(February 11, 2014 at 5:44 pm)Alex K Wrote: Hey DeistPaladin,
You make an absolutely crucial point so often ignored in this debate, rendering most discussions on the topic absolutely moot, ironically!
If you haven't read him, may I recommend Richard Carrier's works to you?
Yes, I have. I enjoy his works and still am sympathetic to the idea of the Jesus myth. Another problem I forgot to mention in the OP is one of proving a negative.
Frequently in these debates, Jesus shrinks down into some poorly defined wandering rabbi of some sort, small and fluid enough to easily slip through the cracks of our knowledge of the ancient world. With a little slight of hand, the "historist" can slyly shove the burden of proof on the skeptic. A few ad hominems about the skeptic being a "crackpot" or some false comparisons to conspiracy theories and holocaust deniers helps to disguise this maneuver.
It's like if an atheist were charged to prove that God doesn't exist. How do you prove a negative, especially when the claim is so vague to begin with?
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
