This Blog-post is a response to Historicity of Jesus 

 
To be with reason does not necessarily mean to be absolutely true. That is the main idea of this article you are about to read. I understand that in the 21st century there are not many people who would like to debate religious matters, and I agree with those individuals since we are not part of this universe to discuss things like this, we are here to evolve, to discover, to prosper and of course to be happy .I am a Catholic and I never fully trust my sense of reason for I believe I could be wrong. I am no fan of superstition, but I also believe that complete materialism makes our lives utterly meaningless. Last but perhaps most importantly, in my opinion, whether or not Jesus existed is of no importance compared to the messages that are associated with him

When I hear that Jesus promoted kindness and sacrificed his life for the others, I would love it in my heart and would try to do the same as much as I can.
It's easy to engage in never-ending conversations and trying to deny the existence of Jesus or God or any other holy being for that matter. These conversations akin to mathematical and scientific discussions can take for ever, but we do not live in this chapter of our existence which we call life indefinitely .

We, as the occupants of earth (and eventually other planets) are constantly fed with magnitude of information in our daily lives. It's quite natural that a scientific and critical approach to everything seems the only way of describing or realization.
However, we also know that science is never absolutely accurate and that our sense of reasoning may not always shed the light of knowledge on our issues.

Blindly using science or reasoning or proof to ignore our true obligations as humans is certainly not the best way to live.
 It is not really important if science or reason can not explain Jesus or God because I am certain that there are plenty of other subjects that can not be explained on mere paper  .Soul, the love of a mother for her child, pleasure in kindness and charity, saving lives and finally happiness among other things. None of the aforementioned concepts could be even remotely reasoned or scientifically proven. So I ask you, the reader; is it okay to ignore all of those things just because we can not describe them? 

 

The only point to the debate is to build up your argument skills, but sometimes you do learn a few things. 
 
I just can't be bothered any more as no-one is listening to the other side an no-one is changing their mind.  I will just continue to believe in fact and largely ignore faith as it serves me well.

His intentions for mankind and what he actually did for mankind are two different things.
I do not beleive doing a bunch of magic tricks and claiming to be the son of god was the right approach to what he mught have tried to accomplish, Instead here we are, thousands of years later with pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religious hate, constant war, and acts of terror all over the world. What he may have intended to accomplish, or even what he did accomplish, only has impact on soccer moms and conservative buisness men, not the world itself. 
 
If you ask me, a supreme being would have been able to do a hell of a lot of a better job.
 
I remember a quote from some scientist that i cant remember the name to. 
"Every question requires an answer, and religion has too many unanswered questions for it to involve reasoning."

" The only point to the debate is to build up your argument skills, but sometimes you do learn a few things.  I just can't be bothered any more as no-one is listening to the other side an no-one is changing their mind.  I will just continue to believe in fact and largely ignore faith as it serves me well. "

 Jesus.... sacrificed his life for the others,

This is the main reason why the worship of Jesus needs to be brought to an end.
 
Edit: Admittedly, Jesus is not the only fictional character in literary history to be an exemplar for martyrdom, but he's among the most widely-known. But martyrdom is bad, regardless of who you worship.

" The only point to the debate is to build up your argument skills, but sometimes you do learn a few things.  I just can't be bothered any more as no-one is listening to the other side an no-one is changing their mind.  I will just continue to believe in fact and largely ignore faith as it serves me well. "

" @oldschool said:

" The only point to the debate is to build up your argument skills, but sometimes you do learn a few things.  I just can't be bothered any more as no-one is listening to the other side an no-one is changing their mind.  I will just continue to believe in fact and largely ignore faith as it serves me well. "

We are here to live a good life , to be good and to make others feel good . 
Faith is one way to move along this road , but certainly not the only one. 
If believing in fact makes you happy then go for it . Whether we believe in fact or faith , we could live a happy life and we could be good people .   I've repeated this phrase many times in my life :
If you believe in God , be good for God . 
If you do not believe in God, be good for goodness .  After all, what is in your mind is nothing comapred to what you do . "

" @daniel_beck_90 said:

 Jesus.... sacrificed his life for the others,

This is the main reason why the worship of Jesus needs to be brought to an end.

"

" His intentions for mankind and what he actually did for mankind are two different things. I do not beleive doing a bunch of magic tricks and claiming to be the son of god was the right approach to what he mught have tried to accomplish, Instead here we are, thousands of years later with pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror all over the world. What he may have intended to accomplish, or even what he did accomplish, only has impact on soccer moms and conservative buisness men, not the world itself.   If you ask me, a supreme being would have been able to do a hell of a lot of a better job. "

" @Suicrat said:

" @daniel_beck_90 said:

 Jesus.... sacrificed his life for the others,

This is the main reason why the worship of Jesus needs to be brought to an end.

"

Yup. That and religion is the manifestation of irrationality in an age where rationality should reign supreme. OP fails to realize that much of the strife that occurs in the world occurs along religious and cultural lines. Religion is far more damaging to the human race than beneficial therefore it needs to be abolished. "

" @Gunner said:

" His intentions for mankind and what he actually did for mankind are two different things. I do not beleive doing a bunch of magic tricks and claiming to be the son of god was the right approach to what he mught have tried to accomplish, Instead here we are, thousands of years later with pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror all over the world. What he may have intended to accomplish, or even what he did accomplish, only has impact on soccer moms and conservative buisness men, not the world itself.   If you ask me, a supreme being would have been able to do a hell of a lot of a better job. "

I understand your point , we are all frustrated . However, you mentioned many things that are not related to Christ at all .  "pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror" are not caused by Jesus ; they are caused by greed religious leaders and men of power who did not believe in any religion or even humanity in the first place. Have you played Assassin's Creed 2 ? remember the final boss and the bishop's confession ?   Also we all could benefit from some optimism . We can see the positive side of our evolution . Technologies , modern medical affairs , a more civilized world and so forth . Not everything that happens to us is bad , that is for certain .    "

" @Gunner said:

" His intentions for mankind and what he actually did for mankind are two different things. I do not beleive doing a bunch of magic tricks and claiming to be the son of god was the right approach to what he mught have tried to accomplish, Instead here we are, thousands of years later with pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror all over the world. What he may have intended to accomplish, or even what he did accomplish, only has impact on soccer moms and conservative buisness men, not the world itself.   If you ask me, a supreme being would have been able to do a hell of a lot of a better job. "

I understand your point , we are all frustrated . However, you mentioned many things that are not related to Christ at all .  "pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror" are not caused by Jesus ; they are caused by greed religious leaders and men of power who did not believe in any religion or even humanity in the first place. Have you played Assassin's Creed 2 ? remember the final boss and the bishop's confession ?   Also we all could benefit from some optimism . We can see the positive side of our evolution . Technologies , modern medical affairs , a more civilized world and so forth . Not everything that happens to us is bad , that is for certain .    "

If its the virtues of Jesus and God that are important and not their existence, then why can't you be just a kind, caring, non-religious person?

" @Gunner said:

" His intentions for mankind and what he actually did for mankind are two different things. I do not beleive doing a bunch of magic tricks and claiming to be the son of god was the right approach to what he mught have tried to accomplish, Instead here we are, thousands of years later with pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror all over the WTworld. What he may have intended to accomplish, or even what he did accomplish, only has impact on soccer moms and conservative buisness men, not the world itself.   If you ask me, a supreme being would have been able to do a hell of a lot of a better job. "

I understand your point , we are all frustrated . However, you mentioned many things that are not related to Christ at all .  "pain, suffering, doubt, disease, starvation, religouse hate, constant war, and acts of terror" are not caused by Jesus ; they are caused by greed religious leaders and men of power who did not believe in any religion or even humanity in the first place. Have you played Assassin's Creed 2 ? remember the final boss and the bishop's confession ?   Also we all could benefit from some optimism . We can see the positive side of our evolution . Technologies , modern medical affairs , a more civilized world and so forth . Not everything that happens to us is bad , that is for certain .    "

I was afraid of the dark as a kid and had to use reason to be able to fall asleep. Death was the ultimate dark and so the skills learned from being afraid of the dark played a part in my religiosity. I consider myself now an atheist, but have the ability to have an existentialist view on the matter.

Now I've had AC II and the Bible ruined for me, all in one thread.  
 
Thanks a lot assholes. 

Just because people can't prove there isn't a God does not mean he exists.
 
Just because there are gaps in theories doesn't mean they can be filled with the faith of the existence of God.
 
 
There is a difference between what is known and what is believed.
 
As people, we have always tried to fill in the unknown with super natural causes. 
 
Whether it be shamanism or a larger organized religion, the idea is the same. We need an explanation, and religion is an easy way to create one. 
 
 
I don't think the existence of religion is necessarily a bad thing, but it definitely cannot be mixed with science by any means.

"

 the love of a mother for her child, pleasure in kindness and charity, saving lives and finally happiness among other things. None of the aforementioned concepts could be even remotely reasoned or scientifically proven. So I ask you, the reader; is it okay to ignore all of those things just because we can not describe them? 

 

" @daniel_beck_90 said:

"

 the love of a mother for her child, pleasure in kindness and charity, saving lives and finally happiness among other things. None of the aforementioned concepts could be even remotely reasoned or scientifically proven. So I ask you, the reader; is it okay to ignore all of those things just because we can not describe them? 

 

While these things a test tube cannot explain, through the reasoning and logic of game theory that economist and psychologist use we know why a mother loves her child, pleasure in kindness and all the happy things you believe only religion can bring. "

" whether or not Jesus existed is of no importance compared to the messages that are associated with him

"

  Guys, guys… calm down! Let us have a civil conversation. Bashing and insulting is not the way to do it.  You are missing my point. I believe religion is merely one way of living good. I know many horrible things have been done in the name of religion, I know many religious people are homosexual haters and I certainly know that religion contradicts with science at some points. However, it's not because of religion, but some of those religious people. Not all members of a religious faith are the same. Just because one pope bashes homosexuals or some bishop abuses his power, does not mean that religion should be abolished. Corruption could be found in any structure of any society from governments to churches. I personally am a catholic and pray daily but am NOT a supporter of the church and have absolutely nothing against homosexuality. Now is it fair to compare me with someone who is an extremist just  because we supposedly share the same faith?  You are trying to empty all those collected furies on religion instead of those who falsely uphold religions. 

  the love of a mother for her child,: 

pleasure in kindness and charity,   
saving lives and finally happiness among other things

Romanticizing altruism and love is dangerous. These are behavioral processes that are no more critical to survial then aggression that manifests as rage or hatred, and avoidance routines that manifests as disgust.  That we do not celebrate aggression or disgust is a incredible bias unless you consider the behavioral calculation that those that celebrate love/charity/altruism may(politicians) or may not (most everybody else)be aware of it. When people lionize the act's of charity and selflessness their platitudes for these behaviors are themselves no different then and investment banker speculating to profit or a herion addict jamming a needle into their veins. The advocate of altruism is himself attempting to advance his/her own self-interest and would benefit greatly from living in an altruistic society.

Setting aside your wholly asinine and counter-productive title, you make good points and then apply them poorly to unfounded results.  If you want to have a respectful discussion, referring to the mindset of others as an excuse is hardly keeping in line with your goal, you hypocrite.
 
It is true that neither reason nor science necessarily give us the correct answers.  However, that is not what they are for, and it is a strength rather than a weakness.  Reason leads us to the answers that are most probably true given the information we have.  Religion, on the other hand, is jumping to conclusions based on information that we don't have.
 
You never fully trust reason, yet you fully trust unreasonable conclusions?  How is that any good way to live?  That it keeps you from worrying about the unknown is hardly a virtue.  That it provides safe, easy answers without any of that bothersome data makes it abhorrent, not commendable.  It is amusing that you claim to be Catholic and claim not to like superstition in the same paragraph, but it is more interesting that you express a particular ignorance/arrogance that is so common among the religious.  You assert that, because your world-view dictates what is possible for others, materialism removes the possibility of a meaningful life.  Care to even attempt supporting this statement?  I am a materialist, and while my life has no more meaning than yours, it does have superior meaning.  The meaning in my life is subject to change with new information, with new preferences.  Better yet, it is the meaning that I determine; it is not simply handed to me from some ambiguous authority.
 
