How Jesus Got A Life

[Fidei Defensor]

[url="http://www.atheists.org/christianity/jesuslife.html"]http://www.atheists.org/christianity/jesuslife.html[/url]

What do you think of this, and how would you respond to something like this?

[Brother Adam]

I would laugh at how bizarre it is. Not even credible athiest scholars deny the existance of a man named Jesus who was a Nazarene and lived in the time of Pontius Pilate, who was crucificed and had a following after his death.

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Mar 14 2006, 08:13 PM']I would laugh at how bizarre it is. Not even credible athiest scholars deny the existance of a man named Jesus who was a Nazarene and lived in the time of Pontius Pilate, who was crucificed and had a following after his death.
[right][snapback]911894[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Other than laughing, how would you logically approach this?

[Socrates]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='Mar 14 2006, 06:39 PM'][url="http://www.atheists.org/christianity/jesuslife.html"]http://www.atheists.org/christianity/jesuslife.html[/url]

What do you think of this, and how would you respond to something like this?
[right][snapback]911856[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I didn't have time to read it all in depth, but it's hardly anything original (nor convincing to a truly "probing mind"). It's just a regurgitation of the same old specious anti-Christian atheist arguments that have been circulating for well over a hundred years now.
For refutations of these individual claims, I'd recommend doing a search on phatmass, and looking up all LittleLes' posts and seeing how they were refuted. (There's simply too much nonsense to respond to in one post!)

These claims are not based on any solid evidence, but are simply baseless assertions and hypotheses. For instance, the earliest gospel manuscript fragments found are those of the Gospel of Matthew (dating to the first century), and attest to Christ's divinity. Fragments of the Gospel of John exist dating back to the early second century.

The infamous "Q source" from which the Gospels were supposedly derived was a 19th Century invention. No one had ever mentioned this source until 19th century "modernists" hypothesized its existance, and [b]absolutely no manuscripts of "Q" have ever been found![/b]
That's right, there's not a shred of concrete evidence it ever existed!

As for Christianity deriving from pagan mystery cults, there is again [b]absolutely no historical evidence[/b] of this happening - just another baseless hypothesis claiming to be fact. Christianity always existed as quite distinct from and contrary to any pagan religions or cults.

Of course, the facts are not likely to stand in the way of the godless faith of the atheist "true unbeliever," so it is a little hard to "logically approach" the blatantly illogical.

[Fidei Defensor]

As a side note, I have often used, and particularly like [url="http://www.tektonics.org"]http://www.tektonics.org[/url] as a source. Its a christian apologetics site with no particular affiliation. It has good resources on this area: [url="http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html"]http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html[/url]

[Socrates]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='Mar 14 2006, 08:11 PM']As a side note, I have often used, and particularly like [url="http://www.tektonics.org"]http://www.tektonics.org[/url] as a source.  Its a christian apologetics site with no particular affiliation. It has good resources on this area: [url="http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html"]http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html[/url]
[right][snapback]911930[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Looks like you've got good arguments against those atheist claims. Is there a particular claim you have trouble with?

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Mar 14 2006, 09:20 PM']Looks like you've got good arguments against those atheist claims.  Is there a particular claim you have trouble with?
[right][snapback]911934[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I guess there isnt one particular one. However, I just feel overwhelmed because their logic seems sound. Even though I know the arguments against theirs, they seem logical. I do know, though, that they are biased against Christianity, so that influences their conclusions.

[Socrates]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='Mar 14 2006, 08:34 PM']I guess there isnt one particular one. However, I just feel overwhelmed because their logic seems sound. Even though I know the arguments against theirs, they seem logical. I do know, though, that they are biased against Christianity, so that influences their conclusions.
[right][snapback]911938[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
What do you mean "they sound logical"?
The historical facts do not back them up. They make baseless assertions.

Name one of their arguments which you think is logical.
(Btw - most of this stuff has already been dealt with and refuted here on Phatmass in the past.)

[indescribable]

if one researches symbolisms in all faiths, a few themes pop up consistently. some take that as human nature and dismiss that religion as a pack of lies. but i believe that that only strengthens the human story, the entire world struggling to find the higher truth that the followers of Jesus found. i believing all the pagan issues can be tough, but thinking that has got me through it.

[Jaime]

I agree with Adam

Laugh. Its so weak in premise, its not worthy of anything else. I think athiests would be embarrassed by this tripe

[YMNolan]

[quote name='indescribable' date='Mar 14 2006, 11:06 PM']if one researches symbolisms in all faiths, a few themes pop up consistently. some take that as human nature and dismiss that religion as a pack of lies. but i believe that that only strengthens the human story, the entire world struggling to find the higher truth that the followers of Jesus found. i believing all the pagan issues can be tough, but thinking that has got me through it.
[right][snapback]912021[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Like when he mentions the similarities to the Mithra (or whatever this greek legend was), he tries to argue that this dispells Christianity. To me though it's really that universality that God intendd to bring to the world. For a Greek, who knew of this story, it would have been a smooth transition to Christianity. It's like everyone, no matter what their culture was, had some kind of outlet that led to Christ. For the Jews of course it was the fulfillment of the Messianic prophecy.

This guy also uses the whole name thing to try to discredit Jesus, as if nearly every name in the Bible isn't a symbol for something.

Bottom line though, nobody knows who Mithra is in today's world. But you better believe the average joe has most likely heard of a carpenter from Nazareth named Jesus.