James, told you the sky was blue, you would have some doubts? All observers are biased. To claim that there are special independent observers of history is ludicrous.

Do we even know he was a brother? Not the cousin?

The early Christian evangelists are obviously biased.

Well I guess there wasn't an independent unbiased observer present at both births. Regardless, he is an eyewitness to the various events in Jesus' life. Did he ascribe some events to supernatural causes? Yes. Does that make his observations invalid or his conclusions invalid? Again, claiming that there are special people who provide unbiased independent observations of history is ludicrous. I gather you fall for a lot of fake news from your special observers of history.

Obviously they are biased. Can’t believe that needs to be said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very, very people doubt Jesus as a historical figure (which is entirely separate from Christianity).

Virtually all non-Christians recognize that such a person existed, much in the way that Cleopatra, Napoleon, Aristotle, Shakespeare, Gandhi, or any number of other historical figures existed. And then died as the 100% mortals they were.

LOL. You're comparing the "evidence" that Napolean or Gandhi existed with the evidence that Jesus existed?

As discussed on the other thread, Socrates is a closer comparison. But even he had contemporary evidence.

Yes, please. Let’s rehash the same arguments we all made yesterday.

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

[Anonymous]

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very, very people doubt Jesus as a historical figure (which is entirely separate from Christianity).

Virtually all non-Christians recognize that such a person existed, much in the way that Cleopatra, Napoleon, Aristotle, Shakespeare, Gandhi, or any number of other historical figures existed. And then died as the 100% mortals they were.

LOL. You're comparing the "evidence" that Napolean or Gandhi existed with the evidence that Jesus existed?

As discussed on the other thread, Socrates is a closer comparison. But even he had contemporary evidence.

Yes, please. Let’s rehash the same arguments we all made yesterday.

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

I DGAF about Jesus; it doesn't affect me one way or another if he actually lived. He most likely did and I'm not debating that.

My only beef on this thread is with the persistent lack of reasoning and misrepresentation of "facts".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

Nobody did that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

Atheists openly admit on this thread that they are denying the historicity of Jesus Christ because they don’t like the issue of abortion being moved back to the states.

Atheists admitting they don’t like “the supernatural” and believe “the world would be a much better place without it.” (That’s the state mandated atheism communists love so much fyi)

An atheist angrily asking for evidence of “god,” despite being reminded many, many times in this forum that science doesn’t have the tools, capabilities, tests, instruments, etc, to prove or disprove God. Religious belief is personal and based on faith. You are asking the same question, getting the same correct answer. Do you think something has changed in the last few days since you asked and were answered?

The denial of the historical existence of Christ in this forum is based on atheists with agendas…out of step with scholarship and evidence and facts. Funny, as atheists pretend they adore “evidence.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

Atheists openly admit on this thread that they are denying the historicity of Jesus Christ because they don’t like the issue of abortion being moved back to the states.

No I don't think anyone did, and you are lying again. It is possible I missed it, but I know I DIDN'T nor did THE VAST MAJORITY of posters.

Atheists admitting they don’t like “the supernatural” and believe “the world would be a much better place without it.” (That’s the state mandated atheism communists love so much fyi)

That's not state mandated atheism by any means. You lie again. I wish people to make their decisions based on evidence and logic. You do when it benefits you, and don't when it doesn't. And it is the religious - AND ONLY THE RELIGIOUS - who are unified around the world to take away basic human rights.

And it's not that we "don't like" the supernatural. It's that there is ZERO EVIDENCE for it. If it existed, I personally would like it just fine; might be fun even! Who doesn't enjoy ghost stories! But that's it, they are just stories, as far as anyone can tell.

An atheist angrily asking for evidence of “god,” despite being reminded many, many times in this forum that science doesn’t have the tools, capabilities, tests, instruments, etc, to prove or disprove God.

The only thing I am angry about is you dishonestly misrepresenting my posts. And thanks for admitting that the same standard of evidence you embrace and demand to show Jesus existed suddenly DOES NOT COUNT when it comes to the big question. That's hypocrisy.

Religious belief is personal and based on faith. You are asking the same question, getting the same correct answer. Do you think something has changed in the last few days since you asked and were answered?

No, nothing has changed about that question since the beginning of human history. So why does it bother you so much?

The denial of the historical existence of Christ in this forum is based on atheists with agendas…out of step with scholarship and evidence and facts. Funny, as atheists pretend they adore “evidence.”

Again you are a lying hypocrite: no one did what you accuse them of, everyone here accepts things on evidence except for you. You believe in something without evidence. Every accusation is a confession.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

Atheists openly admit on this thread that they are denying the historicity of Jesus Christ because they don’t like the issue of abortion being moved back to the states.

Atheists admitting they don’t like “the supernatural” and believe “the world would be a much better place without it.” (That’s the state mandated atheism communists love so much fyi)

An atheist angrily asking for evidence of “god,” despite being reminded many, many times in this forum that science doesn’t have the tools, capabilities, tests, instruments, etc, to prove or disprove God. Religious belief is personal and based on faith. You are asking the same question, getting the same correct answer. Do you think something has changed in the last few days since you asked and were answered?

The denial of the historical existence of Christ in this forum is based on atheists with agendas…out of step with scholarship and evidence and facts. Funny, as atheists pretend they adore “evidence.”

You are either confused or you’re lying. Nobody here denied he existed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

Atheists openly admit on this thread that they are denying the historicity of Jesus Christ because they don’t like the issue of abortion being moved back to the states.

Atheists admitting they don’t like “the supernatural” and believe “the world would be a much better place without it.” (That’s the state mandated atheism communists love so much fyi)

An atheist angrily asking for evidence of “god,” despite being reminded many, many times in this forum that science doesn’t have the tools, capabilities, tests, instruments, etc, to prove or disprove God. Religious belief is personal and based on faith. You are asking the same question, getting the same correct answer. Do you think something has changed in the last few days since you asked and were answered?

The denial of the historical existence of Christ in this forum is based on atheists with agendas…out of step with scholarship and evidence and facts. Funny, as atheists pretend they adore “evidence.”

You are either confused or you’re lying. Nobody here denied he existed.

You mean other than the OP of this thread? Talk about gaslighting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

“As an atheist, I’ve got no dog in this fight.”

Continues to fight, dogs be dammed.

DP here. Who says atheists have no interest in this "fight"?

It is religious people trying to take human rights away that make a fight necessary.

So pretending Jesus never existed and lying about his life on earth to deceive people helps you maintain “rights” how?

In America, we have freedom of religion, to practice as we choose, and you and others on this thread wish you could take that right away. People who want to abolish freedom of religion but worry about their “rights” and hypocritical.

I did not do that at all - in fact I did the opposite YOU LIAR.

I asked to see the evidence he was a god. Because I haven't seen any. And you, apparently, have none either.

Atheists openly admit on this thread that they are denying the historicity of Jesus Christ because they don’t like the issue of abortion being moved back to the states.

Atheists admitting they don’t like “the supernatural” and believe “the world would be a much better place without it.” (That’s the state mandated atheism communists love so much fyi)

An atheist angrily asking for evidence of “god,” despite being reminded many, many times in this forum that science doesn’t have the tools, capabilities, tests, instruments, etc, to prove or disprove God. Religious belief is personal and based on faith. You are asking the same question, getting the same correct answer. Do you think something has changed in the last few days since you asked and were answered?

The denial of the historical existence of Christ in this forum is based on atheists with agendas…out of step with scholarship and evidence and facts. Funny, as atheists pretend they adore “evidence.”

You are either confused or you’re lying. Nobody here denied he existed.

You mean other than the OP of this thread? Talk about gaslighting.

Ha that’s funny I read it exactly the opposite, that the OP was a theist. Genuinely thought that.