My girlfriend and I finally sat down to watch 'The God Who Wasn't There' together. Led to an interesting debate, though she seemed to be a bit more comfortable with the movie immediately after the video rather than the next few days. For example, she said that there was historical evidence outside of the bible for Jesus' existence, though this was just mentioned in passing and I pointed out that she hadn't examined the sources as thoroughly as she should have.
It made me wonder, though. I remember Shane saying something about this in a comment to someone making similar claims a while back, but I can't remember which video it was on or what was specifically said. Do you guys have any experience with Christian apologists' responses to 'The God Who Wasn't There' and have either any ready-prepared retorts, or any sources I could use to look these sorts of things up?
Even if you can find a source, mentioning A man named Jesus, that is no evidence of anything he has done. You still need proof for the other 95% of the stuff related to him.
As for the apologist's response to the movie: Most christians I've mentioned it to will just dismiss it on the basis of faith. Secular and atheist apologists, on the other hand, will be condescending towards me about the movie, suggesting that I should respect other people's beliefs...which is never brought up by me when I mention the movie.
Also, Virgil211, since it was your girlfriend who brought up the fact that there is non-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus, the burden of proof is on her, with all due respect.
If she's referring to the Josephus reference, that was a forgery.
Ask her why Pliny the Elder missed him completely.
Quote from: MrBogosity on December 08, 2011, 06:26:40 AM
If she's referring to the Josephus reference, that was a forgery.
Ask her why Pliny the Elder missed him completely.
Is there a web site that goes into more detail on this part?
She's improved quite a bit even in the past couple of days. She was just telling me about a theory that the book of Revelation was intended as more of a political statement from the time it was written than an actual prophecy, though the latter interpretation has been given more weight in the modern version of the religion. Then she was talking about how Christianity can be a bit disturbing with how violent it really is while the average person going to church seems oblivious to this. Guess she just needed time to digest it. All things considered, she's come a long way.
Here's a fairly good summary with sources: http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm
Quote from: Virgil0211 on December 08, 2011, 06:22:01 PM
She was just telling me about a theory that the book of Revelation was intended as more of a political statement from the time it was written than an actual prophecy
Sounds like your typical backtracking technique.
And if it really is a political statement, it's a pretty retarded one that no sane person should follow today.
Quote from: VectorM on December 09, 2011, 06:30:09 AM
Sounds like your typical backtracking technique.
And if it really is a political statement, it's a pretty retarded one that no sane person should follow today.
She wasn't defending it. More like trying to understand where it came from and when it was written. That's why I said she had improved in the interim.
From what I understand, the 'anti-Christ' in Revelations under this theory is believed to have been an allegory for Emperor Nero, or something. (Almost typed Captain Nero.).
I think Pat Condell had a few interesting things to say regarding the authorship of the book of revelations (something involving mushrooms...)
Quote from: ebalosus on December 09, 2011, 07:27:33 PM
I think Pat Condell had a few interesting things to say regarding the authorship of the book of revelations (something involving mushrooms...)
If you want to read something interesting about the authorship of Revelation read Zoroastrian myth. It is pretty obvious much of Revelation comes from it and the Zoroastrian version makes more narrative sense. I think the reason Revelation seems like it was written by a person on LSD is that they were trying to hammer a square peg Zoroastrian myth through the round hole of Christian myth and it didn't quite work out.