Will Jesus return on a white horse?

[Annik]

i did find this on my first minute on the net of looking for an answer you might accept http://www.squidoo.com/who-really-believ...us-existed

enjoy.

There is no historical evidence in among Jesus' contemporaries that he existed that hasn't been debunked. Until such evidence is found, this is just an appeal to common belief.

[Mark 13:13]

Dawkins is a superb evolutionary biologist. I'm reasonably certain that if I sat down with him for ten minutes I could dissuade him from the HJ bullshit which he obviously learned in his youth.

There is no evidence for a historical jesus. No one living at the time heard a word about the fucker. Period.

Well Dawkins rolled over very fast ; im guessing because when presented with someone who knew their history he realised the truth. But to be honest I really feel trying to prove the person of Jesus never existed isn't a winner and i'm sure many athiests in the forum will agree with me on this. Btw did you see the video underneath i'm listening to it now and its also interesting and related to your question but is somewhat longer.

[Minimalist]

There is no evidence that your boy ever walked the earth. The burden of proof belongs to you to find some. All I have to do is point out that there is, at present, no evidence for your fables.

Let me know when you find some. If you find some.

[Mark 13:13]

i did find this on my first minute on the net of looking for an answer you might accept http://www.squidoo.com/who-really-believ...us-existed

enjoy.

There is no historical evidence in among Jesus' contemporaries that he existed that hasn't been debunked. Until such evidence is found, this is just an appeal to common belief.

So Richard Dawkins when he says Jesus did exist didn't believe what he said ; in other words he lied?

---

Dawkins is a superb evolutionary biologist. I'm reasonably certain that if I sat down with him for ten minutes I could dissuade him from the HJ bullshit which he obviously learned in his youth.

There is no evidence for a historical jesus. No one living at the time heard a word about the fucker. Period.

It is my opinion that if every historian had to provide the kind of proof you are asking me to provide you before they could talk about any historical figure before they could be seen as historical the history shelves in the libraries would be a lot lighter. What more proof do you want that that most ancient historians accept that Jesus did exist. Even Dawkins could tell he was not on very firm ground on that one and was wise enough to concede the fact fast.

[Annik]

There is no historical evidence in among Jesus' contemporaries that he existed that hasn't been debunked. Until such evidence is found, this is just an appeal to common belief.

So Richard Dawkins when he says Jesus did exist didn't believe what he said ; in other words he lied?

It doesn't matter what Dawkins believes. I haven't said a word about him before now. What matters is the evidence. A billion people believing the sky is green does not make it so. Don't try and put words in my mouth... and if you do, at least try and make some connection to what I actually said.

[Zen Badger]

It is my opinion that if every historian had to provide the kind of proof you are asking me to provide you before they could talk about any historical figure before they could be seen as historical the history shelves in the libraries would be a lot lighter. What more proof do you want that that most ancient historians accept that Jesus did exist. Even Dawkins could tell he was not on very firm ground on that one and was wise enough to concede the fact fast.

How about contemporary(non-biblical)accounts of his life?

This, afterall, is a man who according to the bible astonished thousands with his ministry and miracles.

So some-one at the time must have written about him.

[Mark 13:13]

So Richard Dawkins when he says Jesus did exist didn't believe what he said ; in other words he lied?

It doesn't matter what Dawkins believes. I haven't said a word about him before now. What matters is the evidence. A billion people believing the sky is green does not make it so. Don't try and put words in my mouth... and if you do, at least try and make some connection to what I actually said.

I am not putting words in your mouth and you are correct " A billion people believing the sky is green does not make it so" just as i say about Gods non existence. But what i was implying that as a scientist Dawkins would demand evidence for the Historical Jesus and seems to have known that it was true that majority of reputable ancient historians are in agreement he existed otherwise he would have said otherwise. It would seem reasonable to me that if looking for the evidence of a historical Jesus then the evidence of ancient historians would be the only evidence I can give you apart from the millions of Christians that you bump into every day. What evidence would you accept ?

[Annik]

I am not putting words in your mouth and you are correct " A billion people believing the sky is green does not make it so" just as i say about Gods non existence. But what i was implying that as a scientist Dawkins would demand evidence for the Historical Jesus and seems to have known that it was true that majority of reputable ancient historians are in agreement he existed otherwise he would have said otherwise. It would seem reasonable to me that if looking for the evidence of a historical Jesus then the evidence of ancient historians would be the only evidence I can give you apart from the millions of Christians that you bump into every day. What evidence would you accept ?

How about contemporary records? A birth record? Death record? His name in writing somewhere? There aren't any that haven't been show to be written 50 years after his death (at the very earliest, 100+ years is more likely) or a fake. It is not my task to disprove God or Jesus. It is yours to prove it. You're being intellectually dishonest and logically fallacious.

[Mark 13:13]

It is my opinion that if every historian had to provide the kind of proof you are asking me to provide you before they could talk about any historical figure before they could be seen as historical the history shelves in the libraries would be a lot lighter. What more proof do you want that that most ancient historians accept that Jesus did exist. Even Dawkins could tell he was not on very firm ground on that one and was wise enough to concede the fact fast.

How about contemporary(non-biblical)accounts of his life?

This, afterall, is a man who according to the bible astonished thousands with his ministry and miracles.

So some-one at the time must have written about him.

Don't you think that these historians can't do their job properly, don't you think they haven't considered these also? Are you asking me to reinvent the wheel and become an ancient historian before I can accept what ancient historians tell me? Life's to short for me to become a fully qualified historian,scientist,philosopher,psychologist,doctor.... etc.

[Zen Badger]

How about contemporary(non-biblical)accounts of his life?

This, afterall, is a man who according to the bible astonished thousands with his ministry and miracles.

So some-one at the time must have written about him.

Don't you think that these historians can't do their job properly, don't you think they haven't considered these also? Are you asking me to reinvent the wheel and become an ancient historian before I can accept what ancient historians tell me? Life's to short for me to become a fully qualified historian,scientist,philosopher,psychologist,doctor.... etc.

So the short answer is.... No, you can't produce any contemporary accounts of his supposed life.

Thank you for playing.