-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
The Whole Crucifixion Story Fact's Or Fiction ?
- Thread starter TehuTi
- Start date
pladecalvo
Member
That's the $1000,000 question isn't it. The only fact is that nobody knows. Christians will believe it to be true and atheists will believe it to be fiction...........but nobody knows.
Feathers in Hair
World's Tallest Hobbit
I don't know. Because the event is not crucial to my religion, I'm not sure if it matters very much to me.
robtex
Veteran Member
the more details the less reasonable the story becomes. If it is only (a) man named Jesus was cruxified. I would go with highly likley. But if you add to it:
(b) man who was killed was the son of god
(c) man came back to life three days later
(d) man who was cruxified is to be the savior of the human race
(e) man who died now lives in Heaven
(f) man who died was born of a virgin
(g) man who died did so for our sins
(h) man who died will come revist earth in a second coming
ect ect. the more I see added to this the less reasonable this becomes. For me this is because all of the ideas presented are contingent upon one another and as of date none are verifiable. What i mean is we have the hubble telescope. It can see far into space and in all directions. When we don't see heaven year in and year out on it, the other ideas, which are contingent upon the this idea loose merit as well.
When I know that if people die for three days they are going to stay dead past those three days and i read a story claiming otherwise with no supporting evidence it weakens the idea of JC pulling this off and in addition, the other theories attachted to it that are contigent upon it for validity.
When I hear about a god proposed as omnipotent, but who is killable, an impossibility I find it harder to take stock in the surround ideas that are co-dependant on it. In this story other than (a) which is a maybe at best, (b)-(h) are unreasonable just by proposition and than componded as really unreasonable, in an expoential fashion by being co-dependant on one another for their validity.
(b) man who was killed was the son of god
(c) man came back to life three days later
(d) man who was cruxified is to be the savior of the human race
(e) man who died now lives in Heaven
(f) man who died was born of a virgin
(g) man who died did so for our sins
(h) man who died will come revist earth in a second coming
ect ect. the more I see added to this the less reasonable this becomes. For me this is because all of the ideas presented are contingent upon one another and as of date none are verifiable. What i mean is we have the hubble telescope. It can see far into space and in all directions. When we don't see heaven year in and year out on it, the other ideas, which are contingent upon the this idea loose merit as well.
When I know that if people die for three days they are going to stay dead past those three days and i read a story claiming otherwise with no supporting evidence it weakens the idea of JC pulling this off and in addition, the other theories attachted to it that are contigent upon it for validity.
When I hear about a god proposed as omnipotent, but who is killable, an impossibility I find it harder to take stock in the surround ideas that are co-dependant on it. In this story other than (a) which is a maybe at best, (b)-(h) are unreasonable just by proposition and than componded as really unreasonable, in an expoential fashion by being co-dependant on one another for their validity.
robtex
Veteran Member
Feathers in Hair said:
that makes your opinion much more valid to me. The product of your decision is not contigent upon your emotional desires but academic in nature. I would be as bold as to say that christians that answer this question, by the nature of the importance of the question to the Christian faith, have a jaded answer in that it is anti-academic in nature because of the emotional desire of Christian for this to be so.
pladecalvo
Member
Yes, really!TehuTi said:
astarath
Well-Known Member
TehuTi said:
He is speaking of the point that Atheist's require a proof without the aspect of faith attached. So a scientific study or historical/archaelogical proof to show that the story of the crucifixion is real or not.
The theists that believe in the crucifixion hold it true to the opposite end of the spectrum they believe because they use faith to believe.
As for my view, I believe the story to hold truth but the Canonized script of the bible through time has been altered(either purposefully or not) and as such can no longer be 100% accurate.
robtex said:
Rob, that's a good post - spoken like a true logical atheist (and that's no insult; I think you know me well enough to be sure of that).
I suppose, when it comes down to it, the difference between us is that you need "proof" - but you are looking too hard, and in the wrong places.
I am quite happy to accept that Christ was crucified, and understand why he allowed himself to be treated so - even being who he was; without being a Christian, you (I don't think) will understand. But that doesn't matter, does it?
pladecalvo
Member
There's nothing more to share.TehuTi said:
Question: Is the crucifixion fact or fiction.
Answer: Nobody knows.
It's all comes down to what you believe.
pladecalvo
Member
Without their faith what do they have.......nothing.astarath said: