Did Jesus Actually Exist?

For all the reasons that have been explained to you already.

I'm not repeating them.

You mean you don't know?

Is uttering crap a hobby of yours?

Just asking... There's no wrong is asking, is there? :-)

Re: timur (Post 5805421)


This is the core issue, evidently. Setanta already agreed that it was a 'no-brainer' (his words) that a wandering rabbi called something like Yeshua existed 2000 years ago in Palestine.

Now you do too.

So my question is: who is this wandering rabbi, if not the historical Jesus?

It's not me voting you down.

As has been said before, many times, on these forums: Fantastic claims require much evidence. When you tell me nothing is something, it is not up to me to prove anything.

Josephus is nothing?

Another one bites the dust... Too easy!

Well, not much.

First, Josephus wasn't a witness and wrote by hearsay, based on a document that is now lost (how convenient!)

Second, his text is so weird in so many ways that one can simply think of a forgery.

If that's all you have as archeological evidence, I find it a bit light..

That question was for Ed. Yours is: who was this mysterious rabbi wandering around Galilee 2000 years ago, who gave rise to the Jesus legend, if not the historic Jesus?

You have been arguing all along against an idea you never clearly understood, and which you happen to agree with. Priceless!

That's a bit like saying Arthur Conan Doyle was Sherlock Holmes.

No, your wicked mind always twist what I say.

Get to my initial posts and you'll see I didn't change my view.

I know you are a loser that keeps clutching at straws to promote a view that soon will be obsolete.

You have no real evidence that Jesus existed, no matter the efforts you put in distorting the facts.

LOL

You don't even know what you disagree with. Get lost, you're an embarrassment for the Jesus deniers.

You really are a sad clown.

Are you asking me to get as lost as yourself?

I'm a denier on my own and others don't need to be embarrassed because my views on religion.

You, on the other hand, are an embarrassment to human kind.

No, it's like saying there was a real dude at the onset of the Jesus legend. Which is exactly what I have been saying all along.

Setanta has already admitted as much. Ed cannot even acknowledge the evidence, let alone study it, thus he is deep in denial and always will be...

So I think my job is done here. The scientific consensus around the issue has been proven beyond reasonable doubt, and two of my main contradictors are in fact in agreement with the idea of a historical Jesus. I have highlighted the manic nature of the denial mental mechanisms at play... What else is there to discuss?

You are now pretending that a simple wandering preacher that may have been at the origin of the myth is the Jesus as usually described.

You are a liar and, yes, it's much better that you leave these matters alone to those who can hand them honestly.

Bon voyage!

This thread is not about the Jesus 'as usually described' (whatever that means). It's about that wandering rabbi of yours.

I know you are a liar.

No it's not. A lot of people actually believe Sherlock Holmes exists/existed. 212b Baker Street regularly receives letters asking Sherlock to investigate Watergate 9/11 amongst other things.

This letter is quite good, (I know your(sic) six feet under) .



Given that we live in an age with information ready at the click of a button, yet people still believe he existed, it's totally conceivable that, in an age where technology didn't exist, people could believed a fictional character existed.

Still, this debate is about the wandering rabbi, not about the magic dude walking on water, and not about Sherlock Holmes either. If you have been debating the magic dude's existence all along, you're in the wrong thread.