The God Who Wasn't There (1 Viewer)

[Denny Crane]

Saw this on an ad on S2 (google).

http://www.thegodmovie.com/?gclid=CIrU7PbSzpgCFQdDgwodwSwX1g

This DVD makes the claim that Jesus Christ never really existed.

If you think about it, there is no real archaeological or even historical evidence that he did. Though this doesn't really prove he didn't exist.

My belief is that he did exist, and the stories about him are somewhat true. That he was basically a rabbi who was very popular and did go around preaching, that he was crucified.

Son of God? Not my belief. Son of man? Sure, we all are.

 

[Shooter]

Lots of people are trying to disprove the existence of Jesus these days. Maybe they know he's coming back soon, and they're worried about it.

 

[e_blazer]

Old news, and pretty thoroughly refuted:

http://members.optusnet.com.au/gakuseidon/God_Who_Wasnt_There_analysis_Part1.htm

 

[BrianFromWA]

I'm way too tired to start something I can't finish, but I wanted to leave you with this thought:

Postmodernity being what it is, it seems as if most of the West (and I'm even including "evangelical" Christians in this) have fallen into a sound bite trap that robs us of our conscience and humanity. Regardless of where you come in on the Jesus/God debate (and I realize we have all phases of the spectrum covered here), there seems to be something that's been lost over the last few decades...

Jesus was either who He says He was (Son of God, perfect, etc.) or he was a David Koresh wannabe with a better PR guy. That's really it. The "he's a good moral teacher" thing is quite close to the epitome of the lukewarmness that Jesus Himself abhors in Revelation 3:16. If He's the Son of God, then you probably should listen. If he's David Koresh, why are you getting your morals from a lunatic with a God complex? It seems like it's just a way to deflect the message without thinking about it.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

LMAO, I'm sure that's the reason, Shooter.

 

[Minstrel]

If He's the Son of God, then you probably should listen. If he's David Koresh, why are you getting your morals from a lunatic with a God complex? It seems like it's just a way to deflect the message without thinking about it.

Regardless of who Jesus was or wasn't, the wisdom ascribed to him is very worthwhile. I don't believe in what I consider the mythology built up around Christianity, but the moral philosophies are stand-alone...they can be accepted and valuable without believing in gods, burning bushes or virgin births.

 

[BrianFromWA]

You'll listen to radical, paradigm shifting wisdom from a crazy man who thinks he's God? Like, say, deciding polygamy's cool since Koresh fathered 100 kids or so?

"Turning the other cheek" sounded stupid to a lot of really moral folk. So did walking an extra mile over the requirement with a roman soldier's equipment. Loving God with all your heart, soul and strength being the greatest commandment. Etc.

(As others have brought up before, the Golden Rule was already somewhat known, so I won't say Jesus invented that)

The "moral codes" drawn up after the advent and globalization of Christianity were not prevalent in the 1st century. That was really whacked-out stuff.

Again, I'm sorry, I'll talk more tomorrow. Good night!

 

[Minstrel]

You'll listen to radical, paradigm shifting wisdom from a crazy man who thinks he's God?

I'll listen to anything that makes sense to me, regardless of whom it is coming from. I won't have faith in him, but if what he's saying makes sense, I'll incorporate it into my thinking. Further, who knows if the actual Jesus who (probably) existed even said those things? The wisdoms ascribed to the Jesus of legend are certainly interesting and valuable. Whether there was actually a Jesus in reality who said all those things is irrelevant to me, because the source doesn't matter...the substance is all that matters.

Also, while it may have been radical to that region, I wouldn't say it was unique to Jesus or Christianity. Buddha had espoused similar principles of tolerance hundreds of years before.

 

[Denny Crane]

Old news, and pretty thoroughly refuted:

http://members.optusnet.com.au/gakuseidon/God_Who_Wasnt_There_analysis_Part1.htm

Quote from your own link:

"In fact, there is very little evidence for a historical Jesus. Questioning his historicity is, in my view, a valid line of enquiry."

 

[crowTrobot]

Postmodernity being what it is, it seems as if most of the West (and I'm even including "evangelical" Christians in this) have fallen into a sound bite trap that robs us of our conscience and humanity. Regardless of where you come in on the Jesus/God debate (and I realize we have all phases of the spectrum covered here), there seems to be something that's been lost over the last few decades...

Jesus was either who He says He was (Son of God, perfect, etc.) or he was a David Koresh wannabe with a better PR guy. That's really it. The "he's a good moral teacher" thing is quite close to the epitome of the lukewarmness that Jesus Himself abhors in Revelation 3:16. If He's the Son of God, then you probably should listen. If he's David Koresh, why are you getting your morals from a lunatic with a God complex? It seems like it's just a way to deflect the message without thinking about it.

do you really have to buy into every tired retarded apologist excuse you read? jeez think for yourself for a change. assuming he existed there's no reason jesus couldn't have been delusional (or a man caught up in the delusions of his followers) but that also occasionally taught sound modern-like moral principals. history is full of similar examples. you're the one doing the deflecting here.

 

[crowTrobot]

Lots of people are trying to disprove the existence of Jesus these days. Maybe they know he's coming back soon, and they're worried about it.

or maybe they consider fundamentalist dogma detrimental to human society and are trying to speed its inevitable demise.

 

[CelticKing]

It's all in the head IMO, religion and everything else.

 

[hasoos]

Lots of people are trying to disprove the existence of Jesus these days. Maybe they know he's coming back soon, and they're worried about it.

What would be the good of doing that? If he was coming back, and you aren't a believer, your fucked anyhow. Proving he doesn't exist doesn't do you any good. Besides your quote is just another method of "control by fear". Whats next, are you going to tell me to say 10 hail mary's and give 10,000 dollars to the church in order to be "saved"? Yea I'll get right on that one, right after I go to brooklyn to purchase a bridge.

Now if we could get people to quit believing in oversized cults in general, that would do a lot of good. Maybe then folks would quit killing each over because of religious belief, which is in fact, the number one facilitator of human on human violence on our planet. Isn't that great, the hypocrites preach peace, but practice death. Way to go!

 

[speeds]

Lots of people are trying to disprove the existence of Jesus these days. Maybe they know he's coming back soon, and they're worried about it.

There is an equally unbalanced documentary called Zeitgeist that rampages through religion and into the 9/11 conspiracy theory. I'm not sure who these people are putting these docs together are but I don't think they are quite on the level. I also don't like that they constantly quote and associate themselves with legit scientists and thinkers who put a lot more honest intellectual effort into what they say and print.


God is Not Great makes a better case.

 

[Shooter]

I'll listen to anything that makes sense to me, regardless of whom it is coming from. I won't have faith in him, but if what he's saying makes sense, I'll incorporate it into my thinking. Further, who knows if the actual Jesus who (probably) existed even said those things? The wisdoms ascribed to the Jesus of legend are certainly interesting and valuable. Whether there was actually a Jesus in reality who said all those things is irrelevant to me, because the source doesn't matter...the substance is all that matters.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth, and the light. No man cometh unto the father, but by me."

Now, if Jesus wasn't "the way, the truth, and the light," he'd have to have some serious mental problems to claim that he was. So why would you want to listen to a guy like that? Jesus also claimed to be "the Son of God" and said that no man could be saved except through him. That's pretty radical stuff, and if it isn't true, then Jesus was crazy, and out of his mind.

As BrianfromWA says, you can't have it both ways. You can't deny all of the things that Christ said about himself, and who he was, and then turn around and say, "Oh, but he was a nice guy and he had a lot of good advice for us." Seems to me if you really don't believe in Jesus as the son of God, you'd want to stay as far away from him as possible and get all your "good advice" from someone you could actually trust.

 

[BrianFromWA]

do you really have to buy into every tired retarded apologist excuse you read?

Nope. I fail to see how my claim of "believe in Him or not, there isn't middle ground here" is a) an excuse, b) apologist, or c) retarded. But let me guess...there's a thread with "religion", "Jesus" or "God" in it, so you're using your constitutional right to free speech on the interwebs to make yourself look like an unintelligent (or misguided) hater?

jeez think for yourself for a change.

I think I do a fair job.

assuming he existed there's no reason jesus couldn't have been delusional (or a man caught up in the delusions of his followers) but that also occasionally taught sound modern-like moral principals. history is full of similar examples. you're the one doing the deflecting here.

"There's no reason Jesus couldn't have been delusional but occasionally taught..." So which are the occasionally? Which of his mind-blowing, way-out-there unconventional teachings and quotations from the OT were the "occasionally modern, sound" ones and which were the whacked-out, delusional ones. The ones that you choose to follow?

"Sound modern-like moral principals" (sic). What are those? "Loving the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and strength" is the greatest commandment? Wait, you have to toss that one out b/c it involves Invisible Friends. But listen to when he says pearls of wisdom like (paraphrase) "Covetousness is the same as theft". "Give to Caesar what it Caesar's...", but not the "...and to God what is God's"? You're parsing verses and calling me apologetic and retarded?

They're only "modern-like moral principles" b/c they've been propagated by Christians (or those pretending to be) throughout the ages, and/or adopted by the West through the 18th and early 19th century.

 

[Shooter]

What would be the good of doing that? If he was coming back, and you aren't a believer, your fucked anyhow.

There are lots of people who desperately hope that Christ never existed, and is not coming back, and they are trying to gather all the facts they can to reassure them of this position. Christ preached a radical message while he was on earth, and it still doesn't sit well with many people today. They don't like all that stuff about conversion, and change of heart, and they're fighting it with everything they have.

Your quote is just another method of "control by fear".

Is that right? If I tell you that a mudslide is descending on your house, and you'd better leave now or you'll be killed, am I trying to control you by fear--or am I trying to save your life?

 

[BrianFromWA]

What would be the good of doing that? If he was coming back, and you aren't a believer, your fucked anyhow. Proving he doesn't exist doesn't do you any good. Besides your quote is just another method of "control by fear". Whats next, are you going to tell me to say 10 hail mary's and give 10,000 dollars to the church in order to be "saved"? Yea I'll get right on that one, right after I go to brooklyn to purchase a bridge.

Now if we could get people to quit believing in oversized cults in general, that would do a lot of good. Maybe then folks would quit killing each over because of religious belief, which is in fact, the number one facilitator of human on human violence on our planet. Isn't that great, the hypocrites preach peace, but practice death. Way to go!

The number one facilitator of human on human violence on our planet is religious belief? I'm not positive I agree with that, unless you're counting political will and human nature as "religious belief". Did Hitler kill 6M Jews b/c they were followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or they didn't fit in with his plan for world domination? Did Stalin and Mao kill tens of millions b/c they believed in a God, or because they didn't believe Stalin was God? Are African warlords killing hundreds of thousands of people b/c of religion, or race?

You seem to see the world through a lens that blinds you into believing that human nature is much better than "oversized cults". Forget the Hobbes vs Locke debates, I guess. If any professing Christian tells you to be like them, then I agree that they are hypocrites. Christians don't tell you to be like them. They tell us that we're created to be like Jesus, and our sin nature condemns us. Jesus existed to save us from that. Believe it or not, care about God or not, that's your choice. Our government founded on a lot of philosophical 18th century theory based on NT teachings allows you to bash (or ) my belief or any other. I'm not so sure the Romans, Egyptians, Philistines, Persians, Communists, Nazis, Sandinistas, Mayans, or most others would have allowed you to.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Do you realize how many other "Lords" and "Prophets" have duplicated the exact characteristics of Jesus? You should really watch Zeitgeist when you get the chance.

In the end we're all worshipping the sun but we just don't know it...

 

[BrianFromWA]

I don't know what Zeitgeist is...thanks for the link.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Yeah, no problem. It is quite interesting... To some.

 

[CelticKing]

Do you realize how many other "Lords" and "Prophets" have duplicated the exact characteristics of Jesus? You should really watch Zeitgeist when you get the chance.

In the end we're all worshipping the sun but we just don't know it...

Like I said earlier it's all in the head man. Just an imagination created thousands of years ago from men that had too much time in their hands.

I personally believe that there is something (a force or whatever) that rules everything, but I don't believe that there is a god (and jesus, or mohamed) who will come with powers and help humanity, or whatever. Nor do I believe that they existed with such powers as named in the bible and quran. (and other religions for that matter)

 

[Colonel Ronan]

Like I said earlier it's all in the head man. Just an imagination created thousands of years ago from men that had too much time in their hands.

I personally believe that there is something (a force or whatever) that rules everything, but I don't believe that there is a god (and jesus, or mohamed) who will come with powers and help humanity, or whatever. Nor do I believe that they existed with such powers as named in the bible and quran. (and other religions for that matter)

I agree with you. There is something spiritual out there but I think Christianity has missed the nail...

 

[Shooter]

The number one facilitator of human on human violence on our planet is religious belief? I'm not positive I agree with that, unless you're counting political will and human nature as "religious belief". Did Hitler kill 6M Jews b/c they were followers of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or they didn't fit in with his plan for world domination? Did Stalin and Mao kill tens of millions b/c they believed in a God, or because they didn't believe Stalin was God? Are African warlords killing hundreds of thousands of people b/c of religion, or race?

You seem to see the world through a lens that blinds you into believing that human nature is much better than "oversized cults". Forget the Hobbes vs Locke debates, I guess. If any professing Christian tells you to be like them, then I agree that they are hypocrites. Christians don't tell you to be like them. They tell us that we're created to be like Jesus, and our sin nature condemns us. Jesus existed to save us from that. Believe it or not, care about God or not, that's your choice. Our government founded on a lot of philosophical 18th century theory based on NT teachings allows you to bash (or ) my belief or any other. I'm not so sure the Romans, Egyptians, Philistines, Persians, Communists, Nazis, Sandinistas, Mayans, or most others would have allowed you to.

Wonderful post. I think you just popped somebody's balloon.

 

[crowTrobot]

Nope. I fail to see how my claim of "believe in Him or not, there isn't middle ground here" is a) an excuse, b) apologist, or c) retarded.

believing jesus wasn't god has absolutely nothing to do with believing he may have taught some moral principals that are of potential social benefit. linking the two is apologetic excuse for "evidence" that jesus must have been god.

I think I do a fair job.

yup you've come to the conclusion that evolution is just an overblown theory and the earth is 6000 years old because you do a fair job of thinking for yourself.

"There's no reason Jesus couldn't have been delusional but occasionally taught..." So which are the occasionally?

specifics are irrelevant.

 

[crowTrobot]

I agree with you. There is something spiritual out there

wishful thinking. there could be, but if you're claiming to be certain about it you're just as delusional as fundamentalists.

 

[e_blazer]

Quote from your own link:

"In fact, there is very little evidence for a historical Jesus. Questioning his historicity is, in my view, a valid line of enquiry."

Denny, I was referring to the other claims in the film, not specifically to the questioning of the historical evidence for Jesus. Outside of the Bible, as far as I know, the only historical references to Jesus are in the writings of a few historians of the time: Josephus, Pliny the Younger, & Tacitus. These references are pretty slim and subject to dispute. Given the nature of the times, where historians primarily wrote only of royalty and famous warriors, it's not too surprising that there are so few non-scriptural references to Christ. After all, he was born to common people of a suppressed Jewish culture. The Romans had no interest in writing down anything that would aid in the spread of Christianity.

 

[BrianFromWA]

yup you've come to the conclusion that evolution is just an overblown theory and the earth is 6000 years old because you do a fair job of thinking for yourself.

I believe evolution is a theory. I do not believe it is infallible, and do not believe it holds any scientific or imaginary upper hand over creation.

I believe the earth is about 6500 years old, to be precise. I think that having an "old earth" brings up a lot of questions you (and the scientists you "believe in" to help you think for yourself) don't seem to be able to answer when they're posed to you by retarded apologists like me. I understand that there are questions yet to be answered in both hypotheses, which imho puts me one step ahead of a "think for yourself-er" like you seem to think you are.

I have a hard time believing that you're more well-versed in either Christian theological arguments or scientific arguments than I. I could be wrong, but you haven't shown me otherwise. And iirc, just about every thing I post on here carries with it some semblance of a "why" I believe what I believe...whether the topic in nuclear power, religion, archaeology, politics, etc. Your post history cannot come close to competing with that. When you begin to explain your opinions rather than attacking other posters, perhaps they'll carry more weight. Right now, you seem petulant. I'm not trying to tell you you're dumb for having your opinion...I'm saying that your opinion that I'm a "retarded apologist who can't think for himself" is a tad hypocritical and lacking basis.

 

[Colonel Ronan]

wishful thinking. there could be, but if you're claiming to be certain about it you're just as delusional as fundamentalists.

Than that must be the case then.

 

[Shooter]

yup you've come to the conclusion that evolution is just an overblown theory and the earth is 6000 years old because you do a fair job of thinking for yourself.

So those who believe in evolution are "thinking for themselves," and anyone who believes in creation is not? Do I have that right?