Human Programming

There are extra-biblical references to Jesus. Ever heard of Josephus?

quote:

---

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day.

---

Josephus, "Antiquities" XVIII, iii, 3, See Philip Schaff, "History of the Christian Church" (Michigan: Eerdmans, 1950), Vol. 1, pp. 92ff. source

Then please tell me why you believe jesus existed ?If it weren't for science, you would probably believe in the flood. (I'm assuming here ) But now it has been disproved.Now please explain where that belief in jesus comes ? Is it rational ? is it logical ? or is it simlpy put, programming (by your environment)... Or any other answer you find fit.

Yes, I have heard of Jospehus, antiquties 18.Even the most strident of consertavies will admit it was at least modified by Chrisitans, probably in the 4th century.Since this is the case, do you have any evidence it was not a total interpolition at this time?Do you have any reference to it from before Euribus quoted it?

After I de-programmed myself, while receiving a formal education in science, I critically examined different religions and decided to come to my own conclusion. My conclusion was the god does exist and Jesus was/is his son. So, I don't believe becuase of the programming, I believe because I concluded that it is true. (I do admit that it is possible that I didn't actually de-program myself and really am just following my programming and only think, wrongly, that I de-programmed myself, but I'm going to trust my self in that I honestly think I succefully removed the programming and that programming is not why I believe.)

Are you claiming, with Kader, that Jesus doesn't exist without the Bible?

No i had no clue, thx for that information.I quickly googled it and on wikipedia found this:

quote:

---

Concerns have been raised about the authenticity of the passage, at least in part, and it is widely held by scholars that part of the passage is an interpolation by a later scribe. In antiquity, Origen recorded that Josephus did not believe Jesus was the Christ.[32] Michael L. White argued against authenticity, citing that parallel sections of Josephus's Jewish War do not mention Jesus, and that some Christian writers as late as the third century, who quoted from the Antiquities, do not mention the passage.[33] However, most scholars have "no doubts" about the authenticity of the majority of the passage.[34] Certain scholars of Josephus's works have observed that this portion is written in his style.[35] Habermas wrote: "There is no textual evidence against it, and, conversely, there is very good manuscript evidence for this statements about Jesus, thus making it difficult to ignore."[36] Lastly, a few scholars support the authenticity of the entire passage.

---

I critically examined different religions
This would probably mean you have quite an extensive knowledge of a lot of religions, and also means your quite older then me But what I want to know is the HOW. Believing in jesus and him being the son of god with critical examination. You can go step by step i'll try to follow you. Because right now I can't. There is a leap I would have to make. And that leap requires faith, not facts.Because if what you say is true, your in for the nobel prize, and the reconciliation of thousands of year of religious war. What you are telling me is to be honest hard to believe. But I won't dismiss it. And I really want to know how you came logically to that answer.Edited by Kader, : syntax

Well, it is personal, and very subjective.What I don't do is pretend that it is more than a belief that cannot ever be established as fact.Assume for a second that we did find absolutely uncontroversial proof of Jesus existence, say verifiable documents from a variety of sources that attest to his every move from birth to death as well as autographed photos of each of the twelve apostles.What would that show? Would it add any weight to my belief in Jesus divinity? If it were not for science what reason would their be to not believe in a flood? Is my belief rational? Well, I think so.Is it logical? Well, I think so.Is it programming? Again, obviously I do not think so.But please remember that I do not assert Jesus life or divinity as fact, but simply belief.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, I doubt that. I think you're misunderstanding what I wrote (or what I meant by what I wrote). As in formal logic? Because I don't think I can make a informal logical argument for the existance of god, nor anyone else. And for that reason: is true. It still going to require faith. But does that make it not critical?Critical, as I used it:

quote:

---

3. involving skillful judgment as to truth, merit, etc.; judicial: a critical analysis.

---

basically just meant 'without programming'.

If it is personal and subjective, you must agree that your belief is based on nothing but what you've been thaught through the bible and personal experience. There is no facts for you to believe jesus existed. That would show that Jesus existedIf in the document you said existed it is shown that he performed miracles (and people better qualified then you and me would actually review this document and accept it's authenticity) Then this would add a tremendous amount of weight to your belief as Jesus being Divine. (and honestly I'd be the first to admit that I would become quite a believer myself) Exactly, there was NO answer before, and so we believed. But it has been proven that lack of evidence doesn't equal God intervention.

quote:

---

However, rationality is a much broader term than logic, as it includes "uncertain but sensible" arguments based on probability, expectation, personal experience and the like, whereas logic deals principally with provable facts and demonstrably valid relations between them. For example, ad hominem arguments are logically unsound, but in many cases they may be rational.

---

How can it be rational ?
The bible has been proven to contain errors and things that are contradictory. You do NOT believe in some part of the bible, yet you tell me it is rational to believe in jesus ?How can it be logical Rational Def Edited by Kader, : No reason given.

Catholic Scientist,I can't really understand what you means unless you tell me step by step how you came (even illogically) to the conclusion that Jesus was the son of God and that the bible is true.because on one side you say that you used your sense of critic and that you came up with a conlusion. And on the other you agree that there is a faith is required.

quote:

---

Methods of critical thinking

​

Critical thinking has a useful sequence to follow:

​

1. Itemize opinion(s) from all relevant sides of an issue and collect Logical argument(s) supporting each.
2. Break the arguments into their constituent statements and draw out various additional implication(s) from these statements.
3. Examine these statements and implications for internal contradictions.
4. Locate opposing claims between the various arguments and assign relative weightings to opposing claims:

​

* Increase the weighting when the claims have strong support especially distinct chains of reasoning or different news sources, decrease the weighting when the claims have contradictions.
* Adjust weighting depending on relevance of information to central issue.
* Require sufficient support to justify any incredible claims; otherwise, ignore these claims when forming a judgment.

​

5. Assess the weights of the various claims.

---

This is critical thinking. Now what arguments made you go for the bible version. Step by step if possible. You can also email me if you wish draco_03@hotmail.comIn any case, I understand what I am asking of you. But A resume of it would be nice if you think it's too long to type.

Of course. I have never said otherwise. I'm sorry to hear that. It is quite easy to "perform miracles" and in fact magicians do so daily. Particularly given the state of knowledge at the time such a record would have been compiled, accepting it as fact would seem to me to be silly. What does that have to do with any position I have presented?Why do you keep creating these strawman objections? I believe in Jesus (and particularly Jesus' divinity) because I believe that if there really is a GOD, something like the life Jesus lived would be a powerful lesson and message from that GOD.And again, you totally misrepresent my "belief" in the Bible.The Bible is an anthology of anthologies, a collection of tales written by a wide variety of people and meant to serve a variety of purposes. Parts are genealogy, others histories (true or fictional) of a peoples and an era, still others Just So Stories meant to explain the world as seen by the peoples of that time and there are sections that simply list the laws of the peoples at a given point in their history.The issue is one of how I believe in the Bible? Let me try another example.Jesus told many parables. One is about your ass falling in a crack on the Sabbath, another about building a couple houses on different foundations.Does it matter whether or not some ass really was in a crack on the Sabbath, or whether or not there really were two houses built, one on sand, another on bedrock?I don't think so.Regardless of whether the two tales were factually correct, the morals are still the same.Is it reasonable and logical to look at writings and to learn from them?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

That's because some of my evidence is subjective. It works for me but with the lack of objectivity, it cannot be "factual" so some faith is required. Ok, but I don't think you're gonna like it.1) The seemingness of the existance of my soul suggests that a God does exist.
2) The teachings of Jesus in the New Testament of the Bible are true for what they are claimed to be for (personal opinion/subjective evidence)
3) Everything that Jesus said that is capable of being tested is true
4) I've found nothing in the Bible, that is capable of being tested, that Jesus said that was dishonest or false
5) Some of the things that Jesus claimed cannot be tested and seem to be scientifically impossible/miraculous (turning water into wine for example)
6) If Jesus did have magic powers then a scientific impossibility becomes meaningless as miracles would be possible
7) The truth of the non-miraculous teachings of Jesus and lack of falsehoods in his non-miraculous teachings allowes me to have faith that the miraculous parts are true tooSo basically, everything that Jesus said that doesn't require faith was true in my opinion so its not hard to have faith in the miracles et al too.There's more to my religion and faith but hopefully this is enough for you to accept that it is possible to believe in a religion without it being just a programmed belief and that its possible to have a rational belief in god.

Then your belief isn't rational, but more or so cultural and based on the time you were born. Hence why I said

quote:

---

(and people better qualified then you and me would actually review this document and accept it's authenticity)

---

So basically it woupd be proven to be true simply (I was going along your idea of the "if") Well simply put because you believe in Jesus with no fact. Nothing but the bible and your interpretation of it. This alone should ring a bell... maybe you believe because you were programmed? since there is no evdence ? How can it be logical or rational if there is no evidence ? Even worse, thoses religious book have been shown to be wrong. And yet you think it rational to believe in some part of it.I do not know what a strawman objection is, but what im doing is telling you that there is no rationality in your belief. IT DOESNT MEAN YOU ARE WRONG.Please do not read me wrong. All im saying is that it isnt rational. It isn't logical. It's all about faith. And im questionning that faith. And all I keep reading is how it is logical to believe in God through [insert any own interpretation of any religious book]. Some believe in the flood other don't most believe in jesus as the son of god, other as a prophet. All these conclusion are neither logical nor rational if you test and examin where they come from. See where it goes wrong. You say that the moral counts though you do not believe that jesus in itself is just but a vessel for you to get the moral. You believe in his existance. Not simply that he is just here to depict the morals in the bible.Since jesus isnt in all religion but the moral in all religions are pretty much the same, why do you believe in a historical jesus who existed and who is the son of god ?You see my point is that it isnt rational.

You should bookmark this site. Here is the section on Strawman.