Seibertron.com Energon Pub Forums

Three rounds in the ring, no less. This one promises to be a real slugger match, too.

Well, no, not really. It's a "what if" between the late Socrates and the equally late Jesus H. Christ. It is, I assure you, entirely fictional. I assume, however, that neither of them says anything they likely wouldn't have.


I'm posting this because it was an interesting read (mild puncuation errors and all) and because herr von Lord Galvatron has a forum to fill. Well... Again, not really, but you get the point.

I feel like I've seen this before somewhere...anyway, I feel like it's not so useful in teaching anything about these two philosophers as it is in showing what skepticism "looks" like in a discussion, and perhaps introducing some of the basic thought behind secular humanism and atheism. The dialogue is certainly very biased in favor of Socrates, and some of what the author has Jesus say is just outright incorrect. Eating the fruit of the Tree of Life did not give Adam and Eve knowledge of sexuality, nor was physical sex the original sin. Neither of those statements have basis in the Book of Genesis or anywhere else in the Bible.

Jesus' refutations here of Socrates' arguments about free will and God's wrathfulness aren't exactly the cream of Christian thought on those questions, either. Basically you've got a grad student wearing a Socrates mask, beating up on a Jesus who can do nothing but spout platitudes and repeat himself...very gratifying to the guy who wrote it, I'm sure, but not so helpful as a genuine comparison of these two philosophers.

Yes, the lines Jesus got were a bit flat at times. How would you go about giving him lines that better represented Christianity, then?

I got about half way through, but this isn't really a debate, it's Socrates who argues over "Jezus' rhetoric lines", that often don't really add up nor are answer to the questions put forth. So I'll agree with Glyph and J that it's a rather biased parody of the debate.


If anything, it reminds me of 'debates' of Tammuz/HC/etc. versus some of the other people that posted in this forum, but certainly not one versus those that would actually try to put up a debate rather than go with rather silly rhetorics. Even though I do recall seeing such simplistic one liners as answers in the debates before.

This isn't an argument between Socrates and Jesus; this is an argument between a Socratic philosopher and an American Christian fundamentalist. It does indeed reveal tautologies and inconsistencies in the tireless rhetoric of the latter, but it doesn't tell us much interesting about Socrates or Jesus.

An interesting argument between the two might have begun with what it means to be ethical. Socrates (through Plato) believed that an ethical person would do good for his friends and family and ill to those who would harm him. Jesus' ethics preached love and mercy toward those who would do you harm; the parable of giving freely to the man who had just murdered your son is unimaginable in Plato. Like most of the rest of humanity, more Christians seem to follow Socrates on this one!

You have the incorrect link for Wiki's posting on Jesus. It redirects you to a page about the metal group, Slayer.

Here's the actual link on Christ himself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ

I gave up right away because of this.

Jesus
There is only one god.


Socrates
Oh. You should live here in Athens. We have several to choose from.


Jesus
There is only one true God.


Socrates
Of course. And which one is the true God?


Jesus
The true god is Lord God.


Socrates
Yes. But who is Lord God? Or what is he?

Who's on first?

Autobot032 wrote:You have the incorrect link for Wiki's posting on Jesus. It redirects you to a page about the metal group, Slayer.

Here's the actual link on Christ himself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Christ

No it doesn't? I clicked the link just now and it works as intended. The "Jesus Christ" link redirects to the article about "Jesus", and that's the article I included a link to... So I don't know what the issue is. Weird, anyway.

I don't know, Socrates is a big guy and has a nasty right cross. My money's on him.

This reads like a Philo 101 text. Not so much a debate as propaganda. I'm not the biggest fan of Christianity myself, but I certainly take it more seriously than this guy did. I can appreciate anyone wanting to attack fundamentalism at the root, but the scapegoat was ill-conceived.