faroukfarouk
Active Member
Read OP.
All it calls for are historical evidence.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Historical Evidence For the Existence of Jesus
- Thread starter Darkness
- Start date
All it calls for are historical evidence.
outhouse
Atheistically
You don't have any.
You have a book that is said to have plagiarized the bible, by all credible academia.
Start providing sources with links, because your faith is not evidence.
Islamic mythology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Islam incorporates many Biblical events and heroes into its own mythology. Stories about Musa (Moses)[9] and Ibrahim (Abraham)[10] form parts of Islam's scriptures
outhouse
Atheistically
And folks who, with a strait face, loudly assert that "[c]laims made with ZERO evidence ... is (sic) not evidence" strike me as more turgidly tautological than 'relentlessly rational.'
Except you probably have the other party on ignore and don't know the context of his statement.
Now if you would like to show the text of islam has anything credible at all, towards jesus, that is not already ion the bible, please provide sources and links.
faroukfarouk
Active Member
Firstly you off topic.
Secondly you all worked up because you just cannot accept the truth from the Noble Quraan.
Finally you state that Noble Quraan "plagiarized the bible" and that is laughable.
Maybe you should open new thread on this laughable subject.
Promise you you going to make a fool of yourself.
outhouse
Atheistically
Please provide credible sources that show one single credible historian IN THE WHOLE WORLD that uses your book for study on historical Jesus.
There is not one. You know why? it has no historical value outside religious faith.
This is not up for debate, this is your fanaticism and fundamentalism where you are trying to change the whole world to YOUR specific belief, while the rest of the world is using evidence and study and academia to make the best decisions on what is, and is not historical.
This is your one chance, go out and bring back credible sources and links to prove your point is valid. Make sure they are recognized by academia.
The trouble is, as outhouse stated, that it is not accepted as credible for proof. It has a clear and obvious bias. That does not, however, diminish its weight as an important and valuable resource. It is just that it is not credible for scholarly research, There is a difference.
faroukfarouk
Active Member
Is the bible credible evidence on the OP?
No. Not in my opinion.
outhouse
Atheistically
Yes it is. But unlike your view, only some of it is. Not all of it.
WE study the books written shortly after his death to determine mythology from history, and determine what was theology and what had possible historical cores.
Not some book that plagiarized the bible 600 years later, that holds no historical reliability or credibility what so ever, on this topic..
faroukfarouk
Active Member
Please keep your tone down because i am not wearing glasses but binoculars.
Now what kind of evidence are you looking for?
outhouse
Atheistically
Evidence that is dated closer to when the events actually have a possibility of happening.
There is nothing of value in something written 600 years after the events, by men promoting their own specific theological agenda.
Its why you don't have a single credible source, you only have faith.
Why cant you find a single credible single scholar you uses your book to determine Jesus historicity ??????????
Now comes the typical muslim refusal to answer questions directly, and a complete refusal to supply credible sources or links to support their faith.
faroukfarouk
Active Member
So you accept the bible as evidence.But if the Noble Quraan is plagiarized from the bible,as you claim, then its not credible evidence.
Are you serious or you joking?
It time to open a thread on your plagiarized claim.
outhouse
Atheistically
Start providing sources with links to back your unsubstantiated claims.
Your faith is worthless in a historical discussion.
outhouse
Atheistically
That's right.
Your book is not credible evidence. Its why you don't have any credible sources that state as much.
I have asked you a VERY simple task, to provide a SINGLE credible historian that uses your book. Should BE EASY is it has any value. BUT you produce nothing, because there is no credible historians using a plagiarized 600 year old source.
No, The Bible is not credible evidence of anything other than evidence of a religious text. However, if one is looking for an historical Jesus one can cherry pick from the gospel stories and decide for him or herself what has historical merit. It is self gratifying for those that like to find what they are looking for.
outhouse
Atheistically
Your factually in error.
Does the NT state some things that are factually correct?
Is the NT devoid of any historicity what so ever?
psychoslice
Veteran Member
So what is the historical value with Jesus in your book ?.
psychoslice
Veteran Member
This is true and this is what makes it so frustration when debating with these people.
outhouse
Atheistically
Does the NT state some things that are factually correct?
Is the NT devoid of any historicity what so ever?
I can understand why you have problems with the educated.
outhouse
Atheistically
Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed
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
only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate
Almost all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed
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
only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate