How certain are we that Jesus was historical?

[oldbadger]

Christianity would have never gotten off the ground if the "man" never existed. The earliest letters of Paul are dated between the late 40's AD to the early to mid 50's AD, and he spoke about Jesus, and he was a contemporary source. He was there during the time and geographical location, and if Jesus never existed he would have never converted to Christianity.

Paul knew nothing about Jesus, his life or his mission. Paul just knew his name and the fact that he was crucified. That's about it.

Tacitus? What Primary evidence is there from Tacitus? :biglaugh:

 

[oldbadger]

Bunyip is much too dense...............

You think you can win a debate with your insults? :no:

Now.......... let's see what you've got.
You can't provide Primary or Direct evidence for HJ certainty.
Let's see if you understand those two words.

 

[Sapiens]

Paul knew nothing about Jesus, his life or his mission. Paul just knew his name and the fact that he was crucified. That's about it.

Tacitus? What Primary evidence is there from Tacitus? :biglaugh:

As I understand it, sometime after 100 CE Tacitus referred to the presence, in Rome, of Jews who were followers of Christ who had been executed by Pilate in the Levant.

It is kinda reaching to call that a source, but such seems to be the nature of the field.

 

[outhouse]

As I understand it, sometime after 100 CE Tacitus referred to the presence, in Rome, of Jews who were followers of Christ who had been executed by Pilate in the Levant.

It is kinda reaching to call that a source, but such seems to be the nature of the field.

YEC deny evidence much the same way.

Should we give them credibility now?

 

[oldbadger]

As I understand it, sometime after 100 CE Tacitus referred to the presence, in Rome, of Jews who were followers of Christ who had been executed by Pilate in the Levant.

It is kinda reaching to call that a source, but such seems to be the nature of the field.

Well...... that can help plausibility, but it cannot produce certainty.
Obviously, the thread is 'How certain are we that Jesus was historical?' and rather a lot of members can't bring themselves to agree 'No certainty'.

I thought Christianity is all about belief and faith.
If there was more about possibilities, plausibilities and probabilities.... acknowledging no certainty, then that would be great..... but .....

 

[Shuttlecraft]

Paul had a good steady job as a bounty hunter on the payroll of the snooty priests and Romans, rounding up Christians for trial and punishment, but on his way to Damascus with his posse he was zapped off his feet by a blinding light (below) and spoke with Jesus.
After that he became a Christian himself, it was as if the blast of holy spirit got his mind right for him-

 

[Sapiens]

YEC deny evidence much the same way.

Should we give them credibility now?

If, as is the case for the Historicity of Christ, there were only a few scrawny strands of evidence I'd say yes ... but there are many, thick, robust and mutually supporting lines of evidence that the Earth is much older than 10K years. These taken together, destroy the YEC argument.

 

[Sapiens]

Paul had a good steady job as a bounty hunter on the payroll of the snooty priests and Romans, rounding up Christians for trial and punishment, but on his way to Damascus with his posse he was zapped off his feet by a blinding light (below) and spoke with Jesus.
After that he became a Christian himself, it was as if the blast of holy spirit got his mind right for him-

Or perhaps having eaten a loaf of bread with ergot fungi on it. If you're going to grant the historicity of the tall Paul tale, that seems a bit more likely.

 

[oldbadger]

Paul had a good steady job as a bounty hunter on the payroll of the snooty priests and Romans,

....... Wot? You know that they jointly funded his contract? Have they dug up papyrus docs or summint?

......... rounding up Christians for trial and punishment, but on his way to Damascus with his posse he was zapped off his feet by a blinding light (below) and spoke with Jesus.

...... No.... No..... he had a blinding idea .............

After that he became a Christian himself, it was as if the blast of holy spirit got his mind right for him-

........ Paul was a contract busting, manipulating --------- !

 

[Prophet]

You think you can win a debate with your insults? :no:

And you can?! There was actually plenty of material after the insult that definitely comprised an argument you excuse your lack of debate against rather thoughtlessly.

...that neither the words contained within its letters, nor word origin, nor any other agenda-oriented, idiomatic meaning he can generate have any bearing on something's technical usage, whether the subject is the meaning of the word "history", the meaning of the word "contemporaneous" or what comprises a primary source in ancient history.

This isn't the first, nor will it be the last time Bunyip victoriously gloats over a red herring.

You're pretty insulting, too, having introduced yourself to me recently by implying that my ideas are pathetic, but I don't complain about insults levied against me until my adversary begins to hurl accusations which he himself is guilty of.

