| Rostos |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 08:30 PM | Reply with quote #1 |
|
Are there any writings by atheists in ancient times, around the time of Jesus and before? Lets take Jesus for example. Are there any writings around the he lived or after (when there was an explosion of Christianity) that write against him, claiming him to be false? If what is claimed in the bible never happened, but at the same time Christianity exploded, then wouldnt it be logical that people around the time would write aruments against it? For example, if Jesus never lived OR he did but only as an oridnary person YET Christianity exploded, wouldnt it be logical that there would be writings by atheists or non believers around the time stating something like, Christianity is growing but what for, the person who they claimed (Jesus) never lived, so what are they talking about? Or lets take it one step ahead, our belief is that he was crucified and was risen fromt he dead and his disiples were persecuted for there beliefs, wouldnt or shouldnt there be writings saying that, his body was never missing in the first place, or if it is missing, claims that it was stolen, i am after writings etc etc? My point is, Christianity exploded just after the time Christ died and rose, if these things never happened or not as they were claimed to be, dont you think that it would be lgical to conclude that there would be someone or some group writing around the time when all this happened that it is all lies? |
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 08:43 PM | Reply with quote #2 |
|
I mean, surely, there were atheists around the time. If they saw Christianty exploding, surely, there woud be writings by people with all sorts of information, evidences from people around the time trying to prove it wrong etc etc... Thoughts? |
| Loading... | |
| hatsoff |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 09:13 PM | Reply with quote #3 |
|
I don't think Christianity "exploded" until the time of Constantine. And we do know of at least one anti-Christian treatise from shortly thereafter, Julian's Against the Galileans. Unfortunately it does not survive except in fragmentary quotations.
Probably that was the fate of most anti-Christian writings. In the late antique and medieval Christian world, people just weren't overly motivated to rescue anti-Christian literature from the ravages of time.
But Julian was pagan, not atheist. In fact, I don't even know of any atheistic literature from the ancient world outside pre-Christian Greece. If anyone can fill me in on some 1st-5th century Roman empire atheists, that would be nice. But I suspect that no such writings survive.
|
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 09:31 PM | Reply with quote #4 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by hatsoffI don't think Christianity "exploded" until the time of Constantine. And we do know of at least one anti-Christian treatise from shortly thereafter, Julian's Against the Galileans. Unfortunately it does not survive except in fragmentary quotations. What were those fragmentary quotations?
Probably that was the fate of most anti-Christian writings. In the late antique and medieval Christian world, people just weren't overly motivated to rescue anti-Christian literature from the ravages of time.
Why not? if it was all a lie, and it was growing and starting to influence society, why wouldnt a group of "rationalists" attempt toset the record straight?
But Julian was pagan, not atheist. In fact, I don't even know of any atheistic literature from the ancient world outside pre-Christian Greece. If anyone can fill me in on some 1st-5th century Roman empire atheists, that would be nice. But I suspect that no such writings survive. I just find it strange that there arent any.
|
| Loading... | |
| JudeNebula |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 09:56 PM | Reply with quote #5 |
|
| They weren't atheists. They were Romans, and they prosecuted the Christians left and right apparently. Why? Because they obviously didn't believe those claims...
If the Romans had believed the claims that Jesus was really God, you think they would go around killing his followers and damning themselves to a life in hell? |
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 10:23 PM | Reply with quote #6 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by JudeNebulaThey weren't atheists. They were Romans, and they prosecuted the Christians left and right apparently. Why? Because they obviously didn't believe those claims...
If the Romans had believed the claims that Jesus was really God, you think they would go around killing his followers and damning themselves to a life in hell? You are missing the point. Why arent there any writings regarding evidences against Christianty? AROUND THE TIME of Jesus or after? Ie, why arent there writings such as , Christianity is getting a following, but there was no such person as Jesus, or Jesus was never crucified or he never performed miracles......etc etc Or on the claims he rose from the dead, the body was always in the tomb, a guard fell asleep and the body was stolen, the guard admitted to falling asleep, or being tricked etc etc...Why werent there any writings from the guards about what happened? I just find it really strange, that if none of Christianity were true, then SURELY there would be writings by secularists, or non believers or even the romans confirming that at the time. a) the writings of the NT were all lies and or b) that such a person never existed........ There doesnt seem to any writings that is providing any counter claims or evidences against the NT. |
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/27/12 at 10:33 PM | Reply with quote #7 |
|
In human history, when something is claimed, there are always skeptics around who investigate the facts and evidences at hand and write about those... Yet, there doesnt seen to be any, considering it was a big deal...I just find that strange....... Why arent there any external writings, ie, Christians believed in Jesus, but such a person never existed, OR, they claimed he healed certain people, yet, when we talked to them or there friends and family, it was a lie, he never did such a thing or regarding the ressurection, the guard confirmed that he actually fell a sleep, or someone came forward and said the body was stolen... |
| Loading... | |
| itsallgood |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 02:33 AM | Reply with quote #8 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by Rostos
Lets take Jesus for example. Are there any writings around the he lived or after (when there was an explosion of Christianity) that write against him, claiming him to be false?
The jewish council that supposedly examined him did exactly that.
Then you have the romans who obviously did not believe or they would not have killed him or other Christians.
So yea everybody who was not a Christian thought him false obviously.
LOL what a silly question.
|
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 03:13 AM | Reply with quote #9 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by itsallgoodQuote: Originally Posted by Rostos
Lets take Jesus for example. Are there any writings around the he lived or after (when there was an explosion of Christianity) that write against him, claiming him to be false?
The jewish council that supposedly examined him did exactly that.
Then you have the romans who obviously did not believe or they would not have killed him or other Christians.
So yea everybody who was not a Christian thought him false obviously.
LOL what a silly question.
Again, you missed the point. Christianity exploded after his death. If what the NT claims about him was false AND the rest of society (non Chriatian) saw how Christianity was blossoming, then why werent there any writings talking about this? Why werent there any investigations into the many claims? This isnt about the Romans killing Christians, rather, why werent there any writings claiming that Jesus did no perform any miracles, rise from the dead etc etc..... It doesnt make sense, that if the writings about Jesus were all false, yet society starts join Christianity, that there werent any commentators who investigated the whole thing (neutral observers) and find evidence that it was all a lie...... |
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 03:31 AM | Reply with quote #10 |
|
I just find it strange - a man comes into the world, heals the sick, raises people from the dead, teaches good things, gets crucified, and is raised from the dead. - His followers are prepared to die for what they have seen - Christianity explodes and many Christians are persecuted. YET, NO ONE, no skeptical, non believer, atheist or whatever that sees what is going on never investigated it and wrote about it. We know from the bible that there were atheists around the time, surely they would have investigated all the claims. Why wouldnt these skeptics go up to the cured people, raised people, people who saw Jesus walk on water, the guards at the tomb etc etc and investigate it , gather this information, and in fact, if it wasnt true, write about it documenting the evidences they obtained. I know the Romans persecuted the Christians, but they didnt do this because of evidences, but rather because they were threatened, political reasonig etc etc... This is completely different to what i am posting about... |
| Loading... | |
| jonahbear |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 07:45 AM | Reply with quote #11 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by RostosI just find it strange - a man comes into the world, heals the sick, raises people from the dead, teaches good things, gets crucified, and is raised from the dead. - His followers are prepared to die for what they have seen - Christianity explodes and many Christians are persecuted. YET, NO ONE, no skeptical, non believer, atheist or whatever that sees what is going on never investigated it and wrote about it. We know from the bible that there were atheists around the time, surely they would have investigated all the claims. Why wouldnt these skeptics go up to the cured people, raised people, people who saw Jesus walk on water, the guards at the tomb etc etc and investigate it , gather this information, and in fact, if it wasnt true, write about it documenting the evidences they obtained. I know the Romans persecuted the Christians, but they didnt do this because of evidences, but rather because they were threatened, political reasonig etc etc... This is completely different to what i am posting about... The typical argument to this is that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. During the sacking of Israel circa 70 A.D. there were apparently libraries of documents that were burned and destroyed. The atheist may state that the counter claims to Jesus were all burned in this event. I don't buy it but that is the argument. I don't buy it because the propensity for the survival of documents of either: a) An obscure cult - why would such obscure documents have found their way to survival while the counter claims (especially if they were demonstrably superior to the Gospel) were destroyed? b) A pernicious and rampant religion - Surely, had this been the case, the Romans would have ensured that the documents were burned. The other argument is that Christianity just "wasn't that important" so there were no counter claim writings in existence. This just doesn't wash either as Jesus (and allegedly many of his disciples) were martyred for the religious claims. Their claims were not being ignored. So, like you, I do find the resounding absence of counter claim documents rather unusual had there been a siginficant dispute as to Jesus' life. All the while, archaeology is finding fragments of parchments/papyrus of the Gospel accounts even in our modern day! |
| Loading... | |
| itsallgood |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 08:13 AM | Reply with quote #12 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by RostosAgain, you missed the point. Christianity exploded after his death.
