Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-08-2016, 06:44 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 06:32 PM)Born Again Pagan Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 06:23 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Not sure if this is a fair comparison.

History deals with the static past.

But climate change deals with an uncertain future.

But us non scienterrific types are expected to believe it because "Most scientists believe it." Not because it makes any sense, not because the predictions they made about and for it were correct, but merely now because they say so! I will never have any means of checking how many ppm of co2 or whatever there is at present in Antarctica as opposed to what amount that was there in 1600 AD, but when they predict that the sea level will rise by 2 meters, that is something i can check on.

But here the scientists are making a prediction of the future. Predictions are always uncertain.

Historians are not, and cannot be, making any predictions about the past, because that's impossible. Instead, they are digging up tangible evidence to help produce the best approximation of the past they possibly can. Sure, they can be wrong, but being right or wrong is not really the point here.

The point to history is to approximate it according to what the evidence indicates.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 06:55 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 06:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 06:32 PM)Born Again Pagan Wrote:  But us non scienterrific types are expected to believe it because "Most scientists believe it." Not because it makes any sense, not because the predictions they made about and for it were correct, but merely now because they say so! I will never have any means of checking how many ppm of co2 or whatever there is at present in Antarctica as opposed to what amount that was there in 1600 AD, but when they predict that the sea level will rise by 2 meters, that is something i can check on.

But here the scientists are making a prediction of the future. Predictions are always uncertain.

Historians are not, and cannot be, making any predictions about the past, because that's impossible. Instead, they are digging up tangible evidence to help produce the best approximation of the past they possibly can. Sure, they can be wrong, but being right or wrong is not really the point here.

The point to history is to approximate it according to what the evidence indicates.

Mate I think you need another thread. One dedicated to history. Not contemporaries of Jesus. As we know, there are none.

If you start a history I will add to it. What's going on here is idiotic BS. Certainly beneath a rational historian.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:02 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 06:55 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 06:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  But here the scientists are making a prediction of the future. Predictions are always uncertain.

Historians are not, and cannot be, making any predictions about the past, because that's impossible. Instead, they are digging up tangible evidence to help produce the best approximation of the past they possibly can. Sure, they can be wrong, but being right or wrong is not really the point here.

The point to history is to approximate it according to what the evidence indicates.

Mate I think you need another thread. One dedicated to history. Not contemporaries of Jesus. As we know, there are none.

If you start a history I will add to it. What's going on here is idiotic BS. Certainly beneath a rational historian.

I have tried to discuss the contemporary evidence but the topics gets derailed by the mythers and deniers.

For example, this post of yours suggests that Paul wasn't a contemporary, when the truth is he was.

And now you will deny it.

See? That's how it works.

Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:06 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 07:02 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  For example, this post of yours suggests that Paul wasn't a contemporary, when the truth is he was.


Drinking Beverage

No, I was there too. Paul still owes me 50 shekels.

I was also at the Battle of Stalingrad.

I was also on the first moon landing.

To say Paul was a contemporary, shows me plainly you are not a historian.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:09 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 06:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 06:32 PM)Born Again Pagan Wrote:  But us non scienterrific types are expected to believe it because "Most scientists believe it." Not because it makes any sense, not because the predictions they made about and for it were correct, but merely now because they say so! I will never have any means of checking how many ppm of co2 or whatever there is at present in Antarctica as opposed to what amount that was there in 1600 AD, but when they predict that the sea level will rise by 2 meters, that is something i can check on.

But here the scientists are making a prediction of the future. Predictions are always uncertain.

Historians are not, and cannot be, making any predictions about the past, because that's impossible. Instead, they are digging up tangible evidence to help produce the best approximation of the past they possibly can. Sure, they can be wrong, but being right or wrong is not really the point here.

The point to history is to approximate it according to what the evidence indicates.
OK that makes sense. But when teir predictions don't come out, they are no more embarrassed than the predictors of Jesus coming back are when that doesn't happen!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:10 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 06:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 06:32 PM)Born Again Pagan Wrote:  But us non scienterrific types are expected to believe it because "Most scientists believe it." Not because it makes any sense, not because the predictions they made about and for it were correct, but merely now because they say so! I will never have any means of checking how many ppm of co2 or whatever there is at present in Antarctica as opposed to what amount that was there in 1600 AD, but when they predict that the sea level will rise by 2 meters, that is something i can check on.

But here the scientists are making a prediction of the future. Predictions are always uncertain.

Historians are not, and cannot be, making any predictions about the past, because that's impossible. Instead, they are digging up tangible evidence to help produce the best approximation of the past they possibly can. Sure, they can be wrong, but being right or wrong is not really the point here.

The point to history is to approximate it according to what the evidence indicates.
OK that makes sense. But when teir predictions don't come out, they are no more embarrassed than the predictors of Jesus coming back are when that doesn't happen! OOPS Double post sorry!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:44 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 07:06 PM)Banjo Wrote:  To say Paul was a contemporary, shows me plainly you are not a historian.

Since all the available evidence indicates he lived at the same time as Jesus, it indicates that he was, indeed, a contemporary.

And with virtually all modern scholars, this is simply a forgone conclusion. It's not even debated.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 07:49 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 07:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 07:06 PM)Banjo Wrote:  To say Paul was a contemporary, shows me plainly you are not a historian.

Since all the available evidence indicates he lived at the same time as Jesus, it indicates that he was, indeed, a contemporary.

And with virtually all modern scholars, this is simply a forgone conclusion. It's not even debated.

He never met him so everything is BS. Talking about ghosts just means you're a loony.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 08:11 PM (This post was last modified: 06-08-2016 08:46 PM by GoingUp.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(06-08-2016 07:49 PM)Banjo Wrote:  
(06-08-2016 07:44 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Since all the available evidence indicates he lived at the same time as Jesus, it indicates that he was, indeed, a contemporary.

And with virtually all modern scholars, this is simply a forgone conclusion. It's not even debated.

He never met him so everything is BS. Talking about ghosts just means you're a loony.

I can agree that he likely never met him. I have no problem with that, even though there's no evidence that he didn't meet him because he never talks about whether or not he knew Jesus before Jesus was crucified. Although he does say the following:

1Co_9:1 Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?

It should be noted that the verse above is assumed to refer to his supposed religious experience on the road to Damascus, but the reality is that there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that this verse has anything to do with his experience on the road to Damascus.

But being a contemporary has nothing to do with meeting him. This thread speaks of "Contemporary Accounts of Jesus" and not "Eyewitness Accounts of Jesus."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-08-2016, 08:56 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
By that standard, Paris Hilton is a contemporary of OJ Simpson. Care to guess why she didn't testify at his trial?

Paul only ever "saw" Jesus in a vision after the crucifixion. His "account" is quite literally worth less than hearsay and that's assuming that Paul was honest, accurate and even the author of what has been attributed to him.

---
Flesh and blood of a dead star, slain in the apocalypse of supernova, resurrected by four billion years of continuous autocatalytic reaction and crowned with the emergent property of sentience in the dream that the universe might one day understand itself.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Paleophyte's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: