Chaucer

You stated erroneously that GakuseiDon believes in the magic Jesus. A quote from GakuseiDon that NoRobots subsequently provided you shows plainly that, whatever GakuseiDon may believe, he does NOT believe in the magic Jesus at all. Your initial statement about GakuseiDon, a fellow poster here, is therefore in error.

Admit it.

Chaucer

aa5874

Your claims are ERRONEOUS and now DELIBERATELY mis-leading.

FORGERIES cannot confirm characters and events in the NT Canon.

Please STOP making DELIBERATE mis-leading statements.

There are ONLY FORGERIES or non-authentic passages of a character called Jesus Christ in "Antiquities of the Jews" 18.3.3 and 20.9.1.

You appear to be NO longer interested in presenting CREDIBLE sources of antiquity for HJ but seem to be on some kind of propaganda mission.

Please deal with the facts.

The so-called extra-biblical sources of Jesus called Christ are FORGERIES.

Even HJers are ARGUING that their Jesus was NOT CHRIST, but an OBSCURE preacher man, when he lived which is even a CLEAR indication that Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3 and 20.9.1 are forgeries.

Toto

GDon claims to be a Christian, although it is sometimes hard to pin him down on what exactly he believes. But that is outside the scope of this forum. Thanks for your attention to this.

Toto

I have split out some substantive posts on Contra Celsus from this madhouse.

Contra Celsus

If I missed any, please let me know.

aa5874

The BELIEF that Jesus did exist adds NOTHING to the HJ argument.

That is the basis of the HJ argument itself: The belief that Jesus existed.

In other words, HJers BELIEVE Jesus existed.

BELIEF EXPLAINS NOTHING other than belief.

We are WAITING for the ACTUAL CREDIBLE SOURCES of Antiquity to SUPPORT the BELIEF.

But you have ALREADY ADMITTED that there is very little evidence for HJ.

The Game is over. You KNEW in ADVANCE that there was NO ACCUMULATIVE case for HJ.

The HJ argument is so utterly bizarre.

"ALL WE HAVE LEFT IS THE MYTH"

So just forget about HJ from now, Gakuseidon. You can wake up now. The HJ dream is done. "All we have left is the myth"

MYTH JESUS EXPLAINS VIRTUALLY ALL THE EVIDENCE.

MYTH JESUS is a most REASONABLE theory.

Chaucer

* Remove *

GakuseiDon

Kapyong, that's not the argument and I do wish people would stop claiming that it is. No-one argues "they thought he was historical, therefore he existed." It's simply an element in a cumulative case. Other factors are involved: nearness of witness, source, type of genre.

Right, so that would be part of the cumulative case on the mythicist side.

I'm disappointed that one of the few guys who seem to have a genuine interest in the question thinks that this somehow addresses the historicist case raised on this board.

Toto

You do seem to be arguing that if people think someone existed, he is more likely to exist, so you can bootstrap your argument into he realy did exist.

You have yet to demonstrate that this is probable.

GakuseiDon

I'm arguing that people thinking someone existed is part of a cumulative case. That doesn't mean that there isn't a difference between them thinking that someone 500 years before existed and them thinking someone 50 years before existed.

Chaucer

Except that the extra-biblical sources do NOT frame Jesus the preacher as a god-man at all, so evidently they were not gullible enough to believe the Christians' account in this case. That shows that

A) they did not not follow the Christian account in what they wrote, and

B) were well aware of other sources where Jesus was not a god-man.

Chaucer