Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-07-2016, 08:06 AM (This post was last modified: 14-07-2016 08:15 AM by GoingUp.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 05:26 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(13-07-2016 09:36 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  I gave you the link. Investigate it further. It's been known for years, but every time it is shown to the naysayers, you pretend it doesn't even exist.

It exists.

" Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period”.

A graveyard keeper's dwelling (ONE) is not a "town".
You have no evidence.
You *claiming* something is no evidence.

Your cherry-picking is absolutely hilarious. Here, let me provide both the title to that article, as well as the complete text you cherry-picked from:

"For the Very First Time: A Residential Building from the Time of Jesus was Exposed in the Heart of Nazareth (12/21/09)"

"According to Yardenna Alexandre, excavation director on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, 'The discovery is of the utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth and thereby sheds light on the way of life at the time of Jesus. The building that we found is small and modest and it is most likely typical of the dwellings in Nazareth in that period. From the few written sources that there are, we know that in the first century CE Nazareth was a small Jewish village, located inside a valley. Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period'.

"The artifacts recovered from inside the building were few and mostly included fragments of pottery vessels from the Early Roman period (the first and second centuries CE). In addition, several fragments of chalk vessels were found, which were only used by Jews in this period because such vessels were not susceptible to becoming ritually unclean."


No one said anything about a mere "graveyard keeper's dwelling." You are making shit up as you go along.

Concede, because you cannot win this argument with deception.

Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GoingUp's post
14-07-2016, 08:45 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 01:55 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(13-07-2016 08:54 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Unfortunately for you, my statement was valid:

"Not in this argument (regarding the existence of Nazareth) you are not presenting any evidence. You are purposely excluding it to preserve your Nazareth never existed bullshit."

Pathetic! You are playing word games. I know what I have always written about an historical Jesus. You don't.

No word games whatsoever. My statement is very clear. This argument is all about the existence of Nazareth, and in this argument you purposely excluded (avoided) presenting your evidence (that Yeshua existed) to preserve your Nazareth never existed bullshit.

In other words, you will claim Yeshua existed when it suits you, but when it works against you then you will purposely avoid presenting it as evidence.

You can't have it both ways Mark.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 08:47 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 08:45 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 01:55 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  Pathetic! You are playing word games. I know what I have always written about an historical Jesus. You don't.

No word games whatsoever. My statement is very clear. This argument is all about the existence of Nazareth, and in this argument you purposely excluded (avoided) presenting tour evidence (that Yeshua existed) to preserve your Nazareth never existed bullshit.

In other words, you will claim Yeshua existed when it suits you, but when it works against you then you will purposely avoid presenting it as evidence.

You can't have it both ways Mark.


This has to do with contemporary accounts of Jesus, how?

They did not find a city like Carthage. They found a tiny dwelling.

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
[+] 1 user Likes Banjo's post
14-07-2016, 08:50 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Is the discovery of a dwelling (not a town) what you are going to hinge your argument on?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ohio_drg's post
14-07-2016, 08:55 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 02:00 AM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  
(13-07-2016 08:49 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  That is all speculation, not supported with any evidence. I also find it exceptionally unlikely that an entire town would be created in the 2nd century to support an invented prophecy, and yet no one in ancient history ever contested it.

Mr. Ball, how deep are you willing to let yourself get into this crazy shit?



Not true. We have 1st century artifacts, and in fact, there are a large number of ancient tombs discovered.

http://www.antiquities.org.il/article_en...40&id=1638



At least you admit the possibility that Nazareth existed as, at the very least, a place.

"Not true. We have 1st century artifacts, and in fact, there are a large number of ancient tombs discovered.

http://www.antiquities.org.il/article_en...40&id=1638"


Read the article. It says nothing about a town or a city, but only that there is evidence of a dwelling. The article claims this dwelling just may have existed in the first century, or that it may date from later than this.

Also....consider the title of the article, ( "For the Very First Time: A Residential Building from the Time of Jesus was Exposed in the Heart of Nazareth (12/21/09))" which should teach you something about the lack of evidence for a first century Nazareth.

Let's just have a look at your logic.

So far we have tombs, a residential building, pottery and many other items discovered in the general area.

So no one lived there so that they could be buried in the nearby tombs? No one lived in the residential building? No one used the pottery and other artifacts?

Are you trying to tell me that people would travel from miles away from other towns miles away to bury their dead, not live in the residential building, and use various forms of pottery needed for cooking and eating? They would dig trenches in preparation for war to defend ... a graveyard?

Is that what you are saying Mark? Really?

A Jewish inscription related to priestly courses which mentioned Nazareth in roughly the third century. One merely had to note the unlikelihood that priests resettling after the destruction of the temple in the year 70 would have founded a town with the name of a fictional site invented by Christians, and one had sufficient evidence to make it likely that Nazareth existed before then. Archaelogists have discovered a list of 24 families of priests who were relocated after the temple's destruction and one of the family was registered as having moved to Nazareth in AD 70.

For those who may have bought into the “Nazareth never existed” nonsense, I encourage you to reflect on the fact that you have listened to the archaeological equivalent of young-earth creationists. They might well be genuinely skeptical in other areas, but in this one they’ve bought into a conspiracy theory, and one that simply does not fit the evidence we’ve long had, much less the evidence that has come to light more recently.


Get over it. You look stupid.

Facepalm
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 09:02 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 08:06 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period

Read that again, delusional one.
It is YOU that are doing the cherry-picking, and FAILED to actually read the very words YOU posted.

Quote:Concede, because you cannot win this argument with deception.

In your dreams. YOU have not a shred of evidence there was a town named Nazareth which had multiple homes and could be considered a possible place where your mythical Jebus grew up.

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
14-07-2016, 09:05 AM (This post was last modified: 14-07-2016 09:22 AM by GoingUp.)
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 09:02 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 08:06 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period

Read that again, delusional one.
It is YOU that are doing the cherry-picking, and FAILED to actually read the very words YOU posted.

Quote:Concede, because you cannot win this argument with deception.

In your dreams. YOU have not a shred of evidence there was a town named Nazareth which had multiple homes and could be considered a possible place where your mythical Jebus grew up.

Reading Comprehension 101:

Read the bold text as a sentence, and you just might inch a little closer to what has been said.

"Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

"Until now ... no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

Do you get it yet?

All the evidence is available. I can't help that you choose to ignore it. If you are set in your beliefs, you are certainly not unlike a young earth creationist who also ignores archeological evidence.

In fact, you are identical.

I have read much of your stuff here, and recognize a potential talent in historical studies. But if you are going to allow your atheism to influence your position on historical things, then you are in the identical position of a gung-ho Christian historian who still believes that Jesus walked on water, and denies anything to the contrary.

You are in the same fucking boat dude, so get the fuck out and either sink or swim, because the sharks will eat you alive in this subject.

Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 09:20 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Looks like no contemporary evidence has yet been presented in 94 pages. I am shocked! Shocked I tell you! Gasp /sarcasmfont


But a dwelling has been found in an area that could be related to a place a character supposedly lived. Because clearly this is a meaningful argument for the character being real. Just like New York existing means Spiderman and The Avengers are real. /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
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
14-07-2016, 09:21 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 09:05 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 09:02 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Read that again, delusional one.
It is YOU that are doing the cherry-picking, and FAILED to actually read the very words YOU posted.


In your dreams. YOU have not a shred of evidence there was a town named Nazareth which had multiple homes and could be considered a possible place where your mythical Jebus grew up.

Reading Comprehension 101:

Read the bold text as a sentence, and you just might inch a little closer to what has been said.

"Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

"Until now ... no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

Do you get it yet?

All the evidence is available. I can't help that you choose to ignore it. If you are set in your beliefs, you are certainly not unlike a young earth creationist who also ignores archeological evidence.

In fact, you are identical.

Consider

One dwelling does not a town make. It could be the solitary dwelling of the funerary caretaker.

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
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
14-07-2016, 09:26 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 09:21 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 09:05 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  Reading Comprehension 101:

Read the bold text as a sentence, and you just might inch a little closer to what has been said.

"Until now a number of tombs from the time of Jesus were found in Nazareth; however, no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

"Until now ... no settlement remains have been discovered that are attributed to this period."

Do you get it yet?

All the evidence is available. I can't help that you choose to ignore it. If you are set in your beliefs, you are certainly not unlike a young earth creationist who also ignores archeological evidence.

In fact, you are identical.

Consider

One dwelling does not a town make. It could be the solitary dwelling of the funerary caretaker.

Speculation, and now prove there ever existed a funerary caretaker. The article also shows a trench being built, which was common to Jews defending against a Roman invasion.

So you think some funerary caretaker dug a trench to defend the graveyard from the Romans?

Please fuck off?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: