Religion

rug

(82,333 posts)

159. You seem unable to distinguish between a critique and a claim.

Reply to AtheistCrusader (Reply #157)

Tue Nov 5, 2013, 03:26 PM

Nov 2013

The scriptures indisputably exist. You claim they're a fiction and a fraud. Prove it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

210 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Was Jesus even born? [View all] gopiscrap Nov 2013 OP

I think Jesus existed. Whether he is who he says he is, is a matter of faith. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #1

I agree, so the question I am posing is was there a Jesus in the context of what gopiscrap Nov 2013 #2

Why is it plausible that Jesus even existed? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #11

what about the historical artifacts that have been discovered? gopiscrap Nov 2013 #13

What historical artifacts? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #15

Possibly all the parts of the true cross: AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2013 #27

That hardly qualifies as an "historical artifact." At best, it's supposition. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #47

So you are choosing to ignore the question? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #56

Apart from a relatively few historical people Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #99

No edhopper Nov 2013 #100

Which is why believers take it on faith. Fortinbras Armstrong Nov 2013 #101

Why is that ? Leontius Nov 2013 #103

Basic reasoning, lack of objective evidence, common sense... cleanhippie Nov 2013 #104

That the only evidence edhopper Nov 2013 #106

Your first point is typical of much of early history. The scources for three of the Gospels are very Leontius Nov 2013 #107

And there is much edhopper Nov 2013 #108

The idea that the Gospels are based on eyewitness testimony is laughable. stopbush Nov 2013 #137

I also often wonder why anyone thinks such biblical eyewitnesses could write... Moonwalk Nov 2013 #181

The apostle Matthew is described as a tax collector muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #204

Um, no. Just able to do math. People used marks on slates... Moonwalk Nov 2013 #208

All you say is true edhopper Nov 2013 #186

Because the figure of Jesus in the NT is pretty much a straight archetype stopbush Nov 2013 #189

To be fair, thinking Jesus even existed is a matter of faith, too. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #5

There is an interesting point there but I think he exited. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #6

Yes, you've already stated that. Are you agreeing with my point? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #7

I would say that historians believe that all of the writings written about Jesus in the first hrmjustin Nov 2013 #12

Do you agree with my point or not? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #14

I have mixed feelings to be honest. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #16

It's difficult to have a conversation when points of fact cannot be agreed upon. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #17

We don't agree on things. You knew that. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #18

YOU don't agree on things. If its factual, I'll agree with it. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #19

If we cannot agree on even basic facts, what's the point of discussion? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #22

Seriously. How can there be meaningful discussion if basic facts cannot be agreed upon? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #59

I am sorry I did not get back to you. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #61

So if you "simply don't know", then you take his existence as a matter of faith and not fact. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #63

Jesus existance is not a fact. That is clear. I believe the bible that it says he was here. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #65

So you agree with my initial reply which is that you take it on faith not fact. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #86

no I base on the overwhelming consensus of academia. nt arely staircase Nov 2013 #87

Your post would make more sense were my question directed to you. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #88

so if I say I believe in man made climate change because that is the consensus among scientists arely staircase Nov 2013 #89

I say you base your opinion on nothing more than an argument from authority. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #90

+1 okasha Nov 2013 #197

I have no problem agreeing with you. I agree that there is not written accounts of him during his hrmjustin Nov 2013 #96

The virgin birth? Really? stopbush Nov 2013 #133

I know about the translation. I believe in the virgin birth. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #134

Wow. I've got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. stopbush Nov 2013 #135

First off I already own part of the bbrooklyn bridge so you don't need to sell me anything. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #136

I appreciate the humor, but you don't own part of the BB and stopbush Nov 2013 #140

Yes I do own some bricks that were apart of the bridge. And as for my belief I am allowed to hrmjustin Nov 2013 #142

I defend your right to believe whatever you will. That's what being an American is about. stopbush Nov 2013 #146

I understand. You don't elieve in the virgin birth. It is something not easy to believe in. I have hrmjustin Nov 2013 #149

"You either believe or you don't." What a lazy statement. stopbush Nov 2013 #174

Whhat do you want from me? I believe it. If you have a problem with it that is your problem not mine hrmjustin Nov 2013 #176

I don't have a problem with your faith. Just letting you know why i find it so easy to stopbush Nov 2013 #177

and what do you want from me? hrmjustin Nov 2013 #178

Well, I was hoping for a serious discussion, but your blind faith rather closes that door. stopbush Nov 2013 #179

I am not going to engage a person who is going to insult me. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #180

Buh-bye. Don't let the door hit ya where evolution split ya. stopbush Nov 2013 #183

Very rude. I did nothing to deserve your scorn. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #184

Justin always tries to be polite and engaging to everyone on DU Marrah_G Nov 2013 #191

No, the resurrection is implausible, because it is unknown, biologically muriel_volestrangler Nov 2013 #36

Fair point. The Resurrection is implausible, while the existence of jesus is plausible. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #49

not for historians. arely staircase Nov 2013 #45

Hogwash. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #52

name me three published peer reviewed historians who say Jesus of Nazareth arely staircase Nov 2013 #54

