Okay.

In my last thread I had atheists arguing left-right-and-centre that my evidence is not sufficient for the meagre "undisputed" claims. I want to focus on these "challenges" posed to me.

Jesus was a historical person. This is firmly established by having independent contemporary authors writing asymmetrical works. They were not bound together as "The New Testament" until some time in the second century. The first century writers did not all know about each other; although some certainly were familiar with some of the work of their contemporaries.

Now many atheists have reminded me that Luke's census of Quirinius cannot be independently verified unless it's the census of 6AD. This is an open point, it's a point that remains unsolved. But Luke offers far more certainty in the remainder of his works, and especially in Acts which ends in the present of the early church c. 61 AD. Even if Acts were to be written in 90 AD, all the events it talks about take place between the time of Jesus and c. 61 AD - we'll say about 30 years.

Nazareth. It has been partly excavated in 2009, and what archaeologists discovered was that it was a small town consisting of about 50 houses and populated by observant Jews, 4 miles from Sepphoris and linked via roads where it is theorized that Joseph and Jesus would have worked as carpenters/builders.

Pontius Pilate. In 1961 the "Pilate Stone", a block of of carved limestone was discovered, with an inscription naming Pontius Pilate. Josephus also names him.

Caiaphas. The high priest who condemned Jesus. Archaeologists discovered his ossuary in Jerusalem in 1990.

Crucifixion. Atheists long claimed there was no evidence for nails being used in crucifixion, prior to the Christian gospels. In 1968 a 1st century AD ossuary was discovered, inside a Jewish tomb, containing the remains of "Jehohanan the son of Hagkol". Jehohanan's right heel bone still had the crucifixion nail embedded in it.

The Merneptah Stele. Although I am talking about the NT chronology, this requires a mention. Discovered in 1896 in Egypt, it proves beyond doubt that Israelites were living in Canaan by the 13th century BC.

Many atheists still think that the ancient Jewish heritage doesn't really go back that far!

The Book of Daniel. Okay, it would take a whole new thread to discuss this properly, but suffice to say that the discovery of the Qumran scrolls put to bed for good and all the late authorship theory.

John the Baptist:

• Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness. Now when [many] others came in crowds about him, for they were very greatly moved [or pleased] by hearing his words, Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion, (for they seemed ready to do any thing he should advise,) thought it best, by putting him to death, to prevent any mischief he might cause, and not bring himself into difficulties, by sparing a man who might make him repent of it when it would be too late. Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death. Now the Jews had an opinion that the destruction of this army was sent as a punishment upon Herod, and a mark of God's displeasure to him.

What you just read is not from the Bible, it is from Antiquities of the Jews 18.5.2.

His account agrees with the gospels that John the Baptist: had crowds of Jews approach him, had followers dedicated to him, Herod puts him in prison and has him executed, and that John preached a message of virtue and righteousness for each other.

This is a job for members like Minimalist or xPastor, either way by me, "Jesus" existed or not, still comes a milion miles from supernatural claims that come from alot of religionists. If you know the process that goes to form a legend, it isn't that far-fetched to think that it grown towards supernatural claims. And religion proved usefull to control the poor ignorant masses. We got better in the 21st century: Its called television.

Yeah, I'm going to back LastPoet and paraphrase Hitchens on this one:

I'll grant you the historicity of the bible, the existence of Jesus but that doesn't demonstrate that any of the supernatural claims, made within its pages or about his life, actually happened or are even possible. Take Jesus; we can assume that Mary had a virgin birth, we can assume that there was no male intervention whatsoever in his siring however that doesn't show that his paternity was divine or by extension, that any of his moral teachings were correct.

(November 12, 2013 at 6:21 am)Aractus Wrote: Jesus was a historical person.

Sure, why not.

Quote: This is firmly established by having independent contemporary authors

There wasn't a single contemporary author. Everything about Jesus came at least a couple of decades after his death.

Quote: writing asymmetrical works.

Maybe for the most part. The telling of the story evolves as you read the gospels in chronological order though.

Quote: They were not bound together as "The New Testament" until some time in the second century.

True story.

Quote: The first century writers did not all know about each other; although some certainly were familiar with some of the work of their contemporaries.

They certainly knew about each other. Markan Priority is a good theory with lots of explanatory power.

Quote:

---

Nazareth. It has been partly excavated in 2009, and what archaeologists discovered was that it was a small town consisting of about 50 houses and populated by observant Jews, 4 miles from Sepphoris and linked via roads where it is theorized that Joseph and Jesus would have worked as carpenters/builders.

New York. It's a city located in the USA and it's where spiderman would have swung from building to building.

Pontius Pilate. In 1961 the "Pilate Stone", a block of of carved limestone was discovered, with an inscription naming Pontius Pilate. Josephus also names him.

Caiaphas. The high priest who condemned Jesus. Archaeologists discovered his ossuary in Jerusalem in 1990.

Crucifixion. Atheists long claimed there was no evidence for nails being used in crucifixion, prior to the Christian gospels. In 1968 a 1st century AD ossuary was discovered, inside a Jewish tomb, containing the remains of "Jehohanan the son of Hagkol". Jehohanan's right heel bone still had the crucifixion nail embedded in it.

The Merneptah Stele. Although I am talking about the NT chronology, this requires a mention. Discovered in 1896 in Egypt, it proves beyond doubt that Israelites were living in Canaan by the 13th century BC.

---

None of this remotely makes a difference. The reason being that the above is *necessary* for the NT to be true, but not *sufficient*. And you've also got the fact that it doesn't matter that historical places were used as a backdrop for what could potentially be a mostly fabricated story. Spiderman swings from building to building in New York. That doesn't make it any more plausible as a true story, although it would be *necessary* for him to be residing in a real place as opposed to fictional if it were to be a true story - naturally.

Quote:Jesus was a historical person. This is firmly established by having independent contemporary authors writing asymmetrical works.

Danny, you are walking proof that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

I don't have time to really get into your absurd list of bullshit...most of which has been dealt with already elsewhere.

Let's have a list of those "independent, contemporary, authors" so I can shove it up your ass later.

Harry Potter exists because there is literature about him and documentaries detailing his lives. But this information was never supposed to be leaked because the Wizarding World is supposed to be separate from the Muggle World. So you can't prove it is fiction and not fact.

That was a quick one. Got any other stupid ideas?

I'm still waiting for my list of "independent contemporary" writers. I at least expected to get back the typical Pliny/Josephus/Tacitus/Suetonius pile of shit.

(November 13, 2013 at 5:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote: I'm still waiting for my list of "independent contemporary" writers. I at least expected to get back the typical Pliny/Josephus/Tacitus/Suetonius pile of shit.

Don't forget Mark / Luke / Matthew / John.

For arguments sake, even if we accept the historicity of Jesus, that would not offer a shred of evidence for any of the supernatural claims associated with him.

Homer's Iliad and Odyssey contain some accurate history, verified through archeology. There are even extra-Homeric mentions of cities and people from the Iliad (Linear B texts and Hittite texts).

So tell me, how much credibility do you give the supernatural claims contained in those books because they get some history correct and are mentioned in other sources?