FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.

Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 10-21-2001, 12:10 AM   #31
Regular Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 410

The magazine Biblical Archaeology Review has a number of good articles on this subject, including a very short one called When was Jesus Born?, and linked to a debate between Dr. Steve Mason and Dr. Jerome Murphy-O'Connor as to whether we can know if Jesus was born in Bethlehem or not (Murphy-O'Conner says yes, Mason is agnostic on the question). A Response and Surresponse is also offered.

Personally, I accept the concensus that Jesus probably was born between 7 and 4 BC, and think that the evidence that He was born in Bethlehem is sufficient to grant it as both plausible and probable.

Nomad is offline  
Old 10-21-2001, 11:56 PM   #32
Regular Member
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 405

Originally posted by turtonm:
If you want to claim the vast majority of scholars in all concerned disciplines around the world believe Jesus was a real person, you'll have to show some evidence. Otherwise, you are just making noise.

Offering proof is now doing someone's homework for them? Why didn't I think of that! God exists; I won't bother "doing your homework for you" with proof--just do your own work & find the proof for yourself :] If you don't find any, BTW, I'll be sure to fault you for doing poorly.
Oh yeah; what do all those "other scholars" have to do with this? If they don't know anything about the Bible, they are irrelevant appeal to authority. If they do know about Christianity (and not something irrelevant; which would make this appeal to improper authority) please tell us who they are.

The one group who believe that Jesus was *entirely* myth (as opposed to believing that Jesus actually lived, whether or not that man conformed entirely to the NT) have always been charactorized as "extreme" to me; even by skeptics.

I just hope that it's not from the "Psychic Press" or like Achyra S, who likes to use the akashic record (sp?). Yes, the akashic record is the "look into my crystal ball" historical method; one I should hope critical minds are above.

Mmm, finally, if anyone cares, the usual dating is 4-6 BC for Jesus' birth. Yes, they made a mistake when calculating our calendars, but no one is going to change it now (though it was an amusing bit to throw at people hyped up on the "Millenium" -- it was over long before many people had thought about it
Photocrat is offline  
Old 10-22-2001, 05:29 AM   #33
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Barrayar
Posts: 11,866

Originally posted by Photocrat:

If they do know about Christianity (and not something irrelevant; which would make this appeal to improper authority) please tell us who they are.

I said in all concerned disciplines. I can't help it if you launch into tirades without reading, but don't attack me because you haven't read.

Yes, Photo, the burden of proof is on Bede to prove the truth of his statement.

Vorkosigan is offline  

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:36 PM.


This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.