When after his death?.
Quote: If what the NT claims about him was false AND the rest of society (non Chriatian) saw how Christianity was blossoming, then why werent there any writings talking about this? Why werent there any investigations into the many claims?
The fact they were killing Christians was well documented as far as i am aware, so in that regard they clearly did not believe them.
Quote: This isnt about the Romans killing Christians, rather, why werent there any writings claiming that Jesus did no perform any miracles, rise from the dead etc etc.....
The jews did test him and did say he was not the son of god ect.
Quote: It doesnt make sense, that if the writings about Jesus were all false, yet society starts join Christianity, that there werent any commentators who investigated the whole thing (neutral observers) and find evidence that it was all a lie......
THERE WERE AND THEY NAILED HIM TO A CROSS AND KILLED HIS FOLLOWERS.
Quote: I know the Romans persecuted the Christians, but they didnt do this because of evidences, but rather because they were threatened, political reasoning etc etc... This is completely different to what i am posting about..
LOL, so IF WE DO NOT INCLUDE the romans the jews and all the others that persecuted Christians over the years.
NOBODY APART FROM ALL THOSE WERE SKEPTICAL OMG!!!!.
ROSTOS WATCH THIS:
.
|
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 09:05 AM | Reply with quote #13 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by itsallgoodQuote: Originally Posted by RostosAgain, you missed the point. Christianity exploded after his death.
When after his death?. Yes, just after his death. Even during his life, many heard about his miracles, curing the sick, raising from the dead, walking on water, water to wine. This was news. If he gathered a significant following, then surely, purely by probability, there would have been a skeptic out there, investigating this and surely would have written this down...if it was faklse, then someone would have written some commentary down. Yet, there isnt any.
Quote: If what the NT claims about him was false AND the rest of society (non Chriatian) saw how Christianity was blossoming, then why werent there any writings talking about this? Why werent there any investigations into the many claims? The fact they were killing Christians was well documented as far as i am aware, so in that regard they clearly did not believe them. They killed Christians for DIFFERENT reasons. They refused to believe Jesus was the son of God because there expectations of the messiah were different. They didnt think the messiah would come from a poor town (Bethlehem), be poor, help the low end of town etc etc. Jesus came to serve, not to be served, thats why they refused to believe Jesus was the son of God. If for a fact that Jesus' body was always in the tomb, then why would the Romans bother, they would just laugh at the Christians. You are missing the point. Leave the Romans out of this. I am talking about the secular group at the time of Christ, the atheists. SURELY, they would have investigated all these claims and written about it, considering it was such a big deal that they needed to kill Jesus. Quote: This isnt about the Romans killing Christians, rather, why werent there any writings claiming that Jesus did no perform any miracles, rise from the dead etc etc.....
The jews did test him and did say he was not the son of god ect. He said he was the son of God, that is why they said he blasphamid. That is ultimately why he was crucified.
Quote: It doesnt make sense, that if the writings about Jesus were all false, yet society starts join Christianity, that there werent any commentators who investigated the whole thing (neutral observers) and find evidence that it was all a lie...... THERE WERE AND THEY NAILED HIM TO A CROSS AND KILLED HIS FOLLOWERS. It wasnt anything to with wether he had supernatural powers, again, they killed him because they thought the messiah would be rich, and come to be served. The fact that he was able to do what he did but there concept of him was wrong, they were pressured and wanted to kill him...
Quote: I know the Romans persecuted the Christians, but they didnt do this because of evidences, but rather because they were threatened, political reasoning etc etc... This is completely different to what i am posting about.. LOL, so IF WE DO NOT INCLUDE the romans the jews and all the others that persecuted Christians over the years. NOBODY APART FROM ALL THOSE WERE SKEPTICAL OMG!!!!. You have your wires crossed. Did the jews, Romans believe a GOD EXISTS? Of course they did. I am TALKING ABOUT THE ATHEISTS AT THE TIME. PEOPLE WHO DID NOT BELIEVE GOD / SUPERNATURAL EXISTS. If Jesus performed miracles, etc etc, they still would have killed him because he was NOT the idea of a messiah the jews thought it would be. And you pose yourself around here as some sort of intellect. I am glad Jonah understands what i am talking about cause clealry u dont.
ROSTOS WATCH THIS:
. |
| Loading... | |
| Rostos |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 09:06 AM | Reply with quote #14 |
|
Quote: Originally Posted by jonahbearQuote: Originally Posted by RostosI just find it strange - a man comes into the world, heals the sick, raises people from the dead, teaches good things, gets crucified, and is raised from the dead. - His followers are prepared to die for what they have seen - Christianity explodes and many Christians are persecuted. YET, NO ONE, no skeptical, non believer, atheist or whatever that sees what is going on never investigated it and wrote about it. We know from the bible that there were atheists around the time, surely they would have investigated all the claims. Why wouldnt these skeptics go up to the cured people, raised people, people who saw Jesus walk on water, the guards at the tomb etc etc and investigate it , gather this information, and in fact, if it wasnt true, write about it documenting the evidences they obtained. I know the Romans persecuted the Christians, but they didnt do this because of evidences, but rather because they were threatened, political reasonig etc etc... This is completely different to what i am posting about... The typical argument to this is that absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. During the sacking of Israel circa 70 A.D. there were apparently libraries of documents that were burned and destroyed. The atheist may state that the counter claims to Jesus were all burned in this event. I don't buy it but that is the argument. I don't buy it because the propensity for the survival of documents of either: a) An obscure cult - why would such obscure documents have found their way to survival while the counter claims (especially if they were demonstrably superior to the Gospel) were destroyed? b) A pernicious and rampant religion - Surely, had this been the case, the Romans would have ensured that the documents were burned. The other argument is that Christianity just "wasn't that important" so there were no counter claim writings in existence. This just doesn't wash either as Jesus (and allegedly many of his disciples) were martyred for the religious claims. Their claims were not being ignored. So, like you, I do find the resounding absence of counter claim documents rather unusual had there been a siginficant dispute as to Jesus' life. All the while, archaeology is finding fragments of parchments/papyrus of the Gospel accounts even in our modern day! Thats what i am thinking. Those arguments seem like a convinient cop out. |
| Loading... | |
| JudeNebula |
| Posted 05/28/12 at 10:24 AM | Reply with quote #15 |
|
| Rostos, I think you are confused about a few points that when addressed will help you understand.
Quote: - a man comes into the world, heals the sick, raises people from the dead, teaches good things, gets crucified, and is raised from the dead.
1.Jesus never rose people from the dead, or was raised from the dead. Those stories were ADDED on 30-60 years after his death. So there would not been people around from the time of Jesus to dispute these claims nearly half a century later when they were made up. There was never an empty tomb. Etc..
2.This was an illiterate society. There was no medical journals, no newspapers, no scientific magazines, none of that. Illiterate society. So where would they have written this down? And why would that piece of paper have survived?
Do you realize that the earliest copy of the Gospel we have is from the 4th Century?
3. The Romans obviously DID NOT believe Jesus's claims otherwise they would not have killed him.. haha. I mean come on.
4. The Jews did not believe his claims either. That is why they gathered a committee together to INVESTIGATE these claims and and found Jesus to be a FALSE messiah.
5. The Jews would not have arrested Jesus, brought him before high jewish priests beaten him, etc.. and demanded the Romans crucify him if they had believed his claims. OBVIOUSLY THE JEWS OF THE TIME DID NOT BELIEVE JESUS.
Quote:
Romans believe a GOD EXISTS? Of course they did
Not the Jewish God. The Romans believed in the Roman Pantheon. With the main God being Jupiter. |
| Loading... | |
