Is there an historical and living Jesus?

Simon Anders said:
SnakeLord said:
The issue is whether there was a historical Jesus. Medicine woman asserted that religous scholars had confirmed her belief that there was no such person. That is absurd.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Religious scholars did NOT "confirm my belief." You've got that backwards. My "belief" arose from the work of religious scholars.

It is not generally accepted by non-religious scholars that there was no historical Jesus. And for good reason.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Wrong. Biblical scholars and archeologists confirm that Jesus couldn't have possibly existed.
*************
You are pissed off at the religious and Christians and I can think of many reasons for you to be, but that is beside the point.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: I'm not "pissed off." You are making assumptions that are incorrect. This is the same old christian excuse -- that I'm "pissed off at christianity." That's lame.

Medicine Woman' hypothesis has little merit. She could, coincidentally, be correct, but her assertion is weakly supported. The idea that some religious scholars confirmed his non-existence is a joke.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: It's not my "assertion," dear. I don't make up or create these ideas, unfortunately, because I research the topic. I read many versions of the topic at hand, and I come to my own conclusions. I wish that I were the originator of such information, and I would therefore be rich. All I do is weed out the information and accept what I believe to be the truth.

I suppose yet another bibliography is in order. Whew!
Click to expand...
 
Prince_James said:
Medicine*Woman:

Which scholar affirms the Sun hypothesis? I've read it on the internet, but never in a scholarly resource.

If you have any journal articles off hand or high-quality books, post 'em here. I wanna read this.

Plus: Care to be the Mary Magdalene to my Jesus?
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: I've posted a bibliography as a new thread. You will find the "sun hypothesis" among the titles. There are some informative sites on the Web, for example, "Solar Mythology and the Jesus Story." Sorry, I don't have the URL of the Web site. Others are "Bible Truth Online," "Star of Bethlehem," "The Meaning of the Zodiac." However, I cannot guarantee these are credible sites. I had them in my Favorites. My bibliography addresses the "sun" myth.

"My MM to your Jesus?" Hmmm. Would you like to create some miracles?
 
QUOTE]If some party had simply decided to create a mythical Jesus literature, they would have written one gospel.[/QUOTE]
*************
M*W: How do you come up with that?

The fact that the different gospels contradict each other on many points lends credibility to the historical Jesus hypothesis.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: Sorry, but I don't understand your logic. "Contradiction" does not equal "credibility."
 
You are pissed off at the religious and Christians and I can think of many reasons for you to be
Click to expand...

To be quite brutally honest with you, I have absolutely no care about the religious or christians, merely the subject matter. In either case personal feelings towards a group of people is not the argument at hand.

So far the two arguments on this thread are:

1) It's common sense that jesus existed because a "made up person would never stand up to scrutiny"

2) The fact that the gospels contradict each other shows that they're true.

Need I really point out the problems with these arguments?
 
No matter what, there is plenty of evidentiary support of Jesus' existance. He was a man. What they're denying is that he was the prophet, that he was the messiah. They say he was just a man.

Hm, what a shame.
 
There is plenty of evidence but it is good evidence? I mean, there's evidence of Xenu's existence too. But is it good?

Also, I've yet to read of contemporary evidence of Jesus. It seems more likely that there were a lot of teachers wandering around at the time and a mix of people swirled and amalgamated into the myth that is Jesus.
 
existence of Jesus as a common man is not evidence of Jesus.

but I think there is evidence of a guy known as Jesus who were not really a common man because he upset the whole roman society.

I think there is at least evidence of a revolutionary guy named Jesus.

No?
What these scholars said about that?
Do they simply say: no there was no Jesus that get in some way famous by revolutionary thinking and sayings?
 
existence of Jesus as a common man is not evidence of Jesus
Click to expand...

I would actually be inclined to agree. Frankly as an argument it would be like using evidence of the existence of Vlad the impaler, (Vlad Dracula) as evidence of the existence of Count Dracula.
 
Snakelord, We have a bitter woman (M*W) trying to convince people that a few modern authors, who know virtually nothing about that time except for what they read, know if someone was alive over 2,000 years ago.

You are smarter than all this. Like i have said before: I dont care if someone worships Satan and fellates a life size effigy every day at sundown. Why should I?

But isnt the arrogance and lying a little annoying? So you dont believe Jesus and the strory? Who CARES?
 
Democles said:
No matter what, there is plenty of evidentiary support of Jesus' existance. He was a man. What they're denying is that he was the prophet, that he was the messiah. They say he was just a man.

Hm, what a shame.
Click to expand...
*************
M*W: You're wrong. Your evidentiary support cannot be concluded. And, that is not at all what I'm saying. Clearly, I am saying that Jesus did not exist as a human being, therefore, he couldn't have been a prophet nor messiah. Jesus was not a man at all. He was nothing but myth.
 
Medicine*Woman said:
*************
M*W: You're wrong. Your evidentiary support cannot be concluded. And, that is not at all what I'm saying. Clearly, I am saying that Jesus did not exist as a human being, therefore, he couldn't have been a prophet nor messiah. Jesus was not a man at all. He was nothing but myth.
Click to expand...

And we are simply trying to tell you that he could not have been made up. You just cannot create a person out of nowhere.

Better still, give an example of one fictional character who has, in the course of history, been believed as real.

Perhaps, when you cannot you will see how stupid this is. That is all we are saying.
 
*************
M*W: John99... Don't bother replying to any message that I post. You are terminally on IGNORE.
 
ronan said:
existence of Jesus as a common man is not evidence of Jesus.

but I think there is evidence of a guy known as Jesus who were not really a common man because he upset the whole roman society.

I think there is at least evidence of a revolutionary guy named Jesus.

No?
What these scholars said about that?
Do they simply say: no there was no Jesus that get in some way famous by revolutionary thinking and sayings?
Click to expand...
There is evidence for a lot of people that were just like Jesus. Jesus is probably a composite of the lot of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top