Doctor X

rlogan:

That is very honest of you.

I think most atheists started from "somewhere"--some faith. It is a bit of a disappointment to find out that what we felt was true was not. I, too, rather assumed the "stories" were correct . . . until I started reading.

For this reason, I do not like the arrogant assumption of some that anyone who believes is just a deluded fool who listens to country-western music. Having written that, I have just lost my patience with one, but that is because the person simply refuses to look at the evidence.

In a way, it is "good" that no definite evidence for or against a historical Junior exists. If you had concrete evidence of Junior--what if what he said was not "good?" The "teachings" presented in the Synoptics and Jn, especially, are quite offensive. On the other hand, if I could prove it is "all made up" . . . well . . . there goes a great mystery.

It is "fun" to speculate. For example, given the [Useless--Ed.] verbage I spewed above, was the "Pillars of Jerusalem"--James, Peter, and the rest of their bowling league--"secular?" Did they view Junior as a secular teacher?

Evidence? Well the Synoptics denegrate the disciples for never recognizing Junior as divine.

Is that "proof?" Of course not.

For those who are atheists who get sick of having religion foisted upon them, proving that "no one existed" is a revenge akin to proving Clinton bombed Bosnia to distract from his "troubles with Monica" for a conservative Republican, or proving that George the Younger got up one day and made up "weapons of mass-destruction" for a liberal Democrat.

Both are "extreme" views that can blind to what the evidence may actually demonstrate.

One other thing is clear beside the "we do not know what he actual said and did"--the religions developed. What we have now is not "what was."

--J.D.

Magus55

Its good to hear an atheist who atleast accepts the existence of a historical Jesus. Any insight on why so many atheists do dismiss His existence, ignoring the supernatural claims?

Doctor X

Given that no atheist has, yet, in this thread:

this be a Man o' Straw.

However, it is nice to have someone provide the evidence asked of me. Notice what the inappropriate capitalization implies and is intended to imply.

At least somethings are reliable.

--J.D.

Magus55

I think the question would be, what kind of evidence other than writings about Him could He have left behind?

Magus55

James was executed, as were the other Apostles.

offa

Doctor X
Veteran User

Registered: June 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 1892

I may regret this, but:



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He was born in 7 b.c.e. and was a one year old Child in 6 A.D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



. . . that would make him 13 years old rather than one year old in 6 C.E.

Of course, I have not considered the cryopods. . . .

--J.D.


Offa (in reply),

In a debate over whether or not Jesus Christ, the brother of James,
existed or not, we must hit fundamentals. Do you know what you are
reading? Do you understand the "twelve-year rule"? Probably, if you
understood that the first 11 years of an Essene were spent under the
supervision of his mother, and that after the New Years Celebration
after his 11th birthday, he gave up his swaddling clothes and donned
the garb of an acolyte and joined his father's school, then you can
get the first feel of understanding Scripture. At 12 years old he
becomes "begat" and his father is not necessarily his daddy. At
twelve, almost thirteen he becomes a 1st grader. When Jesus was twelve
he was actually 23 and graduating from his "college". Read Josephus'
autobiography (the first page) and you will get a clue.

Jesus Christ was a real person, he dictated the book of "John" and
the other gospel writer's knew him personally. What you need to do is
debunk the twelve-year-rule, and when you can put it away, then you
have proven that Jesus did not exist and that he did not write John.
If you do not want to understand the twelve-year-rule then you are
welcome to remain fundamental and not learn what you really did not
want to know (and the tooth-fairy will reward you).

thanks,
offa (signing off)

Magus55

I'm not referring to this thread. We had a poll here on who accept a historical Jesus. An overwhelming amount said He never existed, or they haven't a clue.

Doctor X

Offa:

The "twelve year rule" is not supported by either the text of Mt or Lk. What you have to prove is that it is.

As for the writers of Mt, Lk, Mk knowing Junior "personally," the scholarship indicates otherwise. You may argue against that, but then I would suggest you write it up and submit it to the peer-reviewed literature.

Magus:

Then you should have specified that. However, "haven't a clue" is a far cry from your implication that the majority of atheists deny any existence of any historical figure. You should not massage the data in such a manner.

Now:

you of course have contemporary and reliable evidence for this.

Finally, any word on the Challenge I offered about a month ago and have directed your attention towards as I do now?

--J.D.

Magus55

Don't remember what the Challenge was. Although, is there a reason you are so concerned with me answering it?

Toto

Magus55 - what does the Bible say about bearing false witness?

the IIDB poll on Jesus existence

22.16% is not a majority, certainly not an overwhelming majority.