spin

Is knowing Jesus after the flesh like knowing Mary after the flesh, or is it something else? Whatever the case, does Paul use the phrase "kata sarka" in a coherent manner?

Incidentally, while looking up 2 Cor 5:16, I got the verse wrong and looked at 5:6: "while we are at home in the body, we are absent from the lord." Paul's knowledge of any of his theology needs no direct connection with the real world at all. But you must admit there is no way forward trying to get Paul to get tangible with regard to things he had never seen in reality.


spin

Gooch's dad

WTF is up with this thread, spin?

Rule 1 from your OP: NO REBUTTALS

So if someone makes an argument you don't like, you get to reply with a rebuttal, but I'm sure if anybody else did, or if we tried to rebut your rebuttal, you'd request moderator action?

This thread is obviously a waste of time, and somebody obviously deserves to be ignored.

spin

So I copied most of the OP from another thread. Hey, don't have me arrested for that. I merely wanted to show that the basic task Peter was trying to perform was as meaningful as its opposite.

Have fun. Relax. :wave:

douglas

Picky! Picky!

Even most Christian apologist admit there aren't any "contemporary" references to Jesus (except for maybe Josephus, which is highly debatable anyway)

The only example that the apologist article cites that I have a hard time dismissing as "non-contemporary" is the one about the Talmud:

My inability to refute this as a "contemporary" account has more to do with my general lack of knoweldge on the subject, than it does on it actually being "irrefutable." Do Jews have an opinion on when the Jewish version of Jesus/Yeshua actually walked the earth? Do we know when this reference was included in the Talmud and who added it?

I certainly understand why you would want to limit arguments to contemporary accounts, but I do believe that the non-contemporary accounts cited by this article do show that something was going on around 100 AD that was starting to garner some attention. It's certainly plausible (I know you don't like this term) to believe that this attention indicates that Jesus was a real person.

aa5874

According to a recent poll, less than 50% of Americans are absolutely sure that God does not exist, therefore Jesus exist.

jakejonesiv

1. Four notable and truthful men, namely Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John wrote biographies of his life. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
2. Every single apostle and disciple died a vile and violent death rather than deny Jesus. Nobody would die for what they knew was a lie. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
3. The Holy Spirit testifies to Christians in their hearts about Jesus. This causes them to lead holy lives and be better people, therby demonstrating that Jesus did exist.
4. Pliny the Youngeer, Josephus, and Suetonius all reported the historical Jesus. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
5. Tacitus had the official records of Pilate, and Jesus' execution order in his hands (which he had dug out of the Roman archives) when he wrote Annals 15:44. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
6. The teachings and personailty of jesus were so unique that it is absolutely impossible to be derived from myth. Only a dynamic historical person could have started the Christian movement. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
7. St. Paul wrote about Jesus' flesh, KATA SARKA! Therefore, Jesus did exist.
8. Not a single opponent of Christianity before the seventeenth century ever doubted that Jesus existed. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
9. He had a brother named James. Therefore, Jesus did exist.
10. Jesus was BORN OF A WOMAN! What more do you skeptics want??? Therefore, Jesus did exist. GAME _ SET _ MATCH.

Jake Jones IV

gstafleu

Cogito ergo Iesus est. (I think, therefore Jesus is.)

Gerard Stafleu

skinumb

Isn't that rephrasing the question? It's surely only irrelevant to 'did Jesus of The Gospels Exist?' rather than did Jesus who (suppossedly) inspired Christianity exist. Or maybe he wasn't resurected, but survived the tomb and hoofed it over to Rome for a second Ministry without the Palestinian eyewitnesses knowing. Okay, maybe not very likely, but plausibility isn't usually a factor in the Jesus story.

Or am I missing something? On first blush I interpreted the question like the second

skinumb

He might have crept out of the tomb overnight and went to Rome without telling anyone and unluckily got executed a second time. No less likely than some of the miracles he pulled off.

oops! posted twice, apologies,
Rich

Thomas II

Not Suetonius I was going by. It was CORNELIUS TACITUS, who lived 55 AD to 120 AD. Is he ok?