Hey, if you are going to spout off some shit about jesus and his fucking merry men then expect to be called on it.

This shit evolved over a century after it was supposed to have happened and not a single Greco-Roman writer heard anything about any of it. The record was so barren that it became an embarrassment to later xtian writers who tried to go back and create some clumsy forgeries which put their godboy into the record.

So if you have evidence then let's hear it. Otherwise, it is hard to separate you from shitheads like G-C and Drippy.

(January 4, 2014 at 1:09 am)Minimalist Wrote: Hey, if you are going to spout off some shit about jesus and his fucking merry men then expect to be called on it.

What 'shit' have I spouted? Unless of course you consider sceptisim 'shit' then its you who spouts shit

Quote:This shit evolved over a century after it was supposed to have happened and not a single Greco-Roman writer heard anything about any of it.

Which is why I am skeptical of it

Quote: The record was so barren that it became an embarrassment to later xtian writers who tried to go back and create some clumsy forgeries which put their godboy into the record

.

yes

Quote:So if you have evidence then let's hear it. Otherwise, it is hard to separate you from shitheads like G-C and Drippy.

You want evidence that there is no proof either way? OBVIOUSLY I can't give it. But then you can not PROVE That he didn't exist.

That's the thing about us skeptics. We need proof before we accept something and you have given none.

(January 4, 2014 at 1:09 am)Minimalist Wrote: This shit evolved over a century after it was supposed to have happened

Then prove it.

Your theory, which isn't unique is not given a second thought by any decent scholar. And all you're doing is parroting the line of Evan Powell, Abelard Reuchlin and Joseph Atwill.

And just like them you have no evidence.

(January 4, 2014 at 5:47 am)Aractus Wrote:

(January 4, 2014 at 1:09 am)Minimalist Wrote: This shit evolved over a century after it was supposed to have happened

Then prove it.

Your theory, which isn't unique is not given a second thought by any decent scholar. And all you're doing is parroting the line of Evan Powell, Abelard Reuchlin and Joseph Atwill.

And just like them you have no evidence.

Just like you have no evidence for the resurrection

Zen, you're trolling. I said I had evidence for the Resurrection: the Gospel accounts plus Acts of the Apostles. That said, I didn't make the claim that I can prove it with evidence. I said there's enough evidence to prove Jesus died on a cross.

Stop trolling.

And Min is just repeating the same bullshit Evan Powell came up with in "The Unfinished Gospel" - which is based on no tangible evidence at all. He cites circumstantial evidence as his primary evidence: "not a single Greco-Roman writer heard anything about any of it" and even then he lies. What his statement should read is that we don't have surviving written records by Greco-Roman - so what? Surviving texts from that period in history that we have today are COPIES, we don't have any originals, so to get contemporary records from Romans you would expect to find 6th-8th century copies of the work (yes that's right 6th-8th century is were you would look for copies). Anything that was written at the time has long since turned to dust. His expectations are unrealistic and furthermore even if he had the 6th-8th century texts he wouldn't accept them and would claim they were tampered with, just like how the other troll in this thread disputes every word said about Jesus in Antiquities of the Jews.

When are you going to get it in your head that the bible is not evidence. It is the claim.

If you're buying a car do you go on the sales brochure and the salesmans spiel?

Or do you research alternative sources or information?

This is exactly the same.

You are basically saying that the bible is true because the bible says so( and you should know by now how much weight that carries here)

FFS you can't even produce ANY contemporary accounts of him, and since his "miracles" were supposedly witnessed by thousands don't you find that even the slightest bit odd?

(January 4, 2014 at 6:17 am)Aractus Wrote: Zen, you're trolling. I said I had evidence for the Resurrection: the Gospel accounts plus Acts of the Apostles. That said, I didn't make the claim that I can prove it with evidence. I said there's enough evidence to prove Jesus died on a cross.

Good -you can supply the evidence,then that jesus died on the cross. You claimed you can prove it...now do so...

(January 4, 2014 at 6:41 am)là bạn điên Wrote:

(January 4, 2014 at 6:17 am)Aractus Wrote: Zen, you're trolling. I said I had evidence for the Resurrection: the Gospel accounts plus Acts of the Apostles. That said, I didn't make the claim that I can prove it with evidence. I said there's enough evidence to prove Jesus died on a cross.

Good -you can supply the evidence,then that jesus died on the cross. You claimed you can prove it...now do so...

Apparently his proof is because the bible says so.

Well, I'm convinced. Aren't you?

No.

(January 4, 2014 at 6:38 am)Zen Badger Wrote: When are you going to get it in your head that the bible is not evidence. It is the claim.

No the claim is that Jesus is an historical person.

When are you going to understand that you, Zen, do not get to decide what is and isn't evidence. You can't just arbitrarily say something isn't evidence, which is all you do, troll, troll troll.

It's because of fucking simple-minded morons like you that can't resist posting in threads like this that intelligent discussion can't take place. Thus, this is my last reply to you on this topic - indefinitely whatever thread, since all you do on these topics is troll and never offer intelligent or informed comment. You're a fucking nuisance.

Since you continually fucking post the same bullshit, I'll respond one final time now, and you can have my silence for the rest of the time you troll these discussions.

"You are basically saying that the bible is true because the bible says"

That's not what I'm saying at all you fuckwit - don't misquote me. Don't make fucking straw man arguments they are the bane of existence. Creating straw man arguments, Zen, is a well known form of trolling. I've asked you time and time again not to do it.

The Bible is not meant to be proof for itself. I never said it was. It's not meant to provide you with convincing proof of God either, nor did I say that it did.

Christians believe the Bible to be the Word of God. If you don't believe this, then what do you have? For the New Testament you have 27 individual "books" written by 8 - 11 different authors. So you have a broad range of independently written material. There are more than 5,800 copies in the original Greek, and as such due to textual criticism we are sure we have the original wording for those books for approximately 99.5%. For the remaining 0.5% most variations either do not matter or don't alter the meaning. For the few passages where the wording does alter the meaning (eg, the number of the beast is 616) although it alters the meaning of the original text to some extent it doesn't do so in any way that raises serious questions about what the broader meaning is.

Some of the 27 Books (most of them in fact) contain verifiable historical information, which lends credibility to its historical accuracy. That's not to say everything can be verified though. For this reason you have historical documents with verified historical events recorded within them, and the independently written documents verify some of the information. For instance, the Last Supper is in Matthew/Mark/Luke AND 1 Corinthians, so it was written down 4 times. What's significant though is that while Matthew and Mark share the same version, Luke and Paul wrote theirs independently. Paul's is similar to Luke's, but not identical, and the way in which it is written shows he has an understanding of this event and isn't copying from a written source. Since Luke doesn't copy his from Matthew/Mark, we have at least 3 independent accounts of the same event.

That's how evidence works, Zen. That's why events like these are accepted by the most sceptical of scholars because it's written down and recorded independently and separately 3 times.

That's the end of my discussion with you.