Do you believe Jesus existed?

[Len Cnut]

Yes, fact.

And the bible claims all sorts of unbelievable things attributed to Jesus from parting of Red Sea to the plagues of locust, the river turning to blood, etc.

It is a book of folklore with some historical facts woven in so unless you were there it is not a fact and there is no way to prove it was true or false.

But there is a way. By comparing the New Testament with other, none Christian, sources, Jesus Christ emerges as a real historic figure. Tacitus, Suetonius and Josephus all cite Jesus/Christ. We also have archaeological evidence of Pilate's prefecture of Judaea.

Anecdotal writings as all the individuals you mentioned were supposedly born after Jesus's death.

Also lets be honest the writings of the ancients are not original as their stories were written and rewritten by others throughout history. Who knows what changes and distortions were introduced as they were handed down over 2000 years of history. Do you really believe the Catholic church has not changed or modified the scriptures over the millennia to fit their own agenda?

I am not saying that the historical Jesus never existed I just dispute the notion that it is a proven fact.

Those three individuals were all writing long before Christianity became an accepted state religion. Also, how else can we explain the Pilate stone?

They still were not alive during Jesus's supposed lifetime so anything they wrote would be anecdotal based on what others told them and we have no way to verify the information they were given.

The Pilate stone does not mention Jesus only Pilate's name and again it is anecdotal as you are trying to prove Jesus existed based on the proof that Pilate likely existed which by the way there is no way to prove the exact date of the Pilate stone or if it is even authentic. it is believed authentic based on where it was found nothing more.

Again I am not saying historical Jesus did not exist. That is not my argument. I am arguing that it is not a "fact" as you and others are claiming but rather a supposition based on available historical evidence. We do not have conclusive proof that he existed so it cannot be considered a "fact".

Well if you a second guessing every individual, extent in every secondary bit of text, you can doubt anyone who has ever existed, did in actual fact exist, from most of recorded history! Outside of certain elite Romans, we have more evidence of Jesus's existence than we do for the mass majority of humans who existed from that era.

You are not an Anti-Stratfordians, are you? If there is one segment of humanity I despise more than atheists, it is Anti-Stratfordians.

The Pilate stone proves the prefecture of Pilate existed. If the New Testament writers did invent Jesus, they certainly did their homework, in getting their correct Roman governor. Why not just except the fact that Jesus of Nazareth did in fact exist.The dots all join if you do that.

''Richard III was in actual fact a ''good guy who was not hump backed - that is all Tudor propaganda''. Lo and behold, they dig up his skeleton a few years ago and what do they find? Curvature of the spine!!

You are still not getting my point Diesel. I never said Jesus did not exist only that it is not a fact as the evidence is anecdotal. All evidence points to his existence but it is not conclusive to be able to claim fact.

And you despise atheists? really? not very tolerant or christian of you............

But what more would one need, to prove the existence of somebody who has lived? Photographic evidence, DNA sample? Using your theory, you would doubt everybody who has lived in human history.

There is something about atheism which seems to produce heightened levels of smugness and a sense of inflated intellectual superiority.

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

Edited March 4, 2015 by Len B'stard

[Dazey]

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

But you don't really need to take a leap of faith to not believe in something for which there's no evidence. That doesn't really make sense.

[Len Cnut]

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

But you don't really need to take a leap of faith to not believe in something for which there's no evidence. That doesn't really make sense.

Well since i can't prove it conclusively then i fall back on my faith that there isn't a God. I have an inate belief that there is no God, some people say that there is, since i can't show them something that goes 'here, see, look, no God' what is there left to fall back on but my faith? I feel that there's no evidence but people who do believe in God feel him inately, in everything, in the same way i feel a lack of God, they think all sorts of things that i don't consider evidence of God existing but they do so, to clear things up, to clear up my inability to disprove God (not sure what that shape that evidence would take, a photo of an empty heaven, Gods tombstone, i don't know) i fall back on my faith. They can do it, why can't i?

[spunko12345]

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

But you don't really need to take a leap of faith to not believe in something for which there's no evidence. That doesn't really make sense.

Precisely. If you took a leap of faith to not believe everything and anything that there's no reason to believe in the first place you'd be leaping around all over the place.

[Dazey]

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

But you don't really need to take a leap of faith to not believe in something for which there's no evidence. That doesn't really make sense.

Well since i can't prove it conclusively then i fall back on my faith that there isn't a God. I have an inate belief that there is no God, some people say that there is, since i can't show them something that goes 'here, see, look, no God' what is there left to fall back on but my faith? I feel that there's no evidence but people who do believe in God feel him inately, in everything, in the same way i feel a lack of God, they think all sorts of things that i don't consider evidence of God existing but they do so, to clear things up, to clear up my inability to disprove God (not sure what that shape that evidence would take, a photo of an empty heaven, Gods tombstone, i don't know) i fall back on my faith. They can do it, why can't i?

It's up to them to prove it, not you.

[spunko12345]

I consider myself a faith based atheist. I have faith in the fact that there is not a God. I can't conclusively prove it but i feel with a certainty, that there isn't a God...or rather i feel a distinct lack of God. But since i can't prove it conclusively one way or the other there's a leap of faith involved. The cardinal difference is that i feel my leap of faith is the equivalent of stepping over a missing floorboard compared to one believers in God make. But I could be wrong and I'm more than open for someone to prove me wrong. I'm not sure how they would or with what kind of evidence, thats kinda up to them...but I'm pretty easy to convince if you've got an idea I'm always open to hear it

And i do not think that all religions are devoid of worth, quite to the contrary i consider the vast majority of them as offering to you perfectly functional ways of life.

But you don't really need to take a leap of faith to not believe in something for which there's no evidence. That doesn't really make sense.

Well since i can't prove it conclusively then i fall back on my faith that there isn't a God. I have an inate belief that there is no God, some people say that there is, since i can't show them something that goes 'here, see, look, no God' what is there left to fall back on but my faith? I feel that there's no evidence but people who do believe in God feel him inately, in everything, in the same way i feel a lack of God, they think all sorts of things that i don't consider evidence of God existing but they do so, to clear things up, to clear up my inability to disprove God (not sure what that shape that evidence would take, a photo of an empty heaven, Gods tombstone, i don't know) i fall back on my faith. They can do it, why can't i?

I take your point but instead of equating a leap of faith to not believe in God to stepping over a missing paving slab I liken it more to stepping over onto a solid bit of concrete. Unless it can be proven that the concrete is actually thin air.