For all of his life, my father has been an atheist. Our family is raised catholic regardless of his beliefs, and to this day he refuses to go to church.
So again, yesterday, he and I were at home while my sisters and mom were at church and he started discussing his theories on Christianity. As he was talking, I couldnt shake the logical reasoning behind his arguments as he painted Christianity to be nothing more than a fairytale.
Some of his points were:
Where was Jesus from the moment of his birth till the age of 30? He claims that Jesus achieved fame through notoriety when he suddenly became the messiah later in life. Therby giving weight to his view that Jesus was just a regular guy who started a new religion.
He dismissed all miracles as being support beams to hold up the religious structure. Citing that some of the contents of the Dead Sea Scrolls were not released by the Pope (to which he says contradicts many stories in the bible).
The Korah factors in here as well, when he describes how Christianity stole some of the Korah’s ideas, etc.
And really, I was dumbfounded because I didn’t have anything concrete to stump him with. All I could do was vouch for the usefulness of religion as a moral code, to which he agreed. So religion isnt completely useless according to him.
Hell of a topic to bring up on Christmas Eve, but I’m wondering if any dopers have reasonable factual examples of Jesus actually being the son of God, etc without citing a source from the Bible which my dad dismisses as a result of storytelling over the years before someone finally written it all down.
The origins, message, and divinity (or lack) of Jesus have been frequently discussed on the SDMB. There is no “proof” that Jesus was God. (If, for example, there is no God (or god), then Jesus can hardly be H/his son.) (There have also been threads arguing whether Jesus even existed.)
One point that your father brought up is hooey: The Vatican has never had anything resembling complete control over the Qumran scrolls and no pope has ever ordered any of them suppressed or hidden. (The majority (but not all) of the original scholars who were initially investigating the scrolls happened to be Catholic and there was a certain amount of grumbling that the committee (not the church) was dragging its feet in realeasing some of the minor scrolls for examination. However, all of that came to a crashing halt when the Huntington Library at Stanford released photographic images of all the scrolls (which had been placed in the library as a precaution against destruction of the originals).)
I would also be curious as to where “Christianity stole some of the Korah’s ideas, etc.” I am only aware of Korah the rebel against Moses. Is there a “book” of Korah? Or was he referring to the “ideas” Korah put forth recorded in the book of Numbers?
I think the OP probably meant Torah not “Korah” but who knows?
Let me preface this by saying that I’m an agnostic. I don’t believe that Jesus was God and I don’t believe in miracles.
Having said that, your father is wrong about the Dead Sea Scrolls. The RCC has never been in a position to supress any of them and they make no mention of Jesus anyway.
It’s possibly that either you or your father are garbling some early church supression of heretical gospels such as the Gnostic texts found at Nag Hammadi (which are frequently confused with the findings at Qumran). There were a variety of heresies in the first few centuries of Christianity but there is no secret biography which turns the canonical gospels on their ears.
Extra-Biblical contemporary evidence for Jesus is virtually non-existent. There is mention of him by Josephus and Tacitus as the founder of Christianity who was executed under Pilate but that’s pretty much it for historical evidence.
There is obviously no proof for miracles, the resurrection or the divinity of Jesus. You just have to take it on faith or not take it all.
I think the Da meant the Koran. If so, he has no idea what he’s talking about- orthodox (Roman Catholic & Eastern Orthodox) Christian doctrine & the NT were well-established by 600 AD.
to address where JC was up till the age of 30, if one does believe JC to have been Divine, even God Incarnate, he was doing the toughest thing of all- being a normal human being.
so here’s the really confounding Q, what did a nobody from nowhere start teaching & doing at age 30 which, within one generation, inspired a thriving religious movement and in three centuries, rocked an empire?
I happen to agree with the OP’s father’s overview, but not with the arguments he gives.
The absence of information about Jesus’ early life is not surprising. There is very little documentation of ANYBODY’s life during that time. It is very sticky to draw conclusions from the absence of evidence. The authors of the New Testament were not trying to write biography or history, they were trying to preach their new religion. So, they focused on miracles, teachings, and events that they thought fulfilled prophecies. They didn’t bother with the mundane.
tomndebb has already explained the Dead Sea Scrolls. There were some early writings that were excluded from the New Testament, because the content was at odds with mainstream Christian theology. For more about those books, see "What’s up with the lost books of the Bible?’
Assuming that “korah” means “torah”, basically the first five books of the bible, then yes, of course. The New Testament books are based on the Old Testament books, and in fact go to great lengths (like geneologies) to try to prove that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy. To say that the New Testament borrowed heavily from the Old Testament is just to say that the religion evolved from Judaism.
Now, having said that, there is no evidence of the existence of Jesus other than the biblical books (and apocrypha) which are, of course, biased sources. However, this is not surprising – there’s barely outside evidence of the existence of Pontius Pilate, and he was governor of the region. We shouldn’t expect there to be evidence of the existence of a minor teacher/preacher/healer from a poor family.
That’s funny, last night I had a very enjoyable chat with my girlfriend’s father. Of course, it was quite different from raizok’s talk, because both of us are atheists.
Whatever or whoever the historical Jesus actually was (granting that there was one), the answer to this question probably has much more to do with the actions of Paul than it does with Jesus.
