Proof of Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-11-2012, 03:15 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:14 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:06 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  We can also assert that he did exist, so it's a lose-lose situation.

...Except that its not.

We are not saying Jesus didn't exist, we are saying his existence consistent to the bible is DOUBTFUL.

We can also say

"I DO NOT believe Jesus existed." Which is not a positive claim at all and doesn't assert anything... Well except nonbelief.

But it all comes down to whoever has the best evidence to support an argument. Unfortunately for those who contest existence, the believers actually do have evidence.It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, for all that matters is that it exists.

Some evidence beats no evidence every single time. It takes a 50/50 split at the start of the debate and turns it into a 70/30 split in favor of existence by the end, which means "likely, probable, very possible."

They don't have to conclusively prove existence to win the argument. All they need to do is provide a better argument, and they do because they have evidence.

You can try to argue against the evidence, but we do is assert this or that, and the evidence remains. Assertion changes absolutely nothing.

What evidence?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:25 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:15 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:14 PM)Free Wrote:  But it all comes down to whoever has the best evidence to support an argument. Unfortunately for those who contest existence, the believers actually do have evidence.It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, for all that matters is that it exists.

Some evidence beats no evidence every single time. It takes a 50/50 split at the start of the debate and turns it into a 70/30 split in favor of existence by the end, which means "likely, probable, very possible."

They don't have to conclusively prove existence to win the argument. All they need to do is provide a better argument, and they do because they have evidence.

You can try to argue against the evidence, but we do is assert this or that, and the evidence remains. Assertion changes absolutely nothing.

What evidence?

Okay, so let's take Tacitus, for example. We both know what it says, so let's see what you can do, aside from assertion, to discredit it.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:26 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:25 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:15 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  What evidence?

Okay, so let's take Tacitus, for example. We both know what it says, so let's see what you can do, aside from assertion, to discredit it.

How do we both Know what it says? Have I met you before?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:29 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:14 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:06 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  We can also assert that he did exist, so it's a lose-lose situation.

...Except that its not.

We are not saying Jesus didn't exist, we are saying his existence consistent to the bible is DOUBTFUL.

We can also say

"I DO NOT believe Jesus existed." Which is not a positive claim at all and doesn't assert anything... Well except nonbelief.

But it all comes down to whoever has the best evidence to support an argument. Unfortunately for those who contest existence, the believers actually do have evidence.It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, for all that matters is that it exists.

Some evidence beats no evidence every single time. It takes a 50/50 split at the start of the debate and turns it into a 70/30 split in favor of existence by the end, which means "likely, probable, very possible."

They don't have to conclusively prove existence to win the argument. All they need to do is provide a better argument, and they do because they have evidence.

You can try to argue against the evidence, but all we do is assert this or that, and the evidence remains. Assertion changes absolutely nothing. If we take all emotion out of it, and weigh the evidence on a scale against the evidence for non existence, obviously the scales will tip in favor of the believers.

Existence of something you call evidence is not sufficient - the evidence must be evaluated and weighed. If your only evidence is the gospels, you don't have any credible evidence.

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
01-11-2012, 03:30 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:25 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:15 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  What evidence?

Okay, so let's take Tacitus, for example. We both know what it says, so let's see what you can do, aside from assertion, to discredit it.

Plus, is false evidence better than no evidence?

If so, then you are going to have to believe in many things.

How can one provide evidence for ones nonexistence?

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:33 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:29 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:14 PM)Free Wrote:  But it all comes down to whoever has the best evidence to support an argument. Unfortunately for those who contest existence, the believers actually do have evidence.It doesn't matter how good the evidence is, for all that matters is that it exists.

Some evidence beats no evidence every single time. It takes a 50/50 split at the start of the debate and turns it into a 70/30 split in favor of existence by the end, which means "likely, probable, very possible."

They don't have to conclusively prove existence to win the argument. All they need to do is provide a better argument, and they do because they have evidence.

You can try to argue against the evidence, but all we do is assert this or that, and the evidence remains. Assertion changes absolutely nothing. If we take all emotion out of it, and weigh the evidence on a scale against the evidence for non existence, obviously the scales will tip in favor of the believers.

Existence of something you call evidence is not sufficient - the evidence must be evaluated and weighed. If your only evidence is the gospels, you don't have any credible evidence.

No gospels.

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:34 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:26 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:25 PM)Free Wrote:  Okay, so let's take Tacitus, for example. We both know what it says, so let's see what you can do, aside from assertion, to discredit it.

How do we both Know what it says? Have I met you before?

No you haven't, but assuming you are well versed in the subject?

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 03:36 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:34 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:26 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  How do we both Know what it says? Have I met you before?

No you haven't, but assuming you are well versed in the subject?

I know what Taticus says

[Image: 0013382F-E507-48AE-906B-53008666631C-757...cc3639.jpg]
Credit goes to UndercoverAtheist.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:10 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 03:36 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:34 PM)Free Wrote:  No you haven't, but assuming you are well versed in the subject?

I know what Taticus says

Okay, so why is what Tacitus wrote not "good evidence" to support the existence of the dude "Jesus" who the Christians fawn over?

Having problems with your computer? Visit our Free Tech Support thread for help!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:12 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:10 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 03:36 PM)Atothetheist Wrote:  I know what Taticus says

Okay, so why is what Tacitus wrote not "good evidence" to support the existence of the dude "Jesus" who the Christians fawn over?

Tacitus was not even alive during the alleged events of the gospels.

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
Post Reply
Forum Jump: