Debate with a Christian

[Zen Badger]

Yes but depending on who or what Tacitus used as his source(s), he's might as well be merely saying that there's a group of people who claim so and so is their leader and this is how he allegedly died. It's just hearsay.

As I stated, if you have to be a historical skeptic to maintain your views, views which no contemporary historian would defend publicly for fear of losing his credibility, then it is time for you to either change your views or confess that you really do not care.

As it stands you have to maintain that every historian who states Jesus existed and was crucified under Pontius Pilate is somehow wrong and you are somehow right, you, a man posting on an atheist website with zero credentials.

I will trust them, and leave you to your futile efforts of denial....

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.

In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.

Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince virtually all scholars of many disciplines.

Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time – more so than any of his contemporaries – with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him.

The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions".

Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.

Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, but there are some mentions also in a few non-Christian Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus. These include the works of 1st-century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus. Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.

Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.

-Wikipedia


Anything else?

Maybe there was a historical Jesus, but without the resurrection and the miracles he was just a man and your religion is just a lie.

[*Deidre*]

As I stated, if you have to be a historical skeptic to maintain your views, views which no contemporary historian would defend publicly for fear of losing his credibility, then it is time for you to either change your views or confess that you really do not care.

As it stands you have to maintain that every historian who states Jesus existed and was crucified under Pontius Pilate is somehow wrong and you are somehow right, you, a man posting on an atheist website with zero credentials.

I will trust them, and leave you to your futile efforts of denial....

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.

In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.

Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince virtually all scholars of many disciplines.

Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time – more so than any of his contemporaries – with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him.

The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions".

Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.

Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, but there are some mentions also in a few non-Christian Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus. These include the works of 1st-century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus. Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.

Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.

-Wikipedia


Anything else?

Maybe there was a historical Jesus, but without the resurrection and the miracles he was just a man and your religion is just a lie.

So well said!!

[discipulus]

As I stated, if you have to be a historical skeptic to maintain your views, views which no contemporary historian would defend publicly for fear of losing his credibility, then it is time for you to either change your views or confess that you really do not care.

As it stands you have to maintain that every historian who states Jesus existed and was crucified under Pontius Pilate is somehow wrong and you are somehow right, you, a man posting on an atheist website with zero credentials.

I will trust them, and leave you to your futile efforts of denial....

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.

In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.

Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince virtually all scholars of many disciplines.

Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time – more so than any of his contemporaries – with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him.

The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions".

Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.

Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, but there are some mentions also in a few non-Christian Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus. These include the works of 1st-century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus. Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.

Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.

-Wikipedia


Anything else?

Maybe there was a historical Jesus, but without the resurrection and the miracles he was just a man and your religion is just a lie.

Precisely!

[Faith No More]

I'm not sure why people get hung up on the historical Jesus debate.

I think it's just to piss Christians off.

[discipulus]

I'm not sure why people get hung up on the historical Jesus debate.

I think it's just to piss Christians off.

I think some spend a couple minutes perusing the various writings of internet "infidels" and conclude Jesus never existed based on these writings.

[Foxaèr]

I think some spend a couple minutes perusing the various writings of internet "infidels" and conclude Jesus never existed based on these writings.

Some, perhaps. My conclusions in regards to Jesus' non-existence derive from there being no actual historical evidence suggesting that such a man existed outside of the fictional bible. There are actual historical references to a great many people from that time, yet none regarding the Jesus character.

[discipulus]

I think some spend a couple minutes perusing the various writings of internet "infidels" and conclude Jesus never existed based on these writings.

Some, perhaps. My conclusions in regards to Jesus' non-existence derive from there being no actual historical evidence suggesting that such a man existed outside of the fictional bible. There are actual historical references to a great many people from that time, yet none regarding the Jesus character.

You, like many others here are wrong. Simply read my posts and you will have citations to extra-biblical references of Jesus.

[truthBtold]

Some, perhaps. My conclusions in regards to Jesus' non-existence derive from there being no actual historical evidence suggesting that such a man existed outside of the fictional bible. There are actual historical references to a great many people from that time, yet none regarding the Jesus character.

You, like many others here are wrong. Simply read my posts and you will have citations to extra-biblical references of Jesus.

A guy name jesus.. not a son of god.

[Foxaèr]

You, like many others here are wrong.

Hardly,l but thank you for your incorrect opinion.

Simply read my posts and you will have citations to extra-biblical references of Jesus.

Read what countless others have cited in the hope that they had provided something never before seen, not realizing that what they think has no relevance in reality? No thanks.

[Revelation777]

As I stated, if you have to be a historical skeptic to maintain your views, views which no contemporary historian would defend publicly for fear of losing his credibility, then it is time for you to either change your views or confess that you really do not care.

As it stands you have to maintain that every historian who states Jesus existed and was crucified under Pontius Pilate is somehow wrong and you are somehow right, you, a man posting on an atheist website with zero credentials.

I will trust them, and leave you to your futile efforts of denial....

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.

In antiquity, the existence of Jesus was never denied by those who opposed Christianity.

Robert E. Van Voorst states that the idea of the non-historicity of the existence of Jesus has always been controversial, and has consistently failed to convince virtually all scholars of many disciplines.

Geoffrey Blainey notes that a few scholars have argued that Jesus did not exist, but writes that Jesus' life was in fact "astonishingly documented" by the standards of the time – more so than any of his contemporaries – with numerous books, stories and memoirs written about him.

The problem for the historian, wrote Blainey, is not therefore, determining whether Jesus actually existed, but rather in considering the "sheer multitude of detail and its inconsistencies and contradictions".

Although a very small number of modern scholars argue that Jesus never existed, that view is a distinct minority and virtually all scholars consider theories that Jesus' existence was a Christian invention as implausible.

Christopher Tuckett states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by Pontius Pilate seem to be part of the bedrock of historical tradition, based on the availability of non-Christian evidence.

Graham Stanton states that "Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed".

The sources for the historicity of Jesus are mainly Christian sources, but there are some mentions also in a few non-Christian Jewish and Greco-Roman sources, which have been used in historical analyses of the existence of Jesus. These include the works of 1st-century Roman historians Josephus and Tacitus. Josephus scholar Louis H. Feldman has stated that "few have doubted the genuineness" of Josephus' reference to Jesus in Antiquities 20, 9, 1 and it is only disputed by a small number of scholars.

Bart D. Ehrman states that the existence of Jesus and his crucifixion by the Romans is attested to by a wide range of sources, including Josephus and Tacitus.

-Wikipedia


Anything else?

Maybe there was a historical Jesus, but without the resurrection and the miracles he was just a man and your religion is just a lie.

I don't need a history book to know Jesus lived and lives NOW! He changed my life! He is the Lord of Lords and Kings of Kings and He will return soon.