one allegiance

So? The invalid illustrative points mean nothing. Moby Dick is a fictional character made up in somebody's mind...there is no evidence that he is real. THERE IS HOWEVER EVIDENCE THAT JESUS IS REAL outside of the Bible. And whoever says that there isn't doesn't know their history. It is that simple. Many Roman and Jewish historical texts mention Jesus and Christians.

Llyricist

What did they ever do to you??

one allegiance

Please, somebody with knowledge of what they are talking about formulate an argument against what I posted. Give me evidence to the CONTRARY of what happened or what someone meant in text from what I posted. None have you have touched my argument...you just say that I'm wrong.

xaxxat

I'm stiil waiting for you to provide evidence from those "original texts" you mentioned...

steph s.

this is nonsense. as you'll discover if you visit a university library and read some academic historical journals, historians 'rewrite history' mainly because they have conducted research and discovered new sources which may shed light on a subject. what historians do you know of that believe they can discover an "ideal 100 percent objective accuracy" about the past?

as richard j. evans (historian of nazism) said, "doing historical research is rather like doing a jigsaw puzzle where the pieces are scattered all over the house in several boxes, some of which have been destroyed, and where once it is put together, a significant number of the pieces are still missing".

things happened in the past. documents etc may or may not have survived which have left traces of them. we can only trace a path back to what happened through the documents and other evidence. but when the sources differ, historians can have great difficulty reconciling them. for example, the byzantine emperor justinian was either a great man and compassionate ruler who bravely fought to reconquer the lost western roman empire - according to procopius ('de aedificiis'), or, he was a sadistic tyrant with no regard for his subjects who was probably possessed - according to... procopius ('secret history'). modern views of justinian don't agree on where the objective historical core is, or even on whether one can be found at all. it's probably somewhere in the middle, but how will we ever know where?

so when you get to someone like jesus, for whom the supporting documents are so flimsy, being "100 percent" sure of anything is a complete no-no.

one allegiance

Why are you waiting on me. The texts are there for you to read, I'm not going to do the internet work for you. Go to my original argument and research the texts that I metioned notable Roman and Jewish historians wrote. It is there, I didn't pull this out of nowhere.

Clete

My point exactly. I was referencing the following point made by you:

------

I'm not sure I'd call Moby Dick a character per se, but that's not really relevant. The point is I've been lurking on this thread for it's entire duration and I've yet to see anything that convinces me that Jesus was a real person. I appreciated the effort you put into the longer post you wrote a page or so ago but I wasn't convinced by any of the arguments in it. You did, however, mention some Roman sources that you said you weren't up for posting at the time. I'd certainly be interested in seeing those.

I can't speak for anyone else, but the existence of a historical Jesus doesn't seem far fetched to me (whether or not he was divine is another matter of course). However, I've yet to see convincing evidence here or anywhere else that he was in fact real. If you have something else, by all means please post it. You may just convince me that a guy named Jesus really did exist 2000 years ago. You never know.

xaxxat

The ORIGINAL TEXTS are on the internet??? Wooooo!!!

Won't the scholars be amazed when they get the news! All that searching, digging and waiting gone for naught! They were on the internet the whole time! Won't they be embarrassed when they find out they could have been using the originals instead of all those copies? Dayum!!!

(Yeah, you did pull it out of somewhere)

one allegiance

What do you think that they are trying to discover the knowledge for? They are working to get it 100 percent accurate. I don't understand your claim, it is just an off hand remark...

So it is there. It isn't relative.

With this logic how can you measure history to anything? You can't. What is the use of any history if we can't even trust it. But yeah, just leave it at "we'll never know" rather than continuing a search. Seems half-hearted to me.

Did I say that. You completely took everything I said out of context.

Again...nobody has attempted a contrary argument to mine. You just continue to pick out bits and pieces and simply say I'm wrong.

one allegiance

hmm...ok...you actually wanted me to give you the original ones...break into a couple of museums...?

Again, someone who continues to avoid the issue at hand. You can post your funny, cute posts all you want...it doesn't help your argument at all.