Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Doug Shaver · 08-06-2011, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Toto, Stephan, your replies do not address the issue raised by aa5874.

He has raised exactly those same issues countless times in other threads, and they have been addressed in those threads. There is nothing new in his OP here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Two or more, evidence based publications, showing the unequivocal presence of an historical figure named Jesus, who lived in Galilee, somewhere.

Some of us here already know that there are none. Those who haven't been convinced by now won't change their minds just because aa5874 says so for the zillionth time.

Doug Shaver · 08-06-2011, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

I think Nietzsche wrote somewhere that the best way to help sabotage a movement is to have someone develop bad arguments for the cause.

I'm not familiar with Nietzsche's thinking on that topic, but I couldn't agree more.

When you have good reasons to question an expert consensus, the last thing you need is assistance from people with bad reasons for questioning that consensus.

maryhelena · 08-06-2011, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Now, it is MY THEORY that the historical Jesus is the IMAGINATION of Scholars BASED on the FACT that HJ of Nazareth has ZERO credible sources of antiquity.

Do you UNDERSTAND that?

This means that HJ of Nazareth MUST be constructed from a BLANK SHEET of paper.

Many Christians RECONSTRUCT their Jesus from sources of antiquity that they CLAIM are RELIABLE and even INERRANT.

But Scholars want to CONSTRUCT an HJ from sources of antiquity that they CLAIM are NOT RELIABLE and FULL of ERRORS.

How did Scholars come to the conclusion that an HJ was born in Nazareth?

Not even the Bible, Ignatius, Philo, Josephus, Suetonius, Tacitus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Origen, Eusebius, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Clement of Rome, Clement of Alexandria support such a claim.

Right Now, I am ONLY willing to ACCEPT that Jesus was a MYTH fable like the Myth fables that other Christians BELIEVED based on the PRESENT EXTANT evidence.

I am arguing that Jesus was NOT a Man in the NT.

I am arguing that HJ is the IMAGINATION of Scholars.

:thumbs:

aa5874 · 08-06-2011, 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Toto, Stephan, your replies do not address the issue raised by aa5874.

He has raised exactly those same issues countless times in other threads, and they have been addressed in those threads. There is nothing new in his OP here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by avi

Two or more, evidence based publications, showing the unequivocal presence of an historical figure named Jesus, who lived in Galilee, somewhere.

Some of us here already know that there are none. Those who haven't been convinced by now won't change their minds just because aa5874 says so for the zillionth time.

Again, other people like Doherty have addressed the HJ/MJ argument and have several written books and have attempted to argue their position right here on SEVERAL threads and some people do NOT agree with Doherty yet I don't see you making any objection to Doherty posting here.

If you have NOTHING to contribute then just do NOT post on this thread.

Toto · 08-06-2011, 11:20 AM

Doherty has written several books because the question of whether there was a historical Jesus is not simple. If you could just say - there is no hard evidence therefore there was no historical Jesus - you wouldn't need to write a book.

aa5874 · 08-06-2011, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Doherty has written several books because the question of whether there was a historical Jesus is not simple. If you could just say - there is no hard evidence therefore there was no historical Jesus - you wouldn't need to write a book.

Doherty is UNWILLING to accept the historical Jesus and his latest book is entitled "Jesus Neither God Nor Man" so what you say does NOT make sense.

Doherty is NOT arguing that Jesus might have been God or might have been man.

You FAIL to understand that people can argue for whatever position they want.

I do NOT accept the historical Jesus of Nazareth based on the present extant EVIDENCE FROM ANTIQUITY and will CONTINUE to OPEN THREADS that EXPOSE the fact that HJ of Nazareth has NO credible historical sources of antiquity.

You are wasting your time trying to tell me what I should post.

Doug Shaver · 08-07-2011, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

You are wasting your time trying to tell me what I should post.

People are wasting their time trying to tell you anything at all.

Doug Shaver · 08-07-2011, 06:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

I don't see you making any objection to Doherty posting here.

You and Doherty both say Jesus never existed. That is the extent of any resemblance between you and him.

aa5874 · 08-07-2011, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

You are wasting your time trying to tell me what I should post.

People are wasting their time trying to tell you anything at all.

I NO longer want to accept opinions about HJ .

I ONLY need to hear about and SEE SOURCES of antiquity about HJ.

If you DON'T have any SOURCES of antiquity about HJ then you are wasting my time.

aa5874 · 08-07-2011, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Shaver

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

I don't see you making any objection to Doherty posting here.

You and Doherty both say Jesus never existed. That is the extent of any resemblance between you and him.

Well, I can't find any credible sources of antiquity that show that it was believed in antiquity that Jesus was CRUCIFIED in the SUB-LUNAR so I am NOT going to say what Doherty says.

I ONLY want to say what SOURCES of antiquity say.

Sources of antiquity say that it was BELIEVED that Jesus, the Child of the Holy Ghost, the Word that was God and the Creator was crucified in Jerusalem AFTER he was condemned to be guilty of death for Blasphemy by the Sanhedrin and AFTER a trial with Pontius Pilate.

See ALL the Gospels.

I NO longer want to accept opinion.

I ONLY want to accept SOURCES of antiquity.

If you have NO SOURCES of antiquity then it is pointless attempting to talk to me.

I DON'T have to say what Doherty says because I have SOURCES of antiquity to SUPPORT what I say.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-06-2011, 11:20 AM	#15
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Doherty has written several books because the question of whether there was a historical Jesus is not simple. If you could just say - there is no hard evidence therefore there was no historical Jesus - you wouldn't need to write a book.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.