Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Philosophy/religion

Join our Philosophy forum to discuss religion and spirituality.

I've completely forgotten why God doesn't intervene

228 replies

Alameda · 11/07/2012 22:11

or isn't there a reason?

OP posts:
GrimmaTheNome · 16/07/2012 16:35

Jesus wasn't invented, he really lived. No serious scholar doubts this.
Yes, but it may be valid to say he was reinvented.

TheJackel · 16/07/2012 16:37

"It's all very interesting. I'd be astonished if Jesus hadn't existed in some form - the Pauline epistles were written within a couple of decades of his death with plenty of his disciples still around. But how much of the Gospels are based on second or third hand eyewitness accounts, and how much on reimaginings to fulfil OT prophecies?"

This biggest problem is not just the unoriginal story. It also has to do with your argument here too. For a man that wanted to preach love ect and from a godly perspective, it's pretty interesting he couldn't write his own philosophies down. And decades after his death people are supposedly quoting him word for word ect? Can anyone here even identify for me the supposed 500 or so witnesses? Oh, that's right, they are an absolute negative to along with the non-existing contemporary record of his existence.. But I'm sure there might even had been sever people named Jesus in that era.

TheJackel · 16/07/2012 16:40

Jesus wasn't invented, he really lived. No serious scholar doubts this.

incorrect:

And lets note some other scholars on the subject:

Further information: Chronology of Jesus and Jesus and history, and Origins of Christianity

Biblical scholar L. Michael White, not himself a Jesus-myth theorist, writes that the usual date given for Jesus's birth is between 7 and 4 BCE. This is based on the gospels of Matthew and Luke, which say he was born a Jew during the reign of Herod the Great, who died in March 4 BCE.[8] According to White, his death is typically placed around 30 CE, during the reign of Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor of Judea from 26 to 36 CE.[9] White writes that, so far as we know, Jesus did not write anything, nor did anyone who had personal knowledge of him. There is no archeological evidence of his existence. There are no contemporaneous accounts of his life or death: no eyewitness accounts, or any other kind of first-hand record.

All the accounts of Jesus come from decades or centuries later; the gospels themselves all come from later times, though they may contain earlier sources or oral traditions. The earliest writings that survive are the letters of Paul of Tarsus, written 20?30 years after the dates given for Jesus's death. Paul was not a companion of Jesus, White writes, nor does he ever claim to have seen Jesus before his death.[10]

And like I said... Feel free to provide us with first hand evidence, empirical evidence, contemporary, or even Jesus literary evidence.. What even makes it more questionable is a supposed son of GOD that supposedly is incapable of writing down his own supposed teachings, philosophies ect. They are all magically written only by someone else entirely.. And you would think a Son of GOD would had made the evidence of his existence irrefutable and crystal clear by anyone and everyone.. None of which you would expect to find regarding someone's actual existence exists in the case of Jesus..

Oh and there is more:

Philosopher George Walsh argues that Christianity can be seen as originating in a myth dressed up as history, or with a historical being mythologized into a supernatural one: he calls the former the Christ myth theory, and the latter the historical Jesus theory.[11] Biblical scholars Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd break the spectrum of opinion into four positions; they call the first three the "legendary-Jesus thesis," namely that the picture of Jesus in the gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke is mostly or entirely historically inaccurate.[12]


The Return of Persephone by Frederic Leighton (1891). Robert Price writes that a central plank of the Jesus myth theory is that Jesus is one of a number of dying-and-rising gods.

    The Jesus myth theory: the gospels describe a virtually, and perhaps entirely, fictitious person. There are no grounds for supposing that any aspect of the Jesus narrative is rooted in history. This view is represented to varying degrees by Bruno Bauer, Arthur Drews, G.A. Wells, and Robert Price.[12]
    There is enough evidence to conclude that Jesus existed, but the reports are so unreliable that very little can be said about him with confidence. This view is represented by Rudolf Bultmann and Burton Mack.[12]
    Historical research can reveal a core of historical facts about Jesus, but he is very different from the Jesus of the New Testament. His sayings and miracles are myths. Robert Funk and Crossan represent this view, one that Eddy and Boyd write is increasingly common among New Testament scholars.[12]
    The gospels are reliable historical sources, and critical historiography should not rule out the possibility of supernatural occurrence, a view represented by John P. Meier and N.T. Wright.[12

You even get obvious plagiarism such as we find in the stilling of the Tempest :

Stilling of the Tempest (Mark 4:35ff.)

