Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 10-26-2012, 08:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

let me ask you a serious question toto

have you even read the bible? because with some of these questions your asking, it doesnt look like it.

the bible constantly has refferences to jesus and the poor, this is common knowledge despite you dismissing cultural anthropologist that state the same thing

Let me ask you a question.

Do you know any of the basic principles of historiography? Because it doesn't look like it.

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

This is common knowledge, however much you ignore it and mention "cultural anthropology" as if that explained anything.

Maybe I should ask if you actually know anything about cultural anthropology. It doesn't sound like it.

outhouse · 10-26-2012, 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

You think the books of Joshua, Kings, Isaiah, or Ezekiel are giving you an actual history lesson?

no it was never intended to be a history book.

are all these people 100% myth??????

outhouse · 10-26-2012, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

let me ask you a serious question toto

have you even read the bible? because with some of these questions your asking, it doesnt look like it.

the bible constantly has refferences to jesus and the poor, this is common knowledge despite you dismissing cultural anthropologist that state the same thing

Let me ask you a question.

Do you know any of the basic principles of historiography? Because it doesn't look like it.

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

This is common knowledge, however much you ignore it and mention "cultural anthropology" as if that explained anything.

Maybe I should ask if you actually know anything about cultural anthropology. It doesn't sound like it.

doesnt answer the question of if you have read the NT.

outhouse · 10-26-2012, 08:56 PM

Quote:

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

im as close to a minimalist as it gets, while holding a HJ view.

I have never stated the NT or OT represents reliable history, it never has, nor intended as history.

Sheshbazzar · 10-26-2012, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sheshbazzar

You think the books of Joshua, Kings, Isaiah, or Ezekiel are giving you an actual history lesson?

no it was never intended to be a history book.

are all these people 100% myth??????

The actual percentages would prove ....interesting.

__I think you would have better odds playing the Lotto.

Toto · 10-27-2012, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Let me ask you a question.

Do you know any of the basic principles of historiography? Because it doesn't look like it.

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

This is common knowledge, however much you ignore it and mention "cultural anthropology" as if that explained anything.

Maybe I should ask if you actually know anything about cultural anthropology. It doesn't sound like it.

doesnt answer the question of if you have read the NT.

Of course I have read the NT. How else would I know that it doesn't qualify as a historical source?

Toto · 10-27-2012, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

Quote:

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

im as close to a minimalist as it gets, while holding a HJ view.

I have never stated the NT or OT represents reliable history, it never has, nor intended as history.

So - explain how you get to such certainty that the central character in this unreliable document actually existed.

Cesc · 10-27-2012, 02:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

the attested flood of the Euphrates in 2900 BC is from the Sumerian epic

Can you point me to a link or book or something?

aa5874 · 10-27-2012, 08:00 AM

Quote:

You take a few bits of the gospels as evidence of the existence of Jesus, without any indication that they represent reliable history.

Quote:

Originally Posted by outhouse

im as close to a minimalist as it gets, while holding a HJ view.

I have never stated the NT or OT represents reliable history, it never has, nor intended as history.

Well, you are in a far worse position than inerratists. You have acknowledged your primary source for HJ cannot be trusted yet use it without any corroboration.

Your position on HJ is actually irrelevant. You might as well stop making any more unsubstantiated HJ claims.

As soon as you admit the OT and NT do not represent reliable history then it is completely reasonable that the OT and NT represent Mythology.

Mythology is not reliable history.

The OT and NT are compilation of Myth Fables of a God and his begotten Son.

Sheshbazzar · 10-27-2012, 09:21 AM

The Ἰησοῦν of the so called 'New Testament' fame is not one whit more of a historical personage than that Ἰησοῦν the son of 'Nun'* of 500+ BCE, upon whom this insane religious 'fish' tale was fashioned.

*Nun= 'fish', Ἰησοῦν the 'fish' godling -sucessor to 'Moses'.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-27-2012, 09:21 AM	#70
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	The Ἰησοῦν of the so called 'New Testament' fame is not one whit more of a historical personage than that Ἰησοῦν the son of 'Nun'* of 500+ BCE, upon whom this insane religious 'fish' tale was fashioned. Nun= 'fish', Ἰησοῦν* the 'fish' godling -sucessor to 'Moses'.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.