View Full Version : The God Who Wasn't There.
Berner
06-22-2006, 12:06 PM
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0455507/
Has anyone else seen this documentary? For those who have, what did you think of it? I'll wait for a few responses before I discuss the topic.
nowhesingsnowhesobs
06-22-2006, 12:11 PM
I saw the trailer, and despite having Richard Carrier and Earl Doherty on board, it seemed like propagandistic rubbish.
From what I've heard it's just another bunch of atheists crying about how people follow religions. Heard it before.
nowhesingsnowhesobs
06-22-2006, 12:30 PM
Err, no, its about Jesus. And more specifically, the possibility that he didn't exist.
But then again, Richard Dawkins appears, which probably makes it unwatchable.
halfdeadhippo
06-22-2006, 12:41 PM
I've never seen this movie, and I'd never even heard about it until I saw this thread. However, after reading that IMDB page, I'm not really interested in seeing it. There's probably a bit of irony in a movie that tries to show that historical evidence can be twisted and spun to favor a certain opinion. But then again, I haven't seen the movie, so take that as you will.
Atomic Rain
06-22-2006, 12:48 PM
Richard Dawkins is awesome!
No, I haven't seen it, although i'd like to.
Err, no, its about Jesus. And more specifically, the possibility that he didn't exist.
:lol: Like I said, huh?
/doesn't have much respect for atheists when they get in preach mode
Atomic Rain
06-22-2006, 01:37 PM
:lol: Like I said, huh?
/doesn't have much respect for atheists when they get in preach mode
me neither, to be honest. I like discussion so that people have heard all the facts, not attempts to convert. To me that's not what atheism is about at all.
However, atheists will enjoy learning some facts about jesus. so i'd say the filmisn't a bad idea.
Berner
06-22-2006, 01:48 PM
Honestly if you just ignore some of the anti-christian bits and look at some of the historical facts, such as the time when the first gospel was written compared to the timeline from the bible and the fact that other saviour messiah myths were around at the time, it makes for an interesting watch none the less.
Spoonful of Shame
06-22-2006, 01:49 PM
I have not seen this yet but I would like too. I have watched some clips from there website and it is definitely interesting.
StrangelyBrewed13
06-22-2006, 01:53 PM
i think it would be interesting but nothing above just that. People's opinions on religion wont be changed on a 2 hour long movie.
nowhesingsnowhesobs
06-22-2006, 01:56 PM
Richard Dawkins is awesome!
He's quite possibly the most irritating person I've ever seen presenting on TV.
Like I said, huh?no
Chrizzle fo' Shizzle
06-22-2006, 03:11 PM
Everybody keeps saying "Richard Dawkins", and I keep thinking "Richard Dawson (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/RicharddawsonMG77c.jpg)"
As for the movie, meh. It sounds like every other documentary I never watched
dislocated214
06-22-2006, 05:09 PM
I saw it. I thought it was somewhat good. More good then bad anyway. It should've been longer though. The part where he goes to his school is amazing. Also, the part where he asks Christians how Christianity spread ("through the holy spirit" lolz).
He's making a couple other religion-based movies. One of them has to do with a girl finding Jesus doesn't exist, while her father is a minister or something.
peeted
06-22-2006, 05:15 PM
not seen it, sounds intresting though. from what i have heard though its just a load of atheists stumbeling upon evidence and debates that have been going on within the theological world for years and they have just presented them as proof of a lack of god.
still it looks intresting and worth waching.
Nevermind that even in the absence of hard evidence that Jesus existed, it makes way more sense to believe that he DID exist (even if you don't think he was God) than that some group of Jews spontaneously got together and created a whole intentional mythology about him and managed to convert lots of people with their story about a man nobody had ever actually seen.
Berner
06-23-2006, 12:18 AM
Nevermind that even in the absence of hard evidence that Jesus existed, it makes way more sense to believe that he DID exist (even if you don't think he was God) than that some group of Jews spontaneously got together and created a whole intentional mythology about him and managed to convert lots of people with their story about a man nobody had ever actually seen.
Just watch it before you criticize man.
Nevermind that even in the absence of hard evidence that Jesus existed, it makes way more sense to believe that he DID exist (even if you don't think he was God) than that some group of Jews spontaneously got together and created a whole intentional mythology about him and managed to convert lots of people with their story about a man nobody had ever actually seen.
One word: scientology.
One word: scientology.
That's right. And Mormonism. Religion is a handy tool. I wish I had thought of it :(
Atomic Rain
06-23-2006, 09:24 AM
He's quite possibly the most irritating person I've ever seen presenting on TV.
Nah.
Channel 4 were about lame about that rpogram
He was strongly against the name, for a start
Sergio_Rueda
06-23-2006, 09:48 AM
Nevermind that even in the absence of hard evidence that Jesus existed, it makes way more sense to believe that he DID exist (even if you don't think he was God) than that some group of Jews spontaneously got together and created a whole intentional mythology about him and managed to convert lots of people with their story about a man nobody had ever actually seen.
