(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: I had that one, the vid of Dawkins, the wikipedia link, and the vid of Bart Erhman speaking on the broad consensus of the subject.
You got more than what you asked for. If that isn't enough, I can't help you.
Unfortunately for your point, not one of them demonstrates that the "vast majority of historians" think anything at all, because 12 historians is not a "vast majority".
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: I don't remember saying anything about a damn poll.
Clearly, you don't understand that only a poll conducted on an objective basis could support your claim of a "vast majority" supporting your position.
Fuck all, I feel even more sorry for your teachers than I had earlier. You're clearly a dense brick.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: I didn't know that having a poll was the criteria.
How else are you going to demonstrate a "vast majority"?
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Again, I will repeat; You were given the sites which included quotes from both theologians and unbelievers regarding the general consensus of the historical Jesus...you were given the video by Bart Ehrman who is agnostic and stated what the general consensus is regarding the historical Jesus, and you were also given the video with Richard Dawkins who admitted that "most historians" believe that Jesus existed...which is ironic because he corrected himself on that very issue. Plus you were given the wikipedia article at which even a guy like Robert Price (as cited) stated that despite him NOT believing that Jesus existed, he realized that his opinion was in the minority, and NOT the majority.
And again, none of that supports your actual claim, but you're too prideful, stupid, or dishonest to disavow your claim.
Which is it?
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Now again, I don't know what more you want...oh yeah...a poll. Well, too bad...I don't have a poll nor did I claim to have a poll. What I have is videos and quotes from men that are in the field, and they are all saying the same freakin' thing.
And what you're really saying here is that you have no support for your claim, which is my point.
Thank you for your confession.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Where am I getting it from? Again, for the third time: You were given the sites which included quotes from both theologians and unbelievers regarding the general consensus of the historical Jesus...
... all twelve of them, what a majority ...
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: you were given the video by Bart Ehrman who is agnostic and stated what the general consensus is regarding the historical Jesus, and you were also given the video with Richard Dawkins who admitted that "most historians" believe that Jesus existed...which is ironic because he corrected himself on that very issue. Plus you were given the wikipedia article at which even a guy like Robert Price (as cited) stated that despite him NOT believing that Jesus existed, he realized that his opinion was in the minority, and NOT the majority.
Ooh, well that certainly speaks for the historians of the world. You're right, twelve is a supernumerary (that means "sufficient", in fancy English) majority to qualify as "overwhelming".
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Videos and quotes of people maintaining the exact point I've argued here.
... which do not support the claim you've made, but don't have the honesty to redact.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Typical? I thought I was one of a kind
That's what thinking gets you when you're not practiced at it.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Fourth time: You were given the sites which included quotes from both theologians and unbelievers regarding the general consensus of the historical Jesus...you were given the video by Bart Ehrman who is agnostic and stated what the general consensus is regarding the historical Jesus, and you were also given the video with Richard Dawkins who admitted that "most historians" believe that Jesus existed...which is ironic because he corrected himself on that very issue. Plus you were given the wikipedia article at which even a guy like Robert Price (as cited) stated that despite him NOT believing that Jesus existed, he realized that his opinion was in the minority, and NOT the majority.
Fourth time: those don't support your claim, but you're not honest enough to admit it.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: You keep spewing that nonsense about what you haven't gotten, instead of focusing on what you DID get...and four times I reminded you of what you've gotten.
What you've provided doesn't support your claim, and that is what I've asked for. Keep whiffing, kid. You'll learn from this discussion to never, ever overstep your evidence.
Then again, maybe you won't. You don't strike me as terribly keen.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: If the general consensus WASN'T true, then you wouldn't have so many people (that you were provided) saying that it IS true...and not behind closed doors, but openly in public, by believers and unbelievers alike.
All twelve of them? Stop the presses.
(November 30, 2014 at 10:24 pm)His_Majesty Wrote: Now again, if that isn't good enough for you, than to bad.
You haven't supported your claim.
It is you losing credibility, not me.
And let's face it, that's a loss you can ill afford.
