Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

I am religious and believe in free will

70 (27.6%)

I am religious and do not believe in free will

10 (3.9%)

I am not religious and believe in free will

113 (44.5%)

I am not religious and do not believe in free will

61 (24%)

Total Members Voted: 249

[redwallzyl]

A survey for everyone: Do you believe that the biblical events/people listed below happened in history?

-Jesus
-Abraham
-The Flood
-Moses

Feel free to give an explanation if you wish.

-yes
-no idea probably a grain of truth
-not like in the story but something happened to create the story from a historical perspective perhaps a tsunami or a breaking ice dam as many cultures from around the world have similar stories.
-he probably existed in some way once again a grain of truth

I'm a vary weird Christian probably as i am going into a anthropological field and have a good deal of history schooling. the way i see it the old testament is the oral tradition of the Jewish people written down long after the events happened so they are not particularly accurate but have grains of truth reflecting their cultural preferences and morals. the new is mostly the story of Jesus with the various things his followers thought about things collected into one area and from my knowledge of early church history i know for a fact they right away they all had differing interpretations even among the original disciples. for the record i am a nineteen year old, introverted, vary logical, liberal leaning, democrat who loves science and believes in evolution and i see no conflict with that and my beliefs. my unfounded musings are that god set the universe in motion with the intent to create life and when it eventually got to a state worthy he grated it sentence (the various species of human) and just watches things play out seeing how we do and sending Jesus to steer us on the right track. (once again unfounded musings)

[Frumple]

-Maybe. It's irritatingly questionable. More likely than the rest of it, though. There were still early church groups that believed the guy didn't actually exist on earth :V
-Complete toss-up. Too far back to have any meaningful way of telling, so far as I can recall.
-No. Arc covered the more charitable response, and we've had the flood discussion a few times previous in thread.
-See 2.

Depends on what you mean by happened, though. As the bible itself described would be a no across the board -- the chances of actual historical figures being as described in the bible is basically nil. Too much time, too much corruption of the source, too dubious a source to begin with insofar as historical accuracy goes. That there may have been historical people or events that the biblical ones worked off afterwards has always been a possibility. A possibility that's largely unverifiable for many of the figures, but a possibility.

[TheDarkStar]

A survey for everyone: Do you believe that the biblical events/people listed below happened in history?

-Jesus
-Abraham
-The Flood
-Moses

Feel free to give an explanation if you wish.

-Yes.
-Yes.
-Yes, although it may have only affected a certain area.
-Yes.

[ggamer]

Most theologians you talk to will tell you that Christianity stands on shaky historical ground, with the old testament re-telling events that took place anywhere from forever ago to Old Kingdom Egypt, and the New Testament following, in historical terms, a very minor rabbi and his cult of 12 trying to start a religion that barely registered on official records until several years after said rabbi was dead.

[lemon10]

A survey for everyone: Do you believe that the biblical events/people listed below happened in history?

-Jesus
-Abraham
-The Flood
-Moses

Jesus: Yes, despite there being no non-bibilical evidence. The time between the new testament being written and him dying is small enough that its very likely that he indeed lived.
Abraham: Not really. I don't know enough about him to judge properly though.
The Flood: Nope. It flies in the face of all known scientific evidence and is impossible for it to have happen naturally (although of course, if a omnipotent god really wanted to create a global 30 thousand feet flood (as would be necessary to cover the top of mount everest) then hide all evidence that it ever happened it certainly could).
Moses: Not really. I don't know enough about him to judge properly though.

[wierd]

A survey for everyone: Do you believe that the biblical events/people listed below happened in history?

-Jesus
-Abraham
-The Flood
-Moses

Jesus: Yes, despite there being no non-bibilical evidence. The time between the new testament being written and him dying is small enough that its very likely that he indeed lived.
Abraham: Not really. I don't know enough about him to judge properly though.
The Flood: Nope. It flies in the face of all known scientific evidence and is impossible for it to have happen naturally (although of course, if a omnipotent god really wanted to create a global 30 thousand feet flood (as would be necessary to cover the top of mount everest) then hide all evidence that it ever happened it certainly could).
Moses: Not really. I don't know enough about him to judge properly though.

A roman historian named Josephus gives a pretty solidly based account for the genuine existence of a historical figure meeting the identifying credentials of Jesus of nazareth.

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XX#Chapter_9

There is another reference to the jesus (the christ) he gives that is of less respected quality.
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Antiquities_of_the_Jews/Book_XVIII#Chapter_3

In addition to Josephus, there is also another Roman historian named Tacitus, who wrote some time in the second century. (Josephus was 1st century)
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Annals_%28Tacitus%29/Book_15#44

So, the romans themselves clearly believed that there was a historical figure for jesus (the christ).

[Bohandas]

A survey for everyone: Do you believe that the biblical events/people listed below happened in history?

-Jesus
-Abraham
-The Flood
-Moses

Feel free to give an explanation if you wish.