By that same logic every other myth/religion in the world suddenly makes sense.
So Zeus actually existed?
Because according to you it makes no sense that a group of greeks decided to invent something about him, how about Gilgamesh? How about every other god or demigod, do they all existed?
Or are we supposed to beleive that only the existence of jesus makes sense but the rest of other very similar cases don't.
By that same logic every other myth/religion in the world suddenly makes sense.
Um no
So Zeus actually existed?
Because according to you it makes no sense that a group of greeks decided to invent something about him,
No because Zeus was never supposed to be a human being. You completely (probably intentionally) misread what I wrote.
how about Gilgamesh?
Probably a real dude
How about every other god or demigod, do they all existed?
Again you totally twisted what I said
Or are we supposed to beleive that only the existence of jesus makes sense but the rest of other very similar cases don't.God almighty MX needs a reading comprehension test before you register
halfdeadhippo
06-23-2006, 12:46 PM
By that same logic every other myth/religion in the world suddenly makes sense.
So Zeus actually existed?
Because according to you it makes no sense that a group of greeks decided to invent something about him, how about Gilgamesh? How about every other god or demigod, do they all existed?
Or are we supposed to beleive that only the existence of jesus makes sense but the rest of other very similar cases don't.
If you take away the supernatural portions of the story, Jesus was just an ordinary human being like the rest of us. If you take away the supernatural portions of Zeus, he ceases to exist. Which is more likely to have happened?
nowhesingsnowhesobs
06-23-2006, 01:01 PM
If you take away the supernatural portions of the story, Jesus was just an ordinary human being like the rest of us.but it's not that simple.
There is, of course, a difference between Jesus and a classical god like Zeus, but what if you were to compare him with, say, Hercules.
loathed
06-23-2006, 01:09 PM
This debate will go on and never end...
Sergio_Rueda
06-23-2006, 01:12 PM
I actually understood what you meant. I used those examples because you spoke about the mythology that was created around him, not about his cualities as a human beign. I did this because i am sure that the historical jesus wouldn't have converted s many people if he were just a philosopher and not the son of god for his faithful.
I actually understood what you meant. I used those examples because you spoke about the mythology that was created around him, not about his cualities as a human beign. I did this because i am sure that the historical jesus wouldn't have converted s many people if he were just a philosopher and not the son of god for his faithful.
Well but the point was, if you want to get uber-critical about it, there isn't any hard and undeniable evidence that Jesus did or didn't exist. However there is plenty of not-quite rock-solid evidence that he existed, whereas the only "evidence" that he didn't exist is the absence of even more of the abovesaid evidence.
As for Zeus, he wasn't a dude. N/A. Achilles, (e.g.) on the other hand, probably DID exist in some form. He probably wasn't a nearly invincible superman who could kill hundreds of men in battle for hours and come out unscathed, but it's quite likely he was based on a real person.
Edit: Although, the Iliad is admittedly a work of fiction so the parallel to Jesus is not exact.
nowhesingsnowhesobs
06-23-2006, 04:42 PM
I'm interested to know, Jude, what form you think Jesus did exist in.
dislocated214
06-23-2006, 11:02 PM
Was Jesus white?
I doubt it.
And if he wasn't, then why do most Westerners believe he was?
Because white=good?
Atomic Rain
06-24-2006, 05:43 AM
Was Jesus white?
I doubt it.
And if he wasn't, then why do most Westerners believe he was?
Because white=good?
Because it makes it easier for them to relate to him.
I'm interested to know, Jude, what form you think Jesus did exist in.
I'm not entirely sure right now. But I think he probably existed in the form of a Jewish laborer 2000 years ago, for one thing.
Of course Jesus wasn't white, all the stained-glasses of a Nordic looking Jesus are as ridiculous as the "black Jesus" introduced more recently by black power types.
sr800bkBassist
06-24-2006, 06:32 PM
:lol: Like I said, huh?
/doesn't have much respect for atheists when they get in preach mode
what makes that different than a christian who preaches?
Smokey D
06-24-2006, 11:28 PM
Was Jesus white?
I doubt it.
And if he wasn't, then why do most Westerners believe he was?
Because white=good?
Because they've had 2000 years of art depicting him as such, largely because Europeans wouldn't have been as familiar with Judeans from the First Century AD as white people.
Uberman
06-25-2006, 10:36 AM
Jesus is conjectured to be the "rabblerousing Jew" in a certain Roman record I don't remember, and he is dealt with rather extensively and by name in the writings of Josephus. And also in this book called the Bible.
Atomic Rain
06-25-2006, 10:49 AM
what makes that different than a christian who preaches?
We should be above that conversion crap. The very nature of our conclusions means that we should encourage people to learn about atheism and reasons for following it, without preaching.
I wouldn't like to have been raised an atheist because this way it was 100% my choice.
