223523 Bullies, 4418 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 111 to 120 of 437
Page 12 of 44 FirstFirst ... 289101112 1314151622 ... LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. Hiro Protagonist is offline
    Hiro Protagonist's Avatar

    Has entered Barovia...

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    5,460

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 6:03am

    supporting member
     

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by goodlun View Post
    Including critical analysis of gospel texts as the primary source for his biography.
    I take issue with this as a form of evidence.
    I think you're confusing Biblical studies with "hard science". From a scientific point of view, the question about the historic existence of Jesus is not complicated.

    Also, you're wrong in assuming that the Bible is the primary source for historians. The Bible is a book arbitrarily put together from a vast selection of texts, some time between the 3rd and the 4th century, and as a principle, not intended as a factual report.

    In fact, serious historians use ALL available sources about the time; that some of them happen to be religious texts, is a facette of the topic, but not the only one, or the primary one, as you assume.


    I am not stating that it couldn't have happened just the lack of contemporary records of it happening
    And what should have been recorded, in your opinion? Like, what about the entire story of Jesus would have been record-worthy to somebody who was not a member of his sect?

    Do you not see how this argument just really muddies the waters. The argument for a historical Jesus is a single Jesus not a compilation of myths. That would be the case for a mythical Jesus.
    Why? So, necessarily, the same person that gave the sermon on the mount and walked over water on the lake Genezareth has to be the same person that was crucified? Which parts of the story are integral to a historical Jesus, in your opinion?

    Let's see if I am good for a lunchbreak analogy: So, you have the poem of the Iliad, and various other accounts of the war of Troy. You also have the war-torn ruins of a city on the exact location of the city, as the poem gives it. Do you need to find tangible evidence for the Troyan horse to conclude that the poem might have a historical base?
  2. DerAuslander is offline
    DerAuslander's Avatar

    Valiant Monk of Booze & War

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    18,451

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 7:22am

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: BJJ/C-JKD/KAAALIII!!!!!!!

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by erezb View Post
    Thank you for inventing a new blood tail about jews, i understand that after we murdered baby jesus we started killing Christians.. Have you any evidence to support such outrageous claim?
    Paul/Saul of Tarsus admitted to persecuting Christians while he was still a Jew and was present at one stoning at least that we know of.

    Quote Originally Posted by erezb View Post
    Do you know the status of jews at the time? well not long after the Jesus period, when a lot of other massaihs came and went, there was a big rebellion against the Romans led by Judah the Maccabie (who was considered by some to be a massaih) that led to the near extinction of the jews and the deportation of them all over the old world. They were wondering refugees, they were too busy surviving to go about killing Christians..In fact after this rebellion a lot of those jews actually became slaves to be dispersed throughout the roman empire.
    This was before that.

    So, no one here is inventing new blood tales, but passing on old ones. While the Acts of the Apostles' account has been questioned by some historians and theologians, Paul's own words in his Epistles generally are considered to have greater historical accuracy.
  3. It is Fake is offline
    It is Fake's Avatar

    Administrator

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    33,899

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 7:26am

    staff
     Style: xingyi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhi108 View Post

    So, no one here is inventing new blood tales, but passing on old ones.
    Yes, and goodlun guess what this means? That EVEN literate societies pass on oral traditions.. You do realize, which is why people are harping on your technological based idiocy, that the majority of History is based on oral accounts right?

    You do realize that history is subjective right? So, if no one, but a sect thought Jesus was important, WTF would the great literate society deem him important enough to be more than a footnote?

    That's why your logic is flawed. You are operating under the belief that since he is important NOW, that he was that important to the masses back then..
  4. erezb is offline
    erezb's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    1,267

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 8:16am


     Style: Boxing,Kickboxing K1

    -2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhi108 View Post
    Paul/Saul of Tarsus admitted to persecuting Christians while he was still a Jew and was present at one stoning at least that we know of.



    This was before that.

    So, no one here is inventing new blood tales, but passing on old ones. While the Acts of the Apostles' account has been questioned by some historians and theologians, Paul's own words in his Epistles generally are considered to have greater historical accuracy.
    Paul of Tarsus (c. 10 - c. 67) originally named Saul, was one of the most notable of early Christian missionaries, his prolific writings forming a major portion of the New Testament. His influence on Christian thinking has, arguably, been more significant than any other New Testament
    So, was he a good man or a bad man in the eyes of Christians? He murdered Christians and than became not just christian but an important christian figure? seems to me that this was a christian killing Christians... Leave us alone we just killed jesus isn't that enough? Besides back than they weren't Christians simply the new jews especially if you asked the romans.
    Last edited by erezb; 10/16/2012 8:32am at .
  5. DerAuslander is offline
    DerAuslander's Avatar

    Valiant Monk of Booze & War

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    18,451

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 10:06am

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: BJJ/C-JKD/KAAALIII!!!!!!!

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by erezb View Post
    Paul of Tarsus (c. 10 - c. 67) originally named Saul, was one of the most notable of early Christian missionaries, his prolific writings forming a major portion of the New Testament. His influence on Christian thinking has, arguably, been more significant than any other New Testament
    So, was he a good man or a bad man in the eyes of Christians? He murdered Christians and than became not just christian but an important christian figure? seems to me that this was a christian killing Christians... Leave us alone we just killed jesus isn't that enough? Besides back than they weren't Christians simply the new jews especially if you asked the romans.
    You may want to keep reading that article, because right now, it's not even worth it to respond to your post.
  6. W. Rabbit is offline
    W. Rabbit's Avatar

    insight combined with intel, fuse, and dynamite

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Work
    Posts
    8,030

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 11:38am

    supporting member
     Style: (Hung Ga+BJJ+MT+JKD) ^ Qi

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
  7. goodlun is online now
    goodlun's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ramona
    Posts
    4,991

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 12:05pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    First of I can't prove a negative, I also acknowledged that the lack of proof doesn't mean he their isn't a historical figure. What I want is to see the Historical method used to validate a Historical Jesus cause every time I dig into it ends right back up to Mark and sources that look like they are using Mark as their source.
    Mark is just not a great source if you go by the
    Below Source Criticism guide lines taken from
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_method
    Core principles

    The following core principles of source criticism were formulated by two Scandinavian historians, Olden-Jřrgensen (1998) and Thurén (1997):[1]

    • Human sources may be relics such as a fingerprint; or narratives such as a statement or a letter. Relics are more credible sources than narratives.
    • Any given source may be forged or corrupted. Strong indications of the originality of the source increase its reliability.
    • The closer a source is to the event which it purports to describe, the more one can trust it to give an accurate historical description of what actually happened.
    • A primary source is more reliable than a secondary source which is more reliable than a tertiary source, and so on.
    • If a number of independent sources contain the same message, the credibility of the message is strongly increased.
    • The tendency of a source is its motivation for providing some kind of bias. Tendencies should be minimized or supplemented with opposite motivations.
    • If it can be demonstrated that the witness or source has no direct interest in creating bias then the credibility of the message is increased.


    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    Yes, and goodlun guess what this means? That EVEN literate societies pass on oral traditions.. You do realize, which is why people are harping on your technological based idiocy, that the majority of History is based on oral accounts right?
    Yes I am aware of the Oral Tradition

    Quote Originally Posted by It is Fake View Post
    You do realize that history is subjective right? So, if no one, but a sect thought Jesus was important, WTF would the great literate society deem him important enough to be more than a footnote?
    Once again something from the sect itself other then an Oral tradition would be nice, just a letter a journal entry something. I get that these things may have existed at one time and are most likely lost to time. I am not looking for news paper clippings here, A lot of history as divulged from very mundane correspondents. I have seen a letter from a roman soldier at Hastings wall asking his wife for socks.

    I am not on some quest to disprove anything, I want to see the historical method used to generate this acceptance cause I am not seeing it.
  8. goodlun is online now
    goodlun's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ramona
    Posts
    4,991

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 12:45pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: BJJ

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Instead of going around in circles. Can some one explain to me why a contempory account isn't needed
  9. DerAuslander is offline
    DerAuslander's Avatar

    Valiant Monk of Booze & War

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    18,451

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 12:49pm

    supporting memberstaff
     Style: BJJ/C-JKD/KAAALIII!!!!!!!

    1
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    May the Flying Spaghetti monster save me from fucking armchair wikischolars...

    I'm trying to figure out who's the bigger idiot, Erezb, who's just plain ignorant, or Goodlun, who wants to seem like he knows something.
  10. Vieux Normand is offline

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    4,271

    Posted On:
    10/16/2012 1:52pm

    Join us... or die
     Style: 血鷲

    2
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by erezb View Post
    I was actually contemplating going IIF on your ass with bits and peaces of quotes and ****
    You? Try to imitate IIF? Please do...

    than i read the last part "mediterranean monobrow getting offed by others of his species" exactly my fucking point...i wish your higher beings in europe (or anywhere else on earth...) could have seen it in the same way and leave us the **** alone.
    Agreed. No more military aid to any middle-eastern country. Exception: each person in the region gets one rifle and thirty rounds. All national arsenals equalized. Then wall the entire area off and let the hairies have at each other. The human gene pool (as well as any subhuman equivalent) would benefit greatly from the result.

    The proof that there is no benevolent omnipotent deity is the presence, on our planet, of the geo-political running sore that is the mid-east. There would be no people from competing abrahamaniac creeds slaughtering each other in places like the Philippines and sub-saharan Africa over gods, books, prophets and arid "holy lands" that have nothing to do with their own peoples' history. Had there been a god, that flea-bitten bit of desert would have been situated on Pluto, leaving our planet in a far better situation. The hairy-monobrows could then do the duelling-schnozzolas until even Pluto would be left in peace and quiet.

    But who am i to talk being an inferior monobrow of Abrahamic dissent, i mean you guys are fucking perfect example of kindness fairness and logic.
    Now now...as redundant as "inferior monobrow" seems, all things are relative. Therefore, be of good cheer: you might be an average monobrow...or you might even be superior to others of your ilk. Though being superior to monobrows would be faint praise for the rest of us--like being smarter than your average sprocket--it might still be reason for you to be a proud little monobrow. All is not lost.
Page 12 of 44 FirstFirst ... 289101112 1314151622 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.