Atheism: What's the point?

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

No, you don't understand. All the chaos of the Dark Ages and the like came because of the fall of Rome, it had nothing to do with Christians being in charge.

All of that chaos had to do with the burning of the library of Alexandria and the destruction of all available knowledge at the time. Care to guess who commanded the death of Hypatia and the destruction of the library? It sure wasn't Nero!

Yes, the Catholic Church was very corrupt at that time, and killed many. But you still can't blame any of that on Jesus.

I didn't, I blamed it on the Catholic church, and I used it to show that it was an overzealous religious leader (the pope) that lead to the chaos, not specifically "the fall of Rome." After all, the Islamic world actually developed significantly after the fall of Rome because they saved as much as they could from Alexandria.

[Dakini]

Wow you are getting very annoying about this.

It's a debate. Do you expect me to keep conceding points when your arguments are poorly planned?

I know about the dark ages and that stuff, but if it weren't for Jesus, the dark ages probaby would still be going on.

What makes you think that? The ideas that ended the dark ages were not Christian ones.

Also, NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HYGIENE OR ANY OF THAT STUFF. JUST SHUT UP.

1. Greenleaf said that virtually everything about life that is better than Roman times is due to Jesus' teachings. I am refuting this statement. You presented the quote as evidence (although I pointed out that this "evidence" is actually just an appeal to authority) and then you denied that this is what he said (even though it was in your quote).
2. If you can't take debate and discussion like an adult, perhaps you shouldn't participate in them. Telling other posters to shut up is really completely unnecessary.

And seriously, isn't it common sense that Jesus was a real person?

It used to be until historians started to have the freedom to actually look at the matter without fear of being burned at the stake.

Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history?

Yes.

No, only a living person could do that.

This statement does not follow from the previous. Many people could have teachings that agree with one another and these ideas could have an impact on history. This does not mean that they would not be living... or that the teachings would not be incorrectly attributed to a fictional person.

If Confucius wasn't real, and his followers just made him up, could they have such an impact just teaching about an imaginary man?

I'm not actually sure that Confucianism actually depends on Confucius being real. I mean, someone certainly said the things that he said and I suspect that it doesn't matter whether it was Confucius or a collection from a group of people or even if the ideas were changed over time and became what they are. But then I don't know much about Confucianism so if someone does and wished to correct me...
I know that in Buddhism, it doesn't really matter if the Buddha existed because the message is what matters. So really, if he didn't, a mythical entity had quite the impact on many societies.
Further, I don't know if you've noticed, but all those Greek, Roman, Norse etc gods were once worshiped and thought to exist. They had quite an impact on the societies where this worship was present. Though it may have been fleeting (few people worship them now) the same might be true of Jesus and Christianity (only time will tell on that part). Also, I suspect that you don't believe that Krishna existed... but well, influence. Or Ahura Mazda... or...

[Dakini]

And seriously, isn't it common sense that Jesus was a real person? Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history? No, only a living person could do that. If Confucius wasn't real, and his followers just made him up, could they have such an impact just teaching about an imaginary man?

Have you ever been to a Star Trek Convention?

lol

[Bassyruk]

What I'm saying is that you shouldn't use the same point over and over again when it hardly even makes sense.

Also, it's kinda hard not to get mad when I'm the only one supporting my side and all of you are attacking everything I believe in and me personally, so.

And what are you talking about "appeal to authority?"

[Dakini]

What I'm saying is that you shouldn't use the same point over and over again when it hardly even makes sense.

How does it not make sense? You claimed your source was credible, your source made a statement, I refuted this statement.

Also, it's kinda hard not to get mad when I'm the only one supporting my side and all of you are attacking everything I believe in and me personally, so.

You just yelled at me to shut up. Do you see me acting like a child and screaming at you? I would say this is attacking me personally.

And what are you talking about "appeal to authority?"

Your link did not provide evidence. It provided a discussion about Dr Greenleaf who is apparently the best legal expert in the world ever who says that Jesus clearly existed because of (blah) without any references to material other than his book. Your evidence was basically "this really smart guy says so". This is called an appeal to authority. You can read more about this fallacy here.

I can't remember if it was you who tried to make an appeal to authority earlier in the thread about Dr Hawking (which was in fact a lie on top of an appeal to authority) or if that was another poster either, but same deal.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

"Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history?"

There are several figures around the time of Jesus, or even before Jesus, who were claimed to do very much the same things that he did including:

Being born of a virgin
Healing the sick
Transforming water into wine
Dying for 3 days and coming back to life
Being the son of god
Performing miracles like walking on water/through walls, etc.
The practice of symbolically Eating the flesh of one's god

Here's a partial list of these people:

Appolonius of Tyana, Horus, Mithras, Dyonisis, Attis, Krishna, Tammuz-Adonis, Demeter

[Tmutarakhan]

No, it was fighting over the throne of the emperor that weakened Rome so that the barbarians could overthrow them.

No. There had been lots of worse fights over the throne before, but the empire held its own against the barbarians regardless, until Christianity fatally weakened all the institutions.

[Dakini]

No, it was fighting over the throne of the emperor that weakened Rome so that the barbarians could overthrow them.

No. There had been lots of worse fights over the throne before, but the empire held its own against the barbarians regardless, until Christianity fatally weakened all the institutions.

The start of the migration period probably didn't help.

[Tmutarakhan]

"Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history?"

There are several figures around the time of Jesus, or even before Jesus, who were claimed to do very much the same things that he did including:

Being born of a virgin
Healing the sick
Transforming water into wine
Dying for 3 days and coming back to life
Being the son of god
Performing miracles like walking on water/through walls, etc.
The practice of symbolically Eating the flesh of one's god

Here's a partial list of these people:

Appolonius of Tyana, Horus, Mithras, Dyonisis, Attis, Krishna, Tammuz-Adonis, Demeter

That's a bunch of hogwash, the atheist equivalent of Creation Science.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

"Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history?"

There are several figures around the time of Jesus, or even before Jesus, who were claimed to do very much the same things that he did including:

Being born of a virgin
Healing the sick
Transforming water into wine
Dying for 3 days and coming back to life
Being the son of god
Performing miracles like walking on water/through walls, etc.
The practice of symbolically Eating the flesh of one's god

Here's a partial list of these people:

Appolonius of Tyana, Horus, Mithras, Dyonisis, Attis, Krishna, Tammuz-Adonis, Demeter

That's a bunch of hogwash, the atheist equivalent of Creation Science.

It's a bunch of hogwash that there are other myths similar to the Jesus story?

[Tmutarakhan]

It's a bunch of hogwash that there are other myths similar to the Jesus story?

The actual myths bear no resemblance to the versions peddled by Acharya S and that circle.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

It's a bunch of hogwash that there are other myths similar to the Jesus story?

The actual myths bear no resemblance to the versions peddled by Acharya S and that circle.

Who the hell is Acharya S?

[Grave_n_idle]

Uhh... look at it

I did. I decided it was too much text that you didn't bother to write (but could have written since it's basically presenting an argument). It doesn't have any corroborating evidence. It just shows that you're too lazy to make your own arguments. I give you the courtesy of spending my time typing each response to things that you say. If I was going to highlight a particular link, I would make a statement, follow it with a link and if the page I link is long and the relevant section is not at the top, I would probably quote the relevant portions in my post.

Instead, you just googled "proof of Jesus" and shoved a link in this discussion without an explanation.

No, I read it, and I think it's obvious that you should read what's under best answer, but if you insist:

Dr. Simon Greenleaf, former professor of law at Harvard University and once recognized by the Supreme Court to be perhaps the greatest authority on legal evidence who has ever lived, made a detailed examination of the evidence relating to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, quoted by L.A. Drummon and P.R. Baxter in the 1986 book How to Respond to a Skeptic. (Chicago: Moody Press, p 117.) He concluded that in any uinbiased courtroom in the world, the evidence would establish the fact that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. The documentary evidence has been examined independently by millions of people, each of whom had the opportunity to find mistakes if there were any. St. Luke, for example, turns out to be as meticulous a geographer and historian as anyone now living. Calling his Gospel "mythology" is like calling Caesar's Gallic Wars "legendary." Contempt prior to investigation is no way to determine the facts. Unlike some religious literature, the Bible is filled with specific names, dates, places. Fifty or sixty years ago it was commonplace to scorn these as legendary or inaccurate, but having such an attitude today requires one to ignore libraries full of research in history, archeology and linguistics. Which of course is your privilege; but the recently-published "Under the Influence" by Alvin Schmidt shows that virtually everything that makes the world today better than it was in Roman times stems directly from the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Dr Greenleaf assumed that all the accounts he was talking about was true. A particularly stupid move when we don't even know who wrote them.

[Tmutarakhan]

It's a bunch of hogwash that there are other myths similar to the Jesus story?

The actual myths bear no resemblance to the versions peddled by Acharya S and that circle.

