Any Evidence For A Historical Jesus?

[chi pan]

"It's known as a P.R.A.T.T. argument - Points (or Previously) Refuted A Thousand Times. I call it the Magic Roundabout."

they certainly are not refuted on this thread and this thread is solely about whether jesus existed or not. if you certainly did refute them then do it again, it should be simple right? oh and saying those historical documents don't count b/c they don't exist doesn't count as an arguement. if they're fake, prove it.

[Forsaken]

if they're fake, prove it.

Its public knowledge that these documents are fake. The onus is on you to prove they are NOT fake!

[chi pan]

no i believe you have it backwards. i presented evidence against you therefore in order to refute evidence you must provide further evidence to prove my evidence faulse. that's how it works. this is an example of how your debate system works.

example: 1st person: "the moon is made of cheese"
2nd person: "i have a rock from the moon and it is not cheese"
1st person: "that rock is not from the moon"
2nd person: "yes it is how can you prove it's not?"
1st person: "it's not up to me to prove that it's up to you"

do you see the flaw? yes this is a rediculous example inteanded to be so simple you can understand it.

---

if i can provide all the evidence in the world and you can refute it just by saying "no" how is that a good debate system?

[Barre]

No.

Like most fictional characters he exists within the pages of one book.

So how do you account for the appearance of the Jesus phenomenon? Do you have a view of how, when and by whom it was started?

---

if they're fake, prove it.

Its public knowledge that these documents are fake. The onus is on you to prove they are NOT fake!

What do you mean by "fake" and by "its public knowledge?

[Cyberman]

"It's known as a P.R.A.T.T. argument - Points (or Previously) Refuted A Thousand Times. I call it the Magic Roundabout."

they certainly are not refuted on this thread and this thread is solely about whether jesus existed or not. if you certainly did refute them then do it again, it should be simple right? oh and saying those historical documents don't count b/c they don't exist doesn't count as an arguement. if they're fake, prove it.

As I still retain a vestige of faith in human nature, I refuse to believe that you are genuinely this dim. The qualifier "in this thread" is your addition to my comment; perhaps if you ventured beyond this thread into others on similar topics, or even to resources that have been cited here or in those other threads, we might finally get a bit of traction going. The historical documents you mention have indeed been shown to be either fake, non-contemporary or not what theists think they are. I have zero interest in discussing things with someone who wants to be spoonfed.

However, in the spirit of New Year conviviality, all of the refutations you seek are archived here in one convenient user-friendly location: http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/. Not only does site owner Ken Humphries dissect the whole Jesus myth atom by atom, he cites his sources.

P.S. For the final time I will ask you to learn how to use the quote tags. While you may not be in breach of the rules per se, using the facility makes it so much easier to read your posts and also ensures that you are not quoting incorrectly, which is a guideline breach. If it will make it any easier, click 'Reply' at the foot of this post and take a look at how I did it.

[Minimalist]

So how do you account for the appearance of the Jesus phenomenon?

The same way every other 'god' was created. Human imagination.




Here's the temple of Karnak. You can bet the Egyptians were just as certain that their gods were real, too.

[chi pan]

first claim refuted from your site "nazareth did not exist during the time of jesus"
counter statement: The city of Nazareth was a small and insignificant agricultural village in the time of Jesus. It had no trade routes, was of little economic importance and was never mentioned in the Old Testament or other ancient texts. Archaeological excavations indicate Nazareth was settled continuously from 900 – 600 BCE- source http://www.nazareth-israel.com/nazarteh-history

you know i don't really see a whole lot of other arguements about jesus never existing on this site. and it certainly does not list any historical references and is clearly a biased site, not good for getting historical facts

[Minimalist]

The noted xtian scholar, Stephan Pfann excavated at "Nazareth" in the late 90's and found a single family farm....not a city.

http://www.uhl.ac/NazarethVillage/nazareth.html

A survey of the area was conducted in February 1997 by CSEC’s archaeological staff. Four seasons of excavation, licensed by the Israel Antiquities Authority and under the joint direction of Ross Voss and S. Pfann, have been carried out by CSEC, with the help of students and local volunteers. These excavations have confirmed the land to be a complete Roman Period terrace farm with a winepress, watchtowers, olive crushing stones, irrigation systems, and an ancient quarry, and have illuminated previously unknown aspects of terrace farming in the Galilee.
The character of the site indicates that the valley and its slopes likely comprised the property of a single family’s farm, which produced a variety of crops. Most of the extent of the original farm has been preserved. This farm remains the most important, and perhaps the only, witness to the life and livelihood of the ancient Nazarenes.

[chi pan]

how can that be possible when it is currently a city? it's like saying the same for New York City.

[Minimalist]

how can that be possible when it is currently a city? it's like saying the same for New York City.

I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here....must be getting soft... but how far back into history do you think New York City goes?

I just don't have the time to give you a history lesson on the area right now.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/nazareth.html