MERGED: The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part 1) & (Part 2)

[His_Majesty]

[FatAndFaithless]

WLC is the "best Christians have"?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

None the sources mentioned (except the controversial Josephus passage) have anything at all to say about the Resurrection, which I thought was the point of the OP - certainly of the title.

Even if Jesus was an historical figure (about which I am undecided), that is no indication of his divinity, or that his purported 'miracles' were any such thing. Many established historical figures have claimed divine or semi-divine status, but that's no reason to go all squiffy over Ramses or Alexander.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

HM, I don't know why you keep harping on that, the beliefs of the majority or authorities don't carry any weight with either you or me, because we know that this would be illogical. The evidence that their beliefs are sourced from would be so much more helpful, don't you think?

[Jackalope]

Even Josephus, which is widely regarded as later interpolation (i.e. forgery) - and the only one that actually mentions Jesus. That kind of "honest, and modest"?

It's hearsay, *at best*.

Dude, you have to look at the entire freakin' context. Yeah, Josephus is the only one that mentioned the name "Jesus", but so what? It is clear based on the context of the other sources that they are talking about Jesus.

Serious, be foreal.

Yet, you haven't made those connections, over other's objections - in this very thread. Most of your sources refer only to christians. - and nobody has expressed doubt that they exist.

[Minimalist]

Yeah, Josephus is the only one that mentioned the name "Jesus", but so what?

Because when the forgery was made in the 4th century jesus had been invented.

It is clear based on the context of the other sources that they are talking about Jesus.

No, it is not. Take the holy fucking blinders off.

[Jackalope]

Plus, Richard Carrier already got his ass handed to him in a debate by a more polished William Lane Craig on the same subject that this thread is titled as...so his objections didn't stand up to scrutiny by the very best that Christians have in apologetics.

As if debate can establish anything beyond whom brings the best rhetoric.

WLC is a good rhetorician, and nothing more.

[His_Majesty]

Um, no, the sources you offered..in addition to being riddled with questions of authenticity, talk about people -who believe- in jesus....maybe.

Bullshit. The only one source that really has an authenticity issue is the Josephus account...and we've already identified the problem and omitted it from the passage....the only problem is, Jesus is still the subject of the passage, which is more than enough for Christians.

-and don't play dumb. Bart believes, but I don't give a shit..and neither should you, at least not if you're maintaining the fiction of attempting a case for christ. If you posted "A case for people who might have believed in a christ figure in the past and those who believe in a Jesus today" I wouldn't be giving you any shit whatsoever - I don't even think that such a case would be required....but that's not what you're attempting to do, now is it?

Bullshit. Tacitus said that "Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at that hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate."

Do you see what he said? He said that "Christus suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilate"

He is not stating this as if it was just a freakin' belief held by the Christians, he is saying it as if it actually happened, because it did.

Tell me why, point to some evidence? Even evidence for a man - I'm already halfway there, after all...I accept that men exist.

That's only half the battle.

[Minimalist]

[His_Majesty]

Yet, you haven't made those connections, over other's objections - in this very thread.

Yeah, it is a good thing you said "other's objections", because Lord knows you haven't offered any objections worthwhile.

Most of your sources refer only to christians. - and nobody has expressed doubt that they exist.

No, most of my sources refer to early Christians that were living their lives based on a man that existed "during the reign of Tiberius and was crucified by a Roman procurator named Pontius Pilate".

And these were their words, not mines.