Not all atheists think that Jesus didn’t exist. Many think he was some kind of prophet or preacher who existed at that time (possibly a Zealot) and may have been crucified. It would be fascinating to learn the truth. But I suspect you’d need to send a large team of specialist chrononauts back in time to even find him, let alone verify or debunk his miracles.
And the problem would be even more difficult with earlier figures- the dates for Moses are very vague, and the pharaoh involved in that story isn’t even named.
First of all if you had read the thread you would have noted that I, the OP, admitted it would have to be a magical time machine. But you see that’s how hypotheticals work.
You completely missed the point of the OP. But let me guess, I bet you don’t believe in the theory of general relativity because Einstein used a magical elevator in space to help prove some of its core tenants?
It’s not in my library system. You said you’ve got the book: could you give the names of the societies which Swanson said had no form of religion?
I’ll consider it.
Are we presuming that the time machine shows that all of the Biblical miracles happened, or just one or a few of them? If so, which ones? Because that affects my answer.
If the time machine showed, beyond doubt, that the sun stopped moving relative to the earth – especially with no major geological disruption as a result – I’d certainly have to rethink something. I don’t think that would prove the existence of a God that was simultaneously omniscient, all powerful, and loving – let alone of one which has laid down a specific set of rules about how and with whom humans should have sex; but it would prove that either I really am living in a simulation, or Something exists which can temporarily rewrite the laws of physics.
If the time machine didn’t show that sort of thing, but did show, say, that there were barrels of water at a wedding and a person named Aramaic-equivalent-of-Jesus asked them to be poured out as if the contents were wine and they were wine: the first thing I’d want to do would be to have some really good modern magicians watch the scene and see whether they could figure out how it was done. If it were done in some way that convincingly actually turned the water into wine: that would make it seem likely that magical powers exist, and that Jesus of Nazareth had such powers. It wouldn’t, again, prove that Jesus was an omniscient, all powerful, and loving God. Maybe other sorts of beings can change water into wine. It would make me want a whole lot more investigation into Jesus of Nazareth – and hey, we’d have that nifty time machine, we’d be able to find out a whole lot more.
Sorry - lack of corroboration; impossible timeline; non-historical events. Nope. But the faithful will believe what they want; if needing evidence, their faith is weak. Which is why a time-machine window into their faith’s origin events will have no effect of belief.
Scientific theories evolve with new data; religions evolve when faced with existential threats. Convert or die, pagan! Oh, but bring your gods along; they can be saints.
Is bald a hair color? Is silence a sound? Is nowhere a place? Is atheism a belief?
Real monotheists (nope, not trinitarian Xians) are atheists about all deities but their particular one. Polytheists claiming monotheism (yeah, trinitarian Xians) believe in their three-gods-in-one and assorted angels, demons, ghosts, assimilated pagan gods, and other woo-woo spirits, and are atheists about all others. Anti-theists may claim no deities exist. A-theists don’t bother with gods, though may note that humans have invented many invisible friends that live in believers’ imaginations. What a funhouse!
I happen to believe in a historical Jesus. However the evidence is not all that strong considering that there were disciples who could have documented things at the time. But I said “especially the miracles” - while I accept a historical Jesus I don’t accept them, and there is no evidence outside the Bible for them.
If you think that is a good record, you should accept the miracles of George Washington as documented by Parson Weems right after his death.
BTW, there seems to be a lot more evidence for other Messiah wannabes at the time. Despite not having a lot of disciples that outlived them. That’s probably because they lasted longer and had more impact on the society during their lifetimes.
The lack of interest in the Jesus cult in Jerusalem after the death of Jesus is telling. If the zombies walked, perhaps people would notice. There was a lot more success further away, no doubt due to the fact that people back then couldn’t hop onto Snopes to check out the resurrection story.
You might see if it’s available by inter-library loan.
Appendix I is a rather dense coded table of documented social and belief factors. I’ll try to tease out the data. But first, what is “religion”? I’ll say the defining factor is worship of sacred elements - deities, places, objects - with hope of supernatural benefits. Use the supernatural to whip the natural world into shape!
Some societies have an idea of witchcraft, which blames others for our woes, and correlates with inadequate food supplies, internal conflicts, and lack of dispute-resolution with neighbors. Some societies have some notion of souls, and ancestral spirits, that don’t interact with the living. Some hold for reincarnation, which sees continuity of character traits, and correlates with settlement patterns. I don’t see those as “religion” as I defined above. So I’ll focus on peoples with a count of zero gods at any level.
[ul]
[li] Arapesh (New Guinea)[/li][li] Arunta (Australia)[/li][li] Kaska (C.Canada)[/li][li] Nez Persés (W.USA)[/li][li] Orokaiva (New Guinea)[/li][li] Shoshoni (W.USA)[/li][li] Yagua (Amazonia)[/li][/ul]
That’s seven of the fifty societies evaluated. The others show correlations between the number of gods, and number of power centers (“sovereign groups”) within the society. Monotheism is rare; very few gods sit alone in their realms but are ringed by spirits. The religion-less societies don’t show a direct correlation but they tend to have very few power centers.
Are we presuming that the time machine operates in our current universe, or could it lead to some fantasy realm? Let’s say the time machine has a minimum range of X decades, so testing and calibrating it is problematic. How do we know where it goes? And how do we know some evil entity isn’t just tricking us? Many deities are tricksters.
I was checking the 40-library system they generally do interlibrary loan through, not just one specific library.
‘What is religion?’ is indeed a doozy of a question.
Thanks for list – I can google the individual societies, at least.
I’ve been assuming that the hypothetical presumes the machine operates in our universe, that its range includes Biblical times, and that testing and calibrating it is not problematic. Outside the hypothetical, all those would be relevant questions – but then, outside the hypothetical, we don’t have a time machine.
“If someone invented a time machine and anyone could go back and observe that these claimed events didn’t happen as described in the Bible would the visual evidence be enough for the faithful to cast out their belief system?”
So, there’s no mention of the word “magical” there.
And yes, I got the point of your OP, which was a attack upon Christianity. It wasnt well hidden : "I don’t believe in Moses, historical Jesus,…or turning water into wine." See you can believe or not believe in Miracles or a Supreme being or Unicorns. But “belief” doesnt come into the fact there was a Historical Jesus. Oh sure, you could join the tiny minority that disputes that, sure, but only diehard atheists would put it as a matter of “belief”.
See, there’s about as much historical evidence in Socrates. Now, you can say you doubt Socrates really exists, maybe Plato- a well know liar- made him up, like Atlantis. But “belief” doesnt enter in the historical facts of whether or not Socrates really existed.
Then George Washington didnt exist. I mean, no cherry tree, he couldnt really throw a dollar across that river and so forth. The existence of some made up legends about a historical person doesnt make the person vanish.
Three or four ancient non-Christian writers mention Jesus. And a bunch of Christian writers also.
Socrates existed (he is featured in a contemporary play as well as in Plato) bud didn’t say the things Plato says he said. George Washington existed and didn’t do miracles. Likewise, Jesus existed but didn’t do miracles.
The first is the assumption that the past is a thing. We have been taught to perceive the past as a firm inscription, as opposed to the future, which is nominally uncertain, but there is no logical/substantive evidence to suggest that the two abstractions as different. The past may in fact be as uncertain as the future, and the more distant in spacetime you are, the greater the uncertainty. Which is to say that even the most amazing magical technology cannot resolve the issue of the uncertainty.
Beyond that, you have to consider that the past of heavily larded with rashomondegreens. You go to find and observe past events – from what “camera angle”, with what “lens”? How can you establish that your observations will be definitive and cannot be countered by different observations of the same events drawn from a different perspective? Or, simply, interpreted differently?
And, finally, there is the ultimate question of the act of observation. Can you observe a past event without affecting that event? This has not even been established as possible or feasible. Even if you are invisible, you will still have some sort of effect on the event. No amount of magic will get you past the fact that your observational device is proactive in nature.
Most importantly, scientific knowledge is founded on ignorance, which it addresses through theory and principle. Religion tells us that throwing a virgin into the volcano will make our crops thrive; science responds by saying that, based on statistical analysis, no causal relationship, or even correlation, can be established between immolated virgins and prosperity, other than, perhaps, the fact that we have fewer mouths to feed. By discovering the definite falsehood of reportedly divine events, you would seek to push scientific knowledge into the realm of absolute positivist truths, which belongs entirely to religion.
Which is to say, the premise of your hypothetical is deeply misguided.
Quoted directly from my post 17: “My hypothetical of a (for all practical purposes, magical) time machine supposes all of the time/place issues could be solved.”
I didn’t say I said it in the OP, I said I said it as the OP. But like I said, if you had read the thread you would have known that.
Well honestly I didn’t know because with all your italics, all caps and frothing I didn’t see one word that actually addressed the OP. And you’re right, I don’t believe in God, Jesus or miracles of the bible, but “attack” seems a bit strong. I posted a hypothetical for discussion, nothing wrong with that. Why didn’t you just post your proof or reasons that you think a time machine wouldn’t change minds instead of launching into a tirade about ‘butt-fucking the laws of physics’ with my impossible, magical time machine?
The historic Georgie, who was tricked into starting the first global war, wasn’t the saintly fantasy figure worshiped by patriots and propagandists now and into the future. Any historic Yeshua bir Miryam was a little Semite bastard probably looking like Yasser Arafat, adopted by a “builder” (middle-class general contractor) whose origin and deeds could not have been as portrayed. The whole nativity timeline is so wrong, it’s not even wrong. Future generations will see infant Georgie as found floating down the Potomac, borne by swans on Easter morning. Same thing.
The whole Xian saga was cobbled together from existing myths and topical politics. Yes, an actual magical time machine would reveal this. No, it wouldn’t matter now.