tsig
a carbon based life-form
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2005
- Messages
- 39,049
I have to agree, fun game.
Bart Ehrman on the Historical Jesus
- Thread starter Nick227
- Start date
- Status
I have to agree, fun game.
Belz...
Fiend God
Did you just lose track of the conversation again ? You said that the NT was all magic. That is a lie, because it is both untrue and known to you.
Do you understand that terrible evidence is still evidence ?
And have you figured out why I said that, yet ? You refuse to do so because you think you have the holy grail of your argument, which says quite a bit about its strength.
Only to an ideologue.
Round and round. It's like I didn't answer this question many times before, right ?
You cannot possibly have been in this debate as long as you have and still not understand the difference between "Christ" and the "Historical Jesus". It has been explained countless times by just about every HJ supporter in these threads.
This is either sheer dishonesty, or complete failure of reason on this subject.
Which is it?
That glass house of yours gets more and more tempting every day. Don't you ever tire of making flame-bait posts like these? I get bored of reading them...
What?? So where did HJers get their story from that obscure HJ was crucified after he caused a disturbance at the Jewish Temple?
It would appear to me that you are conveniently denying your source.
There is no other source for Jesus of Nazareth outside the Bible and Apologetics.
Why are you calling people liars when you actively make fallacious statements. I have not claimed the NT is all magic.
I have stated that I can find NT characters like King Herod the Great, Tiberius the Emperor, Caiaphas the High Priest, John the Baptist, Pilate the procurator and King Aretas but I cannot find Jesus of Nazareth, the disciples and Paul in non-apologetic sources.
I will consider them figures of myth until evidence is found.
You never claimed to have had evidence for HJ so it is a fallacy that everyone agrees the evidence is Terrible.
David Mo
Philosopher
You can speak of “abnormal”, “mysterious” or “extraordinary” if you like. These qualifications fit well to alleged vanishing ships in the Bermuda Triangle. This is a supposed abnormal or extraordinary fact. I agree.
You say the existence of Jesus as a preacher in Galilee is a “supposed natural event”. Yes; a Galilean preacher in the First Century is neither abnormal, nor mysterious nor extraordinary. I agree.
And this clarifies the nature of the problem we are discussing. As yourself are saying these are very different things. Perhaps this explain why scholars (many non believers) have written books about Jesus whereas the Bermuda Triangle is confined to the field of parapsychology, 'mysteriousology' and others extra-academic absurdities.
Perhaps in matching an abnormal event with a natural one you was attempting to discredit the believers in the Christ. There are more rational ways to do it.
Sadly a sizable chunk of the HJ stuff out there that sees HJ and Christ as the same thing ala McDowell or Holding or might as well when they treat the Gospel account as historical and pull out Thallus as support for the three hours of darkness...which no contemporary mentions seeing not IIRC Paul himself.
I have asked this several times but the HJers here has avoided the question. If all one was doing was trying to show Jesus existed as a man why would one use Thallus?
I have compared the quality of the evidence for HJ to that given for the Bermuda Triangle mystery and Thallus certainly fits that bill. At least Van Voorst accepts that Thallus is basically useless due to all the issues; its certainly better then Eddy-Boyd in Jesus Legend who list all the issues...and then basically go but we consider a valid supporting document anyhow (why?!
)Then you have the Bermuda Triangle style half truths like 5000 Greek Manuscripts (except for less then 50 are after our oldest complete Bibles in the 4th century).
This is followed by the Bermuda Triangle style fiction of the evidence being on par with Socrates, Hippocrates, or Julius Caesar (all of whom have know contemporaries who met them) or if they really don't understand ancient history comparison with some post printing press person or event is presented which hits its own level of stupid when the Holocaust or the Moon landing is the event being used. If they want to show they don't understand the difference between social and physical science you get evolution-creationism as the counter.
Again I ask if the evidence for a HJ was so strong why resort to these kind of Bermuda Triangleish slights of hands and nonsensical comparisons?
Paul is a "myth"?!? I have been asking the mythicists to produce the "myth" about a saviour called Jesus, crucified in a timeless age in a non-terrestrial cloud cuckoo land by evil spiritual forces of woo, from which they say the gospel stories were derived; which story they assert that Paul believed in, contrary to the plain reading of the words he wrote. Where is that myth? I asked.
What do I get in response? The person who allegedly believed in the myth is himself a myth!! This is mythicism on acid! MP as well as MJ! Did Paul write his epistles in a non-terrestrial sub lunar domain of woo? Did the ancient sages of cloud cuckoo land have a myth that one day on the sublunary road to the great Damascus in the sky, the spiritual Paul would go bananas and start hearing voices from space? And then Paul's letters were forged to fulfil the prophecies contained in the myth of the man who wrote the letters about the mythman who was crucified in the super terrestrial sublunary domain?
OK, where is this alleged Paul myth? I bet it will be more difficult to get hold of than the timeless crucifixion in the sky Jesus one!
Last edited:
Hey folks! The MJers have got a new slogan. Bermuda Triangle! Let's spot how many more times we'll get told that the consensus of scholarship intentionally concocts a false dating of Thallus so that his work may seem to contain a reference to preternatural darkness at the crucifixion? It accepts this false date because historicists believe in the magic darkness (after all, they believe the Bible is true, don't they?); and also they are willing to fabricate false sources to justify this belief. This is like the Bermuda Triangle lunacy; well, isn't it? Your wiseguy know it all brain boxes are just a bunch of phonies, aren't they?
By Jove! He's on to us Carruthers, get the Lord Chancellor of History on the blower...
Looks like we're done for!
Actually the real reason the Bermuda Triangle got relegated to where it is today is that it didn't last all that long as a public thing. Vincent Gaddis' 1965 Invisible Horizons is when the whole thing started hitting the public and Lawrence David Kusche's 1975 The Bermuda Triangle Mystery Solved is about when the whole thing died as far as the public was concerned.
You seem to think there is a difference between an abnormal event and a natural one. Per Oxford dictionary abnormal: different from what is usual or expected
A man getting out of his vehicle and having a conversion with a tree is abnormal...but it is not beyond natural world explanations. He may be of poor eyesight or he may have dementia brought on by some undiagnosed medical condition (as was the case with King George III)
In fact, the 1976 NOVA/Horizon episode The Case of the Bermuda Triangle give two examples of events that were both abnormal and natural. The first was a Coast Guard cutter in the Gulf able to talk to a station in Savannah, Georgia but were unable to raise Havana, Cuba. The second was said cutter spotting land on their radar where there was no land for miles. Both of these abnormal events were also perfectly natural ones (the first was due to atmospherics and the second due to wave conditions)
As I have pointed out before my beef with the Gospels accounts is NOT their supernatural stuff but all the non supernatural but abnormal events:
1) Censuses were for the taxation of the local area. It is abnormal for people to have to go back to there their ancestors lived for taxation especially if they came from outside the local area.
2) It is abnormal for a person who teachers out in the open to have to be pointed out to the officials via a kiss.
3) The Sanhedrin trial account is abnormal regarding every other work regarding how they operated...and yet not one official Roman or Jew notes this...which is itself abnormal as history generally records the strange and unusual.
4) Pontius Pilate the man whose solution to mob control was to send soldiers out and kill said mob both before and after the supposed time of Jesus goes totally abnormal and cowers in fear of a mob.
5) The crucified were left to rot as a warning to others but the Romans go abnormal and let the body be taken down after the abnormal death after only a few hours (it generally took days for someone to die via crucifixion)
6) The body disappears but the Romans figuring that they haven't met abnormal quote for the week don't investigate what in those times was a capital crime (the theft of a corpse)
7) Then there are reports that people are seeing Jesus so evidently not having met their quota for the month the Romans go abnormal again and instead of wondering if they have been tricked they just ignore the whole thing despite crucifixion generally being reserved for crimes against Rome.
Even stripped of the supernatural Gospel account is just one abnormal event after the other.
Last edited:
Yes, but few if any of these are accepted by historicists, and their position doesn't depend on any of them. Your inclusion of the Lucan census is particularly egregious. The historicists' case depends on acceptance of the Lucan version of the Bethlehem birth story? Contradicted by the Matthean version and attested nowhere but in gLuke? And contaminated by accounts of supposed miracles, inspired by LXX mistranslation of the Tanakh? No, you don't believe that atheist historicists accept this. So why include it in your list of abnormalities designed to refute HJ? The few details taken seriously by these historicists are well known to you. Here is a summary of them from Wiki on HJ.
That is the position you must attack, and the historicists must defend.
Last edited:
But, but, walking on water ghostie christ jesus is impossible!!11!!!11!1!1!!!!!!
Last edited:
Belz...
Fiend God
eight bits
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
- Messages
- 1,580
dejudge
Your "physically" in Mark's account of the watery embarcation is a myth. It's dead.
Stop spreading Chinese whispers!
max
You do realize that it is normal for abnormal things to happen, right? You seem to like television programs as a source. OK. I'll bet there's a daily television program in your market largely devoted to abnormal events that actually happened. It's called "news." Check it out.
Who they gonna call?
Have you forgotten that Mark doesn't say that everybody in the boat saw or heard the same things?
Your "physically" in Mark's account of the watery embarcation is a myth. It's dead.
Stop spreading Chinese whispers!
max
You do realize that it is normal for abnormal things to happen, right? You seem to like television programs as a source. OK. I'll bet there's a daily television program in your market largely devoted to abnormal events that actually happened. It's called "news." Check it out.
Romans would be familiar with ghost stories, normally about those who die violently or whose remains are irregularly handled. Why would they suspect trickery if such stories reached them? They hadn't outsourced the wetwork; they did it themselves. If they did somehow come to suspect trickery, then what do you propose they should have done about it?
Who they gonna call?
Belz...
Fiend God
Then argue with these guys. No one here is doing that except DOC.
Surely, Jesus could walk on the Bermuda Triangle? Sources tell me that it's so full of shipwrecks, drowning virgins, half-strangled aardvarks, and the like, that practically anyone could hop skip and jump across a few kilometres of sea there. In fact, flashbulb moment, maybe this is the solution to Jesus walking on water - 'twas a mini-Bermuda Triangle moment?
Anyway, it must be true cos the well-known historian, Kanye West said it - Jesus walks!
Anyway, it must be true cos the well-known historian, Kanye West said it - Jesus walks!
Well, he's a bit abnormal, at the very least.
Amen Sista!
Well, dejudge said
Now he's saying he never said the NT is all magic. Unless his pants are on fire that must mean that part or all of the non-Jesus rest of the NT isn't magic. Which part or parts, I wonder?
But anyway that doesn't matter because he believes the whole kit and caboodle is a late second century or early fourth century forgery, explicitly designed as deceitful fiction.
- Status