(August 28, 2012 at 6:49 pm)Atom Wrote: A good start would be to cite credible peer reviewed historical publications describing how acceptable historical practices lead to the conclusion that Jesus was a myth. That would give us something to discuss

Can you do the same for all your claims?
It's just that I've read somewhere that "most scholars agree that jesus never existed".
So your claim that "most scholars believe that jesus was a real person" leaves me thinking that someone is wrong. Since you took the time to write all those points, maybe you have all the "credible peer reviewed historical publications" describing why should we accept those points.

Step right up, folks, and be amazed to see the Mighty Atom turn "most scholars" into "most respectable scholars" before your very eyes! It's the marvel of the age! You simply will not believe what you're seeing!

Atom Wrote:To provide comparable testimony you would have to produce a Christian saying that Jesus didn't exist, which is impossible because the person wouldn't be a Christian if they said this. I admit this isn't fair.

EPISTLES.

You know, for a 'research scientist' you don't seem to be very open to exploring all possibilities.

Quote:Some examples of the criteria used by professional historians include giving more significance to data from:

1) multiple, independent sources
2) enemy attestation
3) principle of embarrassment
4) eyewitness testimony
5) early testimony

If you had any of that we would not be having this discussion.

All you have are later self-serving documents which Ehrman admits have been edited.

(August 28, 2012 at 8:12 pm)Minimalist Wrote:

Quote:Some examples of the criteria used by professional historians include giving more significance to data from:

1) multiple, independent sources
2) enemy attestation
3) principle of embarrassment
4) eyewitness testimony
5) early testimony

If you had any of that we would not be having this discussion.

All you have are later self-serving documents which Ehrman admits have been edited.

I was going to post something to do with these bullet points but I didn't think it was worth it. You've done half the work anyways, so I might as well chime in.

1)there's no independent sources. The Gospels rely on the first one written, Mark, which unfortunately isn't actual history, as the author (what seems like) deliberately took OT verses and used them as the story for Jesus. E.g. Last words on the cross -> Psalms 22:1.

2)none to be found.

3)not sure what that is actually...

4)none to be found. Matthew and John are written in 3rd person. Matthew also relied on Mark which is a bit odd for a witness to do. The only confirmed one we have is Paul who saw light practically... Well you already know my views about that man's beliefs.

5)not sure what you mean. It's kind of one and the same as point 4.

(August 28, 2012 at 12:05 am)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(August 27, 2012 at 11:56 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Didn't you do a video about this on one of your channels, or did I just dream it?

Quote:[Edit: Actually if I remember aright, it wasn't a video, you posted something similar over at the original JNE forum many moons ago. I think I still have it as an article in my God-Squad folder (no copyright infringement intended, of course).]

Open license.

That's a good video. I never thought of it that way before. I know someone who is a strong atheist and I'm going to ask him why he believes Jesus is a historical person.

Quote:Some examples of the criteria used by professional historians include giving more significance to data from:

1) multiple, independent sources
2) enemy attestation
3) principle of embarrassment
4) eyewitness testimony
5) early testimony

As I've pointed out before, most of these criteria can be used to verify the resurrection of Snow White. Viz:

Enemy attestation:
The Wicked Queen wanted Snow White dead and gave her the poisoned apple to do the job. She knew Snow White was dead and she later knew that she'd been resurrected. Why would the Wicked Queen admit to something so damaging if it were not true?

Principle of embarrassment:
How about the Magic Mirror, which had the powers of speech and prophecy, not to mention the inability to lie? What a ridiculously embarrassing idea! Yet there it is, giving testimony to Snow White's resurrection.

Eyewitness testimony:
We've got the personal eyewitness testimony of the Handsome Prince, Happy, Sleepy, Sneezy, Grumpy, Bashful, Doc and Dopey, all of whom saw the girl dead and then rise up again.

Early testimony:
The Snow White story, like all true 'fairy tales', have astonishingly ancient origins. In many cases, they likely stretch back to oral traditions that are as old as, if not actually predate, anything in the bible. The Brothers Grimm and Disney versions are the nice, fluffy kid-friendly versions of tales originally filled with more blood, gore, sex and violence than anything Hollywood ever dreamed up.

There you go; significant data to chew over.

(August 28, 2012 at 8:55 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

Quote:Some examples of the criteria used by professional historians include giving more significance to data from:

1) multiple, independent sources
2) enemy attestation
3) principle of embarrassment
4) eyewitness testimony
5) early testimony

As I've pointed out before, most of these criteria can be used to verify the resurrection of Snow White. Viz:

Enemy attestation:
The Wicked Queen wanted Snow White dead and gave her the poisoned apple to do the job. She knew Snow White was dead and she later knew that she'd been resurrected. Why would the Wicked Queen admit to something so damaging if it were not true?

Principle of embarrassment:
How about the Magic Mirror, which had the powers of speech and prophecy, not to mention the inability to lie? What a ridiculously embarrassing idea! Yet there it is, giving testimony to Snow White's resurrection.

Eyewitness testimony:
We've got the personal eyewitness testimony of the Handsome Prince, Happy, Sleepy, Sneezy, Grumpy, Bashful, Doc and Dopey, all of whom saw the girl dead and then rise up again.

Early testimony:
The Snow White story, like all true 'fairy tales', have astonishingly ancient origins. In many cases, they likely stretch back to oral traditions that are as old as, if not actually predate, anything in the bible. The Brothers Grimm and Disney versions are the nice, fluffy kid-friendly versions of tales originally filled with more blood, gore, sex and violence than anything Hollywood ever dreamed up.

There you go; significant data to chew over.

I'm reading "The End of Christianity" and I think one of the authors does the same basic thing around the Salem witch trials to show the problems with trying to prove the resurrection. Haven't got to that chapter yet.

(August 28, 2012 at 8:55 pm)Stimbo Wrote:

Quote:Some examples of the criteria used by professional historians include giving more significance to data from:

1) multiple, independent sources
2) enemy attestation
3) principle of embarrassment
4) eyewitness testimony
5) early testimony

As I've pointed out before, most of these criteria can be used to verify the resurrection of Snow White. Viz:

Enemy attestation:
The Wicked Queen wanted Snow White dead and gave her the poisoned apple to do the job. She knew Snow White was dead and she later knew that she'd been resurrected. Why would the Wicked Queen admit to something so damaging if it were not true?

Principle of embarrassment:
How about the Magic Mirror, which had the powers of speech and prophecy, not to mention the inability to lie? What a ridiculously embarrassing idea! Yet there it is, giving testimony to Snow White's resurrection.

Eyewitness testimony:
We've got the personal eyewitness testimony of the Handsome Prince, Happy, Sleepy, Sneezy, Grumpy, Bashful, Doc and Dopey, all of whom saw the girl dead and then rise up again.

Early testimony:
The Snow White story, like all true 'fairy tales', have astonishingly ancient origins. In many cases, they likely stretch back to oral traditions that are as old as, if not actually predate, anything in the bible. The Brothers Grimm and Disney versions are the nice, fluffy kid-friendly versions of tales originally filled with more blood, gore, sex and violence than anything Hollywood ever dreamed up.

There you go; significant data to chew over.

Haha, Snow White did not resurrect. The poisoned apple came out when the Prince kissed her.