Freethought & Rationalism Archive

aa5874 · 09-27-2009, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimBowe

Quote:

"There are those who argue that Jesus is a figment of the Church’s imagination, that there never was a Jesus at all. I have to say that I do not know any respectable critical scholar who says that any more.”

Burridge 2004, p. 34

Surely, that cannot be the evidence that Jesus existed.

And you must realise that Burridge may not know much or was just lying.

Please tell me how many respectable critical scholars did Burridge know and how much he did not know and what did they all write about the historicity of Jesus of the NT?

Burridge's statement is useless non-sense.

dog-on · 09-27-2009, 09:16 AM

Wanna buy a bridge?

Sheshbazzar · 09-27-2009, 09:18 AM

I didn't fall off of a hay wagon yesterday, I have heard and studied the reasoning's of these thinly disguised apologetics for decades. I don't buy it.
There is nothing plausible about the NTs accounts, a collection of impossible scenarios, fanciful flights of imaginary literary composition, and outright lies.
There absolutely was never an living person that did the things that are attributed to the imaginary jesus of NT fame.
The man, and all that was written about him, was a fictional creation of a demented religious cult. Was then, still is.

Hell, I've had to endure the rantings of a lunatic relative who claims that jesus christ sat down on a stump and talked with him one day while he was out hunting!
I don't believe him, nor the rest of that load of bull-shit 'witnessing' that these damn liars have been trying to force feed me on for the last 60 years.
The whole damn story has been a crock from its inception.

TimBowe · 09-27-2009, 09:19 AM

Quote:

"Some writers may toy with the fancy of a 'Christ-myth,' but they do not do so on the ground of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar. It is not historians who propagate the 'Christ-myth' theories.", Bruce, F.F., The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th revised edition, Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1972

Quote:

"Even the most cirtical historian can confiently assert that a Jew named Jesus worked as a teacher and wonder-worker in Palestine during the reign of Tiberius, was exicuted by crucifiction under the prefect Pontius Pilate, and continued to have followers after his death.", Luke Timothy Johnson, The Real Jesus, San Francisco

: Harper, 1996, 121

Quote:

"Jesus is in no danger of suffering Catherine[ of Alexandria]'s fate as an unhistorical myth" Allison, Dale C., The Historical Christ and the Theological Jesus, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009, 37

Quote:

"I don't think there's any serious historian who doubts the existence of Jesus. There are a lot of people who want to write sensational books and make a lot of money who say Jesus didn't exist. But I don't know any serious scholar who doubts the existence of Jesus.", Ehrman, Bart, Discussion on the Infidel Guy Radio Show, relevant audio available at http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20090113fta.mp3

dog-on · 09-27-2009, 09:22 AM

So Tim.

What evidence do you believe best supports the physical existence of Jesus and why?

Thanks.

TimBowe · 09-27-2009, 09:28 AM

Listen, I don't care either way, it's just that the Christ Myth Theory is essentially without supporters in academic circles.

Sheshbazzar · 09-27-2009, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimBowe

Quote:

"Some writers may toy with the fancy of a 'Christ-myth,' but they do not do so on the ground of historical evidence. The historicity of Christ is as axiomatic for an unbiased historian as the historicity of Julius Caesar. It is not historians who propagate the 'Christ-myth' theories.", Bruce, F.F., The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th revised edition, Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1972

: Harper, 1996, 121

Quote:

"I don't think there's any serious historian who doubts the existence of Jesus. There are a lot of people who want to write sensational books and make a lot of money who say Jesus didn't exist. But I don't know any serious scholar who doubts the existence of Jesus.", Ehrman, Bart, Discussion on the Infidel Guy Radio Show, relevant audio available at http://www.aomin.org/podcasts/20090113fta.mp3

I've read tens of thousands of pages of this kind of bull-shit. The worlds libraries and the Internet is full of it.

And the assertions do not change the facts that the NT stories are nothing more than cleverly cobbled together fictions.
I am only an individual, have never attempted to make a dime off of religion, got nothing to sell either, but I'm no longer gullible enough to get suckered in by this cults lies and crapola.

TimBowe · 09-27-2009, 09:36 AM

But Sheshbazzar, you have to know that biblical historians and scholars are very dismissive of the Christ myth theory. I mean that may not mean anything to you, but regardless of weather the mythical aspects attributed to him are false, you still have to come to terms with the fact that a man named Jesus actually existed.

aa5874 · 09-27-2009, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimBowe

But Sheshbazzar, you have to know that biblical historians and scholars are very dismissive of the Christ myth theory. I mean that may not mean anything to you, but regardless of weather the mythical aspects attributed to him are false, you still have to come to terms with the fact that a man named Jesus actually existed.

But, you just claimed you did not care whether or not Jesus existed, now you are claiming that Jesus actually existed. You really do care.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimBowe

Listen, I don't care either way, it's just that the Christ Myth Theory is essentially without supporters in academic circles.

If ACADEMIC circles support the HJ then just provide the evidence for the historical Jesus.

The sources of antiquity external of the Church must have shown overwhelming support or evidence for the HJ.

There must be an abundance of EVIDENCE in antiquity for the HJ.

Name one single piece of evidence from antiquity external of the Church that support the HJ!

Just one.

You can call your favorite Academic.

Sheshbazzar · 09-27-2009, 10:03 AM

This has been discussed extensively in other threads and forums.
In short the majority of so called "Biblical Historians and scholars" that write anything about Jesus are from a religious background, and their continued academic respect rests upon them supporting the status qua of the religious institutions they are beholding to.
No religious scholar of any repute is going to stand up and say that the field he has labored in, and the degree, and respect he has attained within his field was bought at the price of being a 'yes man' to Christianities lies. He could kiss his ass, and his career goodbye.
I most certainly DO NOT have to come to any such terms, it IS NOT a 'fact' that a man named 'Jesus' did anything that the NT claims he did.
And if that 'Jesus' as described in the NT is not the 'Jesus' that is being postulated by these 'religious historians and scholars' and their imagined 'Jesus' did not actually do the things reported, then they have NO 'real' Jesus at all on which to base any claim that he actually lived. The Jesus of the Books is an absolute fiction.

If it were a 'fact' there would be evidence other than the contradictory religious tracts of a cult. The past and -present- claims of that cult only serve to prove the existence of that cult's imaginary man/god all the less likely

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

09-27-2009, 09:16 AM	#12
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	Wanna buy a bridge?

09-27-2009, 09:18 AM	#13
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	I didn't fall off of a hay wagon yesterday, I have heard and studied the reasoning's of these thinly disguised apologetics for decades. I don't buy it. There is nothing plausible about the NTs accounts, a collection of impossible scenarios, fanciful flights of imaginary literary composition, and outright lies. There absolutely was never an living person that did the things that are attributed to the imaginary jesus of NT fame. The man, and all that was written about him, was a fictional creation of a demented religious cult. Was then, still is. Hell, I've had to endure the rantings of a lunatic relative who claims that jesus christ sat down on a stump and talked with him one day while he was out hunting! I don't believe him, nor the rest of that load of bull-shit 'witnessing' that these damn liars have been trying to force feed me on for the last 60 years. The whole damn story has been a crock from its inception.

09-27-2009, 09:22 AM	#15
dog-on Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: The Netherlands Posts: 3,397	So Tim. What evidence do you believe best supports the physical existence of Jesus and why? Thanks.

09-27-2009, 09:28 AM	#16
TimBowe Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Oak Lawn, IL Posts: 1,620	Listen, I don't care either way, it's just that the Christ Myth Theory is essentially without supporters in academic circles.

09-27-2009, 09:36 AM	#18
TimBowe Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Oak Lawn, IL Posts: 1,620	But Sheshbazzar, you have to know that biblical historians and scholars are very dismissive of the Christ myth theory. I mean that may not mean anything to you, but regardless of weather the mythical aspects attributed to him are false, you still have to come to terms with the fact that a man named Jesus actually existed.

09-27-2009, 10:03 AM	#20
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	This has been discussed extensively in other threads and forums. In short the majority of so called "Biblical Historians and scholars" that write anything about Jesus are from a religious background, and their continued academic respect rests upon them supporting the status qua of the religious institutions they are beholding to. No religious scholar of any repute is going to stand up and say that the field he has labored in, and the degree, and respect he has attained within his field was bought at the price of being a 'yes man' to Christianities lies. He could kiss his ass, and his career goodbye. I most certainly DO NOT have to come to any such terms, it IS NOT a 'fact' that a man named 'Jesus' did anything that the NT claims he did. And if that 'Jesus' as described in the NT is not the 'Jesus' that is being postulated by these 'religious historians and scholars' and their imagined 'Jesus' did not actually do the things reported, then they have NO 'real' Jesus at all on which to base any claim that he actually lived. The Jesus of the Books is an absolute fiction. If it were a 'fact' there would be evidence other than the contradictory religious tracts of a cult. The past and -present- claims of that cult only serve to prove the existence of that cult's imaginary man/god all the less likely

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.