I envy people who have Faith

[BlueBloodedBlue]

I don't but it must be a real comfort to believe in a higher power and have something that gives a meaning to everything.

That's it really.

Can you cite the strong evidence? Not the hypothesis of his resurrection but the actual proven evidence of this event happened that you speak of.

This is the crux of it. The OP was about envying those with faith and several posters have responded with the benefits of having a faith and how it’s not a choice but something you can lean into and be open to.
It’s not as if we’re interrupting you on your doorstep or pulling up a chair while you’re having a private family meal in the pub.

Well, Hawkins, we meet again! You seem very interested in aliens - do you know something we don’t? 🤔

Anyway, I digress. There's a lovely illustration of how I believe God is always with us, even when it feels we've been abandoned in times of trouble:

The same as any historical evidence:
the evidence of the documents which are the best attested of any ancient documents
the evidence of the witnesses
the evidence of the empty tomb
etc
There isn’t really space for me to do it here but you need to read something by professor Tom Wright or (less academic) Lee Strobel’s Case for Christ to investigate the evidence. The evidence is actually overwhelming for someone with an open mind who does not believe in a closed universe

@SnoozyLucy7 An article in The Guardian from 2017:

'How confident can we be that Jesus Christ actually lived?
The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur.

What do Christian writings tell us?
The value of this evidence is that it is both early and detailed. The first Christian writings to talk about Jesus are the epistles of St Paul, and scholars agree that the earliest of these letters were written within 25 years of Jesus’s death at the very latest, while the detailed biographical accounts of Jesus in the New Testament gospels date from around 40 years after he died. These all appeared within the lifetimes of numerous eyewitnesses, and provide descriptions that comport with the culture and geography of first-century Palestine. It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and place – under the aegis of the Roman empire – where there was strong suspicion of Judaism.

What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.'

The better question to ask would be, was Jesus resurrected.

It’s not as if we’re interrupting you on your doorstep or pulling up a chair while you’re having a private family meal in the pub.

Well, actually, for some evangelical types it is just that. Happened to us only a few weeks ago. We were quietly having a drink at a seaside terrace, sitting outside, when my youngest was approached by a woman who asked if they knew Jesus, who then said overtly that if only they believed in him, they might not need their wheelchair. She then experienced a miracle: We remained polite instead of telling her to fuck off and take a flying leap off the sea wall.

Not. OK.

Please don’t be arrogant and rude. My mind is indeed very open and I do not believe in a closed universe. Why would you speak down like that to a make a point? Good grief.

A lot of this do called evidence is washy washy and we definitely can’t trust the bible, for definitive historical accuracy, as all of it was written a long time after the death of Christ, over many centuries, with inclusions, exclusions and change etc. Basically so much of it is hear say, ultimately.

We all believe in what we need to get through life. But please don’t go round putting down people to make your very subjective views.

I agree it's out of order, but Etinoxaurus was saying it's not happening here.

@Vincitveritas I agree that Jesus was a historical figure. The evidence is quite clear - though you should never underestimate the extent to which the famous writers of the Roman Empire had a political agenda. Every single one of them was in thrall to one of the major political factions of their time, and their writings should be approached with a healthy dose of scepticism.

An empty tomb is not evidence of someone coming back to life. It's evidence of someone opening a tomb and removing what was inside.

How is stating facts being arrogant or rude? Many people believe what you say but modern scholarship believes the gospels were written within a generation of Jesus and that we can be sure that the text we have today is 99.5% pure. The testimony is those who actually saw what happened - like any historical document.

@pointythings I'm so sorry. Your restraint was indeed miraculous.

Nevertheless, the evidence for Jesus' existence is there if you care to look for it. My comment was more aimed at the people who say Jesus was just a mythological figure, a bit like Robin Hood. Although, as of 2020, over 56% of the world's population don't need evidence of God's existence, because they have faith (and that's just the Abrahamic religions).

@Malie, a generation is between 12 and 30 years. Can you imagine how much hearsay and exaggeration can happen in a span of time that long? This isn't the gotcha you think it is.

And eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable - research has shown that very clearly indeed.

"Objection hearsay!" (Sorry, I couldn't resist 😋).

@Vincitveritas I fully don't blame you.

😁😉

@Malie

The evidence is actually overwhelming for someone with an open mind who does not believe in a closed universe

It was this that was rude.

And dismissive and patronising.

Many of us have studied religion, including going to religious schools as children.

Many of us have also as adults done the work to read up on what we were told was fact at school / church growing up, with an open mind, in order to establish what we personally believe in.

Calling people closed minded and assuming they haven't researched and read up on this subject, sometimes throughout childhood and adulthood, is patronising and dismissive.

HTH.

@pointythings

Well, actually, for some evangelical types it is just that. Happened to us only a few weeks ago. We were quietly having a drink at a seaside terrace, sitting outside, when my youngest was approached by a woman who asked if they knew Jesus, who then said overtly that if only they believed in him, they might not need their wheelchair. She then experienced a miracle: We remained polite instead of telling her to fuck off and take a flying leap off the sea wall.

Fuck me, this is so awful. I'm really sorry and I commend you for not telling them to fuck off. Disgusting behaviour.

I think that it is very rude to assume that people who don't agree with you haven't studied and opened their minds to learning. It's also arrogant - you'd basically be saying that if people read and study and come to a different conclusion from yours, they're automatically wrong. It's this arrogance that exists in some believers that I find so repulsive, and it massively turns me off religion. Fortunately I have friends who are religious (from a spectrum of faiths)who are not arrogant and who are able to respect that people can have different beliefs without being wrong.

I asked a Christian person today why the all powerful god they believe in would allow the floods, deaths and abject misery in Pakistan.

Their reply: "I don't know."

Can anyone elaborate further?

In that case we can write off all ancient history - in fact all history. For all history is made up of the testimony of eyewitnesses. The first gospel tradition dates back a couple of years from when Jesus rose again. You are of course completely wrong in your assumptions in that you judge in a period when reading and writing are universal and memory is not. In the times the gospels were written memory was everything because people did not read or write. Have you ever been to societies where people can’t read? The memory is astonishing. I don’t know what research you are quoting but no doubt it is based on modern society and not on societies of the first century

I believe that scientists would tell us that it is men’s misuse of the Earth

Gosh, I’d have expected ‘mysterious ways/not for us to understand’ as a reply to that, it’s usually the stock answer to such questions

@Malie

How about children getting terminal cancer or incredibly painful conditions from birth? Genetic things that involve no 'sin' of humans.

Atheists carefully consider these things, they aren't just 'gotcha' questions.

I simply cannot see how a loving god who loves humans could allow an innocent child to be in agony from birth or face painful treatments and ultimately a terminal diagnosis.

I'm not saying this flippantly, it's something I struggle to understand how people of faith reconcile because it doesn't make sense at all logically for innocent children to be put through agony.