You claim to value the message of Jesus and God and proceed to completely misrepresent that message.  Jesus did not promote kindness, he promoted blind obedience.  Did he not say to keep the commandments (note that he doesn't limit this to the first ten)?  Did he not say "Take no thought for the morrow," or that he did not come with peace?  Your Jesus and God are entirely without acceptable morality.  Your God harps on foreskin (over 430 mentions) yet says nothing about child molestation.  He repeatedly throws out laws purposed only to inflate his ego (note the first commandments) yet never bothers to say that one shouldn't enslave others.  In fact, your God promotes slavery, going so far as to say that it is okay to beat your slave so long as they don't die in the first day and a half.  He promotes human sacrifice, rape, and murder, all in the name of blind obedience.  According to your Bible, we should not be good because it is good, we should be obedient to God because what is good is based entirely on his whims.  These are not messages that should be used for any moral system.  They are as vile as moral codes come.   
 
According to your God, having a lustful thought is worthy of eternal torture.  It is equal to genocide in his eyes.  As the saying goes "Hitler burns Anne Frank for a day, and it is evil; God burns Anne Frank for an eternity, and it is just."  That is no God to worship.  One could fully convince me that your God exists and that the Bible is true, and I would not worship the prick.  The God of the Bible does not deserve worship, he deserves only contempt.  No moral person can worship such a creature.
 
If you want to promote the message, at least be honest about what that message is.
 
Reason and science are not blind, religion is.  With reason and science, the data and the processes applied to it are under constant scrutiny.  It must always justify itself using the information available.  Religion, as I said, is based on information that is unavailable.  It is guesswork at best.  Its claims are, by and large, not falsifiable, and critical examination is considered criminal or at least shameful.  
 
You're essentially arguing for non-overlapping majesterium.  To claim that science can't address all issues is unfounded.  You point to several examples, but most of them can be explained by science.  The soul does not exist.  It has never been demonstrated otherwise.  Outside of that, though, parental bonding, altruism, etc. all have scientific explanations.  Let's assume, for the moment, that you're correct.  That science can't address everything.  How does that justify religion in the slightest?  That one method can't work doesn't mean another method automatically can.  It is never justified to simply wallow in ignorance, which is what faith and religion are all about.  Science and reason were not arbitrarily incorporated into people's minds.  They earned their place by being demonstrably reliable.  Faith has done no such thing.  Faith asserts answers where there are no clues.  Not knowing an answer doesn't give one license to just make one up. 
 
It is poor form to argue against science and reason in favor of faith by assuming your conclusion.  That science and reason contradict the purpose your faith says we have in life doesn't weaken them.  IT makes them stronger.  We have no obligations in existence at all until it can be clearly demonstrated otherwise.  
 
The quote you give is telling, as it is essentially an admission of the god of the gaps.  "God" is the label that many apply to ignorance.  What we do not yet know, God dunnit!  How your gods shrink over time.  Gods were once used to explain everything.  As reason progressed, the gods became smaller and more limited.  We now think it ludicrous to believe that the sun is pulled on a chariot.  This applies not only to the progression from god to god, but to single gods as well.  Your Bible has also gotten smaller and smaller.  Your church now believes that evolution is true, and the Biblical account is suddenly figurative.  We now believe that the Earth orbits the Sun, and all those passages stating otherwise in your Bible become mistranslations and misinterpretations.  We now realize that it is in fact wrong to enslave another human being, and sermons just skip over the bits where God promotes slavery.  What you believe is an insult to your very Bible.  Do you live by the 613 commandments?  Do you throw out any concern for the future?  Do you actually live by what your book says?  I'd have to guess the answer as "no."  You live by what you would like it to say and you will engage in any level of distortion to try and justify your position.
 
Perhaps you are incensed by my pointing out that your god promotes sacrifice, slavery, rape, and murder.  This is because, deep down, you are probably also more moral than your god.  According tot he foundation of your religion, whatever God says to do is good.  When he made Jeptha kill his own daughter in sacrifice because of an off-hand comment, murdering a teenage girl was good.  When he commanded that you take unruly children to the edge of town and stone them to death, child murder is good.  When he ordered the soldiers of a successful battle to kill every man in the town, sell the children into slavery, and divide the women amongst themselves to do whatever they wanted, rape, murder, and slavery were good.  Any discomfort you have with that notion is against the will of your god.  Either you believe that all of these things were moral, and you believe that people deserve eternal torture for having the wrong kind of thoughts, or you do not believe in the claims of your god.  
 
All this holding hands, Kumbaya shit adds nothing to genuine conversation.  It wouldn't be nice if we could all just accept many different paths and skip into the rainbow.  What would be nice is if we as a society could grow up and think critically about all claims.  If we could apply reason and progress.  If making shit up wasn't valued above admitting that we haven't an answer yet but are working on it. 

" @daniel_beck_90 said:

" whether or not Jesus existed is of no importance compared to the messages that are associated with him

"

Exactly. This right there is what is important. Even if he did not exist, the teachings that are associated with him are what are important. "

Well... he sacrificed himself so that people could go to heaven. Assuming I believe that, how is that evil?

" Well... he sacrificed himself so that people could go to heaven. Assuming I believe that, how is that evil? "

" @ThatFrood said:

" Well... he sacrificed himself so that people could go to heaven. Assuming I believe that, how is that evil? "

Ahem.....for a follower of Rand, that's extremely evil.  No offense Suicrat :) "

Ah, I see!  I said "assuming" I believe that, not that I do believe it. And I think you're cheating a bit, this was a very unique circumstance where, assuming the conditions are true, his sacrifice essentially saved the human race and it was something that absolutely no one else could have done. I know Objectivists hate self-sacrifice or other such ascetic ideals but the situation was pretty much perfectly created to make self-sacrifice the best thing to do.

" @LiquidPrince said:

" @daniel_beck_90 said:

" whether or not Jesus existed is of no importance compared to the messages that are associated with him

"

Exactly. This right there is what is important. Even if he did not exist, the teachings that are associated with him are what are important. "

And his most widely-remembered lesson, the one symbolized in all of Christendom, is the most horrific immoral teaching ever passed down to more than zero generations.
 
(In case you're wondering what I'm talking about.)

"

" Ah, I see!  I said "assuming" I believe that, not that I do believe it. And I think you're cheating a bit, this was a very unique circumstance where, assuming the conditions are true, his sacrifice essentially saved the human race and it was something that absolutely no one else could have done. I know Objectivists hate self-sacrifice or other such ascetic ideals but the situation was pretty much perfectly created to make self-sacrifice the best thing to do. "

The dictatorship wasn't the problem. According to Christian faith, Jesus HAD TO die on the cross in order for humans to be able to go to Heaven again.
So like, regardless how it went down, Jesus had to sacrifice himself, if one were to believe the Christian faith.

" The dictatorship wasn't the problem. According to Christian faith, Jesus HAD TO die on the cross in order for humans to be able to go to Heaven again.
So like, regardless how it went down, Jesus had to sacrifice himself, if one were to believe the Christian faith. "

I love how heated a debate can get over what is a fairy tale.

" I love how heated a debate can get over what is a fairy tale. "

" @Suicrat: :) yeah, I'm simply stating that Jesus is sort of the perfect role model for asceticism because theoretically he made the ultimate, most "noble" sacrifice. What Jesus did wasn't "evil" because he lived in a different world with different morals, one where asceticism is the best way to go. Saying Jesus was immoral is silly because, well, that's like saying Jesus lived in our world and did everything the bible says he did. Jesus is Jesus, and within the world of the bible he is moral. "

Agreement!
But it is a pretty interesting story, separated from its religious context.

By the way, if the world Jesus lives in is different from ours, and there is such a thing as heaven, then Jesus didn't sacrifice anything by being crucified, he just jumped on the flag pole and moved on to World 2.
 
However, if Judaea is a place on earth, and Jesus was a man, then Jesus committed a heinously immoral act. (An act St. Paul would later go on to claim was the worst sin possible.)

"

" Agreement! But it is a pretty interesting story, separated from its religious context. "