Jesus never existed (video)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-12-2015, 10:04 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 07:52 PM)jennybee Wrote:  Some scholars say that. Others believe he existed as a person--but not as a demigod.

well if theists said this then at least their claim would be possible unlike the millions of impossible claims they keep making
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Ace's post
11-12-2015, 10:04 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 09:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Show me ONE poll of any "experts" in the field. It's not "conjecture and hyperbole" to assume that people EMPLOYED by religious institutions are "occupationally obligated" to tow the line. It's just healthy skepticism. There is no "body" of non-religious experts in the field that even talk about the subject. The claim is that there is a consensus. Where did you get that idea ?
Now you're just being silly. A consensus is the sum of all published scholarly works and papers in a given field, not the result of an opinion poll. Do you think you'd be able to provide, say, Luminon with a single poll which attested to the fact that the majority of physicists don't believe in the existence of Ether? Of course not. The reason we know that is because that's what the vast majority of the scientific literature on the subject points towards.

Come on, Bucky. Even Bart Ehrman, one of the world's most prominent irreligious scholars, said the following in his book Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth: "He [Jesus] certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence."

Are you going to tell me that he's biased as well?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2015, 10:08 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 09:41 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  What happens when it is a bunch of theologians who make their living peddling bullshit to the ignorant masses? Oh, I know. THEY don't have an AGENDA like the skeptics, do they?
Well, similar arguments have been advanced by some Creationists, e.g. that most scientists support the theory of evolution because they would be fired or have their funding cut if they publicly came out against it or because it supports their atheistic world views. I don't think I need to point out why baseless conjecture like that is absurd.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2015, 11:06 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 10:04 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-12-2015 09:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Show me ONE poll of any "experts" in the field. It's not "conjecture and hyperbole" to assume that people EMPLOYED by religious institutions are "occupationally obligated" to tow the line. It's just healthy skepticism. There is no "body" of non-religious experts in the field that even talk about the subject. The claim is that there is a consensus. Where did you get that idea ?
Now you're just being silly. A consensus is the sum of all published scholarly works and papers in a given field, not the result of an opinion poll. Do you think you'd be able to provide, say, Luminon with a single poll which attested to the fact that the majority of physicists don't believe in the existence of Ether? Of course not. The reason we know that is because that's what the vast majority of the scientific literature on the subject points towards.

Come on, Bucky. Even Bart Ehrman, one of the world's most prominent irreligious scholars, said the following in his book Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth: "He [Jesus] certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence."

Are you going to tell me that he's biased as well?

Ehrman's writings on that subject are not as compelling as his other books. As far as the other scholars, Bucky is right.

It is a legitimate question. It should be researched, studied and considered.

If the answer is as clear cut as you say, such investigation should point that out.

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
11-12-2015, 11:24 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 10:04 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-12-2015 09:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Show me ONE poll of any "experts" in the field. It's not "conjecture and hyperbole" to assume that people EMPLOYED by religious institutions are "occupationally obligated" to tow the line. It's just healthy skepticism. There is no "body" of non-religious experts in the field that even talk about the subject. The claim is that there is a consensus. Where did you get that idea ?
Now you're just being silly. A consensus is the sum of all published scholarly works and papers in a given field, not the result of an opinion poll. Do you think you'd be able to provide, say, Luminon with a single poll which attested to the fact that the majority of physicists don't believe in the existence of Ether? Of course not. The reason we know that is because that's what the vast majority of the scientific literature on the subject points towards.

Come on, Bucky. Even Bart Ehrman, one of the world's most prominent irreligious scholars, said the following in his book Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth: "He [Jesus] certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence."

Are you going to tell me that he's biased as well?

"He [Jesus] certainly existed, as virtually every competent scholar of antiquity, Christian or non-Christian, agrees, based on clear and certain evidence."

Are you going to tell me that he's biased as well?


I think Bart is biased on this. He is too certain. He has no definitive evidence for the existence of a Jesus. I am speaking as someone who thinks there probably was an historical character, yet I'm not certain.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2015, 11:39 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 08:18 PM)WillHopp Wrote:  Mark Fulton will be here any sec ...

Hi!Big Grin

I like Atwill's ideas. They make sense.

It's interesting how so many people get too emotional when they hear Atwill's theories, usually responding with ad hominems against him.

They usually haven't read his book. Or they don't appreciate how the government at the time controlled the spread of literature, and particularly how the Flavians rewrote history. Or they can't imagine the government was sophisticated enough to use propaganda. Or they don't understand the animosity between Judaism and gentile cultures at the time.

Also, if Atwill is right, it means that all the bullshit associated with picking the new Testament to pieces has been a great waste of time. People don't like that because it means their jobs, and their books, are pointless.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-12-2015, 11:56 PM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
^^ See, told ya. Thanks, Mark.

Check out my now-defunct atheism blog. It's just a blog, no ads, no revenue, no gods.
----
Atheism promotes critical thinking; theism promotes hypocritical thinking. -- Me
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WillHopp's post
12-12-2015, 12:47 AM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 10:08 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-12-2015 09:41 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  What happens when it is a bunch of theologians who make their living peddling bullshit to the ignorant masses? Oh, I know. THEY don't have an AGENDA like the skeptics, do they?
Well, similar arguments have been advanced by some Creationists, e.g. that most scientists support the theory of evolution because they would be fired or have their funding cut if they publicly came out against it or because it supports their atheistic world views. I don't think I need to point out why baseless conjecture like that is absurd.


In science it is the scientists themselves who are constantly trying to prove each other wrong, because not only is doing so a great way to keep everyone honest, it's also a great way to gain prestige if your work overturns another; and the more established the work is that you've overturned, the more prestige you gain for making a bigger paradigm shift.


Also we have already seen the biblical scholarship shun, attack, and otherwise ostracize their own whenever someone rocks the boat too much. Just look at the history in regards to the historicity of the Jewish patriarchs. Those who proposed, backed, or otherwise supported the idea that Moses, Abraham, and David were myth were blacklisted by their peers. The biblical scholarship community, consisting of people with degrees not just from Harvard but also from such backwater institutions such as Jerry Falwell's Liberty University, represents a very different spectrum of competency than does evolutionary biologists with accredited degrees.


If someone could overthrow evolution with a theory that explained all of the evidence better, they'd be a living legend. If their work withstood scrutiny and peer review, the community would come around; as would many multi-billion dollar industries that rely upon good science. But Christianity is heavily invested in the assumption that Jesus really existed, they have to be; and they are the money behind the vast majority of biblical scholarship. The religion can change, does change, and will change; it is a marvel of social evolution. But while it can mold itself to absorb evolutionary theory and modern cosmology, it cannot do that with mythicism. Or at least, not in the same way or to the same degree. It's possible, and we might yet see 'cultural Christians' in the way we see cultural Jews and others within that faith that already accept the mythical origins of the Torah and their patriarchs.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
12-12-2015, 06:20 AM
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(11-12-2015 11:06 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Ehrman's writings on that subject are not as compelling as his other books. As far as the other scholars, Bucky is right.

It is a legitimate question. It should be researched, studied and considered.

If the answer is as clear cut as you say, such investigation should point that out.
I don't understand what you're getting at. If anyone would be able to list all the published resources from biblical scholars who support the historicity of Christ, it would be Bucky Ball. I don't have access to those resources. The only thing I have is statements from prominent atheist scholars, who are no doubt more knowledgeable about the commonly held views within their own community than any of us, admitting that the consensus points towards the existence of Jesus as a historical figure. Heck, even Robert Price, an atheist and an advocate of a form mythicism himself, admits this. How about the Jesus Seminar?

(11-12-2015 11:24 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I think Bart is biased on this. He is too certain. He has no definitive evidence for the existence of a Jesus. I am speaking as someone who thinks there probably was an historical character, yet I'm not certain.
There is no definitive evidence for the existence of any historical figure from antiquity. Granted, there certainly are historical figures whose existence we are much more certain of than Jesus' because we have coins with their faces on it or contemporary documents about them written by themselves or by others, but there really can be no certainty in historical studies. That's something I agree with, but to suggest that an atheist would be biased in favor of the historicity of Christ sounds somewhat comical.

I understand why you would think that about Christian scholars, but if even atheists who share their views are biased, then who would be an example of an unbiased historian? What about Jewish scholars, are they biased as well?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
12-12-2015, 06:34 AM (This post was last modified: 12-12-2015 06:48 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Jesus never existed (video)
(12-12-2015 06:20 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-12-2015 11:06 PM)Fatbaldhobbit Wrote:  Ehrman's writings on that subject are not as compelling as his other books. As far as the other scholars, Bucky is right.

It is a legitimate question. It should be researched, studied and considered.

If the answer is as clear cut as you say, such investigation should point that out.
I don't understand what you're getting at. If anyone would be able to list all the published resources from biblical scholars who support the historicity of Christ, it would be Bucky Ball. I don't have access to those resources. The only thing I have is statements from prominent atheist scholars, who are no doubt more knowledgeable about the commonly held views within their own community than any of us, admitting that the consensus points towards the existence of Jesus as a historical figure. Heck, even Robert Price, an atheist and an advocate of a form mythicism himself, admits this. How about the Jesus Seminar?


Price acknowledges what the consensus is, but as a mythcist, he disagrees with it. Last I checked, he was of the opinion that if a historical Jesus did exist, it cannot be known given the current state of the evidence; and that he finds a mythical Jesus to be a more probable (though not definitive) explanation.


(12-12-2015 06:20 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-12-2015 11:24 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  I think Bart is biased on this. He is too certain. He has no definitive evidence for the existence of a Jesus. I am speaking as someone who thinks there probably was an historical character, yet I'm not certain.
There is no definitive evidence for the existence of any historical figure from antiquity. Granted, there certainly are historical figures whose existence we are much more certain of than Jesus' because we have coins with their faces on it or contemporary documents about them written by themselves or by others, but there really can be no certainty in historical studies. That's something I agree with, but to suggest that an atheist would be biased in favor of the historicity of Christ sounds somewhat comical.

I understand why you would think that about Christian scholars, but if even atheists who share their views are biased, then who would be an example of an unbiased historian? What about Jewish scholars, are they biased as well?


Since when was Ehrman an atheist? I've only ever seen him identify himself as an agnostic. Consider

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: