Alpha episode 2: Is there more to life than this? Join the Alpha Course for a share of the SBD from this series of posts
Thanks for joining me for episode 2 of the Alpha Course. If you missed the first post, you can read it here. In this series, I hope to explore with you some of the most important questions we'll ever ask. No matter what beliefs or lack of beliefs you currently hold, I invite you to join me in these series of posts for a share of all SBD earned to be split between all active participants throughout the series.
Is there more to life than this?
This series is designed for anyone who have wondered about any of the following:
- Is there a God?
- What is the purpose of life?
- Why is there so much suffering in the world?
- Is there more to life than this?
If you've ever wanted to ask these deeper questions of life in a non-judgemental environment, and receive intellectual, evidence-based answers to life's tough questions, then I invite you to follow me in this series of posts.
How to participate and receive a share of all SBDs earned from this series of posts
To receive a share of all the liquid rewards from this series of posts, you will need to watch the video each week, and comment with the following:
- Something that stood out for you from the video (such as a question or observation), and
- respond to the discussion question
- Engage with other group participants.
Please watch the video from Week 2 below
This week's question is: what do you believe about Jesus and why? Has anything come up in the video that you would like to further investigate?
Rewards from the posts will be shared at the end of the Course among those who participate each week. Its not too late to join the course. You can check out the first post here.
If you are already a Christian, I ask that you kindly leave this opportunity to those who are still seeking. But you are welcome to respectfully engage in the conversations, and share your stories and experiences.
This is meant to be a respectful and open group, where all questions and views are welcome, and where we intend to explore these deeper questions of life without any fear of being judged. So please try your best to be respectful. Otherwise, you will be flagged and asked to leave.
The Alpha Course is held all over the world. If you enjoyed this video and would like to attend an Alpha Course in person, you can go here to find out more.
Alpha Course是一个我在英文区开始的系列。希望中文区的朋友们也能够来参加。
在这个系列中，我们将会一起探讨一些关于人生的大问题； 比如生命的意义是什么？
这系列收到的所有SBD将会与每个参与者一起分享。
Follow me @nextgen622 for the next installment in the Alpha Course series
I believe a person who went by the name of Jesus (or some variant of the name based on translations from different languages) did exist at some time and he was considered a religious teacher. The Jehovah's Witnesses have done extensive research into the life of Jesus and have determined that Jesus was NOT in fact born on Christmas Day because of the weather and other celestial factors that indicate an error of several months.
FROM THE VIDEO
(1) What has the number of copies of a manuscript have to do with authenticity? If 2,000 years from now historians find 300 copies of Harry Potter, does that indicate it is a true account of what actually happened in real life here on Earth?
(2) Jesus said, "If you see me, you have seen God." But Jesus is claimed to be the SON of God, so if you are inclined to believe you see God when you look upon Jesus, then you should also accept that when you see me, you also see God... because God is within us all.
(3) The video claims as evidence the sheer number of prophesies fulfilled by Jesus as 'proof' of evidence. However, if you look at any of the conspiracy theories, you will be amazed by the number of factors that are able to be brought together to validate a claim.
Also, at that time more people believed in and used the services of prophets to see the future, so there will be more of that material available.
The death and resurrection of Jesus is supposed to be the ultimate proof, yet we know that death can easily be simulated with drugs. I have seen someone who can (simply using his mind) lower his heart rate and breathing to the point that they would be considered dead by any average person. It would have been very easy to fake a death at that time in history. Even if the death was not deliberately faked, it could have been that Jesus was in a state that looked like dead, but when cared for, he managed to live a while longer and people were able to see him before he perished.
The video then goes on to claim as evidence, the 2.3 Billion Christians who likely manifested Jesus through self-hypnosis because they desired an encounter so much. We all know the tricks our minds are capable of playing on us.
MY CONCLUSION
Jesus likely was attempting to tell people that God resides in all of us, but people failed to grasp that idea.
Hi @happyme, thanks for your contribution to the discussion once again.
I agree with you that Jesus was NOT in fact born on Christmas Day.
With relation to your other points, here's just some of my thoughts on the matters you raised:
(1) What has the number of copies of a manuscript have to do with authenticity? If 2,000 years from now historians find 300 copies of Harry Potter, does that indicate it is a true account of what actually happened in real life here on Earth?
You are correct in pointing out that the number of copies of a manuscript does not prove anything about the truth of the document. However, the number of copies of the manuscript does strengthen the historical reliability of the document. When all these copies are almost exactly the same, then we can be reasonably confident about the preservation of the original text. And the fact that two of the Gospels, Matthew and John were written by eye witnesses to Jesus' life and resurrection, then I believe it gives more credibility to the truth of what is written.
(2) Jesus said, "If you see me, you have seen God." But Jesus is claimed to be the SON of God, so if you are inclined to believe you see God when you look upon Jesus, then you should also accept that when you see me, you also see God... because God is within us all.
I don't fully understand your point here. Can you please elaborate? Why do you think God is in us all?
Yes Jesus made many similar claims which his Jewish audience at the time all understood. He was claiming to be God through his statements such as "If you see me, you have seen God.", or his claim to be the Son of God, or "I and the Father are one." This is exactly why they killed him, because he claimed to be God.
The death and resurrection of Jesus is supposed to be the ultimate proof, yet we know that death can easily be simulated with drugs. I have seen someone who can (simply using his mind) lower his heart rate and breathing to the point that they would be considered dead by any average person. It would have been very easy to fake a death at that time in history. Even if the death was not deliberately faked, it could have been that Jesus was in a state that looked like dead, but when cared for, he managed to live a while longer and people were able to see him before he perished.
Jesus was crucified. Not sure if you looked into the details of crucifixion, but anyone who was crucified definitely didn't survive. He would have definitely bled to death if he didn't die at the cross. After Jesus resurrected, he appeared to his disciples 40 days before ascending.
The video then goes on to claim as evidence, the 2.3 Billion Christians who likely manifested Jesus through self-hypnosis because they desired an encounter so much. We all know the tricks our minds are capable of playing on us.
The problem with the theory of hypnosis, self-hypnosis or hallucinations, is the fact that so many people came to the same realization, and more importantly the fact that so many of these Christians were killed, tortured and suffered because of their faith, all the while staying faithful to what they believe. Why would so many people do that if they know it wasn't true? In particular, the thing that shook my previous beliefs while I was half way through university was the fact that almost all of his remaining 11 disciples deserted him when he was arrested and crucified, but after the alleged resurrection, they had a complete turn around. They were no longer cowards and afraid, but instead they all became courageous and almost all of them were martyred for their faith. So in my opinion, I can't see anything else that may have occurred to explain the change that happened to his closest disciples except the fact that he really did rise from the dead. We can discuss more about evidence for the resurrection when we get to it in one of the future videos.
Sorry about the lengthy response. Once again thank you for taking the time to view the video and make some really meaningful points to the discussion.
Once again, thanks for offering these discussions. I am learning a lot here.
In response to your question:
There are a number of situational experiences that I have been told about or have personally experienced in my lifetime that lead me to this conclusion. I can't say for sure if the idea is my own or if it was planted into my head by God. It just suddenly dawned upon me that God exists in all of us because God is ubiquitous. Each plant, animal, bacteria, individual cell is a miracle. With no brain, plants can sense things and react to the sensation. Cells and bacteria can communicate without vocal chords and without making a sound. Try and define what God is and you may come to the same conclusion. God is not human-like. God is everywhere at the same time. AND we possess some pretty awesome powers! The power of belief is way more powerful than most people realize. I will give you one example:
While visiting relatives in Greece, I noticed that many (if not most) women wore jewelry that contain blue-stone. It is believed that this stone helps to ward off the evil eye. I didn't believe in this 'crap' and laughed it off. One day, my sisters and I were out in Athens and I began to feel very lethargic and had a head-ache. When we returned to my aunt's home I told her I needed to lie down because I was feeling quite worn out and ill. She suggested I might have the evil eye and offered to cure me. I scoffed at her, but was just too weak to argue, so in order to appease her, I allowed her to do her thing. Within seconds, she told me I had the evil eye and that she was getting my head-ache and she began to yawn. In under 5 minutes, we were both fine! This made me question my current belief and all of a sudden what I thought was 'crap' started to become real. I asked her if she could teach me how to do this healing and she taught me. Some time later, while on a tour bus, a friend of my aunt asked my aunt to see if she may have been 'eyed'. Here was my opportunity to test my new skill. I performed the ritual and took her head-ache and began to yawn. In a few minutes, we were both fine. Then comes the interesting part...
Back in Canada, my sister tells me that it was her that gave me the evil eye when we were in Athens. She also attempted to see if she could do it again, but failed. This led me to conclude that my sister was not strong enough on her own to affect my health, but when in among other believers, she was able to harness the energy from others and make me sick. In Canada, there just aren't enough believers close enough to summon their energy.
If it were a matter of using God's energy or even the devil's energy, then why would distance be a factor? It had to be that each of us have an energy that radiates out from our bodies and diminishes in strength with distance. Just as bacteria in our guts can communicate directly with our brains, we are also able to communicate with the energy of others and borrow some or focus it at something or someone.
If we all have this energy that can be used for good or for evil and it is based simply on belief, then it seems reasonable to conclude that God is a manifestation of our combined belief and that the Devil is also manifested by those who think evil thoughts. Thus it is stated in the Bible that one day the Devil will be vanquished. That day will be when nobody thinks evil thoughts and we all learn to love one another and think only good thoughts! This can only happen when we all understand that we are just a small part of a wonderful living world and that we must all cooperate so that we all succeed.
Nope! I believe it is irrelevant in the overall picture. As others here are still arguing the facts, it seems pointless to try to prove or disprove the details. I wasn't there to witness it and study it, so I can't say for sure either way. What I do know is that even today, we argue about climate change and who is at fault. I read so many statements and watched videos that argue corruption and ego to blame for telling lies and manipulating data. It's just not possible to know who is telling the truth and who is not. So again, I derive my own conclusions and that is to say that this global warming is caused by natural phenomenon that we have no control over. The changing tilt of the Earth's axis will slightly alter how ocean currents move and we know that the ocean is a large factor in weather patterns. Sun spots and solar flares will also affect our weather. We may be contributors, but we are not the major cause.
They were believers, so they believed it WAS true. Just look at all the magic shows and the spectacular tricks they perform. Tell me how those tricks were done. If you can't, you will be forced to BELIEVE the magic really happened. Under pressure, you would still be unable to change your opinion. "I saw it with my own eyes," is the best answer you could give.
No need to apologize for long responses. This is a topic that can't be properly discussed in a few words.
Hi @happyme, thanks once again for responding. I’m really enjoying our discussion here too.
Thanks for your detailed explanation and examples. I understand what you are saying now. That’s really fascinating experiences you had. I trust these experiences must have been powerful for you. I totally believe in supernatural experiences and miracles. I believe there is God and other spiritual forces in the world in the form of angels and fallen angels (evil spirits). I have witnessed many supernatural occurances and miracles too after becoming a Christian half way through university. Actually a couple of the videos later on in this series looks more indepth into these supernatural topics relating to the Holy Spirit, miracles and healing, so we could discuss more about this then if you’d like.
Thanks again for your reply. Look forward to discussing more throughout future videos.
Life is often full of surprises. I look forward to having a few more surprises, and to seeing what the other videos have to say. The responses to the videos are also very interesting.
Jesus for me is just as all the other prophets, a chosen slave of god whom god assigned to summon people to the true path.
However, there are some attributes of Jesus distinguishing him from other prophets, the most important one being that he was raised up to god and that he will come back to earth again!
He was never crucified and killed and nor did he die as many people believe.
He will come back and his coming will be one of the sign of the hour, the final hour.
Like all prophets before and after him, they were all called liars.
You said He was never crucified and killed and nor did he die as many people believe. Just wondering what evidence do you have to support your claims?
Also, you haven't addressed any of the evidence or specific points raised in the video. Not sure if you've had a chance to watch the video, but would love to hear more from you once you've had a chance to watch the video.
Thanks again for being part of the discussion.
Hello mate, sorry for late reply!
Based on all the researches I did by reading all the different 'holy books' I made my own opinion and reach to that conclusion which really make sense to me.
I'll mention a simple logic : Being so powerful with all types of miracles performed, do you think someone like Jesus can be killed just like that by simple human being? And as many are claiming that he was the son of god, how come a son of god got such treatment on earth that has been created by his father!?
Concerning the video, i really like the mention of the teaching of Jesus, these were powerful teachings. I'm really having a great time participating in the discussion!
Hi mate, no problem at all. Thanks for your comment.
That's a very good question: I'll mention a simple logic : Being so powerful with all types of miracles performed, do you think someone like Jesus can be killed just like that by simple human being? And as many are claiming that he was the son of god, how come a son of god got such treatment on earth that has been created by his father!?
Let me try my best to respond to it. What you've said here is exactly at the core of Christianity and why so many billions of people throughout history have followed and trusted in Jesus.
Yes, you are right that since he has done so many miracles, he is more than able to save himself and not be killed, and he too said that to those who capture him. But the reason Jesus came into the world was to offer his own life to pay for the rebellion and sins of the human race. Because you see, from God's perspective, each one of us have fallen short of what God intends for us. We lie and cheat, hate and kill, are selfish and unloving... and we all deserve God's wrath and punishment because of our rebellion and the evil things we have done or thought.
But God's plan was to send his own Son, Jesus, to take the punishment for our sins and the bad things we have done and said. That is why Jesus voluntarily went to the cross and died in our place. This is what we mean by how much he loves us and his grace (unmerited favor) towards us. You see God is a God of justice, and our sins and rebellion need to be punished, but he sent his own and only Son, to die in our place. And as he was crucified, Jesus said "forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."
Grace, love, justice and forgiveness. All these things are at the core of Christianity, and all because Jesus voluntarily sacrificed himself for us.
Thanks for taking the time to read this. Sorry it became such a long answer.
Bless you bro.
Oh thanks so much for such an insightful reply my friend, i really appreciate it! Thanks to you I am actually learning a lot of things that I was not aware of, that's why I am always searching and learning!
I have the check the 3rd part now! Will comment later on!
Hi mate, I will be putting up Alpha episode 4 shortly. If you'd like to continue with the series, please come join us in the discussion in Alpha episode 3 within the next couple of days. Thanks :)
Thanks for the reminder mate! I've just watched part 3 and made my comments too! Looking forward to the next one!
I can be late to comment, but rest assured i'll always be there!
Cheers
@progressivechef!
Thanks mate. :)
If you want to prove it, read the Bible, (Galatians 4 verses 22-24) Do you think you can explain those verses away? The best thing to do is to act like you never saw this comment.
Hi @geneticmemory
Sorry I just saw your comment. I see that you have made several comments quoting the same Galatians 4:22-24 passage "For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the slave woman and the other by the free woman.
His son by the slave woman was born according to the flesh, but his son by the free woman was born as the result of a divine promise.
These things are being taken figuratively: The women represent two covenants. One covenant is from Mount Sinai and bears children who are to be slaves: This is Hagar."
Ok, not sure what point you are trying to make. Please elaborate. Thanks
I'm glad you replied. the first thing I need to point out is that you are using strange Bible. By that, I mean that the word has been changed or at best a bad translation. The words in question are "are being taken figuratively" that is not what the original text stated. "These things are an allegory" is what is stated in all bible that are not new age "New American Bible". Why were the words change (a question to myself?). These two things are not the same, there are close but no cigar! When one said something is an allegory we know that we have to think of them in terms of an allegory. But when one uses the word figuratively it could mean you don't have to concern yourself with it.
There is more my insites on this subject at this page.
http://geneticmemory.org/index.php/wu-files/45-meat-for-strong-men
Also you can check out
Palm 78:21 dark saying
Prov 1:6 understanding proverbs
2 Cor 3:15 the vail
I'm also all ears to hear what evidence you have to support your claim that Jesus was never crucified. Even the most stringent method of studying the history points to the death of Jesus by crucifixion. You have to throw the history away to believe anything else. And if you're willing to throw the history or evidence away, then no discussion or argument among us is gonna be fruitful.
Please forgive me as I stated below I never can tell when a reply is made to me. 17 days later is almost unforgivable. if you believe the verse as stated then it is talking about a root story in the bible. If the root story is an allegory then all of the stories connected to the root story are also allegories. Also one might think that the real name should be used. There was no "J" in the languish at that time, so who are we really talking about? One more thing what history are you talking about? The bible is not a history book. I am in aggrement with Mark Twain when it comes to that question
With Respect.
Sounds intresting will take a look :)
This video produces absolutely no evidence for the existence of a biblical Jesus. The so called proof that is given for the validity of the New Testament by the use of textual criticism is fatally flawed right from the very beginning. The whole argument is dependant on the fact that the original document is true and not some fabricated story. This cannot be proven. Indeed, the modern text of the New Testament in use today differs in many ways from the earliest bibles that we know about. The Bible has been altered throughout history to help serve political and religious agendas. There are so many inconsistencies in the Bible that it just cannot be used as a reliable basis for an argument for the existence of Jesus. Unfortunately, this is what this video goes on to do. From around 12 minutes onwards all the so called evidence is based solely on the New Testament which, as just mentioned, cannot be treated as reliable. So, to answer the first part of this weeks question, I believe that Jesus as a person did not exist because of the reasons that are given above. In answer to the second part. The video did prompt me to research the ideas behind textual criticism and the early origins of the bible. Besides that, it did nothing but further convince me that religions can be built only on faith and not facts.
Thanks for posting @nextgen622. It certainly promotes thought and stimulates conversations.
On whether Jesus existed:
Most contemporary scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his nonexistence as effectively refuted.[5][7][8][32][33][34] There is no indication that writers in antiquity who opposed Christianity questioned the existence of Jesus.[35][36
Bart Ehrman (a secular agnostic) wrote: "He certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees"
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
Thank you for your comment @wilx.
A quote from the article you linked to:-
This use of Christian writings produces a circular argument, therefore this negates any so called evidence the article uses.
Bert Ehrman was a born again fundamentalist Christian as a teenager, changed to being a liberal Christian and now says he is a secular agnostic. He is still a professor of religious studies at The Department of Religious Studies, at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. I would be inclined to take what he says with a pinch of salt.
Many of the authors used as sources are biblical scholars and could be said to be biased. Maybe protecting their careers?
Nothing in this article shows any proof of Jesus.
Historians have their methods for determining the factuality of something; most all, Christian or not, agree he existed according to those methods. This is not arguable, secular ones will tell you this themselves, have heard a couple do so. Ehrman is a known agnostic no one who knows of him will ever accuse him of being a closet christian. Feel free to research this further to confirm this all, if you wish.
Hello again @wilx and thank you for continuing the discussion.
There is absolutely no evidence for the existence of Jesus except for what has been written by Christian believers (see these links here and here). His followers claim extraordinary things about this person yet all they can point to are writings by anonymous authors. Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary and incontrovertible proof. Christianity has never been able to provide that.
Well profesional historians will disagree with you. Here's an interview on a radio show with Ehrman explaining why (with YouTube description):
Non-Christian agnostic historian, Bart Ehrman, is invited on to an atheist radio show apparently in the hope that he will argue against Jesus being an historical person. However, much to this atheist surprise and disapointment Ehrman argues why no serious historian (including himself) denies Jesus' historicity!
This is all very well but again he can offer no proof as to the existence of Jesus apart from writings done by believers. There are no contemporary accounts of Jesus which is remarkable given the things that are supposed to have happened around him. If someone raised people from the dead, could feed five thousand people with a few loaves and fishes and have earthquakes etc when they died on the cross (to name only a few things he was supposedly involved in) then surely someone, somewhere, would have written about it separately from the believers. There is nothing.
Let me ask you this. I take it that you believe that Jesus existed based on what the Bible says. Do you believe everything else in the Bible?
Ok. I sat through the video. Will you, in turn, please take the time to read the following article here which gives a good summary for why a belief in Jesus isn't based on fact and also gives a good reason why certain historians may asert Jesus existed.
Thanks for the discussion.
Tnx for the discussion, thing again is that it's not just certain historians it's most all, their professional methodology leaves them with an undeniable conclusion.. your argument is with them, all who read this can draw their own conclusion on this.
Tnx but am knowlegable of all the reasons why the non-professionals give for their beliefs, and tho worthy of some thought after such and study found them as wanting as the pros..
Best to you in this classroom of life.
This is a really bad historian if he is telling you that the proof is in Pual's writings. If you read Galatians (Galatians 4 verses 22-24) Paul tell those with eyes to see that this guy has no idea what he is talking about.
Hi maninayton,
Have you ever looked into the validity of the New Testament?
If you don't mind, I'd like to share some information about how preserved it's been in comparison with other ancient documents. There are several that can be used for comparison, but I'll add just a few to keep this short, and give you a link where you can check out the accuracy of this, plus you can search for the info yourself.
The New Testament has a 99.5% level of accuracy in comparison with the original documents, and most biblical scholars agree that it was written within 70 years following the death and resurrection of Christ.
Homer's (Iliad) trails behind that at a 95% level of accuracy and was copied 500 years after the original texts.
Sophocles and Aristotle trail behind the above two with no proof of accuracy and both were copied 1400 years after the original copies.
There are fragments of the Gospel of John that date back to AD 125 that are virtual copies of the original and match up at nearly 100, with slight translation variations, that hold the same meaning.
Link to info on the "Rylands Library Papyrus"
With the documented information that we have today, one would have to disregard all of the other ancient writings as there are none among all those listed above, as accurately preserved as the Bible.
Link to Article with References
Hello, @livingwaters. Thank you for your comment and for taking the time and trouble to provide the links. Unfortunately, the argument you use for the historical accuracy of the Bible is misleading. It doesn't matter if the copies of the Bible were 99.5% accurate (a claim that I doubt anyway), if the original was a made up story to begin with then any 'evidence' taken from that source will be false. There is no evidence that the original gospels were true - they are more likely to have been written by believers to promote their particular religion. Also bear in mind the authors of the gospels were not eye witnesses to any of the events contained in the gospels which in itself can be a major source of error.
Both Matthew and John who wrote two of the Gospels comprising the New Testament were eye witnesses. In fact, they spent over three years with Jesus.
All of the gospels are considered to have been the work of anonymous writers between 70 and 110 CE. Links here and here.
There were no eye witnesses. Everything the Christian religion (and all other religions for that matter) is based on is hearsay.
Thanks @maninayton for taking the time to reply. The question I have for you is why do you believe the sources you provide are credible, reliable and valid? It doesn't seem to me that any of those sources are credible, peer-reviewed articles or scholars/authorities in their field, and how can they be trusted? Seems like what you say about Christians pushing a particular agenda is true in those instances. With any belief system, you need evidence to support your claims. I haven't seen any evidence to support the claims of Atheism that prove God doesn't exist. I would like to hear your views on that too.
You said There were no eye witnesses. Everything the Christian religion (and all other religions for that matter) is based on is hearsay.
What evidences do you have to support your claim that there were no eye witnesses and everything was based on hearsay?
Would appreciate hearing more specific arguments/evidence you have to support your claims above. Thanks again for your contributions to the discussions. I'm enjoying our discussion too.
Atheism doesn't need evidence to support non-belief. I don't believe in any god just as I don't believe in fairies because there is no supporting evidence. There is no need for me to prove God doesn't exist for it is religion as a whole that is making extraordinary claims and therefore needs to provide extraordinary evidence. It doesn't and until it does I won't believe (and that applies to any to any religion by the way). The sources I provide point out errors and inaccuracies in the bible which can be verified by just looking through one, they do not make claims of a supernatural being. As to eye witnesses, there is no contemporary eye witness accounts of anything a person called Jesus did or said. I would have thought that someone who is supposed to have performed miricles would have created something of a stir and would have been committed on. There is nothing. If you can provide a contemporary account I would be interested to see it. Till next time - take care.
Hi again @maninayton,
Atheism like any other belief system requires evidence or else you are simply jumping into its claims with blind faith. If you said you were agnostic, then you don’t need to prove anything, because you would be unsure about whether God exists. But since you believe in Atheism, Atheism claims that there is definitely no God, and the universe and life came into existence without any intelligent design and intervention. If you looked at the extraordinary number of factors that is required for life to exist on Earth and the improbability of this happening, you would know that the claim of Atheism is arguably an even more extraordinary claim. So yes, you would need to provide evidence supporting your claim that without any doubt, there is no God/intelligent design, and the universe was a coincidence.
You said The sources I provide point out errors and inaccuracies in the bible which can be verified by just looking through one, they do not make claims of a supernatural being.
Well, the sources you provided aren’t credible. They are websites that no serious scholar/authority in their field would take seriously. The inconsistencies are either taken out of context or misunderstood. For example, the original text of the OT and NT were in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek, not English, so scrutinizing over English words without understanding of the original and without understanding of the whole context of the Bible is not credible.
As to eye witnesses, there is no contemporary eye witness accounts of anything a person called Jesus did or said.
Although I disagree with you about the authorship of the four Gospels. Taking the authorship issue out of the equation. Just because the author may not be an eye witness, doesn’t mean their sources weren’t eye witnesses. Just as our modern day news and history is usually not written by the eye witnesses themselves, but is rather written by journalists and historians who interview eye witnesses to collate their account of what happened, more so in Jesus’ time, accounts were usually passed around first orally. Not sure if you’ve read thrugh all four Gospels yourself, but the detail in the Gospels are pretty vivid, and it takes a lot of faith to believe that all of this was made up.
In addition, I previously talked about archeological evidence that proved people and places in the Gospels were all accurate.
I would have thought that someone who is supposed to have performed miricles would have created something of a stir
Not sure how much of a stir you need, but the fact that we are talking about him 2000 years later, billions of people throughout history worshipping him as Lord, lives transformed, and many willing to die for him isn’t enough of a stir, then I don’t know what is.
The fact that it didn’t create more of a stir among people at the time, was because the Jewish religious authorities and Roman ruling authorities at the time wanted to suppress what had happened to save face and keep control of the people.
Until next time, Jimmy
Just because the document is accurately preserved does not validate the information.
Thank you @maninayton for taking the time to watch the video and contribute to the discussion.
You mentioned that the Bible has been altered throughout history and that there are inconsistencies throughout the Bible. Can you please provide evidence to support your claims? What exactly has been altered and what inconsistencies are you referring to?
Also, what do you think about the references to the existance of Jesus by Jewish historian Josephus and secular Roman historian Tacitus? Here's a post that reference these historians.
One final question, do you believe any historical document is reliable and why?
Thanks again for your contribution to the discussion.
Hi @nextgen622. Thank you for your comment. It is now 03:10 in the morning here and sleep beckons so in order to answer your questions I will provide some links rather than type out a lengthy comment.
These two links here and here cover the bible alterations.
These two links here and here cover the inconsistencies.
This link deals with Josephus while this link deals with Tacitus
and finally
I believe a historical document is reliable when its authenticity can be verified and facts within the document can be proven to be correct.
If you wish I will enter into a more prolonged debate on these and any other points at a later date.
I'm enjoying this - thanks to you and all contributors.
I'm wondering about this statement:
"Indeed, the modern text of the New Testament in use today differs in many ways from the earliest bibles that we know about."
I've never really heard that claim before. What's it referring to?
I believe it's well supported that Jesus the human person existed (and of course I believe He's at the same time God), and that the New Testament as well as the whole Bible is reliable.
It didn't take long, for one thing, for there to be churches. And they were remarkably united, despite being distances from each other. There is so much historical and day-to-day information not only in the Gospels, but in the letters of the apostles. The book of Acts is never claimed to have a very late date. The apostles' letters show well-established churches. Then there's also the theory held by, I think, secular scholars, that there's a source for the synoptic Gospels that's not in existence anymore - Q. If secular scholars can believe this Q exists, then it's not hard to believe either that the material from the Gospels came from records made by Jesus' own apostles that weren't preserved.
Hello @doule and thank you for your comment. I'm sorry it has taken me a while to reply.
To save a lot of typing I have placed a link here to an article which explains the convolutions and in fighting that went on before the Bible came into existence in the form we know today.
You said:-
Here is something to think about. There is an interesting article here which shows the remarkable similarity between the story of the Greek god of wine Dionysus (or Bacchus) and that of Jesus.
Coincidence?
I am just seeing this comment line and let me just say there have been many books written about the crucified saviors one being "The world 16 crucified saviors"
That is because the story is astrological in nature. The story plays out every year in the skies constellations.
Hi, @geneticmemory and thanks for your comment. I haven't seen the book you refer to but I have recently discovered the work done by Dr Richard Carrier. He makes many references to pre Christian myths that tell of 'crucified saviours' and how aspects from those were incorporated into the Jesus story.
As a follow-up. I have done some further research on the book you mentioned and there are concerns about its reliability. Richard Carrier does a write up about it here.
Given what is said, I would treat anything contained within the book with caution.
I am just seeing this. I'm new to steem and not very good at seeing when a reply is posted. In that regard, the platform still needs help as a social media outlet. I will look at the web page you have posted. I will, however, say anyone attempting to rebut that the story is astrological in nature would be hard for me to believe. Because there is no way to change what happens in the heavens. And many Christian authors use the line the devil did this or that. And there for today it is often hard for many to know where caution should be used.
Sorry @geneticmemory but I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. Do you mean that the story of a saviour is preordained by astrology or that the movement of the stars (astronomy) was interrupted by people as playing out a saviour story?
"To save a lot of typing I have placed a link here to an article which explains the convolutions and in fighting that went on before the Bible came into existence in the form we know today."
Your link took me to the footnotes so I'm not sure exactly what you wanted me to see. If the whole article, then I've read and studied many works like that before, so I'm familiar with the arguments. I won't even try to go into them all, but it's simply not true that the New Testament was only established in the fourth century. The New Testament was established by the Holy Spirit from the beginning of the Church. That makes it an infinitely stronger text than the U.S. Constitution, which was written only by men.
"Here is something to think about. There is an interesting article here which shows the remarkable similarity between the story of the Greek god of wine Dionysus (or Bacchus) and that of Jesus."
I'm familiar with those supposed similarities as well. I remember taking note of some of them back in high school, when I was a Christian who knew little about Christianity and didn't live by faith or know almost anything about the Bible.
On that, then, I would say first that when Jesus was casting out demons, they knew Him. According to God's Word, the whole existence of the universe is in Him. "In Him we live and move and have our being." And in this world and in human beings there's a spiritual dimension, and not only does God respond to it, but Satan does as well. The Bible says he can appear as an angel of light.
In no way, then, does it surprise me when in some superficial aspects of Jesus' life seems to have similarities to some of the false gods of the world. I took a quick look at Dionysus on Wikipedia earlier and they have a whole section comparing him to Jesus, but note that the supposed similarities don't impress many scholars - and I assume they mean secular scholars since Wikipedia is in no way Christian or conservative.
What's truly incomparable to me is how Jesus fulfills the Old Testament and further reveals what's in it.
Hello again @doule and thank you for your reply. I'm sorry the link didn't work correctly but you seem to have found the article I was referring to.
Surely this is something of a circular argument. To believe in the Holy Spirit you have to believe in the Bible and to believe in the Bible you have to believe that the Holy Spirit had a part in creating it. The only way you can square the circle on this one is to take it all on faith (as you seem to have alluded to later in your comment). No disrespect intended @doule but to my mind to rely on faith alone you have to abandon all rational thought and critical thinking.
May I ask you this question. From the way I read this in relation to what you wrote just before hand, do you believe that these 'false gods' existed?
I look forward to your reply.
But there's a circular nature to any belief system. Once people form firm beliefs about something, they see things through those beliefs. If I'm not mistaken you identify as atheist? Then isn't your immediate tendency when something challenges your atheism is to seek to defend atheism?
We all take things on faith all the time. If you go to a place you've never been before, and go to sit down in a chair, I'm sure you usually have faith that it's not going to collapse underneath you. But sometimes people might say to someone about a chair that appears to be safe, "don't sit there, it's broken" or otherwise warn people when something looks to be safe but they know it isn't. But pretty much we take things on faith because what we already know, or believe that we know, about someone or something outweighs what we don't know, or don't know yet. So yes I believe in the Holy Spirit and take what the Bible says on faith.
"They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not."
In most if not all cases, they're demons, and the worship of them is satanically inspired.
Hello, @doule and thank you once again for continuing the discussion.
I would just like to go over a couple of points you made:-
I don't have a need to defend atheism. Atheism is the non-belief in a god or gods because of the lack of evidence. If you, or anyone, presented new evidence for the existence of a god then I would look at it, evaluate it and either retain or alter my position accordingly dependent on the results of that evaluation. I am quite willing to alter my views if the evidence is sound enough.
I don't take things on faith all the time. It isn't faith to sit on a chair without fearing it's collapse. It is an expectation built on experience of all the other times I have safely sat in chairs that this one won't fail. Faith is what you require in order to believe in something without any evidence for it.
Could I ask you, and please don't answer if it makes you feel uncomfortable in any way, but what experience did you have that convinced you that the Holy Spirit exists?
And I would imagine a lot of other religions say the same about your god. Why is yours any different from theirs?
I look forward to your reply. Take care till next time.
Hello again, @maninayton. I've been working on replying but other things came up. I can't agree with the definitions and assumptions in that paragraph, which I've seen other atheists use too. It's like they're devised to avoid some real difficulties.
Atheism isn't just the simple denial of something - God's existence. It's a world-view that makes many of its own claims about existence.
And there's plenty of evidence for God's existence, which is why even outside of Christianity and Judaism the possibility of God has always been taken seriously at the least.
The Bible speaks of the natural evidence of God's existence - all of the wonders of this world - and says it's obvious to everyone that there's a Creator. I wrote a post on this subject just recently.
In the atheistic view, the universe came to life and became self-aware and self-conscious by human beings coming into existence, and atheism also claims that not only might all that have happened accidentally, but it definitely did.
So, then, you're definitely sure that it was by accident that somehow out of the "Big Bang" came all of this order, and its richness, including most of all beings that make the universe capable of consciously experiencing itself? Do you really not see even the possibility that there may be a spirit world, and a spiritual purpose for this world's existence?
Actually, it is, because if you haven't tested it beforehand, then you don't know if it's safe or not. It is a matter of needing less faith rather than more faith, at least in the wealthy parts of the world with good furniture and things tend to be maintained, but it's still faith nevertheless.
Well, how about this? From the atheist viewpoint, the universe is at best ambiguous, in terms of whether or not everything has come about through accident, or was created by an all-powerful being. Yet the atheist feels assured that he has the answer, and that it definitely came about by accident. There's truly no definitive evidence for that claim, but the personal opinion of the atheist.
Before I go any further, let me ask you something. It would help me to answer your other questions. What is it that you like so much about atheism?
I believe, like many others, that Jesus wasn't born on Christmas day...there is historical proof that he was born a few months before that...over time we chose Christmas day as His birth day...I'm still not sure exactly why we did that to be honest.
I, again like a lot of others, don't believe that the number of copies of manuscripts mean anything at all except that the manuscripts were sought after and that's why so many are available.
I believe that every single one of us have Jesus in us, especially when we accept Him as our Lord and Savior. I personally try to approach each new person like we are all part of the same big family. I mean if you follow the Bible we are all related way down the line I mean every single different family tree should technically be able to be traced back to Adam and Eve's son Seth...so there is really no reason for all the hatred out there because we are all family. Now don't get me wrong, family is not always great but if you believe in God then you should always treat everyone with courtesy and respect...even when they don't do the same.
Jesus wants us to be kind to one another, to treat others as you'd like to be treated, to love our enemies. Those are hard directions to follow when He isn't in your life...okay who am I kidding, they can be tough directions to follow even when Jesus is in your life...because people can be total jerks sometimes. I thank God that I accepted Jesus into my life because I honestly don't think I would be here today if I hadn't done so.
I think, and again this is my opinion, that God is in everything we see every single day...the birth of a baby, traveling via motorized vehicles and planes, agriculture, a gorgeous sunny day, a blue sky, a rainbow...He is in every single person, place, thing, critter, beast, etc...on the planet. If He wasn't, we wouldn't be in existence. I don't understand how some people can't accept or appreciate all the tiny miracles that we encounter every single day. If everyone felt the same appreciation for the little things in life I think there would be a lot less conflict in the world.
These are all just my opinions but to this day I can honestly say that asking Jesus into my life has made my life so much better than it was without him.
Have an awesome day all! :D
Thanks for sharing my friend! Very good and heart-felt points.
You're welcome. I'm glad you think so. Thank you. :D
meep
LOL. Okay, not sure what I'm supposed to say to that but love your profile picture. Wish I could get mine to load. :D
Have an awesome day! :D
meep
LOL. :D Now I want to watch The Muppet Show! :D
Hi mate, I will be putting up Alpha episode 4 shortly. If you'd like to continue with the series, please come join us in the discussion in Alpha episode 3 within the next couple of days. Thanks :)
I love what you are doing @nextgen622. I'm a christian from Nigeria and I love to follow the series. God bless you, bro.
Thanks bro. You're welcome to join and contribute to the conversation whenever you like . Blessings
Hi mate, I will be putting up Alpha episode 4 shortly. If you'd like to continue with the series, please come join us in the discussion in Alpha episode 3 within the next couple of days. Thanks :)
Jesus is Enki, the anuunaki, we were genetically engineered.
B.I.B.L.E.=basic information before leaving earth
the truth is out there
That one way to look at it. But when I say "leaving earth" I mean leaving the body for the last time. Some would call it being reincarnated or as the Bible says "born again"
Evidence? For Jesus being Enki, agree with your other statement:)
good
Best point is fairly early in the video... "you can't prove Christianity". This is one of the best ways to help others understand that each of our belief and understanding of our faith is only from you, yourself. We will each have a little bit of a different understanding of the Bible, but the key is that Jesus does exist. Notice I say "does" and not "did". GL to all, great posts/series.
Who am I?
BORIS!
Ok, Boris, I agree with that! The issue is Christianity calls the spirit "Jesus" others call the spirit by others names, as a matter of fact, Jesus is one of those other names. The proof of that is the use of the "J" in the name. But just because you use a name you prefer does not or should not lead you to the conclusion that your way is the only way it can be. Another interesting point that no one has mentioned is that the bible as it is commonly known is not the complete works of the Word. You only use the approved verses of the Council of Nicaea (325 A.D.) all the works that were not approved your not aware of. Missing Books (Lost Books of the Bible- *check Amazon) This is also intentdend as a reply to all who talk about how relibaly the text are. All one is saying when they talk about how reliable the text are, is that they were well copied for over two thosand (2,000) years.
Thanks to the following people for participating in Alpha episode 1. Hope you could all join in this episode too:
@maninayton
@happyme
@progressivechef
@frostyamber
@wilx
@stillwater
@theleapingkoala
@livingwaters
@everittdmickey