As Jesus would say, "You hypocrite! First take the plank out of your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the mote from your brother's eye!"

Now.......... let's see what you've got.
You can't provide Primary or Direct evidence for HJ certainty.
Let's see if you understand those two words.

I understand what primary sources mean in the context of source criticism. If we are speaking in that context, for Jesus, the primary sources are the NT, Josephus, and Tacitus. I also believe I understand what comprises a primary source in the context of your agenda-driven mind where accepted meanings of technical terms change to the whims of bias. You basically want a biography written by an eyewitness or an autobiography, yes?

 

[oldbadger]

If, as is the case for the Historicity of Christ, there were only a few scrawny strands of evidence I'd say yes ... but there are many, thick, robust and mutually supporting lines of evidence that the Earth is much older than 10K years. These taken together, destroy the YEC argument.

Is this a classic case of 'muddled subjects'?

HJ..... one subject.
10K Earth...... one subject.

Even JWs accept 13.7 billion year universe etc.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Paul knew nothing about Jesus, his life or his mission.

And your evidence would be?

 

[oldbadger]

I understand what primary sources mean in the context of source criticism. If we are speaking in that context, for Jesus, the primary sources are the NT, Josephus, and Tacitus. I also believe I understand what comprises a primary source in the context of your agenda-driven mind where accepted meanings of technical terms change to the whims of bias. You basically want a biography written by an eyewitness or an autobiography, yes?

Pathetic.
All Secondary, Tertiary and Hearsay evidence.
Therefore HJ can only be possible, plausible or Probable.
Can't be certain.
Read the Thread title. Memorise the thread title. Refer to the thread title.

 

[Shuttlecraft]

Topic title: How certain are we that Jesus was historical?
-----------------------------------------------------

Pretty certain mate, he was seen and heard by the 5 million population of Israel and the Roman garrison for 3 long years, how many more eyeballs do you want?..

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Topic title: How certain are we that Jesus was historical?
-----------------------------------------------------

Pretty certain mate, he was seen and heard by the 5 million population of Israel and the Roman garrison for 3 long years, how many more eyeballs do you want?..

Because, of course, the NT tells us so.

 

[Sapiens]

Pathetic.
All Secondary, Tertiary and Hearsay evidence.
Therefore HJ can only be possible, plausible or Probable.
Can't be certain.
Read the Thread title. Memorise the thread title. Refer to the thread title.

There exists some sort of special dispensation for Biblical Scholarship that appears to permit the "scholars" to raise the value of each of their sources by one rank, thus hearsay becomes tertiary, tertiary becomes secondary, and secondary becomes primary, all because there are no primary sources. I'd like to apply for a similar dispensation for my underwater work in the Arctic ... it is so cold and so hard that I don't think I should be held to the same level of proof as my colleagues here in Hawaii (who think my request is the height of absurdity).

 

[oldbadger]

And your evidence would be?

Ha ha :biglaugh:
My evidence is nothing.........
..... as in.... Paul didn't write any detail about Jesus's life, life mission, job, breakfast preferences.......... anything!

All he mentioned was J's name (Jesus of Nazareth) and his crucifixion.
Look..... if you've got anything which suggests that Paul knew about, cared a fig about or was interested about Jesus the Healer from Galilee....... stick it in a post....... that would be great, 'cos I love adding to my HJ files.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

There exists some sort of special dispensation for Biblical Scholarship that appears to permit the "scholars" to raise the value of each of their sources by one rank, thus hearsay becomes tertiary, tertiary becomes secondary, and secondary becomes primary, all because there are no primary sources.

Petty ad hominem ridicule of biblical scholarship does not make you look smart, only petty.

 

[oldbadger]

Topic title: How certain are we that Jesus was historical?
-----------------------------------------------------

Pretty certain mate, he was seen and heard by the 5 million population of Israel and the Roman garrison for 3 long years, how many more eyeballs do you want?..

Wot? He went to Caesarea?
Israel? There was a place called Israel then?
3 years?
5 million folks? When did 5 million folks 'clock' him? YOu're thinking of five thousand on a Lakeside hill! And a large crowd at his execution (ask outhouse).

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Ha ha :biglaugh:
My evidence is nothing.........
..... as in.... Paul didn't write any detail about Jesus's life, life mission, job, breakfast preferences.......... anything!

Therefore you are sure that he didn't know anything. Excellent.