Shell
06-25-2006, 10:51 AM
Jesus probably looked like a typical Arab.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcfa.htm
sr800bkBassist
06-25-2006, 12:22 PM
Jesus probably looked like a typical Arab.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcfa.htm
the computer image looks like the love-child of Paul McCartney and Sadam Hussein.
Smokey D
06-25-2006, 12:23 PM
There was not a significant Arab population in that part of the Middle East until the 7th Century AD, so it's quite debatable whether Jesus would have resembled one.
he wasn't arabian but he was middle eastern
persians and the like still look very different from the traditional portrayals of jesus
Jharaski
06-25-2006, 01:32 PM
Come on, if Jesus was white, why wouldn't everyone have been like "what the hell is a white boy doing over here?" Because a story involving something like that certainly would have found its way into the Bible.
Mr. Ron
06-25-2006, 01:35 PM
Personally, I think Jesus was just a religious revolutionary of his time, and nothing more. An ordinary man who preached a good word, but in the end he was just that; A man. In a thousand years, maybe people will look back and say that Ghandi was a divine son of god, if you compare the two, they are very similar. I think his followers just saw him as a divine being.
Jharaski
06-25-2006, 01:46 PM
Personally, I think Jesus was just a religious revolutionary of his time, and nothing more. An ordinary man who preached a good word, but in the end he was just that; A man. In a thousand years, maybe people will look back and say that Ghandi was a divine son of god, if you compare the two, they are very similar. I think his followers just saw him as a divine being.
They did, for a couple centuries. Because here's the one thing that will stump almost any Christian - at what point did people have to accepting Jesus? Anyone who was alive at any point after his birth? The Bible was compiled way after his death. Surely there were testaments left out. And no I didn't get this from the Da Vinci Code.
Mr. Ron
06-25-2006, 01:49 PM
They did, for a couple centuries. Because here's the one thing that will stump almost any Christian - at what point did people have to accepting Jesus? Anyone who was alive at any point after his birth? The Bible was compiled way after his death. Surely there were testaments left out. And no I didn't get this from the Da Vinci Code.
LOTS of gospels and testaments were left out. It's historical fact that the church didn't want some of them in there because they were too "outlandish" or they didn't fit the church's message.
LOTS of gospels and testaments were left out. It's historical fact that the church didn't want some of them in there because they were too "outlandish" or they didn't fit the church's message.
Of course they also left some out because of doubtful authorship or authenticity. I don't know anything about why they picked specific ones, however. Although I do know that the reason for including the Gospel of John was thoroughly preposterous - some guy was dead set on having it included it and he used some nonsense about four being a holy number because of some time or other that the number four had showed up in Biblical history. I guess the Trinity being Three wasn't a good enough reason to just have Matthew, Mark and Luke?
Ghoul Hunter
06-25-2006, 09:17 PM
This movie is fantastic.
Mr. Ron
06-25-2006, 11:32 PM
Of course they also left some out because of doubtful authorship or authenticity. I don't know anything about why they picked specific ones, however. Although I do know that the reason for including the Gospel of John was thoroughly preposterous - some guy was dead set on having it included it and he used some nonsense about four being a holy number because of some time or other that the number four had showed up in Biblical history. I guess the Trinity being Three wasn't a good enough reason to just have Matthew, Mark and Luke?
Considering all the main gospels (matthew, mark, luke and john) were REALLY written by Anonymous authors, that argument holds little water.
Smokey D
06-25-2006, 11:36 PM
Of course he wasn't European, but he probably wasn't Arab either. He probably looked more Persian than anything, though of course Palestine was a meeting point for all the significant nations at the time, and he could really have been anything.
Jharaski
06-26-2006, 01:15 AM
Of course he wasn't European, but he probably wasn't Arab either. He probably looked more Persian than anything, though of course Palestine was a meeting point for all the significant nations at the time, and he could really have been anything.
Anything but white, is what the argument really is.
Anonymity
06-26-2006, 04:02 AM
All this debating about if Jesus existed is pointless, believing in Jesus reqires some kind other kind of faith to believe in something that isnt documented in history books, but if you think about, the new testment is a recorded ancient document that isnt regarded as truth (by most people), but people will be skeptical and thats okay, that will only lead them a way to seek out answers.
PerpetualBurn
06-26-2006, 06:27 AM
Oh come on people, let's keep things in perspective. He was allegedly the son of a virgin, and you're complaining about the skin colour? Maybe God's white?
If God is white, I'm making a strongly worded online petition :mad:
PerpetualBurn
06-26-2006, 11:50 AM
I trust Hollywood over history and genetics any day.
Maybe God's white?
\m/ tr00 white power \m/
Atomic Rain
06-26-2006, 12:29 PM
Personally, I think Jesus was just a religious revolutionary of his time, and nothing more. An ordinary man who preached a good word, but in the end he was just that; A man. In a thousand years, maybe people will look back and say that Ghandi was a divine son of god, if you compare the two, they are very similar. I think his followers just saw him as a divine being.
I hear Ghandi fought off an entire army without killing a single man.
Then again, so did the A team ;)
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.