Any Evidence For A Historical Jesus?

[Jackalope]

Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

This one? For reference, is this your own work?

[Fpvpilot]

Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

This one? For reference, is this your own work?

Hi, Cthulhu Dreaming,

That is the one. You are correct. It is my own work.

Kind regards,

Fpvpilot

[Jackalope]

Just checking. It's pretty common around here for theists to copy-paste other sources without attribution. Just verifying that it wasn't the case here.

[Fpvpilot]

Just checking. It's pretty common around here for theists to copy-paste other sources without attribution. Just verifying that it wasn't the case here.

Good. I think it is horrible whenever people simply copy-paste other sources without giving those sources credit.

Kind regards,

Fpvpilot

[DeistPaladin]

Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

Argument from Silence isn't a logical fallacy in the event that we should reasonably expect to find evidence.

If a miracle working godman really did walk the earth bringing back the dead, healing the sick, casting out demons, etc. it is perfectly reasonable to expect that someone would have taken notice.

If Jesus' ministry was as controversial as alleged, that the priestly establishment broke every rule to get rid of him, if his fame did spread far and wide to the surrounding provinces and people from all around flocked to to see him, if even the nobles like Herod Antipas took notice and asked if he was John the Baptist reborn, it would be reasonable to expect we might know as much about him from contemporary non-Christian sources as we know of far less significant messiah wannabes.

If Jesus really did rise from the dead and was seen by so many, the Romans would have taken notice of such a story. A condemned criminal that was crucified was made an example of for the masses. If such a man were to ever be seen having survived the ordeal, it would be an embarrassment to the Romans. It is reasonable to think someone would have taken notice, especially to speak ill of predecessors or of Pilate.

If Jesus didn't perform miracles, rise from the dead and had no successful ministry in his lifetime, he wasn't really Jesus, now was he?

---

P.S. I'll accept the debate if Min is too exhausted of the old run-around.

---

P.P.S. One stipulation: I'll be using the Bible as my source. If you wish to argue that the "historical Jesus" was nothing like the Biblical character, as far as I'm concerned it isn't Jesus.

[Minimalist]

Thank you for informing me of your decision not to engage me in formal debate on the existence of Jesus to substantiate your assertion that the argument I offered was problematic. Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

I informed you of nothing...other than that I think you are just a xtian troll.

As far as the argument from silence goes I suppose you agree with my assertion that there are invisible pink unicorns drinking margaritas in a Tiajuana bar every New Year's? After all, there is no evidence for them, either.

And they are no more absurd as a concept than your dead jew coming back to life.

[Minimalist]

what do we know about history outside documents? what you say is saying we can't know history because we can't trust historical documents.

Another of your gems that I missed, chippy.

Try this and see if you can understand it ( which I doubt.) People LIE. They lie for a lot of reasons. When they are not deliberately lying they are frequently wrong. If they are wrong sometimes it is because they are misled by sources and sometimes they simply do not know WTF they are talking about. Sometimes, they just made shit up to advance the story.

Julius Caesar, in his Commentarii de Bello Gallico (Commentaries on the Gallic War) claims that 250,000 Gauls came as a reinforcement to relieve the siege of Alesia. According to you, chippy, the simple fact that Caesar wrote this down makes it true. We should not question it. The number is fucking absurd. But it makes great propaganda which is what The Gallic War was all about. Caesar wasn't writing for his own troops. Most of them were illiterate. He wasn't writing for the Gauls who did not speak Latin. Caesar was writing to energize his supporters in Rome and scare the shit out of the senatorial party.

Herodotus, writing about the Persian invasion of Greece under Xerxes gave a figure of 2.1 million Persians. The number is preposterous. But the audience ( Greeks ) ate it up because it made their subsequent victory look even better.

Your fucking bible claims that 185,000 Assyrians died outside Jerusalem in a plague sent by your fucking god to save the city. 185,000 men to attack a town of perhaps 10,000 people? It would take a xtian fool to believe such nonsense.

So here we have examples of lying for propaganda. With Herodotus we also have the story of how 100,000 slaves labored for 20 years to build the pyramids. This story was told by his Egyptian guide who had no idea how the pyramids were built. Herodotus was simply misled.

Livy recounts the tale of Trojans escaping Troy and fleeing to Italy. Is that true because Livy wrote it? He also wrote about Romulus and Remus being shoved in a basket and put into a river( sound familiar????) and saved by a wolf. I guess you believe that too because, WTF, its written down?

I'm hoping by this point you have gotten the hint. Virtually everything written by ancient historians must be taken cum grano salis. As the noted British scholar, Philip Davies has noted, literacy in the ancient world was so rare that one must not only consider the agenda of the author but also the point of view of the intended audience. I fully expect that someone like you who is so invested in a book of fairy tales will be unable to grasp the significance of what Davies is talking about.

[Zen Badger]

In the final analysis your sources...

A/ are not contemporary accounts.

B/ do not refer to jesus as the son of god or even as messiah

C/ pretty much only mention him in passing, The only relevence in Josephus's account is to him being the brother of James, who is much more important in Josesphus's opinion.

D/ not one of the accounts makes any reference to any of the miracles he is supposed to have performed.

So even if they are referencing a real person it won't be the jesus of the bible.

[Minimalist]

The only relevence in Josephus's account is to him being the brother of James,

And its far more likely that he is talking about Jesus bar Damneus, anyway.

[Fpvpilot]

Argument from Silence isn't a logical fallacy in the event that we should reasonably expect to find evidence.

---

P.S. I'll accept the debate if Min is too exhausted of the old run-around.

---

P.P.S. One stipulation: I'll be using the Bible as my source. If you wish to argue that the "historical Jesus" was nothing like the Biblical character, as far as I'm concerned it isn't Jesus.

Hi, DeistPaladin,

I agree that “argument from silence” is not a logical fallacy in the event that we should reasonably expect to find evidence. However, I previously explained how the Christ-Myth proponents’ use of the argument from silence was faulty.

Let’s wait and see what Min says in response to my invitation.

Kind regards,

Fpvpilot

---

Thank you for informing me of your decision not to engage me in formal debate on the existence of Jesus to substantiate your assertion that the argument I offered was problematic. Instead of repeating my response to the “argument from silence” fallacy, I’ll refer readers back to my post (#202) on page 21.

I informed you of nothing...other than that I think you are just a xtian troll.

Hi, Min,

Please forgive me for the misunderstanding, then. Is your answer yes or no? If the argumentation I offered truly is “regurgitated shit” and “horseshit,” it really should not take very much time or energy to refute at all.

Cordially,

Fpvpilot