Did Jesus Actually Exist?

@Olivier5,

You're the one running around like a headless chicken accusing people of all sorts just because they don't agree with you. Hysteria and hyperbole are quite apt descriptions, as is big girl's blouse.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Such bombastic statements on your side only show you're losing the argument... Tsk tsk tsk.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Sez you.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Please calm down. Upper lip stiff, and all that sort of things...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

You're projecting again, probably because you've still not got over the knob gag.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

timur wrote:

Weasel away, Olivier, turning the problem around will not change the fact that you have no proof that Jesus existed.

What proof would you be willing to accept?

As a proprietor of a scientific and logic mind, despite all that can be said by deniers, I would accept any archaeological, written by chronologically compatible witnesses, or any other science backed proof that would make a consensus in the scientific field and peer reviewed by independent researchers.

By independent researchers, I mean all those within the scientific field that are not funded by religious institutions.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I can't stand such shrillness. Get over yourself...

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

You have a shrill knob? Can't say I'm surprised.

1 Reply

@timur,

timur wrote:

I would accept any archaeological, written by chronologically compatible witnesses, or any other science backed proof that would make a consensus in the scientific field and peer reviewed by independent researchers.

I've never heard of the term "chronologically compatible witnesses," so you'll have to explain that. Are you saying that you'll only accept written testimony by eyewitnesses? And I'm not sure what you mean by "science backed proof. Can you give examples of what would be acceptable evidence under that standard?

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

Jesus and Christianity are the most believable of all the world's religions and the ones which ring truest within the hearts of men.

Really?

And that is based on what?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

You never say much anyway... Content as you are to pronounce irrelevant comments from the sideline.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Better than talking a load of **** all the time.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Insults are cheap, Izzy. Some people try to say things as they see them. Others always stick to the conventional wisdom of their little parish... You're in the latter category, while I'm in the former.

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

joefromchicago wrote:

timur wrote:
I would accept any archaeological, written by chronologically compatible witnesses, or any other science backed proof that would make a consensus in the scientific field and peer reviewed by independent researchers.

I've never heard of the term "chronologically compatible witnesses," so you'll have to explain that. Are you saying that you'll only accept written testimony by eyewitnesses? And I'm not sure what you mean by "science backed proof. Can you give examples of what would be acceptable evidence under that standard?

Well, Joe,

I would accept:

Archaeological evidence - Some artifact that is indubitably dated of the period and not only conducive but indubitably connected with Jesus existence.

Written evidence by witnesses contemporary of Jesus or contemporary of Jesus contemporaries.

Artifacts or materials that science can attest that they are Jesus related, under the conditions I described.

2 Replies

@Olivier5,

Some people take themselves way too seriously, others like taking the piss out of said people.

1 Reply

@timur,

timur wrote:

Written evidence by witnesses contemporary of Jesus or contemporary of Jesus contemporaries.

Paul the Evangelist was a contemporary of contemporaries of Jesus. Why don't you accept his accounts?

1 Reply

@timur,

Quote:

Archaeological evidence - Some artifact that is indubitably dated of the period and not only conducive but indubitably connected with Jesus existence.

Written evidence by witnesses contemporary of Jesus or contemporary of Jesus contemporaries.

Artifacts or materials that science can attest that they are Jesus related, under the conditions I described.

I compared in a former message that the writings about Jesus are similar to the writings about Pythagoras. In both cases, there is no other evidence but the historical records narrated by witness and followers.

Both of these men, weren't great authorities and neither famous people to be recorded in official records and less to have their faces carved in coins, stones, painted in walls and similar.

At least, Jesus is mentioned in the official court records of the Tractate Sanhedrin 43a.

It should be infantile to ask more than the narrations found about these two historical figures. We understand that they became famous for the rest of the world only after their death. The same happened with Homer and lots of other historical figures of the past.

This is to say, with your obstinate attitude,. you are also denying the existence of Pythagoras and of other great men of the past.

We are so lucky that History is not under your personal decision, otherwise we shouldn't have valid historical records at all... Lol.

0 Replies

@joefromchicago,

Because there is no consensus among the scientific scholars on either the existence of Paul or the authenticity of his epistles.

Quite the contrary, in fact..

1 Reply

@timur,

timur wrote:

Because there is no consensus among the scientific scholars on either the existence of Paul or the authenticity of his epistles.

Quite the contrary, in fact..

I'm aware of the controversy about the authenticity of certain Pauline epistles, but the existence of Paul himself is, I would think, a settled question. But again, if the writings of Paul are not evidence of Paul's existence, then what would you accept to establish his existence?

1 Reply

@joefromchicago,

Something similar to this, Joe:

Quote:

The sources for Pilate's life are an inscription known as the Pilate Stone, which confirms his historicity and establishes his title as prefect;

2 Replies

Did Jesus Actually Exist?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know