How do you know for sure jesus did the things he did and really existed?

[Chris]

How do we know socrates existed?

How do we know Jesus existed?

how do we know socrates existed?
how do we know we exist?
how do we know the internet exists?

and it goes on..and on..and...on and on...and on......and gets a little less relevant every time.
there comes a time when we must stop disbelieving our predecessors dont you think?

my next post will be a bit more positive. I am just feeling a bit sorry for the writers of old.

 

[Chris]

i am briefly going to take a tack here with regard to this Jesus and if he existed and if he was who he said he was the son of God.

I was 13 years old a child in an atheist family. I was warned to keep away Christianity as it was false and all made up.

A friend invited me to a youth group, a boys only one run at a church. I played games and got told a few devotional bible verses. I put up with them in order to play with these nice kids on an alternate Friday night. The strange thing about these people they were filed with unconditional love for me. They This was a christian brethren church. (Very head knowledge-no spiritual stuff encouraged- not like pentecostal).


As a 13 year old boy alone one night with no proof, no theology research, no learned early church history, no theories and no previous life long indoctrination with religion, I sat alone with some months visits to a youth group experience and a piece of paper that had some really basic instructions on how to become a christian on them.
It had a couple of verses.
john 3:16
Romans 3:23
and something else.

From this I knew I was a sinner before God and Jesus was the way the truth and the life. No man comes to the father except by him.

It was a bit of a scary experience but by myself I chose belief in Jesus Christ and to follow. Nobody pressured me.


I read the allegedly correct gospel account and believed in the alleged Jesus Christ son of the alleged Jehovah creator of the universe.


Something happened to me that I was not told would happen. from that moment something external to myself came upon me. a great fullness of joy filled me. It was like I was bursting with joy and happiness. the void inside me was gone. The loneliness and guilt of things done wrong lifted. Jesus had taken my place as a sacrifice for my sin. suddenly I was not alone anymore. Unspeakable happiness filled my life.

I know why those early christian martyrs died. they had no choice. To encounter this phenomenon in your life, you know there is more to this Jesus than just a historical figure. There is a very moreish thing about this you desire it because it feels soo good and is so life changing in a very pleasant way.

How else do I know this Jesus exists/existed.

The time i asked in prayer-

I will test you how you give back tenfold what you give-
I gave a sum of money to charity and the next day was given exactly 10 times that amount by someone.
The day an operation was cancelled because of faith healing hours before major surgery because of faith healing as a result of prayer..

The day I felt God ask me to go somewhere and I had to catch a bus but no bus would come for an hour I looked at the timetable and asked if you want me to do it send a taxi. A taxi was stopping in front of me before I had looked back down.

My wife felt the urge to cook a meal for the lady up the road a few days ago who was sick she felt God ask her to as she knew she was unwell. guess what they had no food because they had not been able to go shopping as nobody has a car in that family.

I asked Jesus what do you want me to do for you in prayer in terms of service. A week later there was a knock on the door, an old friends wife appeared who I have not seen in a couple of years and said Chris I really hope you do not think this odd but I felt the urge in prayer this morning to come and give you a message about service in ministry. helping local kids in the school.

when she came in I said "it is about time you arrived I asked God to send someone". we both looked at each other- Yep holy spirit again! Shouldn't be surprised should we? Its kinda normal.

Doubters will claim it is all explainable coincidences because that fits with their preconceived ideas of the world and it needs to be that way for them it can be absolutely no other way! They cannot believe me and miss out on it all. That is biblical because not all can believe or choose to.

But it is not it is all real and A wonderful experience to live out my life in.

It is all real...very real!

 

[Ashua]

Everything is undermined. Even the famous "I think therefore I am" is not safe from attack:

15. To study physiology with a clear conscience, one must insist on the fact that the sense-organs are not phenomena in the sense of the idealistic philosophy; as such they certainly could not be causes! Sensualism, therefore, at least as regulative hypothesis, if not as heuristic principle. What? And others say even that the external world is the work of our organs? But then our body, as a part of this external world, would be the work of our organs! But then our organs themselves would be the work of our organs! It seems to me that this is a complete REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM, if the conception CAUSA SUI is something fundamentally absurd. Consequently, the external world is NOT the work of our organs--?

16. There are still harmless self-observers who believe that there are "immediate certainties"; for instance, "I think," or as the superstition of Schopenhauer puts it, "I will"; as though cognition here got hold of its object purely and simply as "the thing in itself," without any falsification taking place either on the part of the subject or the object. I would repeat it, however, a hundred times, that "immediate certainty," as well as "absolute knowledge" and the "thing in itself," involve a CONTRADICTIO IN ADJECTO; we really ought to free ourselves from the misleading significance of words! The people on their part may think that cognition is knowing all about things, but the philosopher must say to himself: "When I analyze the process that is expressed in the sentence, 'I think,' I find a whole series of daring assertions, the argumentative proof of which would be difficult, perhaps impossible: for instance, that it is _I_ who think, that there must necessarily be something that thinks, that thinking is an activity and operation on the part of a being who is thought of as a cause, that there is an 'ego,' and finally, that it is already determined what is to be designated by thinking--that I KNOW what thinking is. For if I had not already decided within myself what it is, by what standard could I determine whether that which is just happening is not perhaps 'willing' or 'feeling'? In short, the assertion 'I think,' assumes that I COMPARE my state at the present moment with other states of myself which I know, in order to determine what it is; on account of this retrospective connection with further 'knowledge,' it has, at any rate, no immediate certainty for me."--In place of the "immediate certainty" in which the people may believe in the special case, the philosopher thus finds a series of metaphysical questions presented to him, veritable conscience questions of the intellect, to wit: "Whence did I get the notion of 'thinking'? Why do I believe in cause and effect? What gives me the right to speak of an 'ego,' and even of an 'ego' as cause, and finally of an 'ego' as cause of thought?" He who ventures to answer these metaphysical questions at once by an appeal to a sort of INTUITIVE perception, like the person who says, "I think, and know that this, at least, is true, actual, and certain"--will encounter a smile and two notes of interrogation in a philosopher nowadays. "Sir," the philosopher will perhaps give him to understand, "it is improbable that you are not mistaken, but why should it be the truth?"

17. With regard to the superstitions of logicians, I shall never tire of emphasizing a small, terse fact, which is unwillingly recognized by these credulous minds--namely, that a thought comes when "it" wishes, and not when "I" wish; so that it is a PERVERSION of the facts of the case to say that the subject "I" is the condition of the predicate "think." ONE thinks; but that this "one" is precisely the famous old "ego," is, to put it mildly, only a supposition, an assertion, and assuredly not an "immediate certainty." After all, one has even gone too far with this "one thinks"--even the "one" contains an INTERPRETATION of the process, and does not belong to the process itself. One infers here according to the usual grammatical formula--"To think is an activity; every activity requires an agency that is active; consequently" . . . It was pretty much on the same lines that the older atomism sought, besides the operating "power," the material particle wherein it resides and out of which it operates--the atom. More rigorous minds, however, learnt at last to get along without this "earth-residuum," and perhaps some day we shall accustom ourselves, even from the logician's point of view, to get along without the little "one" (to which the worthy old "ego" has refined itself). -Friedrich Neitzsche, Jenseits von Gut und Böse

 

[Chris]

Everything is undermined. Even the famous "I think therefore I am" is not safe from attack:

The problem with this line of thinking is it comes at a cost the trade of is a life of cynicism questioning everything and not allowing belief without evidence to work its magic in your life. Have you ever met a vivaciously happy cynic? They are usually the people most people dodge if they can. usually they are the party poopers of life no one likes.
whatever you do dont take that personally it is just my observation of people like that. i was refering to your quote and those that question too much unnecessarily, not you personally.
someone has a wonderful personal experience and reveals it and the cynic kills the moment for them and they walk away miserable and wishing they met someone who would at least believe them.

 

[Ashua]

Yeah, I know. i am just saying that those who love to say that you cannot prove Christ is historically real apart from the Bible cherry pick which things they accept without as much "proof."

I think what Neitzsche said concerning proving that "I am" through the faculty of thought is great because it undermines the most fundamentally self-evident "proof." Wherefore there is no real basis to deny Christ's existance when you cannot even definitively "prove" beyond any argument that "you" yourself "are."

 

[theLords]

i am briefly going to take a tack here with regard to this Jesus and if he existed and if he was who he said he was the son of God.

I was 13 years old a child in an atheist family. I was warned to keep away Christianity as it was false and all made up.

A friend invited me to a youth group, a boys only one run at a church. I played games and got told a few devotional bible verses. I put up with them in order to play with these nice kids on an alternate Friday night. The strange thing about these people they were filed with unconditional love for me. They This was a christian brethren church. (Very head knowledge-no spiritual stuff encouraged- not like pentecostal).


As a 13 year old boy alone one night with no proof, no theology research, no learned early church history, no theories and no previous life long indoctrination with religion, I sat alone with some months visits to a youth group experience and a piece of paper that had some really basic instructions on how to become a christian on them.
It had a couple of verses.
john 3:16
Romans 3:23
and something else.

From this I knew I was a sinner before God and Jesus was the way the truth and the life. No man comes to the father except by him.

It was a bit of a scary experience but by myself I chose belief in Jesus Christ and to follow. Nobody pressured me.


I read the allegedly correct gospel account and believed in the alleged Jesus Christ son of the alleged Jehovah creator of the universe.


Something happened to me that I was not told would happen. from that moment something external to myself came upon me. a great fullness of joy filled me. It was like I was bursting with joy and happiness. the void inside me was gone. The loneliness and guilt of things done wrong lifted. Jesus had taken my place as a sacrifice for my sin. suddenly I was not alone anymore. Unspeakable happiness filled my life.

I know why those early christian martyrs died. they had no choice. To encounter this phenomenon in your life, you know there is more to this Jesus than just a historical figure. There is a very moreish thing about this you desire it because it feels soo good and is so life changing in a very pleasant way.

How else do I know this Jesus exists/existed.

The time i asked in prayer-

I will test you how you give back tenfold what you give-
I gave a sum of money to charity and the next day was given exactly 10 times that amount by someone.
The day an operation was cancelled because of faith healing hours before major surgery because of faith healing as a result of prayer..

The day I felt God ask me to go somewhere and I had to catch a bus but no bus would come for an hour I looked at the timetable and asked if you want me to do it send a taxi. A taxi was stopping in front of me before I had looked back down.

My wife felt the urge to cook a meal for the lady up the road a few days ago who was sick she felt God ask her to as she knew she was unwell. guess what they had no food because they had not been able to go shopping as nobody has a car in that family.

I asked Jesus what do you want me to do for you in prayer in terms of service. A week later there was a knock on the door, an old friends wife appeared who I have not seen in a couple of years and said Chris I really hope you do not think this odd but I felt the urge in prayer this morning to come and give you a message about service in ministry. helping local kids in the school.

when she came in I said "it is about time you arrived I asked God to send someone". we both looked at each other- Yep holy spirit again! Shouldn't be surprised should we? Its kinda normal.

Doubters will claim it is all explainable coincidences because that fits with their preconceived ideas of the world and it needs to be that way for them it can be absolutely no other way! They cannot believe me and miss out on it all. That is biblical because not all can believe or choose to.

But it is not it is all real and A wonderful experience to live out my life in.

It is all real...very real!

Thanks for sharing this Chris :yes I really enjoyed reading it.

 

[theLords]

The problem with this line of thinking is it comes at a cost the trade of is a life of cynicism questioning everything and not allowing belief without evidence to work its magic in your life. Have you ever met a vivaciously happy cynic? They are usually the people most people dodge if they can. usually they are the party poopers of life no one likes.
whatever you do dont take that personally it is just my observation of people like that. i was refering to your quote and those that question too much unnecessarily, not you personally.
someone has a wonderful personal experience and reveals it and the cynic kills the moment for them and they walk away miserable and wishing they met someone who would at least believe them.

It's horrible when Christians do this to Christians. Stifling the Spirit?

 

[Chris]

Yeah, I know. i am just saying that those who love to say that you cannot prove Christ is historically real apart from the Bible cherry pick which things they accept without as much "proof."

I think what Neitzsche said concerning proving that "I am" through the faculty of thought is great because it undermines the most fundamentally self-evident "proof." Wherefore there is no real basis to deny Christ's existence when you cannot even definitively "prove" beyond any argument that "you" yourself "are."

there is a huge benefit in knowing about Christianity in an objective form other than I would like it to be that way form. I am happy with the simplicity of the faith and the joy it brings however. there is a bit of a duty to others who ask me questions to have at least researched to some credible degree that which you believe. the more I have read outside the bible the more convinced I am of my already inner truths surrounding Christ his ministry, his impact on the world. It would have been a lot better if all believers in history actually listened to him. The more I understand his teachings the more true they become. every time.
every time I forgive someone even tough my nature screams the opposite, it always works out better for all involved. Every time i withhold judgement the same occurs.

here is another funny thought- If a normal human male was to make up a religion from scratch , I would bet adultery and multiple wives would be mandatory as would alcohol consumption be recommend regularly. I bet women would be treated with less integrity than the bible gives too from the men of those times.

 

[childeye]

Of course I am willing, else I would not be here.



I did not mean to come across as evasive. I was only seeking clarity. You asked me for my definition of "God", and I tried to explain by saying that there are so many different definitions of the term that the word itself is nearly meaningless, at least, not without clarification from the person using the term. Jehovah's Witnesses and Spinozans both use the word "God", for example, but what they are talking about is not even remotely the same thing.



I'm not clear on what you mean by a "binary term". Can you explain?



This, indeed, I would absolutely agree with, except I would change one thing. I would instead say, "I would submit that without knowing what or who god is, how do you know what you are believing in?" Most Christians will readily admit that their deity is completely beyond their comprehension, meaning that they are, by definition, believing in something that they cannot understand, even in principle.



Yes, of course, I understand.

I bow to your eloquence and openess. I mean to say binary terms are defined according to an absolute by which they are relative. Binary terms being good bad, rich poor, right wrong, humility pride, success failure, charity greed, hope despair, trust distrust, truth lies, honesty dishonesty, light dark, blind seeing, free slave, knowledge ignorance, etc...

In essence that there is a Truth that is not man made but precedes men's ignorance and defines knowledge. That Truth being in the most simple terms God is Love and Love eternal. To define God is to define one's moral self.

 

[Ashua]

there is a huge benefit in knowing about Christianity in an objective form other than I would like it to be that way form. I am happy with the sipplicity of the faith and the joy it brings however. there is a bit of a duty to others who ask me questions to have at least researched to some credible degree that which you believe. the more I have read outside the bible the more convinced I am of my already inner truths surrounding Christ his ministry, his impact on the world. It would have been a lot better if all believers in history actually listened to him. The more I understand his teachings the more true they become. every time.
every time I forgive someone even tough my nature screams the opposite, it always works out better for all involved. Every time i withhold judgement the same occurs.

here is another funny thought- If a normal human male was to make up a religion from scratch , I would bet adultery and multiple wives would be mandatory as would alcohol consumption be recommend regularly. I bet women would be treated with less integrity than the bible gives too from the men of those times.

I believe what you are describing is the Hedonist faith.

 

[pianodwarf]

I bow to your eloquence and openess.

There's really no need for that. But thank you.

I mean to say binary terms are defined according to an absolute by which they are relative. Binary terms being good bad, rich poor, right wrong, humility pride, success failure, charity greed, hope despair, trust distrust, truth lies, honesty dishonesty, light dark, blind seeing, free slave, knowledge ignorance, etc...

OK, I understand.

In essence that there is a Truth that is not man made but precedes men's ignorance and defines knowledge. That Truth being in the most simple terms God is Love and Love eternal.

The problem that I have with this is that I hold to a somewhat more deconstructionist view of "truth". Deconstructionists hold that truth is a property of language; e.g., if I say, "Childeye is left-handed", that is a statement that is true or false. If language did not exist, then neither would truth. The concept would be meaningless, and indeed, it would not even exist.

To define God is to define one's moral self.

Inasmuch as it is possible to be moral without having theistic belief, I don't see how this follows. In fact, most philosophers regard the question of the existence of deities as being separate from the question of ethics, in spite of the fact that they also reject ethical relativism. they approach the question of ethics from a purely logical standpoint for the most part, although there are some unusual exceptions, such as Schopenhauer's system (which is the one I follow for the most part).

