Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-07-2016, 09:51 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2016 09:56 AM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(02-07-2016 09:39 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  I never stated that a physical man named jesus never existed. Infact, it was quite a popular name, and there were several men by the name jesus who claimed ot be the messiah. All wrong of course. But the one you are concerned about is "jesus of Nazareth"...whether a man named jesus from nazareth actually existed or not is inconsequential. The magical jesus did not exist, as we know from analysis of historical evidence, or rather, the lack of, as I explained in my earlier post...you know, the earth going dark, the zombie invasion....and if he was the prolific Benny Hinn like charismatic preacher of his day that drew throngs of people from all over, then Philo would have mentioned him, yet he never wrote a word. Even though Philo's writings were the foundation of later christian theology, he wrote the logos, the word etc. yet never mentions jesus, even though he lived in the general region at the time of jesus...almost as if he was an insignificant fellow of no reknown. Perhaps Justus...who was from the same town as jesus, who was a historian at the time of jesus...nope, no mention of jesus...odd Consider

And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

Not sure if you are learning disabled, but once again, I never said a physical man named jesus didnt exist. Whether or not he did doesn't matter. no one who EVER wrote of jesus knew him. All based on stories, and people love to tell stories, especially those with magic, zombies and dragons in them. Not even Paul had met jesus....urban myth is a powerful phenomenon isnt it?

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
02-07-2016, 09:55 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
But just to poke fun, you do realize there is more evidence for bigfoot than jesus right?

It has long amused me that Christians have no qualms admitting that they believe in Jesus, even though there is zero evidence for the magical, miracle-performing, zombie invasion causing, son of a mythical god Jesus, but don't believe in Bigfoot. Perhaps a physical man named Jesus existed, in fact, many men named Jesus existed, and maybe even one of them was a self-professed messiah, who claimed to be the son of god….many people over time have claimed that very same thing…all discredited.

Know what doesn’t exist? Evidence that a single person who ever wrote about Jesus, actually knew him, met him, or witnessed his miracles. ZERO. Contemplate on that for a moment. I have asserted that fact for quite awhile now, as most of you know, and proven it to an exhaustive degree. Now, the question I have is why can people easily believe the Jesus fairy tale, yet dismiss stories of aliens, fairies, or even bigfoot? I wonder if they understand that there is far more evidence for Bigfoot than Jesus. In fact, since there exists no credible eyewitness testimony or contemporary evidence for the magical Jesus, by anyone who knew him, one would assume Bigfoot wins the compare and contrast hands down. (Jesus – 0.)

How about Bigfoot? Unlike the resurrection, which violates absolutely everything we know about almost every branch of science, the existence of Bigfoot doesn't violate the laws of physics, doesn't violate the laws of chemistry, it just seems to violate some of what we know about biology. Why is it that Christians believe claims that have overwhelming, almost conclusive evidence against them, and very weak circumstantial historical evidence for them, but they don't believe claims that at least have physical evidence at hand for contemplation….like Bigfoot?

Furthermore, unlike the resurrection, which is thinly supported by the copy of the translation of the copy of the translation of multiple layers of verbal hearsay by anonymous sources, and zero eyewitnesses, the existence of Bigfoot is supported by direct eyewitnesses alive today, with names, addresses, phone numbers, etc. (Bigfoot – 1)There are pictures and even fuzzy videos to analyze of Bigfoot loping through the forest. (Bigfoot – 2) In fact, since 70% of Americans are infected with some strain of Christian delusion, odds are the majority of these witnesses would be Christians….are you going to tell me one Christian would disbelieve another Christian who would vow they have seen, heard, and smelled bigfoot? You can go and interview a Bigfoot expert who has seen Bigfoot multiple times, and he will share the first-hand eyewitness testimony with you directly. (Bigfoot – 3) Ah, let me guess, they aren’t “true Christians” right?

It would seem like if you were in the business of believing in magic, supernatural, transcendental theory beings, and other unlikely stuff, and you were going to be consistent rather than biased, there are loads of claims that, though unlikely, are several orders of magnitude more probable than a 30AD flying corpse, zombie invasion and the entire world going dark upon his death…like Bigfoot. (Bigfoot – 4)

Bigfoot/Sasquatch/Yeti/Yowie/Almas/skunk Ape/Grassman/Wendigo/Orange Pendeck/Mapingauri/Yeren has been written about, and witnessed for many years WORLDWIDE. It MUST exist then right?

2,000 years from now whatever form of human exists then will inevitably find all of these mentions of bigfoot worldwide, and will certainly exclaim "Bigfoot" existed! He must have, look at the copious amount of worldwide documentation of him.

So let’s tally it up: Jesus – 0, bigfoot – 4. So inductive and deductive reasoning would establish that there is far more evidence for Bigfoot, than Jesus.

Disclaimer: I um...don't believe in Bigfoot either.

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
02-07-2016, 09:59 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
This is getting extremely annoying.

(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

I believe that it is likely that a preacher named jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.
I believe that it is possible that more than one preacher named jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.
I believe that Tacitus is reliable and that his account regarding christians is reliable.

NOW FOR FUCKS SAKE WHAT IS YOUR FUCKING POINT????

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
02-07-2016, 10:01 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 09:55 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Disclaimer: I um...don't believe in Bigfoot either.

Jesus was Bigfoot. His full coat hadn't grown in yet.

There. I just started a new religion. We can collaborate on some texts and in 2000 years we can be worshiped in the new church.

What title would you prefer?

Help for the living. Hope for the dead. ~ R.G. Ingersoll

Freedom offers opportunity. Opportunity confers responsibility. Responsibility to use the freedom we enjoy wisely, honestly and humanely. ~ Noam Chomsky
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fatbaldhobbit's post
02-07-2016, 10:05 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(01-07-2016 10:16 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(01-07-2016 08:16 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Perhaps, and perhaps not. The one thing they DON'T do is make any kind of a claim that Jesus didn't exist at all, and in fact they and others poke fun at Christians for not recognizing this same Jesus as a mere man.


They are non-Christian resources attesting to the existence of Jesus as a mere human being who was crucified for sedition.

They add to the one commonality we find in numerous other texts, that Jesus existed as a man, and was crucified.

"The one thing they DON'T do is make any kind of a claim that Jesus didn't exist at all, and in fact they and others poke fun at Christians for not recognizing this same Jesus as a mere man."

Brilliant! Just brilliant!Facepalm

I now know the flying spaghetti monster really exists because I've never read anyone who says he doesn't. And pink unicorns. And pixies on Mars. And Alice in wonderland.

PS Even if your argument made sense, (which it doesn't,) you are wrong. The writings of the church fathers are littered with propaganda about how Jesus came in the flesh precisely because there were so many critics denying his historicity. Google it.

False comparison, Mark.

Since the allegation of those who claim that Jesus of Nazareth was a complete myth, it is not unreasonable to expect some degree of evidence to support it, if that evidence exists.

It is not unreasonable to expect someone from antiquity to express as factual that Jesus did not exist at all, especially when we see them in debates with Christians discussing this very same Jesus.

We call it evidence of absence (not to be confused with absence of evidence), and it is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

Since we can reasonably expect persons from antiquity writing about their opposition to Christianity to mention as factual- or even question- the non existence of this Jesus, then that evidence should be available.

Since it is not available, then that is evidence of the absence of positive proof to validate the position of the non existence of this Jesus, and it is also evidence we can use to support his existence.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2016, 10:09 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

How about you list what these "other documents" are in which there is no embellishment.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-07-2016, 10:10 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 09:59 AM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  This is getting extremely annoying.

(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

I believe that it is likely that a preacher named jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.
I believe that it is possible that more than one preacher named jesus was executed by Pontius Pilate.
I believe that Tacitus is reliable and that his account regarding christians is reliable.

NOW FOR FUCKS SAKE WHAT IS YOUR FUCKING POINT????

So, let's take you to task and be more precise.

1. Do you believe that the Jesus who was crucified by Pontius Pilate was Jesus of Nazareth, who's life was embellished by the Christians, and therefore subsequently became the centerpiece of the Christian religion?

2. You said that what Tacitus wrote about the Christians was factual, but do you agree that what he wrote about Christ was also factual?

And that is my "fucking point."

Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2016, 10:19 AM (This post was last modified: 02-07-2016 10:25 AM by GoingUp.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 10:09 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

How about you list what these "other documents" are in which there is no embellishment.

For what purpose? You are a Jesus Mythicist, so all I can expect from you are unreasonable and unsupported false arguments about it all. But I will demonstrate with just one, and tear your argument to pieces by proving that you don't even have an actual argument.

Antiquites of the Jews - Book XX

"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions];"

Now I will watch how you will so miserably attempt to make this all about some other Jesus who was called Christ, and who had a brother named James.

Go ahead, let's see it. It is so tiresomely predictable.

Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2016, 10:31 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 10:05 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(01-07-2016 10:16 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  "The one thing they DON'T do is make any kind of a claim that Jesus didn't exist at all, and in fact they and others poke fun at Christians for not recognizing this same Jesus as a mere man."

Brilliant! Just brilliant!Facepalm

I now know the flying spaghetti monster really exists because I've never read anyone who says he doesn't. And pink unicorns. And pixies on Mars. And Alice in wonderland.

PS Even if your argument made sense, (which it doesn't,) you are wrong. The writings of the church fathers are littered with propaganda about how Jesus came in the flesh precisely because there were so many critics denying his historicity. Google it.

False comparison, Mark.

Since the allegation of those who claim that Jesus of Nazareth was a complete myth, it is not unreasonable to expect some degree of evidence to support it, if that evidence exists.

It is not unreasonable to expect someone from antiquity to express as factual that Jesus did not exist at all, especially when we see them in debates with Christians discussing this very same Jesus.

We call it evidence of absence (not to be confused with absence of evidence), and it is evidence of any kind that suggests something is missing or that it does not exist.

Since we can reasonably expect persons from antiquity writing about their opposition to Christianity to mention as factual- or even question- the non existence of this Jesus, then that evidence should be available.

Since it is not available, then that is evidence of the absence of positive proof to validate the position of the non existence of this Jesus, and it is also evidence we can use to support his existence.
You aren't getting any easier to follow as time and posts go on.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-07-2016, 10:32 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(02-07-2016 09:51 AM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(02-07-2016 09:47 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And you think that all these different texts from various religious sects and cultures regarding this Jesus of Nazareth is better explained as all being based upon a wholly mythical character rather than a historical person who's life was embellished by Christians, but not embellished in other documents?

Roman history about him is false?
Jewish history about him is false?
Christian records of debates with non Christians about him are false?

That position is unreasonable.

Not sure if you are learning disabled, but once again, I never said a physical man named jesus didnt exist. Whether or not he did doesn't matter. no one who EVER wrote of jesus knew him. All based on stories, and people love to tell stories, especially those with magic, zombies and dragons in them. Not even Paul had met jesus....urban myth is a powerful phenomenon isnt it?

My question was in regards to a particular Jesus known as Jesus of Nazareth upon whom the Christian religion is based upon. That was exceptionally obvious within the context.

You claim that there were numerous people named Jesus who were crucified at that time.

Please find me documentation to prove that position.

Good luck.

Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: