Did Jesus exist?

[Brainache]

The thing is, all those historians aren't posting here so if you want to use their arguments you will have to defend them here in your words.

Hiding behind unknown historians and non existent records isn't much of an argument.

Or, here's a really wacky and crazy idea: You could try reading a History book on this subject and maybe some of these mysterious unknown Historians might in some magical way become known to you...

Insane, I know...

 

[Brainache]

You have now passed from someone named Mellor who you said was "historian", to listing the titles of three books from people all of whom appear to be NT bible scholars, and not historians.

These are bible scholars writing about their belief in Jesus, are they not? Eddy & Boyd are well known in that respect, the reference to Craig is a reference to a "dictionary of the Bible", and here is the info on Helen K Bond -


http://www.massbible.org/helen-bond
Dr. Helen K. Bond
Title: Senior Lecturer in New Testament Language, Literature and TheologyReligious Affiliation: Church of ScotlandInstitution: University of Edinburgh

Originally from the North-East of England, Helen read Biblical Studies at the Universities of St Andrews (Scotland), Tübingen (Germany) and Durham (England), where she wrote a PhD thesis on Pontius Pilate under the supervision of Prof J.D.G. Dunn. She taught a range of New Testament courses at Northern College in Manchester (1993-6), the University of Aberdeen (1996-2000) and the University of Edinburgh (2000 to the present), where she now holds the post of Senior Lecturer. Her research interests centre around the social and historical world of the first century, the theology and rhetoric of the texts associated with that period, and biblical archaeology. She specialises in the gospels, historical Jesus, Judaean politics, women in the first century, and Josephus. Her books include: Pontius Pilate in History and Interpretation (CUP, 1998), Caiaphas: Friend of Rome and Judge of Jesus? (WJK, 2004) and Israel’s God and Rebecca’s Children: Christology and Community in Early Judaism and Christianity (Baylor, 2007; edited with David B. Capes, April D. Deconick, and Troy A. Miller). She is currently working on a book on Jesus for Continuum’s ‘Guide for the Plerpexed’ and another one on King Herod. Helen is the author of a number of articles and studies, and has appeared several times on TV documentaries. She is married with two small children and lives between Edinburgh and Glasgow.



So the above is yet another example in what is now a very long list of examples of HJ believers in these threads naming various academics in support of belief in Jesus, but where the most cursory search immediately shows that these individuals are invariably NT bible scholars and not typical mainstream neutral historians at all.


And after all that, yet again you still give no quotes whatsoever from any of these people ever claiming to know that Tacitus obtained his one brief sentence from any known Roman records.

That was your claim was it not? That Tacitus knew of the execution of Jesus from Roman records which were available to him.

But you have failed 100% ever to show any such Roman records ever mentioning any execution of Jesus.

And nor have you shown any of the above authors (or Mellor) ever claiming that Tacitus was known to have obtained that sentence from known Roman records.

Where are these Roman records saying that Jesus was executed?

Where are these quotes from any of the people you have just named, claiming to show that Tacitus obtained his mention of the execution of Christus from known Roman records of the time?

You have zero evidence to support a single thing you have claimed.

You appear to be simply making the whole thing up just to support your wish to believe in Jesus.

She is an expert on the subject, therefore she is disqualified?

I can't argue with logic like that.

No one can.

 

[The Big Dog]

colorful ad hominem fallacies snipped and completely ignored

That's a wicked lot of color!

Silly Durham University, handing out PhDs for studies on Pontius Pilate!

I did enjoy the parts where I cited fairly substantial evidence and then was accused of making things up. Fantastic.

 

[tsig]

Historian Ronald Mellor considers it "Tacitus's crowning achievement" which represents the "pinnacle of Roman historical writing".
there ya go, champ, not unknown anymore. Anything you want to share with us, or just going to continue complaining that my sources aren't good enough for you?

Since you ask, I'll share this with you:

That's strangely reminiscent of DOC and his Ramsey quote about Luke being "the best of historians".

 

[IanS]

That's a wicked lot of color!

Silly Durham University, handing out PhDs for studies on Pontius Pilate!

I did enjoy the parts where I cited fairly substantial evidence and then was accused of making things up. Fantastic.

You have failed to cite any evidence whatsoever.

Where are your claimed Roman records that say Pilate had Jesus executed?

Where are there any quotes from your named authors ever saying that they knew of Roman records that said Jesus was executed?

All you have done so far is name various believing bible scholars (there are thousands of those!)


You have no evidence at all beyond your belief in belief.

 

[The Big Dog]

You have failed to cite any evidence whatsoever.

Where are your claimed Roman records that say Pilate had Jesus executed?

Where are there any quotes from your named authors ever saying that they knew of Roman records that said Jesus was executed?

All you have done so far is name various believing bible scholars (there are thousands of those!)

You have no evidence at all beyond your belief in belief.

"All you have done so far is name various believing bible scholars (there are thousands of those!)

You have no evidence at all beyond your belief in belief."

Did you actually read what you just wrote?

Me: cites famous historian who calls Tacitus authoritative
you: But he didn't mention the specific section!
me: cites numerous historians who address that section.
you: ad hominem fallacy coupled with assumptions about me!!! In color no less.
me:

Yeah, I'm done with the Mythticians.

 

[tsig]

"All you have done so far is name various believing bible scholars (there are thousands of those!)

You have no evidence at all beyond your belief in belief."

Did you actually read what you just wrote?

Me: cites famous historian who calls Tacitus authoritative
you: But he didn't mention the specific section!
me: cites numerous historians who address that section.
you: ad hominem fallacy coupled with assumptions about me!!! In color no less.
me:

Yeah, I'm done with the Mythticians.

Protip:The best way to be done is to not hit the submit button.

Insert fork icon>here<

 

[IanS]

"All you have done so far is name various believing bible scholars (there are thousands of those!)

You have no evidence at all beyond your belief in belief."

Did you actually read what you just wrote?

Me: cites famous historian who calls Tacitus authoritative
you: But he didn't mention the specific section!
me: cites numerous historians who address that section.
you: ad hominem fallacy coupled with assumptions about me!!! In color no less.
me:

Yeah, I'm done with the Mythticians.

Yes, I did read it.

Repeat - you have so far presented not one spec of any evidence to support your claim that Tacitus obtained his sentence about the execution from any Roman records.

Nor have you shown one spec of any evidence that any such Roman records ever existed saying that about the execution of Jesus.

And nor have you quoted anything from the bile scholars you are relying on, where any of them have shown any such evidence of Roman records saying anything about the execution of Jesus.

However, in contrast to that, anyone can very easily show you quotes from one of the "fake" letters of Paul, which are supposed to pre date anything we actually have from Tacitus, and which, like the first gospels, did quite clearly claim that Pilate was the executioner. So those letters and gospels can be quite clearly shown as an apparently earlier pre-existing source from which early Christians as well as Tacitus (or his copyists) might very easily have later come to believe that Pilate was once involved in an execution of Jesus c.30AD.

 

[dejudge]

She is an expert on the subject, therefore she is disqualified?

I can't argue with logic like that.

No one can.

You forgot to mention that the expert is affiliated with the Church of Scotland.

Experts who actively worship Jesus as their Lord and Savior are not likely to admit Jesus was a figure of mythology.

Examine the creed of the Church of Scotland.

http://www.churchofscotland.org.uk/about_us/our_faith/statements_of_the_churchs_faith

The Church of Scotland believes in God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit and proclaims Jesus Christ crucified, risen and glorified.

Our standards of belief are to be found in the Old and New Testament (the Bible) and in the Church's historic Confession of Faith. For a brief summary of our beliefs, it is useful to look at the Apostles' Creed, which is used by many churches in declaring Christian faith..

By the people who argue that Jesus was the Son of God are really arguing for a Myth.

 

[Craig B]

... The NT itself is riddled with Fake authors and Fake accounts of Jesus, the disciples and Paul.

In effect, the Gospel was really a Hoax.

Mankind has been deceived for at least 1600 years and was forced to worship a Ghost as a God.

Let me get this right. The gospels are a myth generated by Paul, who is himself a myth. Thus, he and they came into existence through forgery, and the motive for this forgery was to perpetrate a "hoax".

God is a ghost, and people who worship this imaginary entity do so as a consequence not of false belief but of compulsion.

Have you any other fascinating insights to share with us?

 

[dejudge]

Let me get this right. The gospels are a myth generated by Paul, who is himself a myth. Thus, he and they came into existence through forgery, and the motive for this forgery was to perpetrate a "hoax".

God is a ghost, and people who worship this imaginary entity do so as a consequence not of false belief but of compulsion.

Have you any other fascinating insights to share with us?

You have it all wrong. You have NO idea what you are talking about. You propagate highly illogical, baseless un-evidence statements.

You seem to have no idea that Scholars have deduced that the Canonised Gospels were not written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John and that they are not eyewitness accounts.

You seem to have NO idea that authors of the Canonised Gospels claimed Jesus was born AFTER his mother was made pregnant by some kind of Holy Ghost.

The Pauline writings begin PRECISELY where the Canonised Gospels end.

The Pauline writer claimed he was the LAST to be seen of the resurrected Jesus.

Over 500 persons saw the resurrected Jesus before Paul according to Galatians.

Paul persecuted those who PREACHED the Jesus story in Galatians.

Paul persecuted Christians.

Paul was ALIVE after gLuke was composed according to Apologetic writers.

Paul wrote the supposed Epistles after Revelation by John according to an Apologetic source.

Justin Martyr mentioned The Apocalypse of John but not the Pauline Corpus.

The Casnonised Gospels were composed AFTER the Fall of the Temple.

There are apologetic writers who knew stories of Jesus but nothing of the Pauline revelation and Gospel.

No NT manuscripts or Codices of the Jesus story have been found in Jerusalem or Galilee and none have been dated in the 1st century and pre 70 CE.

It was around the 4th century that all apologetic writers knew both the stories of Jesus and the Pauline Revelation and Gospel found in the Pauline letters.

The Existing evidence ADDS up.

The Jesus story and cult are post 70 CE.

 

[Brainache]

The most fascinating part of all of this is seeing the strange ways some people imagine History is studied.

It also fascinates me how some people can be totally ignorant of something, but will nevertheless start to lecture others all about it.

Arrogance combined with ignorance is always hilarious.

 

[dejudge]

The history of the Quest for an HJ is disaster so far. After hundreds of years the QUEST still continues.

Historians and Scholars have been unable to unearth any evidence for HJ.

People here seem ignorant of the fact that the QUEST for an HJ has always ended in a disaster.

Robert Eisenman, an historian, admitted that no-one has been able to solve the HJ question.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quest_for_the_historical_Jesus

Zahl likens the first quest to the Scott expedition to Antarctica, and states that the first quest ended as a total disaster, slowing down academic efforts to pursue research into the historical Jesus.[31]

The Quest for an HJ is really at a dead end. History has repeated itself.

 

[zugzwang]

The most fascinating part of all of this is seeing the strange ways some people imagine History is studied.

It also fascinates me how some people can be totally ignorant of something, but will nevertheless start to lecture others all about it.

Arrogance combined with ignorance is always hilarious.

And the internet has given carte blanche to people to diss experts and academics and professionals, and say, no, they are all talking trash, because I read a couple of paperbacks, and watched a couple of youtubes, and here is the low down.

In a way, this is democratic, isn't it? But as you say, arrogance, ignorance and laziness are a lethal combination. You end up with vegetarian lions, or the equivalent. I used to teach linguistics, and after a while, got used to ignoring the garbage that people spout about language - there is no point in arguing with them. Of course, some people are genuinely interested and curious - that's very different.

 

[dejudge]

And the internet has given carte blanche to people to diss experts and academics and professionals, and say, no, they are all talking trash, because I read a couple of paperbacks, and watched a couple of youtubes, and here is the low down.

In a way, this is democratic, isn't it? But as you say, arrogance, ignorance and laziness are a lethal combination. You end up with vegetarian lions, or the equivalent. I used to teach linguistics, and after a while, got used to ignoring the garbage that people spout about language - there is no point in arguing with them. Of course, some people are genuinely interested and curious - that's very different.

It is most fascinating that you would respond to Brainache who spouts about an undocumented consensus.

Do you know of any data, survey or poll which shows the consensus among Scholars/Historians concerning the question "Did Jesus Exist?"

You seem like the kind of person who would ignore the garbage of an undocumented consensus of which there is no data or statistics.

On the other hand, the history of the Quest for an HJ has been known to be a failure after more than one attempt and hundreds of years of questing.

