To those who say that there’s no evidence that Jesus existed, I would ask what evidence is there that Shakespeare existed. I’m sure they would say that we have the words of Shakespeare as proof. If he didn’t write them, who did?
I would say the same of Jesus. Who said such incredibly wonderful words? Was it Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Was it someone else? Whoever it was should be worshipped as God, because His words were divine and without precedent. The statement of the skeptic should rather be “I don’t believe THE EVIDENCE for the existence of Jesus.”
I would also ask the person who thinks that Jesus never existed what year it is. It’s been 2,000 years “since Christ” (AD). There’s a good clue. Of course, some don’t like to use “AD.” They prefer “CE,” which stands for “Common Era.” That’s how (in their minds) they get rid of Jesus.
Those of you who are CE folks should know that you are in agreement with another group who refuse to worship Jesus—the Jehovah’s Witnesses. They have been using CE in their literature since April, 1964.
42 comments
1) Ray, The Bible's word were hardly "without precedent". There are numerous religions that pre-date the Bible and contain much the same message.
"I would ask what evidence is there that Shakespeare existed"
Well there are the contemporary notes of people of the time that met him. There are his plays. There is his tomb in Stratford.
Whilst none of the above categorically "prove" his existence, there is one significant difference. I am not being asked to worship Shakespeare or spend eternity is pain if I don't. The burden of evidence you need is therefore higher.
Jesus probably existed. I've yet to see a better explanation for the rise of Christianity than the preachings of a charismatic religious leader.
That doesn't mean he performed miracles, or was the son of god, or rose from the dead.
++""Whoever it was should be worshipped as God, because His words were divine and without precedent"
Apparently numerous older religions and secular philosophies aren't considered precedent now.
++"I would also ask the person who thinks that Jesus never existed what year it is. It’s been 2,000 years “since Christ” (AD). There’s a good clue."
Ah, that tired old nonargument. A dating system forced upon the world by the church is not proof of the church's claims about its god.
++"Those of you who are CE folks should know that you are in agreement with another group who refuse to worship Jesusthe Jehovah’s Witnesses. They have been using CE in their literature since April, 1964."
And? We're not doing it to pretend that Christians don't exist. We're doing it because basing the dating system on the approximate birthdate of a fictional character isn't particularly advisable.
Who said such incredibly wonderful words? Was it Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Was it someone else?
Someone else!
The gospel authors are anonymous.
Ray Comfort says evolution cannot be proven true, and must be false.
Ray Comfort says his god cannot be proven false, and must be true.
We have playbills and documents from court of the time that mention Shakespeare's name; the arms granted to him; we have the testament of other writers who knew him; we have the record of his baptism, his marriage and his death; the record of his attending school; his fathers' will; his own will and other legal documents Shakespeare signed, including for the purchase of land.
Produce that much independent evidence about Jesus and you might have an argument, Ray.
"Jesus' words" are full of hapax legomena, so many that it becomes hard to find what is trying to be said sometimes.
Also, anything can become poetic if read in a dramatic and histrionic manner.
Let's first establish proof of the actual existence of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Can you do that, Ray?
I'll wait right over here...
Mr Comfort, first prove to me that you exist and are not a cheap ELISA-style 'AI' spewing random, meaningless phrases you cannot possibly understand. Afterwards, disprove omphalos concept ("last thursdayism"). Then maybe I'll listen to you, if only for entertainment.
We actually have secular/third party records of Shakespeare. Jesus, on the other hand, does not. Banana man really sucks at analogies.
Also, kinda random attack on the Jehovah's Witnesses at the end. Granted, I think they're fucking weirdos but still really random.
Thank goodness for this quote because the rest were really depressing today.
Unless I am remarkably confused I don't believe that Shakespeare ever made claims of divinity, rose from the dead, healed the sick, raised a man from the dead, walked on water, etc.
See the difference?
No of course you don't. You're Ray Comfort.
@birdboy2000
There are other explanations. Such as certain Jewish people breaking from tradition and writing a new testament in order to meet the prophesies of the old testament. There could have been a Jesus but there certainly did not have to be in order for Christianity to rise. All that was needed was Paul. Paul is the most responsible person for the early spread of Christianity based soley on his claims. Mainly because he supposedly railed against it at had his road to damascus experience. That gave him a percieved credibility. And as you probably know, the gospels were written almost a century after Jesus supposedly lived. IMO it is more likely that a group of Jews decided to change things and created the character of Jesus in order to do that. They weren't very adept at history either considering the things that they got wrong, such as Herod's census and the 'slaughter of the innocents'.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't there some scholars who question whether or not all the works attributed to Shakespeare were all written by the same guy? Similarly, there is no doubt that Socrates existed, yet nobody believes the magical claims made about him in his day, and quite a few scholars suspect that what we "know" about his beliefs may have actually just been Plato inserting his own beliefs into Socrates's mouth.
Some of the alleged teachings of Jesus sound nice, and are no different from what other teachers before and after him taught. Tell me, Ray, should the Buddha be worshipped? Since the Gospels didn't even appear until several decades after the alleged life of Jesus, the same problem I mentioned above with Socrates applies especially hard here.
The comment about the dating system deserves no reply.
Ray actually believes that the gospels were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. This, in turn, suggests he is unaware that no one knows who wrote them, and oblivious to the fact that the earliest -- Mark -- was written some 40 years after the supposed resurrection.
"I would say the same of Jesus. Who said such incredibly wonderful words? Was it Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?"
Or Marcion, Basilides, Valentinian, Mary, Judas or Philip? Or Peter, Mani, Matthias, Andrew or Bartholomew?
Oops, sorry I forgot, those other gospels were just made up by over imaginative believers -- but your god books are absolutely the real thing!
One doesn't even need to reference all the "divinely authored" books of other religions to point out the hypocrisy in your argument, Ray. There are plenty of Christian works you don't believe are genuine.
I just have a slightly longer list is all.
The difference being nobody claims that without Shakespeare I'd have no moral code. My beliefs about the universe would not collapse if Shakespeare had never existed.
Second, nobody should be worshipped as a god, even if they say something you like. That would be absurd, and result in people forming cults around any charismatic speaker they come across.
We have contemporary records from Shakespeare's own time and place in history that he existed.
However, the Romans have no record of Jesus. And they (of all people in Roman Palestine back then) would know if he existed. They were notoriously efficient bureaucrats and bean-counters, and some crazy Jew claiming to be the son of god and raising hell in Provincia Iudea would not have gone unnoticed or unrecorded. At the very least, some Roman bureaucrat would have to jot down in the ol' execution ledger that they crucified three citizens that day, and one of them just happened to be a local cult leader.
Or to put it simply: you're just plain bananas, Ray.
We have contemporary accounts from Shakespeare's time and place in history which confirm his existence.
We can't say the same for Jesus. You would think the Romans - quite possibly history's most notorious bureaucrats - would have written down something about a subversive Jewish cult leader raising hell in Provincia Iudaea. At the very least, some bean-counter would have written down in the 'ol execution ledger that they crucified two thieves and a potential terrorist that day.
Oh the irony! So Ray decides to draw an analogy between Jesus and someone else long dead and decides on Shakespeare of all people?
Does the term 'anti-Stratfordian' ring any bells at all, Ray?
The writings of Shakespeare are nice, I like some of them, whether he wrote them or Bacon or whomsoever did it. I don't read that stuff all the time, and if it didn't exist, or the author didn't, my life would not be meaningless without them. I don't worship Shakespeare.
Now Mozart, on the other hand...
Actually, you can never prove the former existance of a historical person with absolut certanity.
Face it, Ray; you are a whore...a whore who is man-obsessed with some charismatic leader from long ago.
You're so pathetic and weak-willed, you need to fantasize about a hyper-masculine man-god in order to cope with your closeted/repressed homosexual urges. Just let it out, mang. We don't care that you're gay.
"we have the words of Shakespeare as proof. If he didn’t write them, who did?
I would say the same of Jesus. Who said such incredibly wonderful words? Was it Matthew, Mark, Luke or John? Was it someone else? "
http://www.atheistmemebase.com/2014/05/02/proof-2/
Most of the good points have already been mentioned, so I'll just add this:
Last I checked, there isn't anyone trying to pass laws that would deny people their civil rights based on how they interpret Shakespeare. They aren't using quotes from Shakespeare to justify their bigoted discriminatory rants; they aren't picketing with signs saying "Shakespeare hates {insert derogatory words about whatever you think is icky here}".
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
