31
   

The most influential people who NEVER lived

 
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 07:50 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Sorry there is zero proof that such a man exist at least no evidence ever found dating back to that period of time instead of generations after his "death".

The link you refer to come down to that we should just accept at least the non-supernatural parts of the writings of a Jewish cult as facts.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:05 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
There is zero evidence of such a man existing in that time period and we do have solid evidence of a great many men going back even further then the Jesus story but none of Jesus.


Well, appart from the Gospels and Josephus.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:12 pm
@Olivier5,
Quote:
Well, appart from the Gospels and Josephus.


Yes the writings of a Jewish cult written after the time period and full of supernatural nonsense.

Stories for that matter that do not even make sense such as the Roman government having the whole population of the area going back to their birth villages to be counted in a census for example instead of in place.

No record of the Romans every doing such a silly thing so we can somehow able to pick the nonsense out from any facts it might contain.

Once more a man by the name of Jesus who was a cult leader at the time might had exist but there no way of knowing one way or another.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  2  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:14 pm
@BillRM,
Forgive me, I didn't realize you know more than all modern scholars of antiquity
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:15 pm
@BillRM,
And that's the last I'll respond to you. This thread is too good to run amok on a tangent.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:30 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
F
Quote:
orgive me, I didn't realize you know more than all modern scholars of antiquity


Sorry granting titles such as modern scholars of antiquity does not give them any power to overrule commonsense and known facts and lack of evidence.

Other then the religious writings of a cult that was done after the time period there is zero repeat zero evidence of such a man existing as a god or a god/man or a man.

Once more I would place the likelihood of a cult leader by that name existing in that time frame and being the model for the religious writing as 50/50.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:38 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Quote:


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

In the context of deductive arguments, the appeal to authority is an logical fallacy, though it can be properly used in the context of inductive reasoning. It is deductively fallacious because, while sound deductive arguments are necessarily true, authorities are not necessarily correct about judgments related to their field of expertise. Though reliable authorities are correct in judgments related to their area of expertise more often than laypersons, they can still come to the wrong judgments through error, bias or dishonesty. Thus, the appeal to authority is at best a probabilistic rather absolute argument for establishing facts.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  3  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:45 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Quote:
Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed


This from a Wikipedia article that can hardly be accused of perpetuating a Jesus mythos.

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

Your posting out of your ass.


Well, if you're going to play the Wikipedia game, there is also this entry which you seem to have overlooked.

For the record, I have hardly any doubt that there was a historical person living at the time of the Roman occupation of Judea whose name was something like Ieshua bar Iosip, or Jesus when Anglicized. That's not the problem. The problem is your unwillingness to be objective and to look at both sides of the issue.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:49 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
Look, I'm not going to contribute to the derailing of this thread. Think what you want.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  2  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:51 pm
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:

Quote:
There is zero evidence of such a man existing in that time period and we do have solid evidence of a great many men going back even further then the Jesus story but none of Jesus.


Well, appart from the Gospels and Josephus.


Where does Flavius Josephus come in? I am unaware that he mentions Jesus anywhere in his writings. At least, not by name. If you want to interpret some references to crucifixtions as referring specifically to Jesus, that's your interpretation.
edgarblythe
 
  3  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:54 pm
I should take back Superman. He is not technically human.
0 Replies
 
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:57 pm
@George,
George wrote:

King Arthur. No one else comes close.



To get back on topic, I couldn't agree more, George. The whole concept of the Round Table and the quest for the Holy Grail probably fired my imagination more than anything else I enjoyed reading at the time. Even more than the quasi-fictional Western heroes I loved -- Wild Bill Hickok and Buffalo Bill Cody, etc. -- all fictional characters in the way they were portrayed, yet based on real people that had actually lived.

Hmmm. Wonder if that has any bearing on the Jesus topic? Nahh.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 08:59 pm
@Lustig Andrei,
I would appreciate it if you and Bill would do us a favor and peddle your papers here: http://able2know.org/topic/215173-1
Lustig Andrei
 
  1  
Reply Mon 27 May, 2013 09:04 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
I'm not peddling anything, Finn. I didn't bring up the subject of Jesus. Neither did you, in all fairness. I'm simply trying to keep you from posting only one side of the debate; all I'm doing is pointing out that opinion on the subject is not exactly unanimous among serious scholars of the subject and that there is room for disagreement. That's all. But, of course, if you're going to make this an emotional issue rather than intellectual, why, I'llgladly withdraw and hold my peace.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 12:42 am
Louis Feldman of Yeshiva University, an internationally renowned Hellenistic scholar who has specialized in Flavius Josephus, did a review of modern scholarship on the alleged Jesus passage in Josephus, and stated that more than 80% of those scholars considered the passage to be in part or entirely an interpolation.
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 12:50 am
By the way, if Professor Feldman is correct (he also says there is no reliable historical evidence for Jesus), then Jesus could reasonably be said to be the most influential person who NEVER lived.
Olivier5
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 05:10 am
@Setanta,
Most scolars agree that Josephus noted Jesus in passim in his Antiquities, and the text was later redacted. There's also one passage of Antiquity of the Jews were he narrates the execution of James, Jesus' brother, in Jerusalem, in close parallel to the Acts.
0 Replies
 
FBM
 
  3  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 05:19 am
The Man with No Name. (in Clint Eastwood's spaghetti westerns)
0 Replies
 
George
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 05:49 am
Whether or not there was a historical Jesus, the narrative is presented as
of an actual person. In the case of Arthur, however, once you get past the
early histories, it is clear that we are reading what is intended as fiction.
FBM
 
  1  
Reply Tue 28 May, 2013 05:58 am
@George,
I don't really understand why people argue about whether or not there was a "Jesus" human. The relevant question seems to be whether, if he existed, was he divine, a loony or a charlatan, etc?
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/11/2021 at 05:49:09