I am an orthodox Christian, ask me a question!

[Eilonnwy]

You are not applying rigorous or correct historical methodological standards, when we are speaking about a Jewish peasant who became, then, only an obscure Jewish religious teacher, marganialised by Jews and gentiles alike; considered a heretic who should be suppressed by the prevailing Jews who were _not_ his followers; and unknown and completely irrelevant to non-Jews. You are comparing a Jewish peasant to Caesar. This is not a correct approach, but is special pleading because you don't apply the same standard to all other first or second century Jewish (or even pagan!) religious leaders in a remote province of Rome on it's border even, with ministries as short as 3 years as in the case of Jesus, not to mention radical and marginal ones. You are not taking into account, either the reputation of the Jews among gentiles as marginal and obscure (especially in their obscure religious belief in some radically transcendent and non-anthropic god) nor the general changing situation in Iudea in this historical period, nor the view of even Jews at Galileans such as Jesus as aliens, and a fortiori what their view of would be Jesus considering his specific religious stance.

First off, you majorly fucked up your quoting in this post, might want to look into it.

But Dude, you're missing the fucking point. I'm not arguing whether a man named Jesus existed or not. I'm arguing why there is no contemporary evidence for a man who performed miracles that are claimed to have been widely known. Someone raises a guy from the dead in front of a crowd and no one...no one writes about it. I'm saying there is no evidence whatsoever for the "Son of God" Jesus, the one you believe in. Whether the myths are based on an actual person who existed or not is another argument.

First of all, there is no reason to think his existence would be recorded outside of the Jewish literature of his followers, unless his followers were actually of a notable amount and his existence would thus be widely known by spreading the word (something which happened much later in Rome).

OF COURSE there is if he's supposed to be the fucking Jewish messiah and what happened in the Bible ACTUALLY happened. The rest of your babbling doesn't matter, because that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that if Jesus existed as in the Bible, where is the evidence for the extraordinary claims in it?

Of course if Jesus was really a peasant who did nothing of consequence there wouldn't be evidence. But you don't believe that. You're a Christian, you have stated you believe in the Bible. So why is there no contemporary evidence of the events in the Bible? These are big claims in the Bible. They DO require more evidence that just the gospels. There's NOTHING. Here's an article I wrote if it helps you to understand what I'm talking about: http://www.examiner.com/x-8776-Boston-At...oof-of-God

And please don't assume things you know nothing about. Verifying the historical existence of a man and verifying the historical existence of a man who performed miracles and resurrections require a higher standard evidence. That's a fact. Verifying that a city exists where Jesus supposedly did some miracles does not verify that Jesus did some miracles. For instance, it is not known for certain whether Plato existed but it doesn't matter because the only thing that matters is what is attributed to Plato. However, the whole of Christianity does not solely depend on what Jesus said, it's also completely dependent on what he supposedly did, especially his miracles, death and resurrection. Needs more evidence. End of story.

BTW, you say you don't discount the existence of other historical religious figures...please tell me, do you discount Hercules or Achilles?

Fact is I apply a rigorous standard of evidence to the existence of historical figures and an even higher standard of evidence to the "miracles" they are claimed to have performed. Extraordinary claims requires extraordinary evidence.