aa5874

Let me make my position clear, since your statement may not reflect my position. It is my view that the historicity of Jesus the Christ is baseless, without merit.

Now, as I have responded to numerous posts, I have come to the realisation that my argument can be simplified. I can now base my argument on one miracle, although I have used other arguments, this miracle is the virgin birth.

I am of the opinion that miracles do not occur, the virgin birth miracle did not occur, all events surrounding that miracle did not occur therefore Jesus as described in the NT is based on fiction, and furthermore everything wrtten about Jesus the Christ in the NT is fiction.

Now, I am of the view, that if an entity really exists, then some things said about it will be true and some things may be fiction. However, if an entity is fictitious in nature, then everything said about it will be untrue, hence fiction.

If I were to use my theory on the fictitious character called Superman, then I would expect everything said about him to be false including, his birth, his name, Clark Kent, his place of residence, the name of his parents, his place of employment, his acquaintances and his superhuman acts.
Again, everthing said about a unicorn will be false and the same applies to a mermaid.

If I apply my theory to any known real person, then it holds true, some information will be true about the person and other information may be false.

Now, if I apply my theory to Jesus the Christ, I cannot find any information about Jesus the Christ that I know will be or is true and all I know about him is false, including the prophecies, the virgin birth, one of the genealogies, the temptation, the miracles and the burial, to name a few.

Now all I wish is that an HJer could show me, within reason, anything that he knows about Jesus the Christ that is true, as written in the NT, and I will make an inquiry and then, if necessary, accept defeat.

You have already acknowledge that I am a real person. Some things said about real persons, and indeed any real entity, will be true or is true and other things said maybe false.

It is not possible to find anything true about fictitious entities, and this has been my experience so far with respect to Jesus the Christ as written in the scriptures.

Perahelion

This is the nub of the myth of the christian religion for me, the contemporary historians of the so called jesus didn't know he existed, they didn't write about him, if he had made such big waves that would not have been the case.

aa5874

I get the impression that you think it is entirely possible to identify and locate real historical characters, or should I say real persons, from known established fictitious material.

aa5874

Error in post

J-D

The following argument is logically valid:

Premise 1: If an entity really exists, then at least some statements made about it will be true.
Premise 2: There is no statement made about Jesus which is true.
Conclusion: Jesus does not really exist.

The following argument is not logically valid:

Premise 1: If an entity really exists, then at least some statements made about it will be true.
Premise 2: There is no statement made about Jesus which is definitely known to be true.
Conclusion: Jesus does not really exist.

Can you see the difference?

J-D

Then you get the wrong impression. Try focussing your attention on what I actually do say, rather than what you imagine I say. If I am not expressing myself clearly enough for you to understand, you could try pointing to some actual statement I have made and asking me to clarify it. Telling me that you know what I am saying does not impress me. I know what I said, and it's not what you think.

spin

You are stating an opinion. Nothing more.

I've tried to show you just how simple and fallacious it is.

Your claim is some x are y, therefore all x are y, where x = data about Jesus, and y = fictitious. The argument doesn't work.

Yes, I understand that that is your opinion.

And the problem is that you have to demonstrate that each and every aspect is fictitious. You can't do this.

Yes, we've heard you say this before. It still comes to the same point. You can't get passed assuming your conclusion, as there is no other way from your data to get there.

Bots aren't real people.

You need to demonstrate that you are talking about a fictitious entity. You have not done so yet. You've only indicated that some things said about Jesus are false. Some things said about you are fictitious, but you claim to be a real person.


spin

J-D

Think about this.

No contemporary Chinese historians wrote anything about Jesus.

But then, no contemporary Chinese historians wrote anything about Cyrus of Persia. Do we therefore conclude that Cyrus didn't exist? No. It might, however, be reasonable to conclude that Cyrus didn't have enough global impact to register with Chinese historians.

From an absence of reference to Jesus in contemporary historians, it is reasonable to draw conclusions about how limited his contemporary impact could have been, but I don't see that it's sufficient grounds to conclude that he can't possibly have existed at all.

You implicitly acknowledge this when you include in your statement the qualifying clause 'if he had made such big waves'. I think we can agree on there not having been, historically, a Jesus who 'made such big waves' in his own lifetime, but that doesn't conclusively eliminate the possibility of a Jesus who didn't make 'such big waves' in his own lifetime.

aa5874

No, not at all. I am ready to throw out all the forgeries, interpolations and redactions in the NT.

Johann_Kaspar

No. Marcion did.