RE: Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
July 27, 2017 at 12:50 pm
(This post was last modified: July 27, 2017 at 12:51 pm by Jehanne.)
(July 27, 2017 at 12:42 pm)SteveII Wrote: [quote pid='1592456' dateline='1501166257']
Bold mine. This is what your whole post boils down to.
The events during and following the life of Jesus are some of the most attested to series of events in ALL of ancient history. We know exactly what the first century Christians believed and much of what they did. Even Bart Ehrman thinks the NT is 99% of what it was originally. I don't care if you don't find it compelling. But this constant nonsense (not just you) of "no evidence" is just silly and show a lack of understanding the evidence, or bad reasoning skills, or misunderstanding definitions, or a bias you bring to the subject.
In case anyone is hazy on the difference, here is an excellent discussion on it at http://pediaa.com/difference-between-evi...and-proof/
This is just bullshit. Outside of conservative evangelical fundamentalist Christianity (and, indeed, quietly within it), no scholar holds to the eyewitness testimony of the Gospels or even Paul, who did not even claim such apart from his epileptic seizures. Why not accept the Gospel of Peter, which, explicitly, claimed to have been written by the Apostle Peter? As for the four "canonical" Gospels, they did not even have the titles that now bear their names, and it is clear that all of their authors (and, apparently, Jesus himself) believed that the World is flat. Question is, "Why are you wasting your time on this nonsense?"
