(February 13, 2013 at 8:41 am)Confused Ape Wrote: As I said in my other post - his books will show how orthodox Christianity came to obscure what he regards as an historical Jesus who was crucified by Pontius Pilate.
This kind of reminds me of a former friend of mine who was a Christian who insisted that the Catholic Church gathered up and locked away all the evidence of Jesus' existence because they wanted to control what people believed about him.
...and people accuse us Jesus skeptics of advocating conspiracy theories.
Quote:Though the Gospel accounts are biased, they cannot be discounted as non-historical.[/quote]
Quote:I've never read any of his books and I don't want to sign up to a website just to read his blogs. This means I don't know the details concerning his arguments about Jesus's existence.
I have read his writings and heard him interviewed. I've yet to hear a good argument from him on that subject. Mostly its appeals to authority ("all the scholars say..."), No True Scotsman ("all the SERIOUS scholars say..."), and arguments from ignorance ("something is behind the legend...").
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
