More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-02-2017, 02:16 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 01:58 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Let's try and make a list of what you think is being disputed with respect to the "Jesus James" connection.

That Jesus had a brother named Jesus, as multiply collaborated by the NT eye-witness, the eye witness account of Paul, and Josephus.

And your original dispute, is since this connection can't be establish archaeologically, than all of them, including Josephus are making allegations, or merely stating their beliefs.

And you more recent argument, has been that we need to establish Jesus's historicity independent of the James Jesus connection, before we can establish that connection.

"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
21-02-2017, 02:23 PM (This post was last modified: 21-02-2017 02:29 PM by TheBeardedDude.)
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 02:16 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 01:58 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Let's try and make a list of what you think is being disputed with respect to the "Jesus James" connection.

That Jesus had a brother named Jesus, as multiply collaborated by the NT eye-witness, the eye witness account of Paul, and Josephus.

And your original dispute, is since this connection can't be establish archaeologically, than all of them, including Josephus are making allegations, or merely stating their beliefs.

And you more recent argument, has been that we need to establish Jesus's historicity independent of the James Jesus connection, before we can establish that connection.

"That Jesus had a brother named Jesus..."

I have not yet seen anyone claim that Jesus was not claimed to have a brother. Jesus is claimed to have had a brother. Meaning that if Jesus is real, he probably had a brother. No one has said anything disputing this.

"...as multiply collaborated by the NT eye-witness, the eye witness account of Paul, and Josephus."

Corroborating the CLAIM that Jesus (if he existed) is claimed to have had a brother. What is NOT disputed is that it is claimed he had a brother. What is disputed is that if Jesus wasn't a real person, that means he didn't really have a brother. So the claims made of Jesus (like, he had a brother) could be corroborated as likely to be factually true (meaning he actually had a brother) if one shows Jesus was a real person. We keep waiting. Drinking Beverage

"And your original dispute, is since this connection can't be establish archaeologically, than all of them, including Josephus are making allegations, or merely stating their beliefs. "

This is fucking gibberish. Clean this shit up and try again. I am not going to try and decipher 6th grade writing skills to discern your points.

"And you more recent argument, has been that we need to establish Jesus's historicity independent of the James Jesus connection, before we can establish that connection."

Can a person have a brother if they never existed? No, that is nonsensical. So if you want to assert for a fact that the person Paul allegedly met was Jesus' brother, that means it is on you to show that Jesus existed and could therefore have a brother.




The take-home point here is that at least 2 out of your 3 points, are STRAW MEN (the one I denoted is indecipherable, I suspect it is also a straw man but it is so poorly written I can not tell what the fuck you are talking about). You are making arguments out of what we are saying that we are NOT making.

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
21-02-2017, 02:41 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
Popcorn


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-02-2017, 02:46 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 02:23 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Can a person have a brother if they never existed?

Of course they can't. If they have a brother they exist.

If it can be established that someone has a brother, than it goes without saying that they exist.

In fact Jesus could exist, and not have a brother. But Jesus could not have an actual brother, and not exist.

Now let's ask a question, let say we had archaeological evidence, that Jesus existed, would the currently available information we have regarding James, establish that he had a brother named James? Or would you still continue to argue that these are merely beliefs and allegations.

Quote:that means it is on you to show that Jesus existed and could therefore have a brother.

This a product of TbD shitty school of reasoning, any idiot can read the collaborating account of the James and Jesus connection, and conclude that Jesus existed based on this. Because as you yourself know, in order to have a brother you have to exist. You think they have to establish Jesus existed independently of this. And the answer is no they don't. That just a part of mental gymnastic you impose on yourself.

"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
21-02-2017, 03:29 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 02:46 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 02:23 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Can a person have a brother if they never existed?

Of course they can't. If they have a brother they exist.

If it can be established that someone has a brother, than it goes without saying that they exist.

In fact Jesus could exist, and not have a brother. But Jesus could not have an actual brother, and not exist.

Now let's ask a question, let say we had archaeological evidence, that Jesus existed, would the currently available information we have regarding James, establish that he had a brother named James? Or would you still continue to argue that these are merely beliefs and allegations.

Quote:that means it is on you to show that Jesus existed and could therefore have a brother.

This a product of TbD shitty school of reasoning, any idiot can read the collaborating account of the James and Jesus connection, and conclude that Jesus existed based on this. Because as you yourself know, in order to have a brother you have to exist. You think they have to establish Jesus existed independently of this. And the answer is no they don't. That just a part of mental gymnastic you impose on yourself.

"If it can be established that someone has a brother, than it goes without saying that they exist. "

In order to establish that someone has a brother (that Jesus has a brother), you have to establish that they (Jesus in this case) exist. You can't put the cart before the horse and expect it to work.

"In fact Jesus could exist, and not have a brother. But Jesus could not have an actual brother, and not exist. "

And Jesus could not exist but have someone claim to be his brother. Or not exist and have someone claim to have met his brother.

"Now let's ask a question, let say we had archaeological evidence, that Jesus existed, would the currently available information we have regarding James, establish that he had a brother named James? Or would you still continue to argue that these are merely beliefs and allegations."

Whether or not Jesus had a brother is irrelevant to me. I simply don't care. If it can be established (evidentially) that Jesus existed, I would buy it that he had a brother. We await the evidence Drinking Beverage

"This a product of TbD shitty school of reasoning, any idiot can read the collaborating account of the James and Jesus connection, and conclude that Jesus existed based on this."

You're correct, an idiot would read that and conclude Jesus existed. You just insulted yourself.

"Because as you yourself know, in order to have a brother you have to exist. You think they have to establish Jesus existed independently of this. "

So let's connect the dots using your logic.

Person A is claimed to have a brother.
Person B claims to have met the brother (person C).
Because Person B claims to have met Person C, Person A must exist? There is literally no other possible conclusion you can conceive of in your head?

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
21-02-2017, 04:01 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 03:29 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  In order to establish that someone has a brother (that Jesus has a brother), you have to establish that they (Jesus in this case) exist. You can't put the cart before the horse and expect it to work.

By establishing someone has a brother, you can establish that they exist.

To give an example. I never met Bob or his brother Phil who died earlier.. But I've read several accounts of people talking about Phil indicating he had a brother named Bob. I also read an eye-witness account of people meeting Bob, indicating he had a brother named Phil. I also read Bob's obituary, indicating that he was Phil's brother as well.

I can logically conclude based on this that Phil existed.

Quote:Whether or not Jesus had a brother is irrelevant to me. I simply don't care. If it can be established (evidentially) that Jesus existed, I would buy it that he had a brother. We await the evidence Drinking Beverage

lol, so can it be established with the material we have that if Jesus existed he had a brother named James? If you believe that the information we have can in fact establish that relationship, then that's all that needed.


Quote:Person A is claimed to have a brother.
Person B claims to have met the brother (person C).
Because Person B claims to have met Person C, Person A must exist? There is literally no other possible conclusion you can conceive of in your head?

If you think you have a more likely conclusion, that explains all the variety of collaborated sources here, than Jesus having an actual brother named James, I'm all ears.

If you don't have a more likely conclusion, that explains all these sources, better than Jesus have a brother named James, than your criticism are just smoke coming out of your fat ass. Whatever alternative conclusions you might have here, are bound to reek of desperation and mental gymnastics.

"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
21-02-2017, 04:22 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
Everyone having had latin at school knows that Cesar wrote frigging reports - lots of them - whereas the Jesus guy is oral history at best. Probably told and embellished at campfires along the Caravan routes.

De bello gallico is about real events, confirmed by history and archeology alike, whereas there's zero scientific evidence for Jesus.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like abaris's post
21-02-2017, 04:58 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 04:01 PM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(21-02-2017 03:29 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  In order to establish that someone has a brother (that Jesus has a brother), you have to establish that they (Jesus in this case) exist. You can't put the cart before the horse and expect it to work.

By establishing someone has a brother, you can establish that they exist.

To give an example. I never met Bob or his brother Phil who died earlier.. But I've read several accounts of people talking about Phil indicating he had a brother named Bob. I also read an eye-witness account of people meeting Bob, indicating he had a brother named Phil. I also read Bob's obituary, indicating that he was Phil's brother as well.

I can logically conclude based on this that Phil existed.

Quote:Whether or not Jesus had a brother is irrelevant to me. I simply don't care. If it can be established (evidentially) that Jesus existed, I would buy it that he had a brother. We await the evidence Drinking Beverage

lol, so can it be established with the material we have that if Jesus existed he had a brother named James? If you believe that the information we have can in fact establish that relationship, then that's all that needed.


Quote:Person A is claimed to have a brother.
Person B claims to have met the brother (person C).
Because Person B claims to have met Person C, Person A must exist? There is literally no other possible conclusion you can conceive of in your head?

If you think you have a more likely conclusion, that explains all the variety of collaborated sources here, than Jesus having an actual brother named James, I'm all ears.

If you don't have a more likely conclusion, that explains all these sources, better than Jesus have a brother named James, than your criticism are just smoke coming out of your fat ass. Whatever alternative conclusions you might have here, are bound to reek of desperation and mental gymnastics.

More bullshit and ignoring of literally every point made refuting your stupidity. The only thing that stays the same is that everything changes (except tomato's bullshit)

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
21-02-2017, 05:06 PM
RE: More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
The simple fact that you can't read what is written to you and reply to it instead of continuously constructing straw men, speaks volumes of the depth and breadth of your intellect. If the only way you can "win" a debate on a subject is to be a dishonest twit, what's the point? Do you think more highly of yourself when you lie and are generally dishonest? Does it make you feel smart to have your arguments kicked in the teeth as you pathetically take shots at your straw men?

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
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
21-02-2017, 05:14 PM
More evidence for Jesus than Caesar?
(21-02-2017 04:58 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  More bullshit and ignoring of literally every point made refuting your stupidity. The only thing that stays the same is that everything changes (except tomato's bullshit)

Is this the best you got? Nice.

I was hoping to hear more about your excellent understanding of history.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: