The Three-Headed "Jesus" Problem

[Aractus]

So you really think that scraps such as this is insurmountable.  

http://dbcfaa79b34c8f5dfffa-7d3a62c63519...agment.jpg

I hope you don't have a job that requires intellectual abilities.

Where in my evidence list did I include anything written in Hebrew?

And where did I say that scraps of writing constituted "insurmountable" evidence in and of themselves?

Don't put words in my mouth and construct straw man arguments. Just answer the question put to you.

Since you vest Sooo much value in the opinion of so called "scholars" that miraculously keep out their employer's bias from their studies, perhaps you can explain just what is soo complex and difficult about evaluating direct evidence for the truthfulness of the claim of jebus' existence so much so that you would be need "scholars" to digest it for you.

Because they're qualified to assess the evidence and give a meaningful discussion on its reliance. They're also aware of all the evidence, they're aware of the predominant opinions in the field, they're aware of what is and isn't considered good enough to constitute evidence when it comes to ancient texts and artefacts, and they are the ones who work in the field and publish evidence.

You should listen to your argument, it's no different to a Holocaust denier saying "I can just interpret the evidence myself I don't need to listen to WWII historians".

In physics, we would need "scholars" to predigest questions of, say, a quark's existence because the math and the relied upon concepts, constants, and nomenclature would be too daughnting for someone who had not completed the prerequisite coursework.

Don't make straw man arguments, asshole. You're talking about a completely different field to ancient history.

For the existence of jebus problem though, none of this is true. The language translations that presupposes a jesus are not being contested, so the skills of ancient hebrew reading is not needed. The dating of the scrolls is performed by radiometric dating and the bible scholars are easily as laymen on that skill as your everyday mailman.
Claims of dating texts by style and so on by "bible scholars" would not be accurate enough to withstand claims of serious statistical certainty. Certainty is completely out the window, only a balance of opinion exists.

Once again you don't know what you're talking about, almost all Christian manuscripts are codices and not scrolls. I never said that NT scholars need to be able to read Hebrew - I said they need to be able to read Greek.