Of Course Jesus Existed
Offline
Note: I am not a theologian or scholar. I am a simple layman. The below is a reflection of my own opinion, having studied this subject and engaged in several debates. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect any official position of the Orthodox Church. The Orthodox Church cannot be held responsible or liable for any errors I might make. The below thesis is simply my own observation, but I believe there is truth to it.
MY ARGUMENT
I am a member of the Greek Orthodox Church. I do not wish to partake in this debate, because by doing so I would be stooping to your level and implying you have a case. You don't. Atheists do not even have the right or authority to even question the historical Christ. I just have a few words.
The rise of the "mythicist" theory (that Jesus is mythical) is a direct result of the errors of the Protestant theology of the 16th century. It was from liberal Protestantism that the "mythicist" theory begun.
By rejecting the authority and ontological existence and reality of the Orthodox Church, Protestantism reduced Christianity to a mere "philosophy," and Christ to just another sage or teacher. This was not intentional, but it was a direct result of their anti-Church stance.
The New Testament is one of the greatest proofs of Jesus, as is the existential and empirical reality of the Orthodox Church (which Christ founded). But Protestantism rejected the Church (which is the other greatest proof), and relegated Christ to nothing but the testimony of the New Testament. The New Testament AND the Orthodox Church, comprise the two wings of authority of authentic Christianity. It takes two wings to fly. Protestants rejected the other wing (the Church Christ founded), and thereby damaged Christian authority and the message of authentic Christianity. By rejecting the Church, they made Christianity (and Christ) susceptible to attack. The rejection of the Orthodox Church left Christianity with holes, open to attack.
The protestants were desperate to garner other "evidences" for Jesus, so they amassed a great deal of "extra-biblical" sources in corroboration with the New Testament (Roman sources, Gnostic, Patristic, Jewish, etc), in order to support the historical Jesus. But since they rejected the validity of the Orthodox Church, which Christ personally established, they were rejecting the greatest proof there is for His existence.
The Orthodox Church was founded by Christ. No historical person has ever founded such an institution; especially one that has lasted and survived through every conceivable onslaught for 2,000 years.
The scientific anthropic principle states that, in its initial conditions, the universe was fine-tuned for the existence and sustenance of life.
There is an anthropic truth with the Orthodox Church. It was fine-tuned by the God-Man (Christ) for the existence of spiritual life. The existence of our many millions of saints (which the west is generally ignorant of), is proof that the Church is a Divine institution. It sanctifies and deifies souls. The Orthodox Church maintains, to this day, direct apostolic (or bishop) succession that goes all the way back to Christ. There is an ancient "rule of faith" (regula fidei) that guarantees the truth about Christ and authentic Christianity. Irenaeus (he was a disciple of Polycarp, who was a disciple of the Apostle John) states that this "regula fidei" is where correct doctrine (orthodoxy) and bishop succession (the laying on of hands) exists.
WE STILL HAVE THIS IN THE ORTHODOX CHURCH TODAY
In Summary and Conclusion,
Protestantism rejected the actual Church that Christ personally founded.
The "mythicist" theory (that Jesus is mythical) came from liberal Protestantism.
By rejecting this Church, Protestantism demoted Christ (though not intentionally) to the level of other sages and teachers; robbing him of His special uniqueness, and making Him vulnerable to attack.
I would say the greatest proofs of Jesus Christ are:
1. The Orthodox Church which He personally founded.
2. Apostolic Succession and the rule of faith (regula fedei).
3. The anthropic spirituality (fine-tuning) within the Orthodox Church that has produced countless saints.
4. The New Testament documents.
5. All the other extra-biblical data.
6. The collective cultural memory and tradition that has been handed down of the original divine knowledge (this is also contained within the authority of the Orthodox Church, apostolic succession and the rule of faith).
The fifth is not what we base the historical Christ on. It is simply what we would expect to find.
The fallacy of the modern "mythicists" and Protestants is that they approached this subject using the inductive method of historical investigation. They investigated this subject backwards. They used the New Testament and the extra-biblical material as if those things alone comprise the totality of the evidence for Christ. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
THE ORTHODOX CHURCH IS THE GREATEST PROOF
CHURCH FATHERS
There are about 500 volumes of writings and teachings of the Church Fathers in Armenian, Coptic and Syriac. Here are the primary (not secondary) source material in Armenian, Coptic, Syriac, Greek and Latin. If you want to learn and hear what true Christianity is from the best sources, learn these languages and read this material in the original languages.
CHURCH FATHERS
Armenian, Syriac and Coptic Writers:
Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium ( about 500 volumes)
Cursus Patrologiae Completus , compiled by Migne
Latin series: 220 volumes
Greek Fathers: about 160 volumes
Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (an updated form of the Migne series)
Acts of Ancient Ecumenical Councils:
Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio, edited by Mansi
Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum, edited by Schwartz
Patrologia Orientalis (about 50 volumes)
Menaion
Synaxarion
The Theodosian Code, edited by Theodor Mommsen
The Code of Justinian, edited in Berlin in the Corpus Iuris Civilis, as well as certain supplemental laws known in Latin as Novellae
English: Anti-Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (38 volumes)
INTRODUCTION TO CHURCH HISTORY
The Christian Tradition (five volumes), by Jaroslav Pelikan (recipient of the John Kluge Award and 42 honorary doctorates. Considered the worlds leading expert on Christian history).
There are many what are called "Jesus historians" today who affirm Jesus existed. In fact, no one who is a recognized "Jesus historian"today denies He existed. I have a list and several quotes and sources by them. But they are really insignificant compared to the Church Fathers. None of these "Jesus historians" have the real authority the Church Fathers have. Read the Church Fathers.
Don't read modern day atheists who are 2,000 years too late and have no authority. Read Saints Maxmus the Confessor, Symeon the New Theologian, Theodore the Studite, John Chrystotom, Basil the Great, Gregory the Theologian, etc. Read Ignatius of Antioch, and Irenaeus (Aganist Heresies). These holy men had direct mystical contact with the risen Christ.
There are no atheists in fox holes
No.
There is something else I want to add. The immediate successors of the Apostles, are known as the apostolic fathers. Some of them (Clement, Ignatius) knew the apostles personally. The original teaching and knowledge was obvious that Jesus was historical. No one even disputed this untill I think the 19th century, and on (to quote Encyclopedia Britanica), "inadequate grounds."
The Church is like a tree.
It grew from a seed. The seed was Christ. A seed must first die before it grows and produces fruit. Jesus died and rose again. The Church was born. The Church is a tree extending through time and history. It is a direct result of His resurrection. This is the greatest proof.
The problem is that modern man (especially in the west) is losing any sense of history. History and the Orthodox Church vindicate Jesus' historicity.
There are no atheists in fox holes
... and so, I exist too, jesus ? what ever ....
tl;dr. You're a lunatic with zero credibility.
Remember Apotheon? His old avatar was Euthymius, actually... hmm. What is it about Greek Orthodoxy that so ravages the mind? Is it the beards? Was Kim Jong Il correct in his public service announcement, “Let's trim our hair in accordance with the socialist lifestyle,” in suggesting it diverts vital nutrients from the brain? Most of the bearded religions are pretty bad, if you think about it.
If I was you I wouldn't want to debate either.
Euthymis, this is a debate forum and if you have no plan to debate, provide evidence of your statements or engage in a discussion about them, then your post constitutes proselytizing, which violates the rules of this site. Please re-evaluate your position or consider this a warning.
The rules may be found here.
i stopped reading your post after i got to this incredibly ignorant sentence.
i have the "right or authority" to question anything i want, and no religious belief is exempt from criticism.
get over yourself.
www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens
SIMPLE? You flatter yourself! Your unfounded suppositions are so indelibly obtuse. Go ahead and prevaricate. This is an attempt to proselytize and you will gain no ground here. Your vacuous post has no place here and I vote for removal.
Miracles don't exist. "Miracle" is a word given to a preposterous event that a theist considers dogmatically advantageous. Def. - Ecclesiastical sensationalism.
Euthymius is also a creationist, as evidenced by his past posts, which should be enough for anybody to stick him in the "Dumb As Shit: Totally Hopeless" column and ignore him.
Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.
Of course the churches believe Jesus existed. How else could they easily collect money from the sheep they fleece?
I will never, NEVER, consider you and your master an authority.
The orthodox church is a fungus on my feces.
That fact that you cannot prove god’s non-existence is inconsequential because we cannot prove the non-existence of anything.
There is what is known in logic as the fallacy of the immovable rock. Modern atheists have already made-up their mind. They are not interested in the truth and facts. They have an agenda, and nothing is going to stop them (as far as they are concerned). They will continue being deceived and deceiving others.
By rejecting the Divine authority and nature of the Orthodox Church (the criterian of truth), all the false religions and heresies (Budhism, Hinduism, Islam, Gnosticism, Protestantism, Atheism etc) relegated Christianity to the level of other religions, and demoted Christ to that of sage, prophet, teacher or myth.
This is the problem with the modern Protestant "apologetic" method on the historical Jesus. They mean well, but they have damaged the Christian witness by rejecting the Divine nature of the Orthodox Church -- the Church Christ established, which is the greatest proof of all.
It's a three legged stool:
Bible, Church, Traidition.
Protestants rejected Church and Tradition, leaving the stool with only one leg -- which cannot stand.
If the Bible was removed from the world, Protestantism would die. But Orthodoxy would continue to flourish because it has tradition and Church.
When speaking of tradition, I'm not talking about dead relics and beliefs of the past. Tradition (paradosis) as understood by the Orthodox Church, is the living and breathing experience and authority of the Christian pleroma (fullness). Florvosky explains this well in his classic:
"Bible, Church and Tradition."
Protstantism is dying rapidly. It is beoming secularized, liberal and apostate. The "mythicist" theory is a direct result of this apostasy in Western Christendom.
There are no atheists in fox holes
Please stop projecting your flaws onto us.
Also in regard to your signature please go here http://www.atheistfoxholes.org/
So no one actually dealt with my arguments. All they did was attack my person and accuse me of proselytizing. This is known in logic as the fallacy of circumstantial ad hominem.
You can't deal with the authority of the Orthodox Church. You can't even touch it. The Orthodox Church is the greatest proof there is for Christ. You know nothing of this, and nothing of our history.
The law of causaility demands:
An effect must have a cause.
The Orthodox Church is the effect.
Christ is the cause.
And proof ouf our Divine nature and authority is the fact that we have overcome every conceivable onslaught and attack for 2,000 years.
There is no institution like this in the world.
There are no atheists in fox holes
No one's dealt with your argument becaus you haven't brought an argument to be dealt with.
Essentially you're saying the Orthodox Church is the one true church because you and other members past and present say so
Bring an argument and I'm sure someone will be happy to tear it up.
For someone who doesn't want a debate you sure are getting touchy about not getting one.
Oh the irony, you accusing atheists of being just like you. My reply actually is at the appropriate level, since what is asserted without evidence can be discarded without evidence. None of your drivel is evidence of anything other than you not understanding the very concepts of logic, evidence and the burden of proof.
Why don't they celebrate thanksgiving in England? They should be thankful the puritans left.
Actually, I dealt with them in a rather amusing way here After all you said you didn't want to participate in a debate so why bother?
Life's a bitch, then you die and nothing matters. So quit taking it so damn seriously!
To the OP, your account appears to be a sock puppet and you have continued with the same proselytizing, your account has been blocked.
To anyone responding to the OP, I am sorry but do not expect a reply anytime soon.
you're making the typical, idiotic assumption that no atheist has ever read a bible, attended church, or at one time been theist, themselves.
if you're going to post on a forum such as this one, you should make an effort to know a tad bit more about who you're talking to. you're making a fool of yourself with these naive stereotypes.
www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens
Because you're a crackpot conspiracy theorist nut. Given your tangents, you're more of a threat to your continued presence this side of a padded room than you are to... whatever it is you're supposedly challenging.
Except for all of the other religions.
Liar! None of my arguments in this thread have been discussed on any other thread on this website. I am arguing here for the authority of the Orthodox Church.
The famous dictum of St. Vincent of Lerins was characteristic of the attitude of the Ancient Church in the matters of faith: "We must hold what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all" [Commonitorium, 2]. This was at once the criterion and the norm. The crucial emphasis was here on the permanence of Christian teaching. St. Vincent was actually appealing to the double "ecumenicity" of Christian faith — in space and in time. In fact, it was the same great vision which had inspired St. Irenaeus in his own time: the One Church, expanded and scattered in the whole world, and yet speaking with one voice, holding the same faith everywhere, as it had been handed down by the blessed Apostles and preserved by the succession of witnesses: quae est ab apostolis, quae per successionem presbyterorum in ecclesiis custoditur. ["Which is being preserved in the Church from the Apostles through the succession of the presbyters."] These two aspects of faith, or rather — the two dimensions, could never be separated from each other. Universitas and antiquitas, as well as consensio, belonged together. Neither was an adequate criterion by itself. "Antiquity" as such was not yet a sufficient warrant of truth, unless a comprehensive consensus of the "ancients" could be satisfactorily demonstrated. And consensio as such was not conclusive, unless it could be traced back continuously to Apostolic origins. -- Archpriest Georges Florvosky. Those who claim I'm proselytizing, are guilty of the circumstantial ad hominem fallacy. I set forth my argument (thesis). And it has yet to be refuted. I can't be refuted. No one can even touch it.There are no atheists in fox holes
I am making the assumption that no atheist on this website has ever been Orthodox or read one single Church Father. So for purposes of this discussion, none of you have ever attended Church (the Orthodox Church).
When I said I refused to stoop to the "mythicist" level, I meant I refuse to play their games. No person who is semi-educated and half-way intelligent, could possibly deny the historical Jesus. I simply used another argument (the authority of the Orthodox Church, apostolic succession, etc) that "mythicists" are not even aware of.
And by the way, there is a conspiracy against Christianity. It has existed since at least A.D. 43. Just because some people are ignorant of this conspiracy, does not mean it does not exist. The Masons and Jews have been trying to destroy and discredit Christianity for centuries. But they keep failing because they are dealing with a force that goes far beyond their comprehension.
There are no atheists in fox holes
so, in other words, your whole argument and everything you've posted here is just like the bible; made up.
www.derekneibarger.com http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=djneibarger "all postures of submission and surrender should be part of our prehistory." -christopher hitchens
Euthymius is banned for creating multiple 'sock puppet' accounts in violation of forum policy.
*wags finger*
The block on the account has been reset, not sure what happened as it was there earlier...
Pretty much. Claims of authority that have all the foundation of a tidal mud flat, proselytizing, goading, and making shit up... is this crap allowed?
Euthymius, the burden of proof is on you. To claim authority based on the notion that your church was supposedly founded by some Jewish scholar that has yet to be proven to have existed is a logical fallicy in itself, yet you scream at others for doing the same. All the while, you give us nothing. Prove that Christ existed then prove he founded your church. Do so with verifiable, peer reviewed fact. If you are unable to do so, leave off.
There are two seasons in Canada, Hockey season and not-Hockey season.
Canada: 16% Atheist and growing.
Don't worry, folks, Euthymius will be well taken care of.
Those nice young men in the white coats are coming to take him away, are they?