Well, lets evaluate that shall we?:

12. The Stilling of the Storm (4:35-41)

Helms (pp. 76, 77) demonstrates how this story has been rewritten from Jonah?s adventure, with additions from certain of the Psalms. The basis for the story can be recognized in Jonah 1:4-6, ?But the Lord hurled a great wind upon the sea, and there was a mighty tempest on the sea, so that the ship threatened to break up. Then the mariners were afraid, and each cried to his god? But Jonah had gone down into the inner part of the ship and had lain down, and was fast asleep. So the captain came and said to him, ?What do you mean, you sleeper? Arise, call upon your god! Perhaps the god will give a thought to us, that we do not perish.? Once Jonah turns out to be the guilty party, they throw him into the maw of the sea, ?and the sea ceased from its raging. The men feared the LORD exceedingly? (1:15b-16a). See also Psalm 107:23-29: ?Some went down to the sea in ships, doing business on the great waters; they saw the deeds of the LORD, his wondrous works in the deep. For he commanded, and raised the stormy wind, which lifted up the waves of the sea. They mounted up to the heavens, they went down unto the depths; their courage melted away in their evil plight; they reeled and staggered like drunken men, and were at their wits? end. Then they cried to the LORD in their trouble, and he delivered them from their distress; he made the storm be still, and the waves of the sea were hushed.?

Mark was aware of a similar episode in the Odyssey 10:1-69, in which Odysseus set sail with his dozen ships from the Isle of Aeolus, the god of winds. Aeolus had given Odysseus a bag containing mighty winds in case he should be stalled in the doldrums. Odysseus falls asleep in the hold, and his men sneak a peek into the bag, letting the winds escape. The ships managed to survive the storm, but Odysseus rebuked his crew for their dangerous folly. MacDonald (pp. 68, 174-175) indicates the origin of Jesus? rebuke to the disciples here (Mark 1:40), as well as the puzzling detail in Mark 1:36 that Jesus and the disciples were accompanied by ?other boats.? It makes no sense in Mark and must be understood as a vestige of the Odyssey.

Yeah, again riding on the back others here.. But Lets address another scholar:

New Testament scholar Robert Price, who argues it is quite likely there never was an historical Jesus, writes that the Jesus myth theory is based on three pillars:

    There is no mention of a miracle-working Jesus in secular sources.
    The Pauline epistles, earlier than the gospels, do not provide evidence of a recent historical Jesus.
    The story of Jesus shows strong parallels to Middle Eastern religions about dying and rising gods, symbolizing the rebirth of the individual as a rite of passage. He writes that Christian apologists have tried to minimize these parallels.[13]

And as I have already pointed out just a few of those, I have to agree based on the clear evidence that such traditions, beliefs, and religions were taken from to form the base structure of Jesus.. Even the salvation concept didn't begin with Christianity in that region. These things that Christians such as Crossfit willingly and woefully ignore..

And here is the best argument you can get by Scholars trying to support the existence of Jesus:

Biblical scholar F. F. Bruce (1910?1990) writes that, according to Paul's letters, Jesus was an Israelite, descended from Abraham (Gal 3:16) and David (Rom. 1:3); who lived under Jewish law (Gal. 4:4); who was betrayed, and on the night of his betrayal instituted a memorial meal of bread and wine (I Cor. 11:23ff); who endured the Roman penalty of crucifixion (I Cor. 1:23; Gal. 3:1, 13, 6:14, etc.), although Jewish authorities were somehow involved in his death (I Thess. 2:15); who was buried, rose the third day and was thereafter seen alive, including on one occasion by over 500, of whom the majority were alive 25 years later (I Cor. 15:4ff).[18] The letters say that Paul knew of and had met important figures in Jesus's ministry, including the apostles Peter and John, as well as James the brother of Jesus, who is also allegedly mentioned in Josephus. In the letters, Paul on occasion alludes to and quotes the teachings of Jesus, and in 1 Corinthians 11 recounts the Last Supper.[18]

The only problem is,... nothing there is original either! Yes that includes many of the supposed teachings, and the last supper itself!

John 6:52-56 (taken from the Mithra's):

52Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, ?How can this man give us his flesh to eat??

53Jesus said to them, ?I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56

Mathew 26: 26-29

26While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, ?Take and eat; this is my body.?

27Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, ?Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of theb covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins. 29I tell you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it anew with you in my Father?s kingdom.?

Now the interesting part is this, if you actually read the footnotes..:

Some of the additions indicate that he utilized traditions that he had received from elsewhere; others are due to his own theological insight (e.g., Matthew 26:28 ". . . for the forgiveness of sins"; Matthew 27:52). In his editing Matthew also altered Mark in some minor details.