Hmmm, just to clarify, I may have misheard Torah for Korah
Judging by the posts here, it seems that my dad has an iron-clad argument against Christianity. Thats a bit depressing since I like to believe in such things as a higher power and heaven/hell, now when he goes on one of his rants in the future, I’ll be stuck going “yes Dad, you’re right” and sipping at my beer. So much for inspiring a heated debate
Why do you credit this as an “iron clad” argument against Christianity? Why do you credit it as any argument against Christianity at all? What do you expect?
Assume, for a moment, that Christianity is true. The claim is that God became an ordinary man, in the form of an itinerant preacher, around 1965 years ago (in terms of his active preaching life). OK so far. What other documentation would you expect, except from his followers (which is what we have)? Rome didn’t pay a lot of attention to itinerant preachers; neither did the Jewish establishment. If the claims of Christianity are true, what would you expect to be true that you are not seeing? What is the counter-evidence that is missing?
That’s because you are his offspring. Hopefully you will not hold his opinions in too high regard merely because he took the trouble of spawning you. In the future, try to formulate your own ideas instead thinking whatever your dad does.
Look, your dad doesn’t know crap about the bible. Although you state he doesn’t think it’s more than storytelling, he should at least know what it says before he starts spouting wrong information. The topic of your little conversation was brought up by the bible, so why not use it in your debate?
Where was Jesus before he started preaching?
Joseph and Mary were living in Nazareth. Because the Caesar at the time called for a census of the entire empire basically, this meant people had to return to their hometown to register for it. Joseph was from Bethlehem, so he and Mary went back there. Mary was pregnant at this time, and when they finally got to Bethlehem, she gave birth. Jesus was circumcised at 8 days old.
Afterwards, they took Jesus to Egypt to hide from King Herod, who was a lunatic who feared the “King of the Jews” would usurp him, he ordered all the boys born in Bethlehem to be killed. After King Herod died, they returned to Nazareth, where Jesus spent his boyhood.
When he was 12, he and his parents travelled to Jerusalem to take part in the passover feast. Joseph and Mary started to head back to Nazareth after it was over, but unbeknowsnt to them, Jesus had stayed behind to talk with the leaders of the temple.
Luke 2:46 - After three days they found him in the temple courts, listening to them and asking them questions. [47] Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. [48] When his parents saw him, they were astonished. his mother said to him, “son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been searching anxiously for you.” [49] “Why were you searching for me?” He asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” [5] But they did not understand what he was saying to them.
You are confused. If you mean the Torah, the first 5 books of the bible, central to Jewish faith, then yes they are similar to the christian bible. Christianity is in fact an offshoot of the Judaism.
If you mean the Koran, then yes it has many elements from the Bible, because Islam is an offshoot of Christianity. All 3 religions are related. Judaism began with Moses, some thousands of years B.C. Christianity began in the 1st century A.D., and Islam began in 610 A.D. When the Prophet Muhammed recieved his vision.
Frankly, just because you are so uneducated does not mean he was right. Well, if I go and start argueing with a toddler that Abraham Lincoln came from the Planet Mars, it doesn’t mean I’m right just because he’s unable to argue back with me.
My point is that no one is in a worse position to make any arguments against the principles of christian faith than your dad. It would be like me trying point in the flaws of the Andorran economy, something I know nothing about. I’ve never been to Andorra. You’re dad doesn’t go to church. It’s even more likely that this illfated ‘debate’ sprang up on christmas eve, when he’s probably feeling guilty about being so recalcitrant. If it’s just a bunch of balogney, then why would it be a big deal to go and sing a few songs with his wife and daughter? Good grief.
Which John, and which James wrote which epistle is still the subject of a certain lively debate. But in any case you are injecting your own prejudices into your reading; I made no mention of eyewitness accounts. And the question still stands: given the standards of the time, what would you expect? Biography was hardly something practiced among followers of small Jewish sects; it only began to seem important as it became a movement, and it was written down, not by the direct followers of Jesus, but by those who were at second hand. His disciples were too busy doing what He commanded them to do: go forth and preach the Gospel. It was left to others to write things down.
While I think it is not logical to dismiss the Gospel accounts out of hand, on those occasions in which they appear to be contradicted by historcal evidence, I am not quite willing to accept their testimony as to history.
All the education in the world can not justify a given religion or religion itself for that matter, because religion is based on faith, not logic.
Good faith is faith without any factual backing, and great faith is faith in the face of contradicting facts. It’s the nature of the beast that the greatest faith involves believing in things that are impossible, such as walking on water, etc. All the education in the world can’t support such beliefs.
John Mark–author of the Gospel of Mark–was the interpreter for Peter, who was one of the twelve apostles of Jesus
Luke was a companion of Paul; and other New Testament writings give evidence that Luke knew some of the apostles, members of the family of Jesus, and members of the Herod family. This Gospel appears to have been written in the nature of investigative report.
John was one of the twelve apostles of Jesus.
James was the half-brother of Jesus.
Jude was the half-brother of Jesus.
The attribution of the authorship of the Gospels to actual individual is supported by writings outside the New Testament by church historians and even individuals who knew the apostles. For example (among others):
Irenoeus, bishop of Gaul in about 180 AD, was a student of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John, confirms the authorship of Matthew, Mark, and John.
Papias, bishop of Hierapolis in Asia Minor, writing about 130 AD, as preserved in the writings of Church historian Eusebius, bishop of Caesarea who lived btween 270-340 AD, confirms the authorship of Matthew and Mark.
