Yellum Notnef

I have no idea what Susan2 is going on about or what the point is.

Susan2

No, that would not be evidence. And since your evidence is not evidence, your argument is not an argument, not valid. Repent.

What do the Nags Head writings prove, that there was a Jesus?

avi

I agree with you Fenton

I am confused.
How does one dig up data that proves absence of a particular person?

I am not even convinced that the paintings found in the supposed "Christian house church" were created in CE 235, as has been believed by most archaeologists for decades now....

How do we confirm, when unearthing some object, or some document, the date when the data was interred?

How does one establish the motive for the burial? Why would anyone, two millenia before the present day, seek to bury something proving that someone or something did not exist, unless there were reason to do so? We have no evidence that JC existed, let alone evidence that his non-existence was of such potential threat that someone felt obliged to bury evidence proving his non-existence.

The fact that no one in that era saw fit to write even one word about him, suggests that if he had been a living person, his influence must have been of such insignificance, that he was forgotten after death.

It is rather the opposite that would have been interesting to dig up: an object or document that someone buried two thousand years ago, that proved the guy was not simply a mythical being. Isn't it peculiar that nothing to date has been found, of such character?

Yellum Notnef

But what the hell does sexual assault have to do with evidence for Jesus in the first place? I read the thread and I have no idea how it turned to child abuse.:huh:

spin

No, I'm saying they have no need for the contortions which christianity is so crafty at. They've had a long time to develop the craft as well.

How do you test it? In this day and age, we know that claims that cannot be tested in any way have no significance.

What's so honest about a bunch of guys who were prepared to kill each other over whether Jesus was god or not?

Certainly necessary. The history of the issue shows that many religionists of the era had backed themselves into a corner and had to resolve the issue some how. It came down to the Arian approach, Jesus was god-like, or the Ossian approach, Jesus was god. Not much difference, but a difference people were willing to go to blows about.

Nice try but no teddy bear.

Most of the founding fathers were christian religionists, so they couldn't help but be biased.

It is the history of how it came to be a necessity that should open your little eyes. It was a purely political process. How does a bunch of guys decide whether Jesus was god or not? Think about it, please. Even the pagan emperor Julian tried to stop the strife between the christians.

Huey, Dewey and Louie.

Sugar and spice and all things nice.

Emerson, Lake and Palmer.

Rum, coconut cream and pineapple juice.

War, famine and pestilence.

Athos, Porthos and Aramis.

Mary, the front door man and the backdoor man.

The butcher, the baker, the candlestick maker.

The Fellowship of the Ring. The Two Towers. And The Return of the King.

All made in heaven.

Comments are supposed to be related to what you are commenting about. This comment is more a reflecting of your drifting thoughts.

Test the claim. Articles of faith are usually untestable. Why is Mohammed the prophet of Allah?

It took the cock crow for him to catch on. You must be joking. If I tell you that you are going to fall on your ass three times before the start of the TV news, your normal reaction is to pay more attention. It's not like the story gives Peter time to forget or anything. He's made out to be a total fool.

The context is young earth christians who in the face of plain evidence such as C14 dating devoutly maintain that the earth was created in 4004 BC.

This is some marvelous tangent. Talk about the refusal of christians to come to grips with scientific evidence and Susan2 changes the subject onto child abuse. Good christian parents, catholic priests, your friendly neighborhood politican all indulge in child abuse.

(Yes, education, compassionate education, based on the development of independent thought and analysis. You can't have a good education when you are a mental slave of religion or social conservatism.)

You mightn't have studied much education theory, but you might learn something useful from the non-believers there.

Oh, I agree.


spin

rlogan

Finishing Susan2 list....


Sun, Moon, Earth.............. I think there's more bodies than this.

Philosophy/religion, secular government, science... you forgot NASCAR

Mother, Father, Child(ren)........... No mother in law?

Protein, vegtables, fruit.......... pfffft. BEER!!

Reading, writing, arithmatic.... Too many. Please shorten!

Bacon, Eggs, Hash Browns..... Coffee.


I like my eggs the same way as my girls: over easy.

mountainman

(4.0) earthquake at Vatican - archives spill to streets

(4.1) Current pope is quoted "What profit has not that fable of Christ brought us!"

(4.2) Someone inside the Vatican "discovers evidence" and leaks documentary evidence to the press

(4.3) Someone outside the Vatican breaks into the archives.

(4.4) Signed confession of Eusebius is discovered.

mountainman

Yes but not in any first approximation.
Those three represent our "cosmic cradle".

Yellum Notnef

I think you should make getting into those archives your top priority.

mountainman

Tunnelling in from rural Australia has not been ruled out. The first few quotes I tendered for were rather expensive. Any other bright ideas out there?


As a final comment about 'records proving jesus did not exist' we might await an advance in technology by which papyri fragments can be scientifically dated without their destruction - - such as some form of spectral analysis of water content or something like that. These things cannot be C14 dated.

The growing body of papyri fragments which defend the hypothesis that the new testament was around in the 1st and 2nd centuries (via paleogrpahy) if removed enmasse to a later century -- via a technological discovery -- might shake the faith of critically minded skeptics to doubt whether the new testament was historically present until a much later than is currenly presumed.