historical Jesus also a myth?

[Ben Kenobi]

Does BK think humans descended from 2 people? If you accept evolution (which BK does, because he's Catholic), then it's an incontrovertible fact that humans descended from precisely 0 other humans.

I absolutely believe that all of present humanity descended from a single person.

[Sava]

Is that what happens when one's entire belief system starts to crumble?

[Sava]

I absolutely believe that all of present humanity descended from a single person.

asexual reproduction?

hell, why not

mmmmmmmmm DIVIDE!!!!!!

did the two clones then have sex? how did gender appear?

[Sava]

not gonna lie, I'd have sex with my clone

[Ben Kenobi]

most recent common ancestor is a thing... however, even the MRCA had a mother and father... and lived in a community with many other humans

As for the actual question. Yes, I believe that Adam and eve existed and that the creation account in genesis is accurate to when it was written. Can't say when that was, the source doesn't offer us much help there. All I can say is that it was really really old, and while it may have been written down first by Moses, that what's in the first 11 chapters was very old in his time.

I do not believe the creation account is something that was revealed to Moses, I think that if it wasn't written down, that the account was already there. There are parallels with other creation accounts around the world which lead me to believe that there is a common link to all of them.

[Sava]

As for the actual question. Yes, I believe that Adam and eve existed and that the creation account in genesis is accurate to when it was written. Can't say when that was, the source doesn't offer us much help there. All I can say is that it was really really old, and while it may have been written down first by Moses, that what's in the first 11 chapters was very old in his time.

it's very rare that I see an adult admit such a thing

[Proteus_MST]

Jesus didn't write the Gospels.

Of course not ... I mean the person who founded the religion or at least "make it international" (like Paulus)

Why? You accept that when Greeks 400 years after Alexander write about Alexander that this is a reliable historical source.

I don't see you challenging Plutarch's Lives as 'Greek propaganda' intended to spread Hellenism.

I don´t challenge the existence of Megas Alexandros ... after all there are numerous sources, including roman and egyptian ones ... and we also know about much more sources which were used by the surviving texts but were lost (for example because of the destruction of the Alexandrian library [and Alexandria, the name of this city as well as numerous other ones, being a good hint at Alexander).
We also know that Caesar visited the tomb of Alexander. Not to forget the hellenic ptolemic dynasty of egyptian pharaos.

I would challenge Alexander being the son of Zeus or some other god of the greek pantheon however.

Again, you don't apply this criterion to Alexander. Why the difference?

This is an argument from silence. Plenty of important events were not recorded or their documentation has not survived. This does not mean we cannot argue that it didn't happen.

You're also arguing that because we lack corroborating documentation that we should assume that the source we do have is wrong. History does not work this way. There is no evidence that what you said is correct.

If a religious sect makes some claims about its prophet that cannot ne verified by independent means, then I am especially sceptic.
I don´t think about the greek historians or hellenism as a religious sect.

I am especially sceptic with regards to claims about supernatural deeds of people (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence).
If 90% of the biography about a religions prophet contains supernatural stories and external sources (i.e. outside of the sect) about the existence of the prophet are (almost?) non existent, I am inclined to assume that the prophet may be mythological as well.
A good example of another mythological figure would be Artus Pendragon. A person with such a well fleshed out history and including existent places, that many people wouldn´t doubt that he really ruled Britain at one time in the past.
In truth however he may be a mixture of stories about several local rulers, which were strung together in order to create a biography of a single mystical king.

Again, this is an argument from silence.

Is it true? Then I don't see why his genealogy or riding a donkey at Passover or debating with the Sanhedrin should give us the slightest pause into it's historical accuracy. It is not written that the disciples did everything right. The Gospels are a very sober account.

Well, that's my point. The Gospels stand or fall as a unit. You can't go and say that Jesus believes that helping the poor is a commandment, but turn around and say that Miracles are an interpolation by crazy fanatics.


They do not actually disagree on this point. There are a number of possibilities. Genealogies can trace different ancestors, and the most common interpretation is one is for Joseph and one is for Mary.

The virgin birth is not something that there is disagreement on in the Gospels. The exact date, is also not something explicitly stated in the Gospels, but they are consistent as to what date of the week of Passover he died on the Cross.

Well, at least Marc and John don´t mention it anywhere.

And I agree ... a lot rests on Yeshua not only being a jewish priest but also having done at least most of the supernatural things attributed to him.
But I also have to say that this also has to include the old testament.

One of the reasons why I don´t consider myself to be a christian anymore is, that I cannot consider the bible to be true ... aqnd if I consider the bible to be true, then it gives a very negative testament about god (Genocide on the Armalekites for example)

[Ben Kenobi]

it's very rare that I see an adult admit such a thing

I'm not quite sure why you're surprised. It's not something I was taught as a kid.

[Sava]

I'm not quite sure why you're surprised. It's not something I was taught as a kid.

which is probably the problem

Most Christians find out this stuff is BS around the same time as Santa and the Easter bunny. I don't think you had the benefit of being forced to go to sunday school.

[Ben Kenobi]

Of course not ... I mean the person who founded the religion or at least "make it international" (like Paulus)

Which person are you talking about? There were quite a few. It wasn't just Apostle Paul. The founder of the religion is Jesus. There were 4 different Gospel writers, none of whom were Paul. The head of the Church is Peter, who is also not Paul nor did he write any of the four Gospels.

Then you have the other remaining Apostles who spread the word around the world, who, "made it international".

I don´t challenge the existence of Megas Alexandros ... after all there are numerous sources, including roman and egyptian ones ... and we also know about much more sources which were used by the surviving texts but were lost (for example because of the destruction of the Alexandrian library [and Alexandria, the name of this city as well as numerous other ones, being a good hint at Alexander).

The Gospel accounts square with descriptions of the area. It's not like it talking about mars. It's talking about specific places, and what Jerusalem was like in that period. Is there anything in scripture that would lead one to believe that it's description of Jerusalem at the time is inaccurate? Or other places?

We also know that Caesar visited the tomb of Alexander. Not to forget the hellenic ptolemic dynasty of egyptian pharaos.

The problem is, who wrote that down? The chain of sources is just not as robust.

I would challenge Alexander being the son of Zeus or some other god of the greek pantheon however.

It shows up in Lives of the Noble Greeks. Same time period. Now, I'm not questioning your assessment of the book as reliable, I'm arguing that the Gospel is also reliable.

If a religious sect makes some claims about its prophet that cannot ne verified by independent means, then I am especially sceptic.

I understand that position, but the bible makes very specific historical claims. Arguing there was no Jewish account is not the same as having a Jewish source which actually says that there was no one named Jesus and that it was a hoax.

Do you not think, given the teachings of Jesus that the Jews would have very specific interest in finding such a source? Contemporaneous with the time of Christ?

I don´t think about the greek historians or hellenism as a religious sect.

Well, they wrote with a purpose, to preserve the memory of their Culture. Read any of the historians of the time. You'll see it's there.

I am especially sceptic with regards to claims about supernatural deeds of people (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence).

If someone in Marco Polo's time brought back stories of ants mining gold, would you be skeptical?

If 90% of the biography about a religions prophet contains supernatural stories and external sources (i.e. outside of the sect) about the existence of the prophet are (almost?) non existent, I am inclined to assume that the prophet may be mythological as well.

Is the Gospel written in such a way that would lead you to believe it was intended to cast Jesus in the best light? Or his followers? I don't see it. It's a pretty sober history compared to Lives.

As for external evidence, again this is an argument from silence. Just because external evidence does not exist doesn't meant that he did not exist.

Two, there is external evidence from non Christians of the time and near contemporaneous with the events from Historians that are well regarded.

This is substantial evidence in favor of the Christian argument that Jesus was a real person, who did live in Israel at the time and that he did exist.

A good example of another mythological figure would be Artus Pendragon. A person with such a well fleshed out history and including existent places, that many people wouldn´t doubt that he really ruled Britain at one time in the past.
In truth however he may be a mixture of stories about several local rulers, which were strung together in order to create a biography of a single mystical king.

Given that we have like 1 actual source from the continent of that time period, I am extremely reluctant to dismiss Pendragon as a myth. Really, the extant documentary evidence in western era pre Charlemagne and after the fall of Rome, is really really crappy.

For historical reasons surely you understand.

Well, at least Marc and John don´t mention it anywhere.

Not mentioning something!= contradiction.

And I agree ... a lot rests on Yeshua not only being a jewish priest but also having done at least most of the supernatural things attributed to him.
But I also have to say that this also has to include the old testament.

From a historical stance, the two are very different documents. Surely you can see this? The Gospels as a unit are something that's a legitimate discussion. The entire OT is massive. All different sources, all different places, time gaps of up to several thousand years.

One of the reasons why I don´t consider myself to be a christian anymore is, that I cannot consider the bible to be true ... aqnd if I consider the bible to be true, then it gives a very negative testament about god (Genocide on the Armalekites for example)

They tried to exterminate all the Jews when they were coming from the desert into what would be Israel. Jews who intended no malice to them.

[Ben Kenobi]

Most Christians find out this stuff is BS around the same time as Santa and the Easter bunny. I don't think you had the benefit of being forced to go to sunday school.

No. I teach it.

[Sava]

Honestly, I can't think of anyone better for the job.

[Ben Kenobi]

As I've said many times, it's really my dream job.

[Sava]

between that and your political activities and where you live, I'd say you are in the best possible place (aside from a padded room)

[Ben Kenobi]

between that and your political activities and where you live, I'd say you are in the best possible place (aside from a padded room)

What can I say? Hot Chicks, beautiful weather, great Mexican food. God bless Texas.