For Jesus, Abraham and Moses there doesn't seem to be to be any reason to assume that they were any less real than L. Ron Hubbard, Jim Jones, or Marshall Applewhite

As for the flood, I do recall hearing about archaeological evidence of a period of intense widespread flooding in the middle east that could have inspired the legend. I also definitely recall archaeological evidence showing that the Mesopotamians were telling that story about their own gods and heroes long before the Hebrews started telling their version.

[Vilanat]

I don't see how time is a factor here since the only texts that mention him from said era are almost entirely christian. when keeping in mind that the Church had almost complete control over the literature of the centuries that followed its entirely logical to assume that jesus was an invented figure to promote a religion and that the new testament authors putting him in the time it had to serve as establishing myth to the new religion it promoted.

What we fail to imagine is just how ignorant the general population was at the time. with literacy rates well below the 5% and almost non existent communication between ordinary people even across a small space as the Land of Israel, it's easy to invent a story about a guy that performed miracles in another city and have them believe in it. The "space" between a simple farmer born in 100 AD in a village near Nazareth to a simple urban dweller born in 100 AD living in Jerusalem can be bigger than the "space" a simple farmer from Israel has to an urban dweller from Alaska. It would have taken them at least 3 days of full daylight travel. those people of old might have indirect communication via merchants or travelers, but the chances of them having direct communication is rather slim. in that "space" of old time, an organization driven by a certain agenda can inject any number of "Facts", "Tales", "Eye Witnesses", Texts and whatnot to an extremely large proportion of the population and establish a character that never existed, or, existed in a whole different manner and importance.

This "space" is further magnified when speaking about a village dweller living 100 AD in a village near Nazareth and the happenings of 50 AD in jerusalem. 

A roman historian named Josephus gives a pretty solidly based account for the genuine existence of a historical figure meeting the identifying credentials of Jesus of nazareth.

Again, as i said above, in an era where the literature was almost completely in control by the established religion, such texts could have been easily manipulated and injected with any number of pages the original author never wrote.

[Rose]

As a non christian, I'm pretty sure all three of those people existed, as well as some sort of non-global flood.

[wierd]

The "revisionist history from christian scribes" angle does not seem to play well with Tacitus, who is very... erhm... "Unflattering" about christians, and the christ.

That is, unless you think this is something a christian scribe would write:

Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.

[Rolan7]

Wow, that's a fascinating quote.

To be contrary, it does seem somewhat possible that it could be fake.  Particularly due to the end, where Tacitus expresses sympathy for the Christians.  Paraphrased, "Even the heathen witnesses the Christians being martyred and realizes that it's unjust".  But, it does look pretty legit.

[TempAcc]

Well, considering this is Nero he's talking about, its pretty easy to sympathize with pretty much anyone or anything else, in comparison :v
Nero was never very popular in Rome, so its natural that contemporary Roman historians and scholars would find reasons to portray him in a negative light regardless of what they were discussing. Hell, from all we know, most sordid/nefarious details of Nero's personal life (incestous relationship with his mother, dressing his catamite as his late wife and calling him by her name while crying on his lap, running down children under his chariot, etc) might just be political propaganda fabricated by his many contemporary detractors.

And in regards to the survey thing, pretty much what everyone said. There are contemporary and multiple sources (some reliable, other less so) pointing to the figure of Jesus of Nazareth, both directly and indirectly.

Moses is a bit more questionable, since there aren't many non christian sources pointing to him left. Some egyptian sources supposedly refer to a figure that could be Moses, but thats still open for interpretation.

On Abraham, he's just too far back and there's no non jewish/christian sources that mention him, I think, altough that is kinda expected from such an ancient figure. His existence is not unlikely, though.

As for the great flood, its doubtful it had the proportions described in the bible, but there is archeological evidence that a pretty big flood happened in the area in which the biblical Noah would have lived. Probably not a world destroying catastrophic event, but localized disaster? Not that unlikely.

[Bohandas]

Wow, that's a fascinating quote.

To be contrary, it does seem somewhat possible that it could be fake.  Particularly due to the end, where Tacitus expresses sympathy for the Christians.  "Even the heathen witnesses the Christians being martyred and realizes that it's unjust".  But, it does look pretty legit.

The choice of the word "heathen" m8ght be more due to the translator's prejudices than the original writer's

[Calidovi]

As for the great flood, its doubtful it had the proportions described in the bible, but there is archeological evidence that a pretty big flood happened in the area in which the biblical Noah would have lived. Probably not a world destroying catastrophic event, but localized disaster? Not that unlikely.

I find it interesting how the bible's scale only goes so far. Middle Eastern peninsula + East Mediterranean Europe + Egypt does not represent the world, and when prophets of those times bear no insight to the scope of the world in comparison to Abrahamic God it's always odd, if not slightly humorous, how the vast creations of the world are merely all that can be seen by the prophets of those times.

[Rolan7]

Wow, that's a fascinating quote.

To be contrary, it does seem somewhat possible that it could be fake.  Particularly due to the end, where Tacitus expresses sympathy for the Christians.  "Even the heathen witnesses the Christians being martyred and realizes that it's unjust".  But, it does look pretty legit.

The choice of the word "heathen" m8ght be more due to the translator's prejudices than the original writer's

Ugh sorry, I made that look like a literal quote when I was actually paraphrasing.  My fault.