 

[WIP]

How do we know Jesus existed?

how do we know socrates existed?
how do we know we exist?
how do we know the internet exists?

and it goes on..and on..and...on and on...and on......and gets a little less relevant every time.
there comes a time when we must stop disbelieving our predecessors dont you think?

my next post will be a bit more positive. I am just feeling a bit sorry for the writers of old.

I think you misunderstand the reason behind these questions. Too often those that don't believe in the scriptures claim that they lack validity because they were written by the hand of men. Quite often these same persons will refer to the writings from other historical documents as fact when they too are no more valid by the same criteria as the writings from the Holy Bible. We ask these questions because we want to understand why scoffers are willing to accept some historical documents as valid and others not so. They will read the hieroglyphs etched in stone and accept that as fact but dispel the writings of the Bible.

Even as recent as the Civil War. There isn't a human alive today that can provide first-hand account to validate the events of that era so we are left with nothing more than historical documents to base our beliefs upon. How is that any different than the documents we read in the Holy Bible?

The validity of the Bible has been challenged for as long as the documents have been in existence. Unfortunately we don't have a single person alive today who can provide first-hand account of the recorded events. It is also true that the events of the Bible have not been proven to never have happened either. Ergo, Christians still believe these documents as fact and according to the writings of these documents we also believe them to be devinely inspired. This is where our faith comes into play.

 

[Bonairos]

Not to take away from the OP, though I understand his point (as evidenced in post #62/I like it by the way) but it seems to amaze me that Christians seem to be on the defense (most of the time) when we have reason to be on the offense (position of gain rather than defending against gain).


For what it's worth, here was my first reaction to the thread, (my response) "How do you know for sure that Jesus did NOT do the things He did and that He really NEVER existed?"

Again, not taking away from the OP (for I do get it) but it would be nice to put those who claim to be unbelievers in the position of defending themselves (beliefs. etc) with history(?) rather than allowing them to (attempt to) prove Believers wrong.


Be blessed, Stay blessed, and be Bold!

 

[Eventide]

How do you know for sure Jesus did the things he did and really existed?

Do it without bible verses. There is a way, actually there is a few.

Pardon the redundancy if this has already been mentioned.. although by far the most significant answer should be because Christ lives within the believer.

 

[childeye]

There's really no need for that. But thank you.

OK, I understand.

The problem that I have with this is that I hold to a somewhat more deconstructionist view of "truth". Deconstructionists hold that truth is a property of language; e.g., if I say, "Childeye is left-handed", that is a statement that is true or false. If language did not exist, then neither would truth. The concept would be meaningless, and indeed, it would not even exist.

Inasmuch as it is possible to be moral without having theistic belief, I don't see how this follows. In fact, most philosophers regard the question of the existence of deities as being separate from the question of ethics, in spite of the fact that they also reject ethical relativism. they approach the question of ethics from a purely logical standpoint for the most part, although there are some unusual exceptions, such as Schopenhauer's system (which is the one I follow for the most part).

Words are communication. I am unable to fathom how words preced Truth in existence. Tell me if you believe in the moral ethical statement treat others as you would want to be treated? Do you acknowledge the existence of such feelimgs as empathy and compassion?

 

[pianodwarf]

For what it's worth, here was my first reaction to the thread, (my response) "How do you know for sure that Jesus did NOT do the things He did and that He really NEVER existed?"

Hi, Bonairos: Most atheists, including me, would respond: "I don't know that for sure." Did you know that? Most Christians don't, which is why I bring it up.

Sidetracking slightly here: most people think that an atheist is someone who insists with absolute certainty that deities do not exist. In fact, very few atheists say that. Of all the dozens, if not hundreds, of atheists that I've met and interacted with over the years, I've only ever met one who did. Most atheists will say something more like this: "I am not completely certain that there are no supernatural beings with incredibly powerful abilities. However, since the claim seems to me to be very far-fetched, and because there is little to no evidence to support it, I do not entertain the notion. If presented with compelling evidence, I will change my position."

It is rather like if I told you there is an invisible man living in my spare bedroom, and that he floats above the floor so you can't hear him walk, and he has special body chemistry so you can't smell him, etc etc. Do you know for certain that what I am saying is wrong? No. But the claim is very farfetched, and I can't give you any proof, so you don't give the matter any thought.

I owe posts to at least two other people. Please bear with me... as I said, you've asked serious questions that deserve serious responses. This one is just one of the ones that's a lot easier for me to address, so I'm doing so now. (Also, in addition to everything else, I just found out that I might lose my job in about four or five weeks, so that's yet another priority that's coming up.)

 

[pianodwarf]

Words are communication. I am unable to fathom how words preced Truth in existence.

It is because truth is a property of language. In order to say something that is true, you have to say something first.

Tell me if you believe in the moral ethical statement treat others as you would want to be treated?

If I am a sexual masochist who wants you to do certain things to me, for example, it does not follow that I should do them to you. Nevertheless, it is a good guideline most of the time, which is why so many of the world's religions, including all the major ones that began before Jesus was born, mention it in one way or another.

Do you acknowledge the existence of such feelimgs as empathy and compassion?

Absolutely I do -- in fact, according to the ethical system to which I largely adhere (the one developed by Schopenhauer), compassion is the most fundamental characteristic of ethics. It may interest you to know, by the way, that unlike most atheist philosophers, Schopenhauer did not sneer at Christianity. Quite the contrary, he expressed great admiration for many of the precepts that Jesus espoused.

 

[Chris]

Hi, Bonairos: Most atheists, including me, would respond: "I don't know that for sure." Did you know that? Most Christians don't, which is why I bring it up.

Sidetracking slightly here: most people think that an atheist is someone who insists with absolute certainty that deities do not exist. In fact, very few atheists say that. Of all the dozens, if not hundreds, of atheists that I've met and interacted with over the years, I've only ever met one who did. Most atheists will say something more like this: "I am not completely certain that there are no supernatural beings with incredibly powerful abilities. However, since the claim seems to me to be very far-fetched, and because there is little to no evidence to support it, I do not entertain the notion. If presented with compelling evidence, I will change my position."

It is rather like if I told you there is an invisible man living in my spare bedroom, and that he floats above the floor so you can't hear him walk, and he has special body chemistry so you can't smell him, etc etc. Do you know for certain that what I am saying is wrong? No. But the claim is very farfetched, and I can't give you any proof, so you don't give the matter any thought.

I owe posts to at least two other people. Please bear with me... as I said, you've asked serious questions that deserve serious responses. This one is just one of the ones that's a lot easier for me to address, so I'm doing so now. (Also, in addition to everything else, I just found out that I might lose my job in about four or fiveweeks, so that's yet another priority that's coming up.)

will pray for you and hopefully my felow christians here wil to to help rectify this. let us know what we can pray for for you

 

[jasoncran]

if there were no humans left or any intellegence would the truth of the law of physics cease to exist?

 

[Chris]

Hi, Bonairos: Most atheists, including me, would respond: "I don't know that for sure." Did you know that? Most Christians don't, which is why I bring it up.

Sidetracking slightly here: most people think that an atheist is someone who insists with absolute certainty that deities do not exist. In fact, very few atheists say that. Of all the dozens, if not hundreds, of atheists that I've met and interacted with over the years, I've only ever met one who did. Most atheists will say something more like this: "I am not completely certain that there are no supernatural beings with incredibly powerful abilities. However, since the claim seems to me to be very far-fetched, and because there is little to no evidence to support it, I do not entertain the notion. If presented with compelling evidence, I will change my position."

It is rather like if I told you there is an invisible man living in my spare bedroom, and that he floats above the floor so you can't hear him walk, and he has special body chemistry so you can't smell him, etc etc. Do you know for certain that what I am saying is wrong? No. But the claim is very farfetched, and I can't give you any proof, so you don't give the matter any thought.

I owe posts to at least two other people. Please bear with me... as I said, you've asked serious questions that deserve serious responses. This one is just one of the ones that's a lot easier for me to address, so I'm doing so now. (Also, in addition to everything else, I just found out that I might lose my job in about four or fiveweeks, so that's yet another priority that's coming up.)

will pray for you and hopefully my fellow Christians here will to to help rectify this. let us know what we can pray for for you. start a thread in the prayer requests.