Malachi151

I really hate the whole "formal debate" thing, but this issue really annoys me.

As much as I hate debates, I'd "like" to engage in a formal debate over the evidence FOR a Historical Jesus.

If there is a taker then I'll setup the debate. I don't have much time these days, so don't expect it to be too fast paced.

The guidelines of the debate would be this:

General:
1) Naming scholars who hold a certain view is not a form of evidence.
2) The focus of the debate will be primary source material, not reviews of scholarly opinions.
3) I don't know any language other than English. All points have to be made in English and no point can be made to be reliant on another language for rebuttal. In other words, the HJ debater can't claim that a certain text says something in Greek and then not provide a translation and require me to come up with a translation in order to rebut the point, etc.
4) The "Mythical Jesus hypothesis" is not a subject of this debate.
5) Links can be provided, but all points have to be made by the debaters in the debate thread. i.e. a point can't be reliant on information that is only presented in a link, the debate stands or falls on the content of the posts alone. (Possible exceptions to this may be made for certain sets of data if that data is difficult to reproduce in a post, i.e. large tables, etc.)

Opening Statements:
1) The person making the case for a Historical Jesus gives the first opening statement.
2) The opening statement must include an enumeration of points that the debater feels provide positive evidence for a Historical Jesus.

Lastly, in addition to the guidelines above, additional guidelines may be provided and agreed upon prior to the start of the debate.

If anyone wants to have this debate, then I'll start a formal debate thread.

Clivedurdle

I assume you are excluding possible based upons, for example Ellegard Teacher of Righteousness.

Malachi151

That's what I was thinking, and would rather debate. I'd rather not delve into claims of a historical "other person," upon whom the Jesus character is patterned.

Not that that wouldn't be interesting, its just not what I want this debate to be about.

Jo

Hello, Malachi,

If you are interested, we have a formal debate proposal forum and relevant rules and procedures for debate.

Regards,

Alcyonian
FDD & FDP Moderator.

mountainman

Are you accepting positive conjectural evidence,
or positive archaeological evidence, or positive
textual criticism evidence, or what sort of
positive evidence are you prepared for?

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

GakuseiDon

Hi Malachi, I'm willing to be involved, though I'm only an amateur -- no worries about me using the original languages for proof. Hopefully I might learn something along the way.

I'd like to make sure that the debate is about evidence for a HJ though, not for the all-singing all-dancing Gospel Jesus. If you are okay with that, please start a thread in the Debate Proposals website.

Ted Hoffman

Good. Please do provide a link when you are ready. Cheers.

aa5874

But isn't the all-singing all-dancing Gospel Jesus the basis of the search for an HJ? As far I know, all the information about Jesus, apocryphal or non-canonical, depict him in similar vein to the Jesus of the NT and there are no extant historical information to contradict them.

Malachi151

Here is the link to the debate proposal:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...50#post4949250

Toto

No it is not. There have been, so far, three "Quests" for the historical Jesus, based on the idea that a real person in history can be found by a proper analysis of the gospels which discards the supernatural elements.

You may judge these quests to be failures, as some have on either the mythicist side or the supernaturalist side, but they are attempts to find a historical, non-supernatural figure.