RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 9, 2015 at 2:17 am
(This post was last modified: June 9, 2015 at 2:21 am by TheMessiah.)
(June 9, 2015 at 2:14 am)Minimalist Wrote:Quote: I have no idea how the Wiki told you that ''Historians are in disagreement'' - the Wiki states that there is near unanimous agreement that Jesus existed
We know. You are desperate for someone to tell you that your bullshit is right. You seek vindication, not enlightenment. I don't blame you for clinging to bullshit so thoroughly but by the same token I'm not going to let you feel comfortable about it.
Let's see the evidence that those "historians" use. If it is just your fucking bible, you are screwed.
Damn right I seek verification from historians; it'd be utterly ignorant not to do so and priding yourself on not doing that does not make you look skeptical, it makes you look desperate and hyper-aggressive. I seek verification from historians because not doing so would be ignorant. They analyse the historical world and give us information.
They are literally experts in their chosen field
This is akin to a climate-change denier saying ''I don't care about the Scientists, what I'm saying is right. Their grasp of evidence is nonsense'' --- or should I deny myself a doctor and choose faith healing instead? Would I be ''enlightened'' by not seeking out the experts?
