Jesus did not rise from the dead -- My debate opening statement.

[Jehanne]

It is interesting that Drich would reference the Gospel of Thomas, which says the following:

(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."

Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

http://www.gnosis.org/naghamm/gthlamb.html

A "sayings Gospel," like Q, Thomas does not contain any of the miracle stories of Jesus.  It may have been composed as early as 50 AD.

[Angrboda]

Drich, as much as I enjoy watching you engage 21stCenturyIconoclast (sort of like watching a man box a crippled kangaroo), your quote from 'Gotquestions' is weak as hell. Most of those sources are either suspect (e.g., later interpolations into the text of Josephus) or relatively late works that do no more than establish that there were Christians with certain beliefs, which isn't in dispute. I really don't have time today to get into the mud and wrestle over each source, and it's not terribly important that I do so, since I'm not a Jesus-myther in the first place. But a compilation of late hearsay sources really doesn't help establish much of anything beyond the existence of a community of believers, few of whom would have had anything like first-hand knowledge of what they believed.

Like it or not, the best sources we have for the historical Jesus are the canonical Gospels, and they aren't terribly good sources.

Here's a good article that discusses the problems with the secular sources as such:
http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/ar...istory.htm

It's a fascinating article, well worth a read.

[Crossless2.0]

Drich, as much as I enjoy watching you engage 21stCenturyIconoclast (sort of like watching a man box a crippled kangaroo), your quote from 'Gotquestions' is weak as hell. Most of those sources are either suspect (e.g., later interpolations into the text of Josephus) or relatively late works that do no more than establish that there were Christians with certain beliefs, which isn't in dispute. I really don't have time today to get into the mud and wrestle over each source, and it's not terribly important that I do so, since I'm not a Jesus-myther in the first place. But a compilation of late hearsay sources really doesn't help establish much of anything beyond the existence of a community of believers, few of whom would have had anything like first-hand knowledge of what they believed.

Like it or not, the best sources we have for the historical Jesus are the canonical Gospels, and they aren't terribly good sources.

Here's a good article that discusses the problems with the secular sources as such:
http://rationalrevolution0.tripod.com/ar...istory.htm

It's a fascinating article, well worth a read.

I'll take a look when I crawl out of today's work swamp. At a glance, it does look fascinating.

For Drich (or anyone else who gives a damn), I've been re-reading John Meier's A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus and can't recommend it highly enough. Meier does an admirable job also dismantling claims that the extra-Biblical "sources" we have on Jesus  are reliable or useful for establishing much of anything about Jesus that can't be gleaned from the Gospels.

[21stCenturyIconoclast]

21stCenturyIconoclast

that Jesus more so than not never existed in the first place.

Not a fan of History huh? In addition to the quick 'goto' Tacitus, Josephus, Julius Africanus quotes the historian Thallus, Pliny the Younger, in Letters 10:96, recorded early Christian worship practices including the fact that Christians worshiped Jesus as God and were very ethical, and he includes a reference to the love feast and Lord’s Supper, The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a) confirms Jesus' crucifixion on the eve of Passover and the accusations against Christ of practicing sorcery and encouraging Jewish apostasy.

Lucian of Samosata was a second-century Greek writer who admits that Jesus was worshiped by Christians, introduced new teachings, and was crucified for them. He said that Jesus' teachings included the brotherhood of believers, the importance of conversion, and the importance of denying other gods. Christians lived according to Jesus’ laws, believed themselves to be immortal, and were characterized by contempt for death, voluntary self-devotion, and renunciation of material goods.

Mara Bar-Serapion confirms that Jesus was thought to be a wise and virtuous man, was considered by many to be the king of Israel, was put to death by the Jews, and lived on in the teachings of His followers.

Then we have all the Gnostic writings (The Gospel of Truth, The Apocryphon of John, The Gospel of Thomas, The Treatise on Resurrection, etc.) that all mention Jesus.

In fact, we can almost reconstruct the gospel just from early non-Christian sources: Jesus was called the Christ (Josephus), did “magic,” led Israel into new teachings, and was hanged on Passover for them (Babylonian Talmud) in Judea (Tacitus), but claimed to be God and would return (Eliezar), which his followers believed, worshipping Him as God (Pliny the Younger).

There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.All independently report of Christ.

All point to a biblical consistent picture of Christ. albeit one piece at a time.

https://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

DRICH

HELLO, ANYBODY HOME TODAY?!

I SAID THE BIBLE JESUS, REPEAT, BIBLE JESUS, GET IT?!

A Jesus character may have existed, but like all ignorant and deceiving pseudo-christians like you

that like to purport a "Jesus" existed in this time period is NOT enough, we're looking for the Jesus

character that is Yahweh god incarnate or the son of Yahweh where actual EYE WITNESSES that lived

within the time period wrote about the alleged godly Jesus, with absolutely NO HEARSAY ACCOUNTS!!

DO YOU UNDERSTAND? 

Now, wipe the egg from your face once again pertaining your lack of reading comprehension, because the erroneous proof that

you've included should be embarrassing to you, but because of your blatant ignorance upon this topic, it isn't proof whatsoever!

Now, you have two choices, you either run and hide from your pseudo-christian ignorance like the majority of your brethren 

have to do to save face, or you defend your position like your biblical doctrine so states, and debate me 

upon this topic where its just you and me, sport!  Understood? The forum's alumni are watching!

DRICH, ARE YOU GOING TO RUN AWAY IN DISGRACE, OR DEFEND YOU POSITION LIKE JESUS WANTS YOU TOO?

"But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who

 asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect."  (1 Peter 3:15)

b

[Minimalist]

Like it or not, the best sources we have for the historical Jesus are the canonical Gospels, and they aren't terribly good sources.

Actually, they flat out suck.

[The Grand Nudger]

Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Slayer.

[Crossless2.0]

Like it or not, the best sources we have for the historical Jesus are the canonical Gospels, and they aren't terribly good sources.

Actually, they flat out suck.

Well, yeah . . . they do.

But I'm willing to grant them the smallest measure of respect as historical documents, if only to encourage the chew toys to keep coming back. 

[21stCenturyIconoclast]

21stCenturyIconoclast




Not a fan of History huh? In addition to the quick 'goto' Tacitus, Josephus, Julius Africanus quotes the historian Thallus, Pliny the Younger, in Letters 10:96, recorded early Christian worship practices including the fact that Christians worshiped Jesus as God and were very ethical, and he includes a reference to the love feast and Lord’s Supper, The Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 43a) confirms Jesus' crucifixion on the eve of Passover and the accusations against Christ of practicing sorcery and encouraging Jewish apostasy.

Lucian of Samosata was a second-century Greek writer who admits that Jesus was worshiped by Christians, introduced new teachings, and was crucified for them. He said that Jesus' teachings included the brotherhood of believers, the importance of conversion, and the importance of denying other gods. Christians lived according to Jesus’ laws, believed themselves to be immortal, and were characterized by contempt for death, voluntary self-devotion, and renunciation of material goods.

Mara Bar-Serapion confirms that Jesus was thought to be a wise and virtuous man, was considered by many to be the king of Israel, was put to death by the Jews, and lived on in the teachings of His followers.

Then we have all the Gnostic writings (The Gospel of Truth, The Apocryphon of John, The Gospel of Thomas, The Treatise on Resurrection, etc.) that all mention Jesus.

In fact, we can almost reconstruct the gospel just from early non-Christian sources: Jesus was called the Christ (Josephus), did “magic,” led Israel into new teachings, and was hanged on Passover for them (Babylonian Talmud) in Judea (Tacitus), but claimed to be God and would return (Eliezar), which his followers believed, worshipping Him as God (Pliny the Younger).

There is overwhelming evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ, both in secular and biblical history. Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. People will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.All independently report of Christ.

All point to a biblical consistent picture of Christ. albeit one piece at a time.

https://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-exist.html

DRICH

HELLO, ANYBODY HOME TODAY?!

I SAID THE BIBLE JESUS, REPEAT, BIBLE JESUS, GET IT?!

A Jesus character may have existed, but like all ignorant and deceiving pseudo-christians like you

that like to purport a "Jesus" existed in this time period is NOT enough, we're looking for the Jesus

character that is Yahweh god incarnate or the son of Yahweh where actual EYE WITNESSES that lived

within the time period wrote about the alleged godly Jesus, with absolutely NO HEARSAY ACCOUNTS!!

DO YOU UNDERSTAND? 

Now, wipe the egg from your face once again pertaining your lack of reading comprehension, because the erroneous proof that

you've included should be embarrassing to you, but because of your blatant ignorance upon this topic, it isn't proof whatsoever!

Now, you have two choices, you either run and hide from your pseudo-christian ignorance like the majority of your brethren 

have to do to save face, or you defend your position like your biblical doctrine so states, and debate me 

upon this topic where its just you and me, sport!  Understood? The forum's alumni are watching!

DRICH, ARE YOU GOING TO RUN AWAY IN DISGRACE, OR DEFEND YOU POSITION LIKE JESUS WANTS YOU TOO?

"But in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who

 asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect."  (1 Peter 3:15)

b

ANYONE SEE "DRICH" RUN PAST THEIR HOUSE REGARDING MY CHALLENGE ABOVE?

I know, he certainly doesn't want to be known as running away from defending his serial killer Jesus' alleged existence, so he's probably getting together all of

 the old pseudo-christian warn out and embarrassing material that has easily been dispatched over the years to "assume" that the BIBLE Jesus allegedly existed.

So many pseudo-christians don't do their homework to see if this BIBLE Jesus really existed  in the first place. They take an a priori stance that Jesus existed,
 then they swallow the division of the faith that they're comfortable with, and when doing so, they waste so much of their time while on earth supplicating to a 
myth that causes family divisions, strife, and DEATH, to name but a few drastic entities when one becomes a pseudo-christian.



FAITH: strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

^^^^^^^^^^
What an embarrassing and flimsy way to throw one's life away.  

   

m

[FatAndFaithless]

ANYONE SEE "DRICH" RUN PAST THEIR HOUSE REGARDING MY CHALLENGE ABOVE?

m

Dude, beating your chest over saying something nasty to Drich is the lowest of low-hanging fruits.

[Minimalist]

Actually, they flat out suck.

Well, yeah . . . they do.

But I'm willing to grant them the smallest measure of respect as historical documents, if only to encourage the chew toys to keep coming back. 

The problem with ancient historical documents is that they tend to tell us far more about the times in which they were written than they do about the times they are supposed to be talking about.

So while any document is a "historical document" what it tells us is what later xtians in divergent sects tended to believe at the time they were written.  They don't need a "historical" jesus for that.