Sources?

I made a hasty search for reliable, historical sources concerning Jesus and the early church. There are remarkably few of these. Unfortunately historians turn to unreliable sources when there is nothing else. Meaning in the case of Christianity they turn to the Bible; though in all fairness they also turn to gospels not part of the "official" canon.

If one takes non-biblical sources, it's impossible to say to a certainty Jesus even existed. Oh, it's very likely he did. It's just not certain. Not like we know Caesar, Tutankhamen, Pericles, Cleopatra, Alexander, etc. existed. Also there's no record at all of what, if anything, he taught, or whether he was crucified or otherwise executed.

If he was really that disruptive a figure, no one in Judea took much notice of it. Not the locals, not the Roman overlords, not the traders passing through. And naturally there's nary a peep concerning any miracles at all. Not the wanton killing of barren trees, nor a miraculous resurrection witnessed by anyone at all.

Of course, to say there are no surviving accounts of any of this does not mean none ever existed. However, momentous events, especially when they happen over a long time, tend to generate so many records that it strains credulity past the breaking point in this case, assuming half of the traditional story of Jesus were even close to truthful. Hell, there are surviving records of events of much lesser import which took place a lot earlier, in Judea and elsewhere.

Religious texts, especially when dealing with actual people, are highly suspect. So are all writings about actual people written by their supporters or subjects. For example, there is an account of Ramses ][ fighting off an enemy army near Megiddo or Kadesh all by himself. What's walking on water compared to that? These things are highly biased and likely 90% fiction. This is why they're not reliable.

Claims of miracles, in religious texts or otherwise, are also highly suspect. Just consider Achilles. I can buy his heel is vulnerable, but not that he would die if wounded there. How many people have pierced one or both heels, and absent some kind of infection have died of it? Most claims of miracles reveal the inherent ignorance of the times, like Jehovah stopping the Sun to aid Joshua in his conquest of Canaan <facepalm>.

So where did Christianity come from and why did it spread? As to the first part, probably from Jesus and other thinkers of the day. As to the second, that's a complicated question, but it likely begins with the appeal inherent in the message used by the early church. Propaganda only takes you so far if you are selling something people don't want to buy.

Quote: Nareed

So where did Christianity come from and why did it spread? .

Greatest story ever told.

consider the library at alexandria ... all ships entering port where searched two copies of any sort of book or records were made for the library, a good deal of counterfeit junk was sold to the library....
yet the good stuff went amiss.

consider the ecudorean natives who hear a rumor the priests are harvesting organs for rich americans....despite lack of refrigeration or any way to test the organs the stories lasted longer than the missionaries lives did.

Do you really need a strong factual basis? Doesn't seem so.

People are arguing against math on the other site.

Isn't Islam even more fraught with difficulties? Yet look at the following it has.

Quote: Nareed

<facepalm>

Second the motion: bring B9 back!

Quote: rxwine

Do you really need a strong factual basis?

You should :)

Quote:

Isn't Islam even more fraught with difficulties? Yet look at the following it has.

My interest is how religions come about. And how is it people can believe in any kind of deity without evidence, while at the same time dismissing other deities without evidence.

Quote: Nareed

My interest is how religions come about. And how is it people can believe in any kind of deity without evidence, while at the same time dismissing other deities without evidence.

It took hundreds of years for the church
to get where it was in the time of
Constantine. Almost 400 years. That's
a very very long time for word of mouth
to get around. Uneducated ignorant
people all want to believe in something,
might as well be what your neighbor
believes. It's convenient.

Quote: Nareed

My interest is how religions come about. And how is it people can believe in any kind of deity without evidence, while at the same time dismissing other deities without evidence.

The first part is easy. People want answers. When you leave a piece of dead meat in a jar, and then suddenly there's life in there in the form of maggots, there lies a mystery that needs an answer. I can totally understand the creation of religion. Knowledge gaps need to be filled by something. Science does the same thing, they're just a little more... direct.

The second part is also easy. Because they want to. I believe the Leafs are the greatest team in sports. There's no evidence to support this (certainly) and, in fact, there's quite a bit to disprove this belief. Doesn't matter. Go, Leafs, go.

Religion is pretty much the same, the only real difference being power. If Christianity didn't have the ability to affect your life, just as the NHL does not affect you at all, I doubt you'd hate it like you do.

Alas, it does, so you do.

Quote: Nareed

My interest is how religions come about. And how is it people can believe in any kind of deity without evidence, while at the same time dismissing other deities without evidence.

Druids didn't have picnics.

You can only go so far meting out brow beating, preaching hell fire and other punishment and future rewards for the weary patrons while taking their 10%. I think some churches have figured out humans need sociable affairs.

(Did Druids have picnics? That is the question.)

EDIT

Appears Druids were all about picnics. Oh well...

Quote: Face

The first part is easy. People want answers.

I don't think so.

Consider religion <> Christianity. Aside from creation and foundation myths, which are common to pretty much all religions, you find nothing in the way of "answers." In Greece this was one task undertaken by philosophers. In Rome there were secular myths, like the story of Romulus and Remus, the story of Numa, and the fable about the "Seven Kings of Rome."

If you consider ethics, then the Greek myths are a mixed bag. Odysseus does well against gods and fantastical creatures, so does Jason. Arachne doesn't fare well against the gods. And you can make what you will about Pandora. Maybe it's more a male/female split, considering Greek women were thoroughly subjugated.

The few Roman myths, if we leave the faux founding myth in the Aeneid, were blatantly made up for political purposes. This was nothing new. Alexander did it, so did Queen Hatshepsut in Egypt and other pharaohs as well.

Foundation myths, BTW, are still ongoing. There is probably not a single country on Earth without at least one today. Do you really believe Washington couldn't tell a lie? Oh, the man was a moral giant in many ways, but there is no need to idolize him.

Quote:

When you leave a piece of dead meat in a jar, and then suddenly there's life in there in the form of maggots, there lies a mystery that needs an answer.

Curiously enough, that represents one of the first applications of the scientific method in history. And science does provide real answers to the mysteries of the physical world, and has been doing so steadily for 3 centuries.

Quote:

The second part is also easy. Because they want to.

Yes, but why do they want to?

Ponder this phrase concerning Louis XVI in the early stages of the French Revolution: no man can reign innocently.

This means Louis was guilty by virtue of having ruled. And this is a fascinating question. But that aside, it's as good a definition of deities as any other: they're all burdened with a nasty aspect. Ra, the life-giving Sun god, commanded Sechmed to destroy humanity (later he changed his mind and tricked her into abandoning her task). The Greek gods did all sorts of awful things to various humans, and even to other gods. Jehovah is a first-class bastard, as I've said a number of times.

Yet they also do nice things, right? Create the world, drive out your enemies (when they feel like it), provide a good harvest, etc.

Who would want to worship such deities??

What would you call a man who dutifully provides for his family, yet from time to time gets angry or drunk and beats the crap out of them?