Started By
Message
re: Does anyone actually believe this
Posted on 7/6/14 at 4:56 pm to TbirdSpur2010
Posted on 7/6/14 at 4:56 pm to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Dude I was home schooled and am very familiar with word etymology. You're kind of overcompensating here.
All I'm saying is you can type until the cows come home and no one will change their mind. I'm glad you're happy to have your druthers on religion in general and Jesus in particular, and I'm certainly at peace with mine. Nothing more to it than that tbh
Ah, shite, sorry for forgetting you TBird.
I meant no disrespect in putting forth Platitude, nor did I mean to act condescending. I just wanted to show you why I dislike that route. I understand where you come from, but I like these kinds of topics.
0
Posted on 7/6/14 at 4:59 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
I don't hold my own as golden. I don't know nor have I ever met Josephus, why would I stick up for him? I'm the first to admit that it's possible that I could be wrong. It's that kind of openness and honesty that I look for in a conversation about these sorts of topics and you've given no reason to believe you're looking for the same.
If you're asking why I don't give you an actual argument, it's because that's all you're looking for, an argument. I look for discussions. I learned a long time ago not to waste my time on arguments.
If you're asking why I don't give you an actual argument, it's because that's all you're looking for, an argument. I look for discussions. I learned a long time ago not to waste my time on arguments.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:00 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
That he was BELIEVED by christians to be the savior, which is a simple fact. Jewish and Roman scholars who mention him obviously did not believe he was what he supposedly claimed to be. The only one that seems to, Josephus, is a known forgery.
I agree with this sentiment, and would like to outline that for Stacked.
quote:
And it doesnt matter which "Jesus" figure was the real Jesus, all that matters is there was ine,
This is where we find the crux of the debate, or at least the point I want to touch on the most:
If the earliest text devoted to him have no grounding in actual history. (Really, the only thing everyone seems to agree on is that there was a man baptized and then crucified, and that's it.)
If all that's necessary to say "yarp he existed" is: There was a guy named Yeshua who was a preacher and who was killed...
Then you're going to have to forgive my skepticism.
It'd be like saying, as I mentioned: There was a Greek warrior who cleaned a stable, therefore Hercules exists.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:01 pm to Stacked
quote:
I don't hold my own as golden.
So you're admitting that the passage from Josephus is a known forgery and not exactly a great place to start when arguing for the historicity of Jesus?
The rest of it to me, is white noise.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:05 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
If all that's necessary to say "yarp he existed" is: There was a guy named Yeshua who was a preacher and who was killed...
Then you're going to have to forgive my skepticism.
A man named Yeshua from Nazareth who was baptized in the Jordan river and then crucified for sedition by Pontius Pilate is a pretty specific narrative. The vast majority of the rest of his story involves miracles and divine claims, which are obviously rejected by non-christians. Essentially, the only claims believed by non-believers are the agreed upon secular claims. Not much else about his life CAN be true unless he actually was what he claimed to be.
In other words, if your criteria for him "existing" were actually met, you'd be forced to worship him.
quote:
It'd be like saying, as I mentioned: There was a Greek warrior who cleaned a stable, therefore Hercules exists.
Its far more specific than that.
This post was edited on 7/6/14 at 5:07 pm
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:08 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
I think Jesus existed but I don't think he was divine or performed miracles.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:10 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
So you're admitting that the passage from Josephus is a known forgery and not exactly a great place to start when arguing for the historicity of Jesus?
Why would you assume by accusing me of holding my opinion as golden and untouchable, and me saying that I don't, that that must mean I admit that Josephus' passage is a known forgery? You're swinging wild and erratically.
As for this known forgery that "everyone knows," you've still only quoted wikipedia. Again, we can't get people to agree on things that happened in this country last week, while all of us were alive during it, and it was recorded, reported on tv, and people shot footage from their cell phones. In your wikipedia quote was this "Although the exact nature and extent of the Christian redaction remains unclear,[13] there is broad consensus as to what the original text of the Testimonium by Josephus would have looked like.[10]" It doesn't even sound like this one person knows what was and wasn't there, let alone "everyone."
I trust your opinion on this matter is now changed and you believe everything the opposite of what you started page 4 of this thread believing.
This post was edited on 7/6/14 at 5:13 pm
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:14 pm to Stacked
Josephus was a jewish scholar who actually had a pretty strong dislike of christianity. Why would someone like that make such bold, flattering claims about a faith he did not hold or even respect?
His passage referencing Jesus essentially admits that Jesus was the son if God, it makes no sense for him to make that claim.
His passage referencing Jesus essentially admits that Jesus was the son if God, it makes no sense for him to make that claim.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:15 pm to Roger Klarvin
He's just going to say Josephus didn't write that and quote wikipedia.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:16 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
A man named Yeshua from Nazareth who was baptized in the Jordan river and then crucified for sedition by Pontius Pilate is a pretty specific narrative.
Why, though, are those accepted and everything else rejected? That makes no sense to me, that we accept all of that almost universally but openly and quickly dismiss anything else from the New Testament.
Jesus' being crucified would have been in Christian Text (for Josephus to mention), so it's not unheard of that he could have gotten his information from folklore.
quote:
Its far more specific than that.
Sure, from the Bible. There are few sources who accredit anything other than a guy named Jesus was crucified. Especially those that were alive in even a moderate proximity to Jesus' existence.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:19 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Why, though, are those accepted and everything else rejected? That makes no sense to me, that we accept all of that almost universally but openly and quickly dismiss anything else from the New Testament.
Who is we? You realize there's people who don't dismiss the New Testament, right?
This post was edited on 7/6/14 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:19 pm to Stacked
This thread had real potential before ya'll ruined it with your historicity of Jesus debate. It's not nearly as fun YEC.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:22 pm to KSGamecock
I feel like we have so thoroughly crushed YEC in the past on this board that it isnt even worth discussing anymore. Knocking around the few remaining young earthers just isnt fun anymore 
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:23 pm to KSGamecock
quote:
This thread had real potential before ya'll ruined it with your historicity of Jesus debate. It's not nearly as fun YEC.
The Year Earth was Created is way too facile.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:25 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
StrawsDrawnAtRandom
Are you ready to
me yet? I ain't ever gonna quit you.Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:26 pm to Stacked
You two just need to frick and get it over with.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:27 pm to Stacked
quote:
He's just going to say Josephus didn't write that and quote wikipedia.
Roger isn't siding with you on Josephus you toolbag. He's saying it's a forgery, like I was. He even said it earlier and I even highlighted it.
I even linked you to Josephus.org.
While a biased site, it gives direct references to books you can read and where the information was collected on Josephus.
For a guy who is so quick to admit that he's wrong, you certainly are suggesting otherwise.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:27 pm to Roger Klarvin
There does seem to be some relationship style tension in our exchange.
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:29 pm to StrawsDrawnAtRandom
quote:
Roger isn't siding with you on Josephus you toolbag.
Y u mad, though?
Posted on 7/6/14 at 5:32 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
You two just need to frick and get it over with.
Gross
Page 4 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News