Find me one peer-reviewed paper that proves a negative. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #55

peer reviewed historians who claim Jesus didn't exist are about as common as peer reviewed scientist arely staircase Nov 2013 #58

Find me one peer-reviewed paper that proves a negative. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #68

atheists for jesus by richard dawkins arely staircase Nov 2013 #69

You obviously do not understand what a peer-reviewed paper is. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #71

I know I am still wating for just three from your side arely staircase Nov 2013 #76

Since you seem unable or unwilling to produce anything peer-reviewed cleanhippie Nov 2013 #85

You're the one with the positive claim Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #110

yeah because martian teapots are a real academic discipline like history, etc arely staircase Nov 2013 #111

You don't really understand burden of proof do you. Goblinmonger Nov 2013 #113

You're aware, of course, okasha Nov 2013 #198

Do you even read your own sources? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #62

yeah dawkins says possible but not widely supported arely staircase Nov 2013 #64

What evidence is there to support an historical jesus? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #66

here Athests for Jesus by Dawkins arely staircase Nov 2013 #67

An article by Dawkins is evidence of an historical jesus? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #70

it is evidence of the acceptance of his historical existence among even the most arely staircase Nov 2013 #72

Ah but Richard Dawkins is no Joseph Atwill. rug Nov 2013 #73

right? arely staircase Nov 2013 #74

Actually, he is conceding the point. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #84

Jesus may well have existed, a religious Jew and a revolutionary against Rome. meti57b Nov 2013 #173

i agree, but i don't believe DesertFlower Nov 2013 #24

I don't believe that there's any artifactual proof or any reference to Jesus that's dated to the... Fridays Child Nov 2013 #3

how can you get ahold of that documentary? gopiscrap Nov 2013 #4

Here you go. Fridays Child Nov 2013 #9

thanks gopiscrap Nov 2013 #10

i saw it. very interesting. DesertFlower Nov 2013 #25

I agree. Fridays Child Nov 2013 #44

It doesn't take a lot of effort to see that we'll never really know. Like King Arthur or William dimbear Nov 2013 #8

Do you know of any evidence to support the idea of the existence of Jesus? cleanhippie Nov 2013 #20

Well, the evidence for his existence is a bit slim. longship Nov 2013 #21

To believe he did not exist requires the belief in a mid-first century conspiracy, rug Nov 2013 #23

False. Deep13 Nov 2013 #32

Not at all. rug Nov 2013 #39

+1. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #77

Nope, there is nothing from the 1st century which supports a corporeal Christ intaglio Nov 2013 #143

There is nothing in the record to support a conspiracy. rug Nov 2013 #147

There is every evidence of a mystery cult intaglio Nov 2013 #165

Then it should be a simple task to identify it and establish how it wrote the Scriptures. rug Nov 2013 #166

Well, no-one does know who wrote the scriptures intaglio Nov 2013 #167

Wrong about Paul. okasha Nov 2013 #199

Galatians 4:4 intaglio Nov 2013 #202

Nice try, but no cigar. okasha Nov 2013 #209

and so would any worshipper of Dionysus intaglio Nov 2013 #210

I doubt it. Cleita Nov 2013 #26

Is there any evidence for that last sentence? rug Nov 2013 #28

I was gonna ask that myself. gopiscrap Nov 2013 #30

Yes. The late Joseph Campbell wrote about it. Cleita Nov 2013 #33

Posit sounds more like a hypothesis than evidence. rug Nov 2013 #35

I'm just going to exit right here. Cleita Nov 2013 #40

Very sensible. I'm going to follow your lead. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2013 #42

Don't forget to take Joe Atwill with you. rug Nov 2013 #53

No problem. rug Nov 2013 #51

i agree. nt DesertFlower Nov 2013 #60

You must edhopper Nov 2013 #83

Strictly speaking, they are not parallels at all. rug Nov 2013 #91

I think the case is much stronger than edhopper Nov 2013 #92

"acknowledging such is a problem for your belief in the divinity of Jesus as portrayed"? rug Nov 2013 #93

message deleted edhopper Nov 2013 #94

He was born if he existed, but we don't know if he existed. Deep13 Nov 2013 #29

Whoever came up with the phrase "Render unto Caesar" was real. But was it JC or Titus Flavius? AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2013 #31

Good question. n/t Cleita Nov 2013 #34

Geez. Please google Joseph Atwill on DU in the last month. rug Nov 2013 #37

Google it yourself. My response is my own and not dependent upon any previous DU post. AnotherMcIntosh Nov 2013 #41

I don't need to. I read his thoroughly discredited crap in five threads in four forums. rug Nov 2013 #50

I believe that a Joshua of Nazareth existed, lived past 30, and then burnsei sensei Nov 2013 #38

historians only universally agree on two things about Jesus arely staircase Nov 2013 #48

Don't be distracted by Joseph Atwill and the like, there are perfectly respectable scholars who dimbear Nov 2013 #43

