Is Jesus God?

[tat tvam asi]

^Do you mean to refer to "The Word" in John?

If so, then correct, that is in no way credible evidence of either an historical Jesus nor a divinity Jesus.

[v_serkov]

Of course, I mean that

[Avid Reader]

Just for kicks, I Googled this question and got over 45-million hits. Judging from a few random clicks, it seems like there is little consensus, even among Christian scholars. Not being a Christian myself, I don't really have an opinion. To me it's kind of like asking if the White Rabbit's watch was a Rolex.

[v_serkov]

ok , we won't speak if Jesus was god or not , no matter . what about an opinion if he actually existed like a real historic person . I think that is main question!

[tat tvam asi]

Yes, that is a growing question these days. And the other thread about Doherty's book "Jesus Neither God or Man" goes into that. There isn't enough credible evidence to conclude that Jesus ever really existed in history in the first place. Believers rest on a flimsy foundation of speculation and uncertainty, as if the foundation is completely strong and certain. It's a bluff, but it's coming to an end....

[R. LeBeaux]

ok , we won't speak if Jesus was god or not , no matter . what about an opinion if he actually existed like a real historic person . I think that is main question!

Hi v_serkov, and welcome. If you check out the parent forum for this thread, you will find hundreds of topics under which this question has been debated, going all the way back to 2002. Not that we can't start another one here, however, you might want to take a look back and see what others have said, claimed, "proved," "disproved," etc. There are some pretty interesting discussions on the subject, far more cogent and in-depth than those on many other sites I have visited. The main listing is at:

booktalk.org/belief-religion-philosophy ... hy-f8.html

[tat tvam asi]

http://www.booktalk.org/jesus-neither-g ... 11515.html

[v_serkov]

Yes, that is a growing question these days. And the other thread about Doherty's book "Jesus Neither God or Man" goes into that. There isn't enough credible evidence to conclude that Jesus ever really existed in history in the first place. Believers rest on a flimsy foundation of speculation and uncertainty, as if the foundation is completely strong and certain. It's a bluff, but it's coming to an end....

I can't agree with you , tat tvam asi, that it's coming to an end.Let's take for example the most popular social network which is facebook.com.The bible page has more than 8 millions ( can you imagine that ? I can't !) fans .That means that more than 8 millions people only on facebook believe in so-called "pure " fertilization due to "holy spirit " , "resurrection" of the body and the other fairy tales. The bible is a non-historical book , there are no any historical facts, just tales and myths.I have nothing against myths but I'm against the attempts to treat the myths as real historical facts and , moreover, try to present them like having any "saving" significance for humakind.Everything that our humankind has , I mean science , freedom of conscience , developed health care (maybe not everywhere in the world but any way the quality of health care in our days is distinctive from the medieval one ) is not due to any church , priests , or religion .But nowdays the most of people prefer to avoid the real truth , which presents science , analytic philosophy and logic.Of course, this truth is not so joyful but that's the truth!

[Robert Tulip]

v - thanks for joining the conversation here. Your observation of the inertia of Christian belief makes sense, but then there is also the fact that sometimes change can happen quickly. When Columbus discovered America, and to a lesser extent when Galileo discovered the moons of Jupiter and Darwin discovered the law of evolution, there was a sudden shift in opinion. Educated public opinion recognized that these new findings made sense, and this informed view then percolated through society.

My view is that Christianity is headed towards a cusp, a broad recognition that its tradition is mythological, not factual. To date this argument has not been presented in a way that is persuasive for believers, because atheism has generally argued that religion as such is a bad thing, invalidly inferring a broad critique of spirituality from the valid critique of religious traditions.

If the argument gets traction that religion is necessary and good, but has been based on some simple errors that can be corrected, we could see rapid change in mass opinion.

[tat tvam asi]

I can't agree with you , tat tvam asi, that it's coming to an end.

The "bluff" is coming to an end. The "bluff" where one person claims to have hard evidence for an historical Jesus when they really do not. They can no longer do that because when pressed for contemporary source material they have nothing to offer, literally. They can only provide you with non-contemporary sources which are not concrete or absolute and then insist that non-contemporary sources are good enough. And I see this as the beginnings of what Tulip has outlined above.