izzythepush
 
  1  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 07:11 am
@Olivier5,
He can't even get the name right.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 07:55 am
@izzythepush,
Could be worse...
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 09:30 am
@Olivier5,
When it come to being a liar, you ware without peer. At no time did i say or even imply that Louis Feldman held any point of view with regard to the historicity of your boy Jeebus. Your use of reasoning and logic is non-existent.
Olivier5
 
  0  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 12:12 pm
@Setanta,
No, but you implied that all passages quoting Jesus in Josephus were concerned by a review of many relevant academic publications done by Feldman, and pointing to a redacted text. This review only concerned one of the two passages.

It may seem as a detail, but it means that the name and some of the story of Jesus was known and mentioned by Josephus, in Ant. XX. That passage is considered genuine by most scholars, and in any case WAS NOT COVERED BY THE FELDMAN LITERATURE REVIEW you mentioned so many times.

And you have never admitted as much... Talk about weasels.
Frank Apisa
 
  0  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 01:47 pm
Never thought I would hear Beth talk like that.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  3  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 01:49 pm
@Olivier5,
No, there definitely was no such implication. This is why it is impossible to have a coherent conversation with you. Citing Felman's publication only shows that there is not any universal, or even near universal consensus about evidence for Jeebus by modern scholars. That was relevant because you kept raning about the testimonium as though it were iron-clad proof, and Finn started his thread with an unsubstantiated claim scholars believe that Jeebus existed. Neither conclusion is supportable on the evidence which is why i cited Feldman.

Citing Feldman's paper does not tell us whether or not those scholars believe that there was an historical Jeebus. Citing Feldman's paper does not tell us whether or not Feldman believes there was an historical Jeebus. But you, with your complete lack of reasoning abilities and logic, take the ball and run with it. You cite the testimonium as though it were proof, and take no account of the well-developed suspicion among scholars that it is in part or entirely an interpolation.

More that that, you keep calling me a liar when i have made no claims about what Feldman does or does not believe. You're a hateful scum-bag, all you care about is arguing for argument's sake, abnd being able to claim that you've "won." I'm through talking to you, you're an idiot.
Olivier5
 
  0  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 05:09 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
No, there definitely was no such implication. This is why it is impossible to have a coherent conversation with you. Citing Felman's publication only shows that there is not any universal, or even near universal consensus about evidence for Jeebus by modern scholars. That was relevant because you kept raning about the testimonium as though it were iron-clad proof, and Finn started his thread with an unsubstantiated claim scholars believe that Jeebus existed. Neither conclusion is supportable on the evidence which is why i cited Feldman.

Jesus you're thick.

1. I never ever used the testimonium in any way, and certainly not as iron-clad proof. I KNOW it is dubious. I have been using the book 20 passage, which is seen by almost all scholars as genuine. Therefore, Josephus spoke of Jesus.

2. It is a PROVEN FACT that almost all modern scholars specialised in the issue conclude that a historical Jesus existed.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Fri 31 Oct, 2014 05:15 pm
@Olivier5,
Isn't "modern scholars" an oxymoron? They're guessing at what may have existed two thousand years ago from mystical history.

The Torah was written 16th - 17th BCE. It claims this planet is only 6,000 years old, but science has refuted this with many factual evidence that this planet is 4.5 billion years old.

Quote:
The New Testament is an anthology, a collection of Christian works written in the common Greek language of the first century, at different times by various writers, who were early Jewish disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. In almost all Christian traditions today, the New Testament consists of 27 books. The original texts were written in the first and perhaps the second centuries of the Christian Era, generally believed to be in Koine Greek, which was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean from the Conquests of Alexander the Great (335–323 BC) until the evolution of Byzantine Greek (c. 600). All of the works which would eventually be incorporated into the New Testament would seem to have been written no later than around AD 150.[


Mythical stories get changed and glorified over 150 years. Humans are not a good source of consistency when they create any god. They end up performing miracles that's not recorded anyplace else.

It's not logical to use one book as the messenger and supporter of its own stories.

Why are there so many errrors, contradictions, and omissions from this book authored by god himself? One simple answer; they were authored by different men.

Don't forget; the bible treats women and slaves like property, and believers are supposed to stone non-believers and homosexuals by stoning them to death.





Olivier5
 
  0  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 06:21 am
@cicerone imposter,
Scholar = scientist. In this case, historian or philologist. And yes, they are 'guessing' quite a few things but they are technically and intellectually equipped to do so better than you and I. Why would you like to second-guess them? Do you second-guess atomic physicists or entomologists?

BTW, the Torah was written around 9 century bc, at the soonest. The Hebrews did not exist in 17 bc.

Quote:
the bible treats women and slaves like property, and believers are supposed to stone non-believers and homosexuals by stoning them to death.

That's part of what Jesus helped change though.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  3  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 10:38 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
My point is that the arguments presented by A2K atheists are often ludicrous, waaaay below par.


then why the **** are you posting in a thread which was set up for atheists to discuss their experiences? really, this is simply too annoying.

(yes, this is Beth posting)
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 10:45 am
@ehBeth,
But, Beth, that's what Olivier is all about -- being annoying, nothing more.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 10:47 am
@Lustig Andrei,
Well, that was my one crack at saying something to him about it in this thread. I'm not going to feed it any further.
0 Replies
 
timur
 
  2  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 11:55 am
Olivier wrote:
intellectually equipped to do so better than you and I.


What do you know, you little mind?

I know a lot of them in my daily life and I can tell you that some of them are far from being brilliant.

That says a lot about your own intellectual "equipment".

Stop making up crap..
Olivier5
 
  2  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 12:12 pm
@ehBeth,
Because I am an atheist. What else? Smile
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 12:27 pm
@timur,
I know a few entomologists, none of whom I'd describe as brilliant but within their domain I trust their expertise.
timur
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 12:39 pm
@Olivier5,
However, you, like Frank, make "blind guesses" about that expertise.

Something like faith..

Jesus very existence is based on that kind of faith.

Olivier5
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 12:45 pm
@timur,
If by that you mean that I tend to trust and believe scientists within their domain of competence, that is correct.
timur
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 12:52 pm
@Olivier5,
The problem is that many you cite may be "experts" of events that have yet to be proved..
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 01:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Between the 17th and 12th centuries B.C.E., the primitive, pictograph-like alphabet was employed in Shechem, Gezer, Tell al-Ḥāsī, Tell al-ʿAjūl, Beth-Shemesh, Megiddo, Tell Rehov, Tell Beit Mirsim, and Lachish. These inscriptions are generally called Proto-Canaanite. Another, larger group, the so-called Proto-Sinaitic inscriptions (1500 B.C.E.) were probably written by a colony of northwest Semitic slaves who worked the mines in Wadi Ma'ara, near Sarābīṭ al-Khādim. It seems that this script generally served a religious function and may have been developed by a Canaanite priesthood. Certainly, all official government documents were written in cuneiform (e.g., el-Amarna letters) which obscured the alphabetic script.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/judaica/ejud_0002_0021_0_21120.html
Olivier5
 
  1  
Sat 1 Nov, 2014 02:23 pm
@timur,
Their expertise usually covers certain sources of certain periods... If you mean that you don't believe historians, or History, that's fine with me. After all, it's a science and therefore what is considered true today may considered false tomorrow.
 

Related Topics

The tolerant atheist - Discussion by Tuna
Another day when there is no God - Discussion by edgarblythe
church of atheism - Discussion by daredevil
Can An Atheist Have A Soul? - Discussion by spiritual anrkst
THE MAGIC BUS COMES TO CANADA - Discussion by Setanta
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Atheism
  3. » Page 568
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 05/05/2024 at 12:21:39