Who the hell is Acharya S?

The person who started circulating these claims that all the myths you listed included elements similar to the Jesus story.

[Allbeama]

Man the bible is so fucking boring. I like the parts with sex and violence, but the characters are painfully 2-dimensional.

I know, right. Especially this 'God' character. Always trying to get man to worship him. Sounds like a bad James Bond villain.

I would like to make people worship me... but I lack the Power this God person possesses... I must have it!

[Allbeama]

I prefer to be Agnostic because it leaves me with "wiggle room". I won't say one way or the other if God or many gods exist because this is beyond my capacity as a scurrying little human in a universe that is so big it might make my tiny insignificant human brain explode if I try to figure it out. Its like an ant trying to grasp the concept of inertia.

[Otagia]

Dunno for certain about the others, but I'm rather sure that several gods through the Egyptian pantheon share an awful lot with the Christ myth, and from the Norse, Odin hanging himself from Yggdrasil is quite similar to the crucifixion (even going so far as to share having his side pierced with a spear), although the motivation is rather different. Of course, it's not evidence of the Christ myth being a fabrication, and can be explained quite well in a number of ways (Jungian psychology being my personal choice).

Then again, it's hard to imagine that Christianity wasn't influenced by Egyptian, Greek, Roman, etc. mythology. After all, the Hebrews lived in Egypt for centuries, then got exported to Babylon, and the Romans had control of Judea for quite a while as well, and once Christianity itself sprung up, a huge amount of modifications were made to better fit the populations being converted (Christmas, Halloween, etc.). Assuming that there wouldn't be religious cross-pollination is just silly.

[Enadail]

The person who started circulating these claims that all the myths you listed included elements similar to the Jesus story.

Even if he started circulating them (which he didn't... historians knew about these accounts long before), it doesn't invalidate the stories. Horus is extremely well documented, and bears remarkable resemblance. Krishna was in Indian mythology long before Jesus "lived", and he also bears the same sort of resemblances. Just because someone told a story and was a crackpot doesn't mean the stories are false.

[Tmutarakhan]

Dr Greenleaf assumed that all the accounts he was talking about was true. A particularly stupid move when we don't even know who wrote them.

Greenleaf's argument was actually a technical point of law. Writings are by definition "hearsay" (we do not have the author as a witness on the stand testifying from his personal knowledge and subject to cross-examination; rather we have the piece of writing saying, that the author said...) but several kinds of hearsay are nonetheless admissible evidence; one of these exceptions to the hearsay rule is of course for "official records", and Greenleaf argued that the New Testament counts as an official record since it has been in the custody of the Church, a legal body charged with keeping such records. This is a weak argument even on its own terms, since the Church was not a legal body back in the time of Jesus or for several generations thereafter; if we had court records from the Pilate administration, or whatever, that would be more like it, but of course we have nothing of the sort.

[Tmutarakhan]

The person who started circulating these claims that all the myths you listed included elements similar to the Jesus story.

Even if he started circulating them (which he didn't... historians knew about these accounts long before), it doesn't invalidate the stories. Horus is extremely well documented, and bears remarkable resemblance. Krishna was in Indian mythology long before Jesus "lived", and he also bears the same sort of resemblances. Just because someone told a story and was a crackpot doesn't mean the stories are false.

The actual stories of Horus and Krishna bear no particular resemblance to the Jesus story at all.
Acharya is the one who started a list of supposed resemblances that has widely circulated as a chain e-mail and can be found in various modified forms on a bunch of web-sites, claiming for example that Horus was born on December 25 (of course, the Egyptian calendar is different from the Roman, and there is no possible one-to-one matching of Egyptian dates to Roman ones), that his mother Isis was a virgin (quite the contrary, the story is that the evil Set hacked her husband Osiris into pieces and she had to hunt all over to put him back together, in particular needing to find his penis before she could become impregnated), etc. etc. and similarly claiming that Krishna was born of a virgin (he was actually the sixth of eight children) and was associated with a sacred lamb (he was actually depicted as a cow-herder), etc., etc. I don't know exactly where UnhealthySeekerOfTruth got his info from, but his list of purported Jesus-clones looks a lot like Acharya's. The resemblances between motifs in the Jesus story and motifs in other religious stories are no stronger than you could find between any random stories.

[Enadail]

The actual stories of Horus and Krishna bear no particular resemblance to the Jesus story at all.
Acharya is the one who started a list of supposed resemblances that has widely circulated as a chain e-mail and can be found in various modified forms on a bunch of web-sites, claiming for example that Horus was born on December 25 (of course, the Egyptian calendar is different from the Roman, and there is no possible one-to-one matching of Egyptian dates to Roman ones), that his mother Isis was a virgin (quite the contrary, the story is that the evil Set hacked her husband Osiris into pieces and she had to hunt all over to put him back together, in particular needing to find his penis before she could become impregnated), etc. etc. and similarly claiming that Krishna was born of a virgin (he was actually the sixth of eight children) and was associated with a sacred lamb (he was actually depicted as a cow-herder), etc., etc. I don't know exactly where UnhealthySeekerOfTruth got his info from, but his list of purported Jesus-clones looks a lot like Acharya's. The resemblances between motifs in the Jesus story and motifs in other religious stories are no stronger than you could find between any random stories.

Alright, lemme dig into my cultural background here...

Krishna is God incarnate while not actually being God.

He was of a line of kings but raised as a peasant.

He was heralded by wise men and a bright star.

He was "baptized" in the Ganges river.

He was killed and resurrected to help fight off the oncoming evil.

He was known for healing the sick and casting out evil from the body.

Horus is similar a well. Of course, its easy to reject when you wanna reject it. But a lot of your points are valid... Horus was not born of a virgin, nor was Krishna. Of course, you missed the word "similarities" and exchanged it with "exactly the same".

[Allbeama]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

Christianity also seems to lead inevitably to much violence. At least the tribes fought for honor and glory, not because zeal lead them to destroy all heretics and unbelievers. And the Judeo-Christian society we live in is ten times more corrupt than any polytheistic society ever was. I think its fine what Jesus taught but what his biographers later decided what to put in the doctrine and theory of Christianity is shown by history to be fairly vile and hateful.

[Neo Bretonnia]

There are two kinds of atheists.

The first kind are the ones who don't believe for whatever reason and that's the end of it. Almost all atheists view themselves in this way but only about half of them are right.

The second kind are the ones who are as zealous about their atheism as any believer in God, and go out of their way to mash it in people's faces, attacking other people's beliefs. They rarely admit to this, preferring the image of the first kind.

Read a few posts on the subject on this forum and you'll see the difference very quickly.

[Enadail]

The second kind are the ones who are as zealous about their atheism as any believer in God, and go out of their way to mash it in people's faces, attacking other people's beliefs. They rarely admit to this, preferring the image of the first kind.

So... basically theists who lack belief?

Except that atheists are on the defensive all throughout the world (except for Europe, which seems to have accepted that atheists aren't evil).

[Tmutarakhan]

Alright, lemme dig into my cultural background here...

Krishna is God incarnate while not actually being God.

This notion of a God incarnated as a human being is, to be sure, a close parallel with the ideology that grew up around Jesus. The problem is that it does not appear to have been part of the Krishna story until c. 200 AD, and may be a response to Christianity rather than an independent parallel. In the original Mahabharata, prior to the insertion of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna is a fairly minor walk-on character, prince Arjuna's chariot driver; the revelation in the Gita that he has been God in disguise all this time comes as rather a surprise to Arjuna, and to the reader, since Krishna hasn't seemed all that extraordinary up to that point.

He was of a line of kings but raised as a peasant.

The cases are not really analogous: the Davidite line had been out of power for centuries; Krishna is rather one of those "hidden prince" stories more like Sargon etc.

He was heralded by wise men and a bright star.

Source? I have never heard of such an element in the Krishna story.

He was "baptized" in the Ganges river.

There is no real resemblance to "baptism", as you acknowledge by putting it in quotes. I was "baptized" in a hot tub this morning, does that count too?

He was killed and resurrected to help fight off the oncoming evil.

Krishna's death, by an arrow to the foot, is more like Achilles or Siegfried; and he was not resurrected. Jesus on the other hand did not partake in any warfare.

He was known for healing the sick and casting out evil from the body.

Source? I don't know of any healing stories about Krishna.

Horus is similar a well.

In what respect?

Of course, its easy to reject when you wanna reject it. But a lot of your points are valid... Horus was not born of a virgin, nor was Krishna. Of course, you missed the word "similarities" and exchanged it with "exactly the same".

There just aren't many points of similarity; most of the claimed points of similarity are sheer fabrication. There are, to be sure, certain motifs that you find repeated in stories all over the world, but you don't get more matches comparing Jesus to Krishna or to Horus than you do comparing Cinderella to Hansel and Gretel.