There are a few reasons why Christians are Christian. One of the main reasons is to do with Jesus and who he was and what he did. After all if he was who he said he was and performed those miracles, rose from the dead then it would be foolish to deny his claims about being the son of God and that the way to heaven is through him. What's a way to convince them that the gospels cannot be true?
In short, make their rational personalities fight with their irrational ones.
Thanks for the example; I was struggling to find think something up. Something I've observered in their mentality is that they're quite happy to use one set of rational thought to judge other works yet fail to apply it to their own religion.
false? it's a waste of precious time. Jesus, the story, the changes to the story, even the gold hoarders of the vatican or whatever voodoo bs homophobe freaks out there are the equivalent value of 'time' itself.
Hail science and the brotherhood of man/sisterhood of women! F minus to the bigoted bastidges!
Wait guess I fail then because I'm bigoted towards fundies? Yet I have no prob working with them; beyond the myth. peace!
Convincing a christian that the jesus story is a myth is like felling the Bastille with a single hand bomb. The whole edifice of christian faith will fall if it is proved that jesus didn't exist. Do you think this is possible or it can be done? The Jewish faith and the Hindu faith exist for some 6500 years, the Greek-Roman faith existed for sveral thousand years, Zoarastrian faith also still exists. Christianity will also go out of existance after taking its own time.
do you have a bare-chested statue of a man that you worship or even worse bow to?
then check me out as a make a bare-but fart in your general direction(s)
Before convincing the christians, is it possible to convince all athesits that Jusus did not exist? It is only natural that the faithful will be more reluctant to accept that Jesus did not exist than we atheists.
Apparently, the evidence presented so far doesn't seem adequate for all to accept that Jesus did not exist. Many atheists are reluctant to accept this.
Before convincing the christians, is it possible to convince all athesits that Jusus did not exist?
Not the ones with a grasp of the issue, no. The position that Jesus did not exist is crap, and has been academically untenable for over a hundred years.
Time to ditch that idea.
Your problem is you're placing your conclusion way before the facts. You're clearly very upset ("Pulpit pimps" was a clear give-away) and disgruntled with Christianity, and so you would like an argument that means everything about it was a lie... because apparently, Jesus just being a mistaken preacher isn't enough for you.
This is why you've taken a historical position that is in total deviance of the facts and in clear opposition to a vast majority of scholars, religious and non-religious.
It's akin to what Truthers, creationists and other ideologically motivated groups do. Oh, and theist apologists. I won't stand for that kind of attitude getting a foothold in a movement that's supposed to be rational.
Not that I have much to worry about as long as your attempts at debate stay at this level.
"Many atheists are reluctant to accept this."
Or perhaps too many atheists are more then eager to accept this based upon nothing more then wishful thinking. A historic figure existed that was named Jesus as is demonstrated by quite a few historic sources.
If you feel that the evidence that such a historic figure has ever existed is insufficient, please also realize that the same can then be said for Alexander the Great, most of the Greek philosophers and even quite a few Roman emperors.
If Jesus did not exist at all is a wishful thinking, then it is high time that atheists shed this delusion.
We try to do our part in making that happen, and make sure atheists use the best arguments available to them rather than the sloppy ones ;)
Ok, I'll accept that, but, what would those best arguments be ?
I'm reading throught Bart Ehrman's book Misquoting Jesus. It's very well written and, although all authors have a bias, this is the least biased I've read.
One of the alternative explanations he gives for Christianity is that Jesus was a Jewish teacher who had a small group of followers who believed that he was going to come back from the dead. When he died and didn't come back they were at a loss and didn't know what to do. They truly believed what he had told them and expecting his return started to fabricate stories about his life and his resurrection by sending letters around.
I think that this sort of explanation that accomodates the historical Jesus is quite plausible because we also see evidence of this sort of human behaviour, the mechanics involved in the transfiguration of a human into a deity by man, in other religions.