Apparently you can't do polls on here.... but

Do any of you think that Jesus actually existed? What do category do you fall into?

A. Believed he existed, claims are false

B. Believed he existed, claims are exaggerated

C. Don't believe he existed

D. Believe he existed, claims are true (sorry had to leave the idiot category open)

Views: 748

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

@ Khemin: I'm with Rosemary on that much, Mykeru has now shown him/her/it self to be a troll. Dedicating a post to a U-R-ugly nonsense posting is trollspeak for not-capable-of-or-interested-in-intelligent-debate.

Personally, I love your hair. ;-)
A. He PROBABLY existed the propaganda is all FALSE!
The question is, once you strip away the "propaganda" what have you got?
NADA! (nothing) US!!! WE ARE ALL GODS! LOL :)
Uh...ok

/backs away sloooowly
lol it was joke!
Uh...ok

/backs away eeeven moooore sloooowly
Oh my, now I'm a troll.

I'm upfront about going school yard when a conversation deteriorates to the point where words like "douche-nozzle" can be deployed. Unfortunately, some people don't see the incivility of people arguing for ridiculous things provided it's dressed up in circumlocution and pompous phraseology. These are the same sort of people who are impressed with a politicians carriage provided they spout bullshit with assurance, tend not to read the fine print and eventually become enablers of nonsense themselves.
HA HA HA!!! I'm not a Goddess... I'm SATAN!!! Bow down and worship me!! lol
HA! ;)
F. He probably didn't exist - but there's no way to disprove it, and the evidence for and against his existance are both fairly weak.
I'm sorry if I don't deal with your full post. I assume that when someone posts a laundry list of evidences for anything, they lead with their best evidence and if the first couple items aren't persuasive, it's a waste of time to "fisk" the whole thing.

You wrote:

"Of course Jesus actually existed. The historian Thomas Cahill, in "Desire of the Everlasting Hills: The World Before and After Jesus" examines the historical evidence. By closely comparing the first hand accounts in the Gospels, there is a discernible personality and a distinct moral sensibility."

You begin with an assertion and follow it up with an appeal to presumed authority which leads to this:"By closely comparing the first hand accounts in the Gospels, there is a discernible personality and a distinct moral sensibility." Yes, so what? You can say the same about a number of fictional narratives, including Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories.

"There was a recently discovered a 2,000 year-old ossuary (bone box) with his name on it in the same tomb as his brother James. Even though there are questions as to the authenticity of the inscription, everything else in the tomb tends to substantiate that there was a group of his followers (led by St. James) who considered themselves followers of Jesus but who still considered themselves Jews. There is also mention of him by Josephus, a Jewish contemporary. And, there is the recently discovered, and apparently authentic, Gospel of Judas Iscariot."

The James Ossuary is a forgery, the forger has been arrested. All it proves is there were ossuaries at the time of the supposed historical Jesus. The quote by Josephus is likely a later interpolation into a text not written contemporaneously or by any witnesses in the first place. And the Gospel of Judas is "apparently authentic"? An authentic what? Authentic Gospel? Authentically written by Judas? Or just another bit of oral tradition not written by an apostle of uncertain provenance? As the Gospel of Judas so revises the story of Jesus and Judas it worsens the problem of inter-gospel contradiction, and so much for "discernible personality and a distinct moral sensibility".

And so on and so on...

All your post proves is that bad evidence is not proof, even if you have lots of it.

RSS

CONNECT WITH ATHEIST NEXUS

Latest Activity

Debra Stevenson posted blog posts
25 minutes ago
Teresita Mattox posted a status
1 hour ago
Teresita Mattox posted a blog post

Best Free Online Dating Sites

Free Online Dating Site - Whereloveisfound.comFalling in love might feel closer to a daydream than possible for many with busy lives. But it is possible and the WhereLoveIsFound team have created a dating experience "100 percent dedicated to the community and providing a place for people to find genuine love and happiness." Below they explain why loveless singles should try their site.What inspired WhereLoveIsFound?Whereloveisfound.com was inspired by love, building a community for people all…See More
1 hour ago
Loren Miller replied to Loren Miller's discussion Latest Activity?
"After a bit of thought, I've come up with a list of the basic items which used to be found on a member's profile page and whether they are currently present in the new profile, at least as it is displayed on mine: Member's name &…"
1 hour ago
Loren Miller commented on John Hutcheson's blog post Are the media too giddy over the Pope?
"Wouldn't know, really.  The last couple days, the US news media has been focused (for good or ill) on this EF-5 tornado which wiped out a considerable portion of Moore, Oklahoma.  When you only have half an hour to report national and…"
1 hour ago
Loren Miller replied to Loren Miller's discussion Latest Activity?
"For that matter, when the upgrade was originally applied, I had my photo slide show on my profile as with the old layout.  Now I don't.  SOMETHING got tripped over!"
1 hour ago
Debra Stevenson replied to matthew greenberg's discussion Pope Francis says even Atheists go to Heaven
"I wish the RCC would reform itself along with the main branch of the LDS church, the SDA's and the JW's ( they desperately need reform , none of the eighty something splinter groups can be called liberal in all actuality). …"
2 hours ago
Tony Carroll commented on Jeffrey's group Trekkies
" "
2 hours ago

© 2013   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service