If you believe in George washington but not in Jesus/God why?

Question

for every argument george washington existed there are as many that show Jesus did. same arguments will make for Christs being alive as any for George having lived, let alone was president

theres more proof God exists then george did exist. thats not even in question. im asking why ppl who do believe in george dont believe in God too.

what proof is there that washington existed? letters, paintings, witness statements? we have these of Christ. although His letters arent catholic approved. but anyone couldve created the figure head of george washington. it would be in their best interest to do so as they fought against english rule. he may have been or not, been president. another way to keep the english from destroying our resolve. if they cannot capture or kill him (bc he wasnt real) then we win by continuing the war thru his leadership. the way he is written of is almost Christ like too btw.
look at a dollar bill his pic is on it. i have seen money w/Christs likeness too.
there is no more proof one over the other is my point (in question). why believe one over the other? when neither are believed in by proof, of their existence. but rather by their evidence of life.

i do say Jesus/God bc He is One in the same.

there are no mortal remains of george washington as some think there may be.
one other thought, George kneeled and prayed to the Father in Christ, bc he believed in Christ. make your actual arguments geo existed. they can be sd exactly for Christs argument as well.
my thought is believing in geo but not Jesus is like believing in george but not his parents. ;o)

theres far more records of Christ, then there is of george washington and the same arguments apply. Jesus had relatives then & today. (half bros & sis')
geo is the perfect documented person to use. bc of his recorded life is such all know him. but no one can prove by the records he lived. clothes wood teeth family all can be forged misread. many ppl and kingdoms were sd to be fables, til they acually found them. there isnt a point of argument for either that isnt workable one for the other

id love to make ppl reason "why". conversions between them and God alone not me or a church or any other influence. but im am only trying to understand as to why one over the other since theres as much proof as Christ did as george did.

George Jesus

clothes clothes
witness' testimony witness' testimony
relatives relatives
letters letters
his likeness His likeness
nothing remains of either on earth that proves they existed. these which on both sides couldve been faked. shroud of tourin could be fake georges teeth too. why believe in one over the other. this isnt about believing in Christ as God which i do clearly. it is why some believe in george (who believed in Christ/God) but dont believe in Christ having lived. all arguments may be applied to either equally so

Answer 1

HAHAHAHA OMG, CANT ANYONE READ???? he asked why, if you believe in historical documentation of a red crayon why not a blue one too, right? i know so, (i asked him) yeah i cheated! it is ok, its not an ethics question! haha

he asked and made point that all arguments relative to one or the other can be made to show or disprove they did or didn't exist. if you say statues mean anything Jesus has more, by Greater world renowned Artists!
Jesus has the LARGEST too, Rio baby "spring break". The death was written of when ordered. so that's written proof of Jesus life, while He still lived! because you cant kill someone twice! Christ, sd turn the other cheek not.... no i wont say it. i will get fan mail for a month if i do! there are more world renowned authors & artisans who wrote of & made likenesses of JC then GW so if we go by who was written of by whom as of importance making a difference then Christ wins by a mile!
who painted GW, name them????? waiting???? lol
Now, who painted Jesus' pic? Leonardo, Micheal Angelo, me 7th grade! Jesus had been around longer (forever actually) so He def has had more publicity! i know and believe they both existed like Cj sd GW knelt and prayed in JC's name. now i wont believe in JC bc Cj or GW kneeled and sd Amen Jesus, but if you believe such a man lived as GW and HE BELIEVED it isn't so out of thought to wonder why a person would believe in GW & not JC. Good Question, great avatar! ( i luv your bunny12)
God Love, peace out!

Answer 2

There are far more proofs that Washington existed. It's absurd to even doubt that Washington may not have existed since we have so much historical proof, and it's only 250 years old.

The argument about Jesus is a complicated on, mainly because The Bible is considered the most accurate source of information. Keep in mind that what was written about Jesus came from various people with different points of view--and they contradict often. Did someone name Jesus exist? Most likely, but information from 2000 years ago is, well, questionable.

But comparing Washington to Jesus? I always thought the consencious was that there has been a George Washington and he was the first president of the USA. Jesus is so heavily doubted because he is considered a messiah, which upsets a lot of other people whose religion already HAS messiah.

Answer 3

There is more evidence for George Washington having existed than evidence supporting Jesus' existence. As an atheist, I believe that a man in, now what we call Israel, existed and I can even accept that people believed that he was a messiah. But that is all that I can accept. In order for me to believe that he was the son of god, and everything else, would require more corroborating evidence and proof. Which is something that I have not experience, save the Bible, which was written incredibly long ago with political and social pressures.

Answer 4

A lot of people Jesus existed, but not that he was the son of god. Moreover there's a lot of evidence to say that Mr. Washington existed, and not a lot of evidence to say he didn't exist. Finally, assuming that we are on the fence either way, Ockham's razor doesn't say that it's a simpler theory for us to assume that Washington didn't exist, considering that he was a person important to history.

On the other hand, that's part of the justification for even non-theists to believe that Jesus existed; because at the very least, someone had to say the things that are quoted as being Jesus, and in many ways it's much more complicated to say that Jesus didn't exist, even from an athiest standpoint. But the jury's still out on that.

The Cherry tree incident is apparently false though. I forgot where I read that though. Oh well.

Answer 5

You're kidding, right? What about other historical figures; was Henry VIII real? How about Newton? Admiral Nelson? Andrew Jackson? Gehghis Khan?

I believe in George Washington because he is mentioned in many, many books, not just one. We have letters he wrote, we have his clothes and false teeth. We have many, many pictures of him painted from life by reputable artists who actually met him. We have his signature on a variety of documents. We have living people who are related to him. This is a poor argument for the existence of Jesus. Next time, pick someone less documented and more obscure for your comparison figure. It will still be an illogical argument, but at least it won't be as silly as this one.

Answer 6

Im afraid thats the lamest argument I may have seen here.
George was seen by quite a few more people and was documented on both sides of the Atlantic. His involvement in the war of that time means his life was documented rather closely.
We know where is body is.
We can go check that.

Even if you believe Jesus of Nazareth lived, you dont have to believe he was anything to do with god.

Answer 7

Much of what we think we know about George Washington is likely false. Is it possible he didn't exist at all? Yes, but it would have required a massive conspiracy, since there are boundless contemporary records of him by people who claim to have personally known him. Not to mention we have countless of his own personal letters signed by him.

Do we have documents written by Jesus? Do we have firsthand eyewitness acounts of him? No, and no. Would it require a conspiracy to account for what we have? No. Ordinary mythmaking is sufficient to account for all known documentation about Jesus.

Combine that with the fantastic accounts attributed to him that closely align with pre-existing legends, and combine it with our knowledge of what Logos was all about, and the proper conclusion is he was originally a mystical being, who was later historicized.

It's possible there was a real life human somehow intertwined in the mythical Jesus of the Bible, but if so, we know nothing about him.

Answer 8

I am not disagreeing with your view. Let me say that first.

But, actually, there is only one piece of physical evidence that Jesus the man ever lived, and that is his death sentence. After that, we only have accounts from witnesses. We have more physical evidence for George Washington's life. However, that does not mean that one was more real than the other.

Answer 9

Why would anyone lie about George Washington? He was not very special, and he made no large impact. Jesus, on the other hand, is supposedly the son of god, and is our savior. Not only did he never declare himself to be the son of God, he never claimed to be divine in any form. If Jesus doesn't believe he was god, neither shall I.

Answer 10

The first documented existence of Jesus was over 40 years after his death with the Gospel of Matthew.

Why aren't there any examples of writing during his life? No Roman records, nothing.