(August 23, 2013 at 7:38 am)Sword of Christ Wrote: Jesus certainly existed there's no real academic doubt over that.

Au contraire, mon frere.

There's a lot more to suggest that Jesus did not exist than things to suggest he did. I've debated this before, and I don't feel like summing up everything I've said. Plus you have the burden of proof, so maybe you can provide the evidence for historical Jesus and I'll debunk it for you? It'd be easier that way.

For starters: the Bible is no good. Not as historical evidence.

(August 23, 2013 at 1:25 pm)CleanShavenJesus Wrote:

(August 23, 2013 at 7:38 am)Sword of Christ Wrote: Jesus certainly existed there's no real academic doubt over that.

Au contraire, mon frere.

There's a lot more to suggest that Jesus did not exist than things to suggest he did. I've debated this before, and I don't feel like summing up everything I've said. Plus you have the burden of proof, so maybe you can provide the evidence for historical Jesus and I'll debunk it for you? It'd be easier that way.

For starters: the Bible is no good. Not as historical evidence.

Maybe he has a hidden birth certificate carved on some stone in his basement.

There are a documents from that time still, I have however never seen one with proof Jesus was a real man or that any man with that name ever even existed. Stories are great but when one claims they are true I suggest this guy do as you are saying and fucking prove it or keep it shut. Keeping it shut reduces the volume of asshat that some of these nards display.

Quote:Au contraire, mon frere.

There's a lot more to suggest that Jesus did not exist than things to suggest he did. I've debated this before, and I don't feel like summing up everything I've said. Plus you have the burden of proof, so maybe you can provide the evidence for historical Jesus and I'll debunk it for you? It'd be easier that way.

For starters: the Bible is no good. Not as historical evidence.

The evidence we have for Jesus general existence as as good as many other historical figures we accept so unless you want to apply a special double standard. Sure it's possible that Jesus wasn't divine, had no powers and was a essentially a wandering end of the world preaching failed prophet one of many. But I would point to the influence he has had upon the world, society our moral and value systems and institutions, all the lives he touched over thousands of years, to all the things he said and taught and ask if you really think this is the work of a deluded nutcase. This was a man spoke with the authority of God himself don't forget so he would have to have been pretty barking mad if he wasn't. It goes without saying really.

Esq already went through this with you. The difference between, say, Socrates and Jesus is that the latter is said to be a miraculous existence, whereas Socrates was pretty only ever considered a great philosopher. Whether or not these men existed is irrelevant, but the claims made about their lives are.

(August 23, 2013 at 1:51 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote:

Quote:Au contraire, mon frere.

There's a lot more to suggest that Jesus did not exist than things to suggest he did. I've debated this before, and I don't feel like summing up everything I've said. Plus you have the burden of proof, so maybe you can provide the evidence for historical Jesus and I'll debunk it for you? It'd be easier that way.

For starters: the Bible is no good. Not as historical evidence.

The evidence we have for Jesus general existence as as good as many other historical figures we accept so unless you want to apply a special double standard. Sure it's possible that Jesus wasn't divine, had no powers and was a essentially a wandering end of the world preaching failed prophet one of many. But I would point to the influence he has had upon the world, society our moral and value systems and institutions, all the lives he touched over thousands of years, to all the things he said and taught and ask if you really think this is the work of a deluded nutcase. This was a man spoke with the authority of God himself don't forget so he would have to have been pretty barking mad if he wasn't. It goes without saying really.

What evidence again?

As has already been said, other historical figures are accepted as real because no divinity claims are attached to them. The standard is raised by those who claim Jesus' divine nature, so naturally extra scutiny follows. A rational person should never accept a walking god on the authority of muddled verses and hearsay.

You're right...jesus must of been barking mad. Or made up.

(August 23, 2013 at 1:51 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote:

Quote:Au contraire, mon frere.

There's a lot more to suggest that Jesus did not exist than things to suggest he did. I've debated this before, and I don't feel like summing up everything I've said. Plus you have the burden of proof, so maybe you can provide the evidence for historical Jesus and I'll debunk it for you? It'd be easier that way.

For starters: the Bible is no good. Not as historical evidence.

The evidence we have for Jesus general existence as as good as many other historical figures we accept so unless you want to apply a special double standard. Sure it's possible that Jesus wasn't divine, had no powers and was a essentially a wandering end of the world preaching failed prophet one of many. But I would point to the influence he has had upon the world, society our moral and value systems and institutions, all the lives he touched over thousands of years, to all the things he said and taught and ask if you really think this is the work of a deluded nutcase. This was a man spoke with the authority of God himself don't forget so he would have to have been pretty barking mad if he wasn't. It goes without saying really.

You didn't provide any evidence. You just said, "Yeah no he existed," which is what you already did...hence me asking for evidence. Give me something. Historical accounts. Something. Something aside from, "the story of Jesus affects a lot of people, so it happened."

(August 23, 2013 at 1:59 pm)BadWriterSparty Wrote: Esq already went through this with you. The difference between, say, Socrates and Jesus is that the latter is said to be a miraculous existence, whereas Socrates was pretty only ever considered a great philosopher. Whether or not these men existed is irrelevant, but the claims made about their lives are.

Roman emperors had miraculous claims made about them as well, so are we to assume they never existed?

(August 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Roman emperors had miraculous claims made about them as well, so are we to assume they never existed?

Any of them claimed to have risen from the dead? Water to wine? Loaves and fishes? What are you even talking about?

Evidence, please.

(August 23, 2013 at 2:12 pm)Sword of Christ Wrote: Roman emperors had miraculous claims made about them as well, so are we to assume they never existed?

Do you worship said emperors?

(August 23, 2013 at 2:32 pm)Captain Colostomy Wrote: Do you worship said emperors?

No that would be idolatry, only God alone should be your only focus, you will get the rest of the world thrown in for free. Yes so Jesus was God in some sense but it's not about worshiping a man it's all about God God God. You don't worship science, Carl Sagan, Neil Degrasse Tyson or anything like that, just God alone. The moment your focus wavers from God idol worship will kick in.