Scientists slowly proving the bible is right.

Discussion in 'Religion and Spirituality' started by peilthetraveler, Dec 10, 2010.

  1. stu

    stu

    That's equivalent to the Three Bears attesting Goldilocks lived when she lived.
     
    #71     Dec 16, 2010
  2. Wallet

    Wallet

    Yes and at the same time does not disprove it.

    You're remarks are your opinion not fact. There's more evidence affirming the Person of Jesus, than denying it. Thus the reason most scholars believe there was a Jesus.

    Say what you want, most scholars and historians think your wrong.
     
    #72     Dec 16, 2010
  3. Wallet

    Wallet

    Yes there is, as it has been put out time and time again. Your statement is false and misleading
     
    #73     Dec 16, 2010
  4. jem

    jem

    you do understand that the second passage of Josephus alone proves you are full of shit.

    You do realize that just about every Christian and secular scholar on antiquities disagrees with you.
     
    #74     Dec 16, 2010
  5. Jesus lived, he was an incompetent carpenter who didn't want to work so he become the David Blane of his day and lived off of others who gave him food and shelter and all that crap. He appealed to the poor and stupid, the Tea Party people of today, and he became popular, like Ron Paul.
     
    #75     Dec 16, 2010
  6. So now you are saying Matthew, Mark & Luke were not real people? Wow. I bet you think the holocaust never happened too, just like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Maybe you also think we never landed on the moon either.
     
    #76     Dec 16, 2010
  7. Lucrum

    Lucrum

    I can't wait to see stu's response to this.
     
    #77     Dec 16, 2010
  8. Ron Paul = Jesus reborn!
     
    #78     Dec 16, 2010
  9. stu

    stu

    Whether it is true or not most scholars believe there was a Jesus is debatable. People who study Jesus or Christ are normally biblical scholars rather than mainstream historians.
    Mainstream rather obviously don't really care about establishing things that are not historical.
    They don't care about formerly confirming Robin Hood was not an historical figure either. That's not their role.

    So no, most historians do NOT have any professional reason to accept that Jesus was a historical figure
    The main reason being, there is just no historical evidence for it.

    But in any case, any historian who states Jesus was an historical figure, has yet to provide the usual classical historical evidence for it they learned is essential, when they trained to become a historian in the first place.

    To date it's never been done.

    Just religious claims ingrained into society over centuries wrapped up as historical fact, when it is actually nothing of the kind.

    You have to completely suspend all your training skills and understanding of what it is to be a historian if you are going to say Christ was an historical figure

    Certainly no one on this thread has produced any evidence which stands historically valid that the Christ character ever existed in reality.
     
    #79     Dec 16, 2010
  10. stu

    stu

    Nothing is known of Matthew, Mark, & Luke apart from what is mentioned in the Gospels. So they were real people according to what? The Bible?
    Well that won't wash.

    You're saying Cinderella and her two Ugly Sisters were not real people? Wow. I bet you think the holocaust never happened too, just like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Maybe you also think we never landed on the moon either.
     
    #80     Dec 16, 2010