No Jesus...and a bit of snark.... wcmagumba Nov 2013 #46

Great site for exploring the start of the Christ myth boomer55 Nov 2013 #57

this sight does not argue Jesus didn't exist arely staircase Nov 2013 #75

That's an excellent site that should be visited by people making the argument against a corporeal stopbush Nov 2013 #175

No. No contemporaneous historical evidence of his existence. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #78

you are confusing the existense of the man with myths about him arely staircase Nov 2013 #79

here: Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #95

Here's a musical take on your question, by Nashville singer-songwriter David Olney... DreamGypsy Nov 2013 #80

Was Jesus ever born? LostOne4Ever Nov 2013 #81

he existed , was a prophet not the son of god, and was probably crucified madrchsod Nov 2013 #82

Yeah, but he could make one hell of a pine nightstand. Kablooie Nov 2013 #102

The only report from close to Bible times is that the family business was making farm implements, dimbear Nov 2013 #112

There are no contemporaneous writings stating that he existed. Duh. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #97

That is true but that does not mean he did not exist. hrmjustin Nov 2013 #98

It means that his existence is improbable, yet plausible. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #105

We know about Julius Caesar. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #109

hippie edhopper Nov 2013 #114

The complete lack of evidence for starters. cleanhippie Nov 2013 #115

I think there are two figures here edhopper Nov 2013 #116

The burden is not on people who aren't aware of his existence, to disprove it. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #117

Well if he did live edhopper Nov 2013 #118

40 years was a lifetime in that period. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #119

Why would someone write a fictitious account of a fictitious person four decades later? rug Nov 2013 #120

That seems more logical to me edhopper Nov 2013 #122

That raises the question of who did it and the purpose of their propaganda. rug Nov 2013 #126

There's little evidence of the people who actually wrote it AT ALL. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #132

It was written. rug Nov 2013 #138

Still ignoring the one or the other billion adherents mutually exclusive faith issue huh? AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #139

That doesn't even make sense. rug Nov 2013 #145

Cite contemporary evidence for the existence of 'jesus'. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #150

Let's say there is none. That does not provide evidence of the necessary alternate explanation. rug Nov 2013 #152

No alternate explanation is required for a work of fiction. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #154

If your claim is that it's fiction, then who wrote it and why? rug Nov 2013 #156

You seem to have some fundamental misunderstanding of the burden of proof. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #157

You seem unable to distinguish between a critique and a claim. rug Nov 2013 #159

Again, burden of proof. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #161

You're repeating yourself. rug Nov 2013 #162

None is required, unless you're starting from a presuppositon that it is true. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #163

I see. Your evidence is a) not required and b) I'm irrational. rug Nov 2013 #164

The premise that it must be true and thus disproven is irrational and begs the question. Sure. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #168

The premise is that the scriptures exist. rug Nov 2013 #169

No, that's not what I said. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #170

Therefore . . . . someone created a forgery. rug Nov 2013 #171

I don't call fiction 'forgery'. I call it fiction. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #172

I am saying that edhopper Nov 2013 #187

Lots of reasons. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #124

That's not a reason. rug Nov 2013 #125

To exert control, for starters. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #128

That's ludicrous. rug Nov 2013 #129

Or controlling individuals at the time. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #130

Ok. By whom and why? Where is the evidence of that? rug Nov 2013 #141

They are mutually exclusive. (There's your evidence) AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #148

Ah, "I don't need to know who wrote them, why can be assumed." rug Nov 2013 #151

Scant historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #153

Zero evidence of an alternate explanation. rug Nov 2013 #155

"is required." AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #158

"exists". rug Nov 2013 #160

Very forthoughtful, wouldn't you say, okasha Nov 2013 #200

Therefore Harry Potter is a real person. Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #203

You do not have a good grasp of logic, do you. rug Nov 2013 #205

You have nothing but insults. Warren Stupidity Nov 2013 #206

That post is not an insult. Your reply was not a logical conclusion. rug Nov 2013 #207

True but there was an oral history and practiced storytellers. edhopper Nov 2013 #121

Could, but hardly certain. AtheistCrusader Nov 2013 #123

The Q hypothesis is a famous posited source. rug Nov 2013 #127

Was he born? JimboBillyBubbaBob Nov 2013 #131

Makes not the slightest difference M.G. Nov 2013 #144

M.G., you know nothing about Buddhism. Manifestor_of_Light Nov 2013 #190

I know a tiny bit more than nothing about Buddhism. M.G. Nov 2013 #192

So the Buddha wrote nothing but a bunch of monks wrote down what they think they remembered Leontius Nov 2013 #193

If we're really going to discuss Buddhism.... M.G. Nov 2013 #194

That really was not the point I was making and I will not dispute your take on Buddhist Leontius Nov 2013 #195

More religious debate... M.G. Nov 2013 #196

These debates always turn sour. Lobo27 Nov 2013 #182

Until those people edhopper Nov 2013 #185

And there's the harm to society that comes from the validation of magical thinking. trotsky Nov 2013 #188

He NEVER produced a Politicalboi Nov 2013 #201