Note they don't tell you where this "elsewhere" came from.. But we know where it came from.. It was a clever editing from the Mithra's. Mithra had 12 "companions" or "disciples." The number 12 dates back millennia to the original sun-worshiping religions, and the 12 signs of the zodiac. Furthermore, the motif of the 12 disciples or followers in a "last supper" is recurrent in the Pagan world, including within Mithraism. Mark gave Jesus a last supper with twelve followers, identical in every way with the last supper of the Persian god Mithra, down to the bread and wine. This to which included the followers of Adonis, Attis, Osiris, and other Pagan Gods of the Mystery Religions. New members of the Mysteries of Isis and Osiris completed their initiation with a sacramental meal as well. And even The Spartan King Kleomenes had held a similar last supper with twelve followers four hundred years before Jesus... And so it's no surprise to see this same thing in regards to the story of Jesus.

TheJackel · 16/07/2012 16:45

So unless someone has more than "I believe" , there is no real discussion for the existence of "Jesus" .

seeker · 16/07/2012 17:10

Just to say that I'm sadly leaving this thread now- the contributions are too long and polemical for me to keep up with in amongst other things. See some of you on future threads!

madhairday · 16/07/2012 17:15

seeker I'm with you - I've only just seen this but these long C&P posts are too much and not in the usual flowing conversation vein. I'm not contributing on this one but yes, see you soon.... Grin

nightlurker · 16/07/2012 17:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

GrimmaTheNome · 16/07/2012 17:38

To lose one set of beliefs may be regarded as a misfortune but to lose more looks like carelessness....

seeker · 16/07/2012 17:43

"Regarding the ability to move mountains with faith the size of a mustard seed, that was a promise to the apostles, and not to the regular followers of Christ. Ask and ye shall receive, to me, means that God will answer your prayers, but may not always answer "yes" to them. He may answer "no", but he will still answer, and the person will hear the answer if they are listening."

Just popping bacteria to say that itnis is just more of the same. As far as I am aware, God has never said "yes" to a prayer! And the final phrase is just, yet again, putting the onus on humans. "I answered but you weren't listening properly" . You're all loving and opnmipotent, God! The least you can do is make yourself clear to the people who love you, and not behave like a gas lighting husband!

TheJackel · 16/07/2012 18:03

[quote]I believe Egyptian beliefs originally came from God,[quote]

I'm guessing "I believe" is your means of inventing truth.. Again just a means of self-inventing. Unfortunately there isn't anything to back that up with..And you will need to decide which GOD you're talking about. GOD is a pretty loose term.. Pantheism then has total and equal claim as well to GOD here then. Pantheism was just lost over time..

nightlurker · 16/07/2012 18:20

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SurprisinglyCurvaceousPirate · 16/07/2012 19:10

Is god willing to prevent evil but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him god?

niminypiminy · 16/07/2012 19:12

I'm leaving too. Whether God answers prayer is an important topic, but it's just getting derailed by TheJackel's posts.

headinhands · 16/07/2012 19:17

Yes but Nightlurker, to a non believer, believing in unverifiable/untested/untestable words in any text is akin to self-invention in as much as there is no evidence that it wasn't man-invented regardless of what claims the text may make about is origin.

I find the fact that the first 4 commandments are to do with god's ego very telling. Why on earth would an all powerful creator have such a frail ego. It seems as ludicrous as a grown adult feeling offended by a baby!

AMumInScotland · 16/07/2012 20:48

The huge long posts just start to feel like being bludgeoned after a while, don't they?

GrimmaTheNome · 16/07/2012 21:16

I tend to ignore posts over 3 paras except some of Holos and pick up the jist from more succinct responses TBH

I'm glad I came back just for seekers 'Just popping bacteria ' DYAC (I hope!!)Grin

poshbird1 · 16/07/2012 21:36

This reply has been withdrawn

The OP has privacy concerns and so we've agreed to take this down.

nightlurker · 16/07/2012 21:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SurprisinglyCurvaceousPirate · 16/07/2012 21:59

And why doesn't he nightlurker? Sad

See my post above, "Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent."

nightlurker · 16/07/2012 22:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SurprisinglyCurvaceousPirate · 16/07/2012 22:23

How can losing a child ever be made right?

And why does god want our lives to be hard?

Nonio · 16/07/2012 22:28

For the first 30 ish years of my life I believed quite openly in God, my faith was tested by cancer, a close family member suddenly loosing the use of half there body to name but a few because of our free will and a firm belief that God tests our faith to make it stronger by not intervening.
Until I saw an 18 month old baby have half it's face blow off... Now I don't believe in god to standby and watch such an innocent in such pain is beyond words. And defiantly not a god I could believe in.

amicissimma · 16/07/2012 22:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SurprisinglyCurvaceousPirate · 16/07/2012 22:43

I have been through earthly pain amicissima, and believe me it pushed me about as far away as it is possible to imagine from believing in god.

The suffering I witnessed of a friend, her children and her family was agonising and if that was god's plan then he is most definitely a malevolent god and not something I want any part of.

nightlurker · 16/07/2012 22:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.