Ben C Smith

Papias lived in Asia Minor. Irenaeus was originally from Asia Minor. The difference is not actually one of geography but one of age, since Irenaeus claims to have been in Asia Minor in his youth.

Ben.

PhilVaz

aa << You are just not making sense. You appear to just chatter about shatter. >>

I thought the message was clear and I've been consistent. Here it is again:

(A) there are people on the Internet who "think" there is this "big debate" going on about whether an historical Jesus existed (these are people who ONLY read Internet Infidels, Rational Responders, and other atheist/skeptic/freethought sites, but ignore mainstream NT or Jesus scholarship)

(B) J.P. Holding's book was written for such people, or for other people (like myself) who know there is no real debate on this topic but would like the best arguments against "Jesus mythicism" anyway, so they can engage in this bogus "online debate"

(C) The truth in actual NT and Jesus scholarship is there is no debate on whether Jesus existed :wave: since it was shattered 100 years ago, again 50 years ago, again 30 years ago (e.g. Michael Grant), again 20 years ago (e.g. R.T. France), again 10 years ago (e.g. John P. Meier), again last year (e.g. Eddy/Boyd), and again a couple weeks ago by J.P. Holding and company (i.e. there wasn't much shattering necessary, just the few cranks, eccentrics on "copycat" and "pagan parallel" conspiracies, and some "scholarly" arguments from silence that need answering)

(D) The real debate is between more conservative or "traditional" biblical scholars (Catholic, or evangelical, or Orthodox) who affirm Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and those liberals or modernist scholars (Catholic, or Protestant, or Orthodox or skeptics) and others who reject that

I tend to repeat myself in this thread so I've been entirely consistent. And yes Jesus did resurrect, ascend into the clouds a bit, but we don't know his exact angle of trajectory, speed, velocity, or acceleration at this point. However it can be calculated very precisely with exact Christian mathematical and physics principles. Just kidding.

Phil P

Steven Carr

Phil seems to have ignored this thread.

Grant's 'shattering' consisted of saying that the theory had been shattered. He never even addressed Wells' arguments.

France agreed with Wells about most things, and Wells trashed France's argument about how Christian interpolators would never use phrases found in the New Testament.

So what 'shattering' was there by France and Grant?

And Phil just can't produce this evidence of a 'Jesus of Nazareth', despite me asking him many times to do so....

aa5874

J P shattered the principles of Physics. I am serious.

JoeWallack

JW:
Agent JP, why don't you tell the Lying Machine to bring me into the Matrix of your imaginary Theology world so I can discuss his article directly with Agent O? I triple dare you!



The One

Jeffrey Gibson

I don't have the text of France readily to hand. So would you be kind enough, Steven, to quote France's statements to this effect?

And where in Wells can his trashing of France be found?

Jeffrey

aa5874

And now a little later.


You don't know what the best evidence is? You're not agnostic!

Your position perhaps do not require any evidence.

Ben C Smith

Agreement again, my friend! Amazing.

No, on the topic of atheism versus theism (which was indeed the topic of that part, the second part, of the exchange), I am not agnostic. I think (only think) the best evidence in that debate points to agnosticism; but I am not agnostic. I accept the existence of God on faith, making me a theist.

I can offer little if any in the way of evidence for the existence of God.

However, I am in a very different position when it comes to the existence of the historical Jesus; for that I do indeed have evidence, and I do not take it on faith. The first part of the exchange was about the HJ.

So, to summarize, the best evidence on the topic of the HJ leads to the existence of an HJ (and no, I am not offering to debate that point here and now), while the best evidence on the topic of the existence of God leads to agnosticism (and again I am not offering to debate that point with you here and now; nor ever).

Ben.

aa5874

So you don't need any evidence for faith in God.

Some say the Universe is evidence for some kind of God.

Well, that is extremely odd since the NT only presents a Jesus who was both God and man. I wonder which credible book has information that Jesus was a just man?



Evidence for the HJ? What, where, when and which book? Was his name Jesus, Christus, Chrestus or Immanuel?

You don't know!

Steven Carr

Again? Have they been deleted from this thread?