Now, the Questers are proposing their HJ barely existed, hardly known, a nobody but how could that be when they have ALREADY attempted to use Tacitus Annals 15.44 with Christus and Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1?

The Questers forgot that their own assumptions.

The Questers forgot who they were questing for--a nobody.

The Questers forgot their HJ was a crucified criminal who was executed because he caused a disturbance.

The Questers forgot the history of their Questing for HJ.

No HJ has ever been found.

Albert Schweitzer in his Quest for an Historical Jesus admitted Jesus of Nazareth had no real existence and was either literary fiction or an eschatological concept.

Robert Eiseman, an historian, admitted No-one has solved the question of an HJ.

The HJ argument is a known established dead end argument.

 

[Brainache]

It is most fascinating that you would respond to Brainache who spouts about an undocumented consensus.

Do you know of any data, survey or poll which shows the consensus among Scholars/Historians concerning the question "Did Jesus Exist?"

You seem like the kind of person who would ignore the garbage of an undocumented consensus of which there is no data or statistics.

On the other hand, the history of the Quest for an HJ has been known to be a failure after more than one attempt and hundreds of years of questing.

Now, the Questers are proposing their HJ barely existed, hardly known, a nobody but how could that be when they have ALREADY attempted to use Tacitus Annals 15.44 with Christus and Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1?

The Questers forgot that their own assumptions.

The Questers forgot who they were questing for--a nobody.

The Questers forgot their HJ was a crucified criminal who was executed because he caused a disturbance.

The Questers forgot the history of their Questing for HJ.

No HJ has ever been found.

Albert Schweitzer in his Quest for an Historical Jesus admitted Jesus of Nazareth had no real existence and was either literary fiction or an eschatological concept.

Robert Eiseman, an historian, admitted No-one has solved the question of an HJ.

The HJ argument is a known established dead end argument.

It's very simple dejudge, all you have to do is find me the Academics who are teaching that there was no "HJ".

Should be easy, if as you say, the HJ argument is dead.

So who is it?

If you can't find anyone (Carrier doesn't count, he doesn't teach), it might be because there is no one teaching the kind of nonsense you prefer.

 

[dejudge]

It's very simple dejudge, all you have to do is find me the Academics who are teaching that there was no "HJ".

It is very simple Brainache!! All you have to do is find me the evidence from antiquity used by Academics who teach there was an HJ.

You cannot find any and have not been able to do so.

The HJ argument is a dead end failed argument--lots of Academics and No Evidence--A recipe for disaster.

If you can't find anyone (Carrier doesn't count, he doesn't teach), it might be because there is no one teaching the kind of nonsense you prefer.

It is far easier to find teachers than evidence. I think there may be a "Billion" teachers.

There is ZERO evidence.

Do the maths.

Your HJ is a Perfect Non-entity--all magic -no history.

Your teachers are teaching a dead end failed argument using known forgeries and sources of fiction as history.

Your teachers are teaching logical fallacies.

 

[Navigator]

"We don't have enough data to determine the case." seems to be the favored vote so far.

 

[pakeha]

"We don't have enough data to determine the case." seems to be the favored vote so far.

Indeed.

And the internet has given carte blanche to people to diss experts and academics and professionals, and say, no, they are all talking trash, because I read a couple of paperbacks, and watched a couple of youtubes, and here is the low down.

In a way, this is democratic, isn't it? But as you say, arrogance, ignorance and laziness are a lethal combination. You end up with vegetarian lions, or the equivalent. I used to teach linguistics, and after a while, got used to ignoring the garbage that people spout about language - there is no point in arguing with them. Of course, some people are genuinely interested and curious - that's very different.

What youtube videos have you seen posted up by non-HJers here at the JREF forum?
What paperbacks quoted?*

Albeit inadvertently, aren't you poisoning the well here?
Or would strawmanning describe your post more accurately?

My own impression is that majority of the posters here are, to use your own words, "genuinely interested and curious." Still, I'm posting pre-coffee so I could be wrong, wrong, wrong on that.
And not for the first time!


* Other than good old Bart, now that I think of it.

 

[zugzwang]

pakeha

Oh, I agree with you that most people here are interested and curious. The scorn for academics is not prevalent here really, but you do find it in the anti-HJ movement.