Historical Evidence For the Existence of Jesus

[psychoslice]

Site is worthless educationally speaking, and carries no credibility at all.


Your out of your league here. Its time you let it go brother.

Only because you cannot handle that there was no Jesus, he never excited, if you like it or not.

 

[psychoslice]

Sure:

​

I thought you were full of **** and wind lol.

 

[JoStories]

Your ignorance of the topic is all but laughable -- laughable and pathetically obvious. Why don't you drop the pretense and actually read some peer reviewed material?

I dont think that is quite fair becuase, honestly, Josephus has been largely discredited as being apologetic, as I mentioned. That said, there is other, more accepted evidence outside of religiously held opinion, that points to the possibility, and again, it is still held as a possibility, that a man much like Jesus did exist. I mentioned Habermas and outhouse mentioned a more current analysis that does point that out. But keeping in mind that Josephus is so contentious, it is best, IMO, not to rely on that source.

 

[JoStories]

He wants me to read books, which is semi valid, but I like articles that address specific areas of research. That and I can read articles at work where I cannot pick up a book.

I also prefer professor time over book time.

Agreed. I look to experts on the topics. Erhman, of course, although I do believe he is biased against but he is still highly learned. Armstrong, but again, here is another biased source. I do admit her examination of the History of God is quite an excellent book, albeit dry as hell. Habermas is good for the examination of the research into the historcity of Jesus, but I do like the article you provided even more. Still, face to face didactic classes allow back and forth argument which I truly love.

 

[JoStories]

Most of that has been proven to be fraud.

Not really. It is based on evidence outside the realm of religion.

 

[JoStories]

It just never happened, simple.

It seems to me, and forgive me if I am wrong, that you are reacting here more out of an emotional response than any intellectual POV. Perhaps prove your assertions with peer reviewed articles? That would at least lend you some credibility instead of just insulting those who you disagree with?

 

[JoStories]

Paul never meant the Christ to be a man, the Christ to Paul was a Christ Consciousness, nothing to do with a man called Jesus.

Proof please.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I dont think that is quite fair becuase, honestly, Josephus has been largely discredited as being apologetic, as I mentioned.

You really need to stop pawning off uninformed and internet fed presumption with informed opinion.

 

[steeltoes]

The only thing we can be certain of is that Josephus has been tampered with and that it is late.

 

[outhouse]

Only because you cannot handle that there was no Jesus, he never excited, if you like it or not.

Is that what you really think? I don't care.

But your lack of credible sources when there is an over abundance of credible sources on the topic is very telling on your part.

 

[JoStories]

You really need to stop pawning off uninformed and internet fed presumption with informed opinion.

It isn't uninformed. It's after arduous study and thought on the topic though graduate theology courses under the tutelage of people like Erhman and others. Can you say the same?

 

[Desert Snake]

I dont think that is quite fair becuase, honestly, Josephus has been largely discredited as being apologetic, as I mentioned. That said, there is other, more accepted evidence outside of religiously held opinion, that points to the possibility, and again, it is still held as a possibility, that a man much like Jesus did exist. I mentioned Habermas and outhouse mentioned a more current analysis that does point that out. But keeping in mind that Josephus is so contentious, it is best, IMO, not to rely on that source.

Contentiousness is dependent on the subject matter. I disagree with some of what Josephus wrote, and I would not use his writings as a source for certain things, however, in some subjects, I believe that he can be used as a legit source of information. You do realize that many authors, if held to the scrutiny that one might hold Josephus to, would not be viable as a believable source? Like the authors that wrote that Jesus did this or that, in the Bible? Why should I trust their writings? It is also religious writings, which also lead to more scrutiny. What happens, is that people simply pick and choose sources to suit their own beliefs.
/Example: Jesus was a Rabbi who taught such and such, yet He wasn't the Messiah.
Well, how do I trust that Jesus was a Rabbi? or even real? It's from the same sources that one would be discrediting.

 

[JoStories]

Contentiousness is dependent on the subject matter. I disagree with some of what Josephus wrote, and I would not use his writings as a source for certain things, however, in some subjects, I believe that he can be used as a legit source of information. You do realize that many authors, if held to the scrutiny that one might hold Josephus to, would not be viable as a believable source? Like the authors that wrote that Jesus did this or that, in the Bible? Why should I trust their writings? It is also religious writings, which also lead to more scrutiny. What happens, is that people simply pick and choose sources to suit their own beliefs.
/Example: Jesus was a Rabbi who taught such and such, yet He wasn't the Messiah.
Well, how do I trust that Jesus was a Rabbi? or even real? It's from the from the same sources that one would be discrediting.

Agreed but one has to start somewhere with what they accept or don't. It a catch as catch can scenario. No matter what position one holds there will be those who disagree, particularly with these topics.

 

[McBell]

I thought you were full of **** and wind lol.

*yawn*

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It isn't uninformed. It's after arduous study and thought on the topic ...

If true, the results are clearly not commensurate with the effort.

 

[Quagmire]

No its not, there is so much evidence you would have to be a morn not to see it.

Guess I'm a morn then.

 

[Quagmire]

I don't have to do what you think I should do, your just trying to pick on me because you hate my guts,

I'm trying to get you to show some courtesy to everyone else in here. Not to mention that the way you posted that message it's a rule 7 violation. I didn't report it because I figured it was unintentional, but now that you know what's wrong with the way you formatted that post I will in the future.

and you would love to see me gone from this forum, am I right ???.

I wouldn't lose any sleep.

Could I ask, what the hell is really wrong with you, why are you so aggressive towards me ??????.

I've tried explaining that to you a couple of dozen times by now. Since it wasn't what you wanted to hear, you didn't.

Often those that criticise others reveal what he himself lacks.”
― Shannon L. Alder

And sometimes they're just annoyed.

 

[JoStories]

Has everyone forgotten common courtesy here, not to mention the forum rules?

 

[Quagmire]

Has everyone forgotten common courtesy here, not to mention the forum rules?

Of course. Otherwise we wouldn't need a staff.

 

[psychoslice]

It seems to me, and forgive me if I am wrong, that you are reacting here more out of an emotional response than any intellectual POV. Perhaps prove your assertions with peer reviewed articles? That would at least lend you some credibility instead of just insulting those who you disagree with?

If I have insulted anyone here, its because they insulted me first, so please don't jump to conclusions just because you don't agree with me. So if you belie that Jesus was a real character, then you prove it to me.