Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
22-06-2016, 09:50 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:46 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:42 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Someone writing about someone (with a common name no less) decades after the person supposedly existed when there is precisely 0 evidence from contemporary sources, isn't in-line with any logical belief that this person was likely to be real.

You presupposing this person exists biases you to believe literally anything that you want to support your Jesus. And how many people have you convinced with this presuppositional bullshit? Consider

And you belong to the dishonest constituency whose brain is so fried that they have trouble inferring one way or the other. They are unable to determine whether the sources and materials we have support the existence of a historical jesus, or support that he did not exist at all.

The dishonesty requires them to project themselves as those sitting on the fence on the question, as innocuous agnostics.

-10 pts for continued bullshit deflection
-10 pts for projecting your failings onto others
-10 pts for presuppositional apologetics

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, 09:52 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:49 AM)seoq Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:14 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  And it did, a "mischievous superstition" as Tacitus called it, "thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. "

Your point being?

That the news of the resurrection did spread, and some would label it as a mischievous superstition, and others as an actual event.

"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, 09:52 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:46 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  And you belong to the dishonest constituency whose brain is so fried that they have trouble inferring one way or the other. They are unable to determine whether the sources and materials we have support the existence of a historical jesus, or support that he did not exist at all.

The dishonesty requires them to project themselves as those sitting on the fence on the question, as innocuous agnostics.

-10 pts for continued bullshit deflection
-10 pts for projecting your failings onto others
-10 pts for presuppositional apologetics

More ramblings from a dishonest coward.

"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, 09:53 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:19 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  lol, just the non-sensical ramblings of another dishonest atheists.

"Another" is singular, you uneducated fool. "Atheists" is plural. Do you ever plan on getting an education ?

Quote:Either, there's a strong and persuasive case to made for why the James/Josephus is unreliable, inauthentic, like there is for the Testomnium or there isn't. Either there's an argument strongly in favor of inauthenticity or there isn't.

There may be. I know you religionist fundies need the world to be black and white. Yet you can't seem to make it. All you can do is make claims, and talk around it, and make claims about OTHERS you CLAIM are a majority. Yet you can't prove any of them are unbiased.

Quote:You clearly don't have that argument, and you appeal to some sort of dishonest agnosticism on the question, because that's the best you can muster.

Nice try. MORE deflection. YOU cannot address even ONE of Carrier's or Price's arguments.

It must be my "polluted" mind. Facepalm

You have no evidence Jesus existed, and you can't demonstrate Josephus is reliable.
You got nothing.
AND you have admitted you cannot be objective. YOU disqualified yourself from this discussion.

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
22-06-2016, 09:57 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:50 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  -10 pts for continued bullshit deflection
-10 pts for projecting your failings onto others
-10 pts for presuppositional apologetics

More ramblings from a dishonest coward.

-10 more points for deflection
-10 more points for projecting your failings onto others

Drinking Beverage

It should be obvious (but apparently not to you) that pointing out the flaws in your reasoning isn't "ramblings from a dishonest coward." You not admitting failing of logic or your ignorance or your illogical presuppositions, doesn't make me a coward or my writings "ramblings."

You on the other had, decide to deflect instead of engage and then double down on your bullshit. I am going to assign another -10 pts for that deflection from a dishonest twit. Drinking Beverage

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, 10:00 AM (This post was last modified: 22-06-2016 10:03 AM by seoq.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:49 AM)seoq Wrote:  Your point being?

That the news of the resurrection did spread, and some would label it as a mischievous superstition, and others as an actual event.

Many decades later. What is your point exactly? I never said that news of a supposed resurrection didn't spread. I was explaining to you how it would be possible for non-Christian contemporary accounts of Jesus to exist if what was written about him was true (as per your question). This has nothing to do with what I was trying to get across. It's entirely frustrating to respond to something like this, but perhaps I deserve it by not being clear with what I wrote.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-06-2016, 10:15 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 10:00 AM)seoq Wrote:  It's entirely frustrating to respond to something like this, but perhaps I deserve it by not being clear with what I wrote.

No, it's the standard reaction to trying to deal with Tomasia.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes unfogged's post
22-06-2016, 10:38 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 09:53 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  There may be. I know you religionist fundies need the world to be black and white.

No, I'm just calling a sham a sham, which this whole cloth of lack of belief amounts to, nothing but dishonesty masquerading as one's intellect. It's not a result of sources and materials not allowing us to infer one way or the other, but a desire by individuals such as yourself to not hold positions to defend. Cowardice parading as bravery.

Folks like yourself attempt to see everything in regards to such topics through the lens of proof, of absolute certainty in such instances, not in regards of reasonable and unreasonable conclusions, what can be inferred as more likely to be the case than not, based on the available sources, etc. This posturing is all a sham of course, that presents itself only when topics related to religion come about.

For you the question of whether Jesus existed or not, is not between him existing or not, but between lacking a belief one way or the other and believing one way. A tendency found almost exclusively among parties inclined to define themselves as lacking a belief, but absent everywhere else.

"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, 10:47 AM (This post was last modified: 22-06-2016 10:51 AM by Tomasia.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 10:00 AM)seoq Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:52 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  That the news of the resurrection did spread, and some would label it as a mischievous superstition, and others as an actual event.

Many decades later. What is your point exactly? I never said that news of a supposed resurrection didn't spread. I was explaining to you how it would be possible for non-Christian contemporary accounts of Jesus to exist if what was written about him was true (as per your question). This has nothing to do with what I was trying to get across. It's entirely frustrating to respond to something like this, but perhaps I deserve it by not being clear with what I wrote.

I was responding to this point of yours:

"Given that what Jesus supposedly did was so miraculous you would expect news of it to spread just as fast between those who did not believe as it supposedly did with those who did believe."

News of the resurrection did spread pretty fast, and contrary to your previous suggestion, claims of the resurrection are present as early as we can trace it, seems to have been in circulation as early as his J.C.'s death, hence why it's found in pretty much every iteration of christianity at the time, both orthodox and heterodox. In Paul's use of an early Christian Hymn. If his followers made it up, they didn't seem to have waited decades to do so, but soon after his death.

You have writers like that of Matthew's Gospel's, writing in response to Jewish detractors, who were claiming the disciples stole his body, Tacitus pointing out the breaking out of the "mischievous superstition".

"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, 11:19 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(22-06-2016 10:47 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 10:00 AM)seoq Wrote:  Many decades later. What is your point exactly? I never said that news of a supposed resurrection didn't spread. I was explaining to you how it would be possible for non-Christian contemporary accounts of Jesus to exist if what was written about him was true (as per your question). This has nothing to do with what I was trying to get across. It's entirely frustrating to respond to something like this, but perhaps I deserve it by not being clear with what I wrote.

I was responding to this point of yours:

"Given that what Jesus supposedly did was so miraculous you would expect news of it to spread just as fast between those who did not believe as it supposedly did with those who did believe."

News of the resurrection did spread pretty fast, and contrary to your previous suggestion, claims of the resurrection are present as early as we can trace it, seems to have been in circulation as early as his J.C.'s death, hence why it's found in pretty much every iteration of christianity at the time, both orthodox and heterodox. In Paul's use of an early Christian Hymn. If his followers made it up, they didn't seem to have waited decades to do so, but soon after his death.

You have writers like that of Matthew's Gospel's, writing in response to Jewish detractors, who were claiming the disciples stole his body, Tacitus pointing out the breaking out of the "mischievous superstition".

Uses Christian stories/myths to support Christian stories/myths while ignoring the lack of contemporary evidence to corroborate Christian stories/myths (the purpose of this and numerous other threads tomato has tried to hijack with presuppositionalist apologetics)

-100 for repetition of stupid shit
-1000 for quite literally using myth to support myth. Drinking Beverage

"The bible says..."
No one cares. The bible has no corroborating evidence Laugh out load

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
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: