steph s.

who saw jesus balancing on two donkeys on the way into jerusalem (mt. 21:7) and why didn't the other gospel writers tell the author of matthew he'd made a daft mistake? did he misread zechariah 9:9, and if so doesn't that prove he wasn't there?

ZikZak

Well, you are.

a) You are claiming that there are things about the Bible that "everyone knows" and yet are completely against all current historical scholarship. This demonstrates a deep ignorance of the subject on your part.

b) You believe that we have to "Give [you] evidence to the CONTRARY of what happened" in order to doubt the existence of Jesus. This demonstrates a deep misunderstanding of the historical and philosophical method on your part.

c) You seem not to understand the meaning of "evidence" for a historical event. When asked to present such evidence, you claim that the existence of Christians proves the existence of Christ and seem unable to grasp the difference.

There are arguments against your Josephus paragraph (the only actual evidence you have presented) available on many Bible history websites.

xaxxat

:banghead:

How many verifiable first century manuscripts (esp. the gospels) do you think are in existence?

The issue at hand is how you have access to the ORIGINAL TEXTS...

one allegiance

No. I see that you are fairly new so you probably didn't see something that I answered (maybe it was in another thread). There are SEEMINGLY contradictory questions when from the bible when it is taken OUT of context...When you go back and read the text for yourself, in full, in makes since. And no it doesn't or wouldn't disprove Jesus in any way.

one allegiance

You keep asking for the original text like I have it...Or like I can translate Greek?...What is your point. Don't you think there were many copies of these texts made...I don't understand what you are getting at here.

Diogenes the Cynic

The point is that there AREN'T any original manuscripts. All we have is multiple generation copies, none of which match exactly with any other. We don't know what the orginal texts said because they don't exist any more and the copies that we have don't agree with each other.

one allegiance

Another clever way to dodge the task at hand. I AM ASKING YOU TO GIVE ME COUNTER EVIDENCE TO WHAT I SAID. And I don't know where you get that they are completely against history...This continues to amaze me. If they are and they do go agaisnt scholarship...SHOW ME... how am I supposed to answer anything if all I get from you all is "your ignorant"...Come on

Furthermore, I'm not responding to anything else that isn't potential counter evidence to my argument.. LAY OUT AND ARGUMENT AND POINT OUT WHERE MY HISTORY IS WRONG AND GIVE ME EVIDENCE FOR IT. It is that simple

one allegiance

We have many copies of many things does that mean it doesn't agree with the original text. NONSENSE.

Ok NOW I'm done answering to irrelevant remarks.

ZikZak

No. Lesson #1 in the phlosophical method is this: the burden of proof lies with the positive claimant. That is you. You are the one claiming that Jesus existed. Therefore, you and you alone carry the burden of proving your point. So far, the only thing relevant that you have offered is Josephus, a well known interpolation.

xaxxat

If you don't have the originals, how the hell do you know the copies are correct???

NONSENSE is right...