Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-07-2016, 11:33 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
I don't feel like going back on 48 pages of xtian bullshittery. Did any of them ever come up with any "contemporary" accounts of their godboy? Or do they not know what "contemporary" means?

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
14-07-2016, 12:03 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 11:33 AM)Minimalist Wrote:  I don't feel like going back on 48 pages of xtian bullshittery. Did any of them ever come up with any "contemporary" accounts of their godboy? Or do they not know what "contemporary" means?

No. We're still on the "trying to prove Nazareth existed" pointlessness.

GoingUp also seems determined never to actually address the points raised, so I imagine we're going to be here a while.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
14-07-2016, 12:28 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 11:13 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 11:06 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  Awww .. play the apologetic card when the evidence stacks up against you because you don't have any legitimate argument whatsoever to contest it.

That is so cute!


FALSE PREMISE!

1. The supernatural aspects of Jesus qualify him as a myth, therefore Nazareth is also a myth.

2. The supernatural aspects of Jesus qualify him as a myth.

3. Therefore Nazareth is a myth.

Nice going, dude. Laughat



The only one making any shit up is you zealots.

The evidence indicates that people lived directly in Nazareth during the first century. Even if it's just one unearthed dwelling place so far, the rest of the evidence along with it- including the many tombs, graffiti, pottery, designation of priests, trench, biblical references- definitely indicate it was occupied by far more than just one family in one house.

All biased interpretation.
There is no actual evidence that Nazareth was a populated town early in the 1st Century.

Yes there is, and plenty of it.

But go ahead and ignore it. You can't help yourself, because you just can't even fathom the possibility that anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth could actually be true, any more than a young earther could fathom the possibility that evolution could be true.

It goes against everything you BELIEVE, after all.

And you think you are different than young earthers? I am completely indifferent to you both, so I can sit back and clearly see all the similarities.

And they are plentiful.

Fucking hilarious ... Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 12:38 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 12:28 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Yes there is, and plenty of it.

What appears to you to be "plenty" is hardly sufficient. We'll sit back and observe your bias continue to work.

Quote:But go ahead and ignore it. You can't help yourself, because you just can't even fathom the possibility that anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth could actually be true, any more than a young earther could fathom the possibility that evolution could be true.

Ah yes. We're all angry zealots. Facepalm
There may have been a man names Yeshua, there may not. It's all irrelevant. There is no way to know. "Anything to do" with the guy is lost to history.

Quote: because you just can't even fathom the possibility that anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth could actually be true, any more than a young earther could fathom the possibility that evolution could be true.

Any more than YOU could fathom the opposite true. YOU are just as biased as anyone else, here. AND you are not conversant with the issues, any longer. You admitted it.

Quote:It goes against everything you BELIEVE, after all.

YOU are no different.

Quote:And you think you are different than young earthers? I am completely indifferent to you both, so I can sit back and clearly see all the similarities.

And they are plentiful.

Fucking hilarious ... Laugh out load

So are you.
Fucking hilarious. .... LOL
You are no different. You tell yourself you are special.
You are not special. You TOLD us you were unwilling to learn.

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
14-07-2016, 02:14 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 12:38 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 12:28 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  Yes there is, and plenty of it.

What appears to you to be "plenty" is hardly sufficient. We'll sit back and observe your bias continue to work.

It's more than sufficient. In fact, no one who is qualified on this subject even considers the possibility that Nazareth didn't exist in the first century, and all of them view this "Nazareth didn't exist" crap as being nothing but the rantings of idiots who are disgruntled with religion.

If you walked into a room with the pros and announced "Nazareth never existed in the 1st century," you would bring down the house with laughter, because everyone would think you were joking due to the fact that no one could ever dream you were being serious.

You embarrass yourself.


Quote:
Quote: because you just can't even fathom the possibility that anything to do with Jesus of Nazareth could actually be true, any more than a young earther could fathom the possibility that evolution could be true.

Any more than YOU could fathom the opposite true. YOU are just as biased as anyone else, here. AND you are not conversant with the issues, any longer. You admitted it.

The moment I heard the claim that Nazareth didn't exist in the 1st century, I checked out the evidence to support the claim.

Firstly, there was no evidence to support the claim at all. None.

Secondly, every argument was nothing more than an argument from silence, and that isn't good enough by any stretch of the imagination.

Thirdly, all evidence that demonstrates the existence of Nazareth was ignored, or was contested with yet even more arguments from silence.

It didn't take long to figure out the claim was nothing but total and utter bullshit, unsupported and fallaciously implied. The only one I see who support this kind of crap are those prone to conspiracy theories, or those with a bone to pick with religion.

But no level headed person on earth with experience in this subject agrees with the claim, and for damn good reason.

Quote:
Quote:It goes against everything you BELIEVE, after all.

YOU are no different.

Yeah I am. I'm not like you, so therefore I am different. I don't buy into conspiracy theories, or hate on religion because I don't accept it.

That's how i am different. Try it sometime, you might do well with it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 03:37 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 02:14 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  It's more than sufficient. In fact, no one who is qualified on this subject even considers the possibility that Nazareth didn't exist in the first century, and all of them view this "Nazareth didn't exist" crap as being nothing but the rantings of idiots who are disgruntled with religion.

Except I'm not "disgruntled with religion". You make unfounded assumptions, as you need to to make your fool generalizations.

Quote:If you walked into a room with the pros and announced "Nazareth never existed in the 1st century," you would bring down the house with laughter, because everyone would think you were joking due to the fact that no one could ever dream you were being serious.

Yet you don't name even one. You admit you are not conversant with current trends.

Quote:You embarrass yourself.

Your opinion. Nothing more.

Quote:Yeah I am. I'm not like you, so therefore I am different. I don't buy into conspiracy theories, or hate on religion because I don't accept it.

Neither do I. Your assumptions are totally false.

Quote:That's how i am different. Try it sometime, you might do well with it.

You are no different.

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
14-07-2016, 04:39 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 03:37 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 02:14 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  It's more than sufficient. In fact, no one who is qualified on this subject even considers the possibility that Nazareth didn't exist in the first century, and all of them view this "Nazareth didn't exist" crap as being nothing but the rantings of idiots who are disgruntled with religion.

Except I'm not "disgruntled with religion". You make unfounded assumptions, as you need to to make your fool generalizations.

I have read enough debates between you and other people on this forum to warrant my position. From hard-core theists such as Call of the Wild(a total nut job btw), to hard-core atheists such as Free(either a scholar or exceptionally talented layman) you continuously hold the position that is most unlikely and improbable, grasping at threads just like a god damn young earther does.

You are just as disgruntled with religion as a younger earther is with evolution.

Laugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-07-2016, 04:57 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 04:39 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 03:37 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Except I'm not "disgruntled with religion". You make unfounded assumptions, as you need to to make your fool generalizations.

I have read enough debates between you and other people on this forum to warrant my position. From hard-core theists such as Call of the Wild(a total nut job btw), to hard-core atheists such as Free(either a scholar or exceptionally talented layman) you continuously hold the position that is most unlikely and improbable, grasping at threads just like a god damn young earther does.

You are just as disgruntled with religion as a younger earther is with evolution.

Laugh out load

You have no clue what I think about religion. I don't tolerate Fundamentalism.
The fact is you know NOTHING about me, and you're a fool, making assumptions, as that's you knee-jerk way to deal with people who disagree with you.

I have talked about it multiple times with multiple people.
You are just too clueless to have seen it or read it.
You are a blind idiot dolt of the first order.
You are not even conversant with the current issues involved in this subject you pretend to know about.

You don't get to tell me what I think, stupid gramps.
Thank goodness I don't have to actually deal with anyone like you IRL.

It's hilarious you should mention "Free".
Facepalm

Laugh out load

Consider

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
14-07-2016, 05:01 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
GoingUp - What the fuck is wrong with you, man?

Stop slinging accusations and acting like you're the only person on earth with a "proper" understanding of these subjects. We are here to discuss it, not to sling accusations of "atheist fundamentalist" (or whatever) around whenever someone disagrees with you or what YOU feel is the scholarly consensus on something... even if it really is the consensus, it may be a tradition that needs to be further challenged.

What you are doing is attempting to manipulate the conversation by emotion, rather than dealing in facts, while claiming to be dealing in facts and hiding by a pretense of neutrality. A neutral person would actually deal with the points being raised, rather than slurring the people making them.

It's one of the most irritating approaches I've seen, in some ways worse than the religious fundamentalists.

Several people have now raised points that you simply gloss over, myself included. My point was simple and ignored in your last response... the archaeological evidence you cited points to a single, small dwelling. Do you really not understand that a village can be built in the course of 70 years? How many American small towns do you think now exist that didn't exist in 1946, or more accurately, how many crossroads sites which consist of a couple of hovels can develop into a small village (worthy of one priest) in the course of 70 years?

All the sources you mention which detail Nazareth as a place are written long after the time Jesus was supposed to have had a father with a career as a carpenter, there, including the Gospels you reference, written by and for people who had likely never been to Nazareth.

You cannot ignore these basic questions of reasonable inference and basic skepticism, while simultaneously accusing US of being the ones who are too stubborn to change our minds.

Edit to Add: Another point I made, in my post you ignored, was that "in the first century" covers a lot of ground, so while yes we would be laughed at for saying it didn't exist in the first century, the question of whether it was there at the turn of the millennium is a wholly different question, and you are being disingenuous by conflating the two questions.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
14-07-2016, 05:33 PM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(14-07-2016 04:57 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(14-07-2016 04:39 PM)GoingUp Wrote:  I have read enough debates between you and other people on this forum to warrant my position. From hard-core theists such as Call of the Wild(a total nut job btw), to hard-core atheists such as Free(either a scholar or exceptionally talented layman) you continuously hold the position that is most unlikely and improbable, grasping at threads just like a god damn young earther does.

You are just as disgruntled with religion as a younger earther is with evolution.

Laugh out load

You have no clue what I think about religion.

It's obvious from your own words what your thoughts are.

Quote:I don't tolerate Fundamentalism.

And the existence of Nazareth in the 1st century is some kind of fundamentalist belief, right?


Quote:The fact is you know NOTHING about me, and you're a fool, making assumptions, as that's you knee-jerk way to deal with people who disagree with you.

Like I have said, I read your threads with other posters, and have assumed nothing.

Quote:I have talked about it multiple times with multiple people.
You are just too clueless to have seen it or read it.
You are a blind idiot dolt of the first order.
You are not even conversant with the current issues involved in this subject you pretend to know about.

Oh cry me a river, will ya?

Quote:You don't get to tell me what I think, stupid gramps.

That's because you are too busy telling everybody else what you think, so you don't need me to tell you anything. It won't get through to you anyways.

Quote:It's hilarious you should mention "Free".

You brought him up several pages ago, and Mark kept referring to a thread regarding "Who was Saint Paul" in which Free participated. I'm not sure what you see about it as being hilarious, but then again ... with the way your mind works, off kilter and all , who the fuck knows? Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: