To begin with, it is generally admitted that after the capture of Troy, whilst the rest of the Trojans were massacred, against two of them--Aeneas and Antenor--the Achivi refused to exercise the rights of war, partly owing to old ties of hospitality, and partly because...
I agree. There are too many different Christianities involved in the first few centuries making it extremely difficult to show how they all funnel back down to one single founder. I think it a pointless endeavor and that scholarship would be better served by accepting the differences.
The so called Jesus of history, even if there is a consistency within a small portion of Q that might point to a preacher, is so far removed from the gospel storyline that there really is no point in making that sort of connection.
I've read Q, and I do believe there is a possible case to be made for an historical Jesus of sorts, but he is not to be confused with the Christ of the epistle writers. James or no brother James nonsense notwithstanding.
Wells has more intelligence stored in the end of his little finger than you have in your entire brain. Josephus has been tampered with, try someone else. Oh, there is no one else.
That's a stupid argument and you know it. It's as if you are suggesting that an historical Jesus can't be revealed due to language barriers, he's only known to those that read German or Greek. I've read plenty from scholars that read the texts and they don't come to the same conclusions as you...
Oberon sees the name James and jumps to all kinds of conclusions. Interesting that none of the gospels or Acts note that a brother of Jesus had a ministry, nor did they note that this James was supposedly martyred. Supposedly the Josephus reference is to be believed and trusted says Oberon, even...
You've attributed less than anyone, all you have proven to show is your little quips.
An historical Jesus is so far unknown, there are far too many uncertainties involved, that's why it's called a quest and so far a single founder for Christianity is as allusive as the holy grail itself, and...
And after all is said and done, what have you got, Sherlock? All we ever get from you guys is Jesus had a brother named James, and Josephus clinches it. That's it. That's all we ever get, over and over, repeated like a mantra as if it will become factual if repeated enough times.
Yes, there...
You guys make a mockery of scholarship with your stupid little straw man arguments. You consider the experts to be the ones that support your forgone conclusion about an historical Jesus, that's how you tell an expert from a non expert and that shows how incredibly biased you are. Scholarship...
It's no use. Those that believe Jesus is historical are extremely sure of themselves even though the scholarly consensus is all over the map. Just look at the Jesus Seminar to see how a cross section of Jesus scholars vote on the probability of various gospel events and sayings being accurate or...