Caesarea is the earliest known example to have used underwater Roman concrete technology on such a large scale. Sometimes we think we are nowadays much better in science development. And they living in 2,000 years ago were just primitive in everything - nothing scientific. Perhaps we need to re-think about it, twice.
So no problems establishing a 2,000 year old lump of concrete's historical existence, while on the other hand Jesus's presents all sorts of nothing.
In Stoic logic, AFAIK, a speech is very different from a saying/logos. Just 2 cents: A problem with atheist would be there has been not enough systematic scholarly research and studies formally dedicated to establish a school of thoughts and knowledge. That could be a real problem for any self-claimed atheists, without requiring any professional training or following a set of knowledge base! Either someone who just learns nothing and studies nothing can easily claim to be an atheist. Or (s)he would have to understand all sorts of religions in order to establish herself/himself to be an atheist. In order to defend whatever challenges by any religious believers, researchers, scholars, theologians, etc. However, it would be almost impossible to study so much about all religions or various definitions of God as claimed by whatever believers. imo, the best candidates as atheists would be professional trained philosophy scholars/academics. But still, imo, they cannot establish a body of knowledge for atheists. There is no theologians in atheism. How could they argue and debate against others who are knowledgeable in their own field of studies like Christianity or Christian theology. Perhaps the latest development is they try to organise their collective knowledge by building up a web like this one: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Main_Page http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rationalism covering various threads, like these: But again, an atheist would have to learn so much about all things in order to become an atheist. Otherwise, (s)he would be quite weak in defending her/his position. Especially when wanting to challenge others for their faiths. That's relatively primitive, imo. Not many capable people can do it well by becoming an atheist who is able to posses so much various knowledge about all faiths plus philosophy schools. If there are some, I would like to know their names and learn their independent thoughts, besides non-believing in all-religions. --- TBC
Here is another web already mentioned some time ago: Many contributors are academics, AFAIK. https://infidels.org/infidels/honorary.html
imo, there should be many differences between a Real Jesus (before any physical church was openly built) and Canonized Jesus. Perhaps Dawkins should have started to lead a team to build up a well-established body of knowledge on Atheism. But he hasn't yet.
..... don't be too hard on yourself. With all the subtly of a Trump tweet, at least you've managed to derail your own thread.
imo, Stoicism could be just like the Roman concrete technology, old but scientifically advance when comparing to today's contemporary knowledge. imo, Stoicism would be simply a practical philosophy system that could be suitable to every daily secular person without any belief in religion while living in a democratic society. No churches, No religions and No institutions. Just individuals. And every individual is equal. No classes. Perhaps a model has been developed/existed longer than 2,000 years ago, that many of us nowadays without knowing its existence might be still trying hard to find a similar model, without much success. imo The Real Jesus could be equivalent to simply a 1/3 Stoic, focusing on only ethics part. Leaving the other two parts for physics and logic to some dedicated professionals. Since these two parts apparently require much more intellectual energy that most common people would not like to spend in them. LOL
Q Could This Ancient Porn Change The Way We Think About Christianity And Homosexuality? This is the world in which the New Testament was written. 21/07/2017 http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/20...christiani_a_23040103/?utm_hp_ref=au-homepage UQ
I think some people would be very interested to see if there would be an established organisation doing serious/formal research supported by ample funding for studying atheism, in order to build up a body of knowledge, possibly. Especially a/the definition of God!