re: Does anyone actually believe this

quote:

---

I don't debate!

---

So what have you been doing this whole time?

"Debate is a method of interactive and representational argument."

quote:

---

Jesus was mentioned in the Works of Josephus, a historian of the time. Whether you believe Jesus is God or not is up to you, but he very much was here and was recorded by non-christians alike as being so.

---

Here's you, not debating.

quote:

---

Josephus mentioning Jesus is a "known Christian interpolation?" Care to provide a link to any group of people claiming to know this?

---

More Stacked, can't be bothered with debate.

quote:

---

I have the Works of Josephus and I'm aware. For me it's the same as having a Civil War historian today. Were they alive to fight in the war? No, there are civil war buffs and historians who have an accurate assessment of the Civil War because we aren't that far removed from it in history. Josephus was much closer in years to the time Jesus was on earth than any Civil War historian is to the Civil War today. I'm okay that Josephus wasn't one of Jesus' disciples, in fact, I think it adds to his credit much more that he wasn't.

---

Not making a point here, I'll gather?

quote:

---

I think historians are sometimes strange, what is it to me though what they decide to write about? I'm just saying that a non-connected source referenced Jesus's existence, which Josephus is and did. What are you getting at? You've admitted he did also. That's all my point was.

---

quote:

---

People around here can't even agree on if Sandy Hook was or wasn't a hoax, why would anyone think people would agree on something that happened 2K years ago? I don't assume I'm right about something just because I have an opinion. So why would I argue with other people that they are wrong?

---

quote:

---

As for this known forgery that "everyone knows," you've still only quoted wikipedia.

---

Who is this person not debating? I wonder what his name is?

quote:

---

Who is we? You realize there's people who don't dismiss the New Testament, right?

---

I wonder if he has a handle?

quote:

---

This thread had real potential before ya'll ruined it with your historicity of Jesus debate. It's not nearly as fun YEC.

---

-- Klarvin telling you directly that this was a debate.

quote:

---

Are you ready to me yet? I ain't ever gonna quit you.

---

--

Is this you not trying to debate?

quote:

---

So you think that the SECrant and wikipedia is what I will rely on to mold and make changes to my historical beliefs on God from a 5 page thread? If my opinion could be changed that easily I don't deserve to have one at all. I may be wrong, but it most likely will not be because of anything someone does or says on the Off Topic board.

And for the record, Roger Klarven was wrong in his exaggeration. He said "His passage referencing Jesus essentially admits that Jesus was the son if God" That just isn't so. Acknowledging Jesus existed in no way "admits that Jesus was the son of God." A ton of people believe Jesus existed who also think he was NOT the Son of God. The historian Josephus is no different.

For every book cited to your wikipedia copy and past, or your website, there is a book and website directly contrasting your point of view. It is what it is. By existing, I don't believe any of those authors and books mean you're wrong, nor do I believe someone's opinion being cited by wikipedia means I'm wrong. If you think it should convince me otherwise, I'm sorry.

---

quote:

---

He STILL believes that, with interpolations omitted, Josephus spoke directly of a man named Jesus that was put to death by Pilate. He's not saying that with interpolations omitted Josephus spoke nothing of Jesus. So what is even your point?

---

How on Earth can you say you're not debating?

Christ, Stacked.