Mary's 10 Year Pregnancy!

[Statler Waldorf]

Unsupported assertion.

No, it’s supported and well known, 42 authors mention Jesus while only 10 mention Tiberius. That’s over four times as many.

Thank you. You admit that you reject scholarly consensus when it doesn't support your position, favoring pseudo-science instead.

No, I reject the scientific majority opinion (not consensus) because of contrary evidence. You’re rejecting the consensus opinion of historians with no contrary evidence at all. All you did by bringing up evolution was demonstrate that your beliefs are even more extreme than young-Earth creationism. Nicely done.

I just love that argument. A lie repeated 24,000 times becomes true.

Truth reported 24,000 times.

Yes we are. I see no reason to take Christian stories about Jesus any more seriously than I take ancient Greek stories about Hercules.

“I see no reason to accept that the Holocaust really happened over the killing of Ewoks in the Return of the Jedi”

Absurdity at its finest.

Again, it's not a matter of liking. It's a matter of fanciful woo being written into history with no evidence.

You’re the one not accepting the accepted position; that is irrational until counter-evidence is provided. That’s how history works. We do not have to re-invent the wheel every day for people like you.

How sad. Maybe one day we'll live in a truly rational world where woo will be recognized as woo.

I prefer the world we live in now where history is recognized as history and people like you are laughed at.

No, you haven't.

I’ve seen your videos, I know you’re fully aware of the evidence for Jesus; you merely dismiss it upon irrational grounds. I cannot help you there.

I used to believe in a Historical Jesus.

Then you used to be rational.

Now I don't because I've found no proof that there was one.

There’s no proof that any historical figure existed.

I used to be a conservative Republican. Now I'm a liberal Democrat because of what I learned. I have more than demonstrated in my life being perfectly willing to say "I was wrong" and changing my beliefs when I'm exposed to new evidence. Show me the evidence and you have my attention.

I actually agree with Ehrman on this issue, there are a small group of people who will believe in the Jesus Myth no matter how much evidence is provided. They do not want Jesus to have existed so they will irrationally believe he never existed. Ehrman believes this sort of irrationality is driven by a severe and illogical hatred for organized religion. Ehrman is correct in comparing these people with people who deny the Holocaust and who believe Abraham Lincoln never existed. The important task for those of us who actually value historical facts is to convince the people in the middle who have been exposed to the falsehoods espoused by the Jesus myth crowd. Those people’s minds are not too far gone yet.

You've been warned before about how poisoning the well through false association is a deceptive tactic. Now I'm calling you out on it.

They’re not false associations. You are all denying historical facts for self-serving reasons. This is exactly what Ahmadinejad does concerning the Holocaust, he hates Jews so therefore they were never unfairly persecuted. You hate Christianity so therefore Jesus never really existed.

Do you wish to have a rational discussion about this or are you going to use more deceptive tactics?

I wish to have a rational discussion, but I feel that is not possible with you on this matter. When you insist on arbitrarily dismissing evidence that no historian does there is nothing else I can do other than call you out for your lunacy.

Not all of it but enough.

You personally collected this evidence or merely read about it?

The most powerful one I've seen are the Annals of Tacitus, which are late (2nd century), contain at least one altered word we know of and are so oblique they don't mention Jesus by name and are written in a fashion that suggests he could have been passing on what he'd heard from them.

Please do tell if you have something better. I'm seeing a lot of petulant ad hominems and deceptive tactics from you but so far not one shred of evidence.

Well you’ve already conceded that we have more than “a shred of evidence” by referencing Tacitus and Josephus. You must justify your assertion that the evidence we do have for Jesus is not sufficient in order to establish his existence. Until you do so, I see no justification for needing anymore evidence.

Except when it appears in the Bible. 1John 4:1-3

Where do you get this stuff from? The false sprits in John 4 and the antichrists in 2 John 1 are leading people (gnostics) to believe Jesus was not a physical person but rather a spiritual phantasm who merely appeared to suffer, not that he never existed at all and was merely a myth created by early Christians. Apparently, your ideas are even too extreme for demons and antichrists.

Because shitballs like you murdered anyone who dared think about the stupidity of your fucking fairy tales, asswipe.

You’re so terrible at this. Christians were not in power until the 4th Century (and even then only in Rome), where are all the references to the Jesus Myth prior to that? Where’s your evidence that any references to the Jesus Myth were ever destroyed by the early or later Church? It’s obvious you’ll believe anything.

Just remember that all you motherfuckers have a ton of blood on your holy hands.

No blood on these hands old timer.