Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-06-2016, 02:46 PM
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:46 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:39 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  There you go lying again.


I just did.

That makes no sense. YOU claim to give first-hand accounts of Jesus (using the gospels no less) but I'm lying by pointing it out?

Do you know what the word "lie" means?


There you go lying again. That's lie number 2 in less than 10 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 02:50 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:23 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:18 PM)Chas Wrote:  The Bible can be treated as one work regardless of the number of authors of various pieces of it.
It is a collection of writings selected from a larger collection of writings hundreds and even thousands of years after the alleged events.
Without corroboration from outside that small collection, none of it can be accepted as factual regardless of whether or not there is internal support.

No, scholars, historians, informed laymen can draw a variety of reasonable inferences from the writings of the bible, in regards to historical facts, etc.. beliefs that likely originated amongst the community, part of a particular tradition, etc....

You might want to tell those like Bart Ehrman they can't, but they'll likely just laugh at you.

Inferences are just that - inferences. Without supporting evidence, they are not facts.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 02:52 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:46 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:46 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  That makes no sense. YOU claim to give first-hand accounts of Jesus (using the gospels no less) but I'm lying by pointing it out?

Do you know what the word "lie" means?


There you go lying again. That's lie number 2 in less than 10 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That solves that quandary. You don't know what "lie" or "liar" means or you're too dishonest to admit you said something blatantly dishonest just to be an ignorant dick.

I'm so surprised by this [/sarcasmfont]

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 02:54 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:38 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:18 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is a collection of writings selected from a larger collection of writings hundreds and even thousands of years after the alleged events.
Without corroboration from outside that small collection, none of it can be accepted as factual regardless of whether or not there is internal support.

And some of the writing were written a few short years after the events mentioned by them. And other using sources earlier and closer to the events than their own writings. Some explicitly state they're writing of historical events and happening, some just tell a story, a poem, etc....

So? It is the veracity of the writings that is in question. There are many reasons not to just accept them, primarily lack of corroboration and also distance in time from alleged events.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
22-06-2016, 02:55 PM
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:23 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  No, scholars, historians, informed laymen can draw a variety of reasonable inferences from the writings of the bible, in regards to historical facts, etc.. beliefs that likely originated amongst the community, part of a particular tradition, etc....

You might want to tell those like Bart Ehrman they can't, but they'll likely just laugh at you.

Inferences are just that - inferences. Without supporting evidence, they are not facts.


Either those inferences are reasonable or not. More likely to be case or not. Be the best explanation or not.

If it's not evidence that makes a conclusion more reasonable than others, than I don't know what is.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 02:56 PM (This post was last modified: 22-06-2016 03:00 PM by SitaSky.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:33 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:19 PM)SitaSky Wrote:  How do you know Paul met his disciples and his brother? Because he said so?

Atheists complain about not having first-hand accounts, yet when first hand accounts are offered, they question whether or not the individual was lying. It's a shell game right?

Paul provides a first hand account of meeting his disciples and brothers. Are you suggesting he was lying about this? If not, than I'm not too sure what your argument is.

Yes I think he was either lying or maybe the people he spoke to were lying, what does Paul say about Jesus?

We barely get anything that places Jesus within any context outside of plagiarized God man stuff or fulfillment of prophecy so it's very easy to see it's a made up story or Paul got lied to. Once again where are the historical accounts of Jesus outside of the Bible, outside of scripture and the gospels? If you don't have any than it's pretty easy to assume any mythical magical mumbo jumbo is just that.

The main thing is, Paul says Jesus was crucified and resurrected, he wasn't there but no one who was there thought to write this shit down? They didn't think this was important? I don't think so, it would've been mentioned by historians if it really happened.

[Image: sagansig_zps6vhbql6m.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 03:02 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:34 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:33 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  Atheists complain about not having first-hand accounts, yet when first hand accounts are offered, they question whether or not the individual was lying. It's a shell game right?

Paul provides a first hand account of meeting his disciples and brothers. Are you suggesting he was lying about this? If not, than I'm not too sure what your argument is.

Now you're claiming that the gospels are first-hand accounts?

Also, you ever going to back up your claim that I am a liar and list what "lies" you're referring to? Or are you just going to keep up with the same ol' bullshit?

"Time out" says referee Grasshopper. In the post to which you are responding, Tomasia did not claim that the Gospels are first-hand accounts. His claim was that "Paul provides a first-hand account of meeting his [i.e., Jesus's] disciples and brothers." Paul didn't write any Gospels. just sayin'.

I don't think either of you is lying here, but posts can be misread sometimes. Tomasia did not make the claim that you say he did.

I would like to add another observation of my own, though. According to Christian teaching (at least the Catholic teaching that I had), Jesus did not have any brothers, because his mother Mary was "ever virgin". So how could Paul meet these non-existent brothers?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 03:04 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:55 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  Inferences are just that - inferences. Without supporting evidence, they are not facts.


Either those inferences are reasonable or not. More likely to be case or not. Be the best explanation or not.

If it's not evidence that makes a conclusion more reasonable than others, than I don't know what is.

Good point. It is the evidence that is lacking.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 03:07 PM
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 02:52 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:46 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  There you go lying again. That's lie number 2 in less than 10 minutes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That solves that quandary. You don't know what "lie" or "liar" means or you're too dishonest to admit you said something blatantly dishonest just to be an ignorant dick.

I'm so surprised by this [/sarcasmfont]

When you said that I claimed the gospels were first hand accounts, you were lying. I made no such claim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 03:07 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 03:02 PM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 02:34 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Now you're claiming that the gospels are first-hand accounts?

Also, you ever going to back up your claim that I am a liar and list what "lies" you're referring to? Or are you just going to keep up with the same ol' bullshit?

"Time out" says referee Grasshopper. In the post to which you are responding, Tomasia did not claim that the Gospels are first-hand accounts. His claim was that "Paul provides a first-hand account of meeting his [i.e., Jesus's] disciples and brothers." Paul didn't write any Gospels. just sayin'.

I don't think either of you is lying here, but posts can be misread sometimes. Tomasia did not make the claim that you say he did.

I would like to add another observation of my own, though. According to Christian teaching (at least the Catholic teaching that I had), Jesus did not have any brothers, because his mother Mary was "ever virgin". So how could Paul meet these non-existent brothers?

Tomato had already claimed I was a "liar" and had yet to back that up.

Tomato has also claimed that the gospels are reliable for making accurate inferences about Jesus and the history of that time.

And Paul does not give a firsthand account of Jesus' life. He gives a firsthand account of what he claims are accounts from other people.

So no, no "time out" because tomato still needs to show me my lies.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: