[Matthew G. Bianco]

I want to get an idea of this socity and its religious content.

[Thork]

Likely a radical. A 2000 year old Osama Bin Laden, who was martyred when the Roman army caught up with him and his terrorist cell ... the disciples.

History doesn't write it that way because Christianity took off and the Roman's adopted it. Later when Constantine decided what should and shouldn't be in the bible as they pushed Christianity out through the Holy Roman empire; they made his mother a virgin, he performed miracles, wise men visited him, a star went over Bethlehem etc etc.

A modern day example would be Malcom X. At the time he was an enemy of the state and the FBI perused him. He is now held up as a visionary as it is politically convenient to do so. Same with Nelson Mandela. He served a life sentence for his crimes but it all got exonerated because of the destruction of apartheid and a transfer to black power. But Nelson Mandela went to prison for dangerous crimes.

I suspect Jesus was no different. He probably organised raids on Roman traders and soldiers, stole from Roman businesses, presided over the executions of Roman prisoners and stood on a box preaching about how you needed to kill romans in the name of God. They didn't just crucify anyone in those days. It was rare and saved when they needed to make an example of people. I'll bet Jesus was a nasty piece of work.

I watch the Arabs on TV these days with their weird views saying everyone else should live like them or burn in the name of Allah and I think ... why the hell would I listen to a guy from the Middle East 2000 years ago? Even the ones today are backward.

[mister bickles]

ì voted for the option "Son of God", born of a virgin;

actually.....i take issue with the options;

the fact that Jesus Christ walked the Earth is indisputable and irrefutable....i know of no serious historian(s) who question that!

so, it gets back to the question Jesus Himself asked of His disciples:
whom do you say I am?

as per C S Lewis, that really only leaves three viable options: Lord, liar or lunatic!

if you accept the veracity of the New Testament and all the auxiliary evidence supporting it, then, "liar" and "lunatic" are out of the question....

so: that only leaves "Lord";

the next question is: do you accept Him or reject Him? 

that's your choice.....

the hardest thing, for me, is not believing the Bible but living a Christian life!
(this flat Earth stuff pretty much 'clinches' the veracity of Scripture....or....rather...leaves you with no real option except to be a theist of some sort....that would mean either Christianity, Islam or, maybe, @ a pinch, Hinduism)

as some here may have noticed, i have a bit of an anger problem.....i lose my temper easily..... 

that can make it difficult to live a proper Christian life....

but....with God's help.....

[Pongo]

ì voted for the option "Son of God", born of a virgin;

actually.....i take issue with the options;

the fact that Jesus Christ walked the Earth is indisputable and irrefutable....i know of no serious historian(s) who question that!

so, it gets back to the question Jesus Himself asked of His disciples:
whom do you say I am?

as per C S Lewis, that really only leaves three viable options: Lord, liar or lunatic!

if you accept the veracity of the New Testament and all the auxiliary evidence supporting it, then, "liar" and "lunatic" are out of the question....

so: that only leaves "Lord";

the next question is: do you accept Him or reject Him? 

that's your choice.....

the hardest thing, for me, is not believing the Bible but living a Christian life!
(this flat Earth stuff pretty much 'clinches' the veracity of Scripture....or....rather...leaves you with no real option except to be a theist of some sort....that would mean either Christianity, Islam or, maybe, @ a pinch, Hinduism)

as some here may have noticed, i have a bit of an anger problem.....i lose my temper easily..... 

that can make it difficult to live a proper Christian life....

but....with God's help.....

People say that Jesus is a myth because there are no accounts of him outside the bible.  Just like the Jewish enslavement in Egypt or the zombie invasion of Jerusalem.  You would think someone would have bothered to take the time to jot a bit of this down...  But no, not even Jesus, who I believe was likely illiterate, thought it would be a good idea to get a contemporary account of his life. 

[Hoppy]

ì voted for the option "Son of God", born of a virgin;

actually.....i take issue with the options;

the fact that Jesus Christ walked the Earth is indisputable and irrefutable....i know of no serious historian(s) who question that!

so, it gets back to the question Jesus Himself asked of His disciples:
whom do you say I am?

as per C S Lewis, that really only leaves three viable options: Lord, liar or lunatic!

if you accept the veracity of the New Testament and all the auxiliary evidence supporting it, then, "liar" and "lunatic" are out of the question....

so: that only leaves "Lord";

the next question is: do you accept Him or reject Him? 

that's your choice.....

the hardest thing, for me, is not believing the Bible but living a Christian life!
(this flat Earth stuff pretty much 'clinches' the veracity of Scripture....or....rather...leaves you with no real option except to be a theist of some sort....that would mean either Christianity, Islam or, maybe, @ a pinch, Hinduism)

as some here may have noticed, i have a bit of an anger problem.....i lose my temper easily..... 

that can make it difficult to live a proper Christian life....

but....with God's help.....

Even Jesus became angry, it is not necessarily a sin.

[Ghost of V]

Made up fictional character based on Harry Potter.

Probably never existed, as there's no evidence that he was a real person.

[M4X]

Fake as the hell is and death

[mister bickles]

Made up fictional character based on Harry Potter.

Probably never existed, as there's no evidence that he was a real person.

you must know more than the historians, then....i'v yet to see one of any repute who seriously questioned Christ's earthly existence/tenure.....

[Ghost of V]

Made up fictional character based on Harry Potter.

Probably never existed, as there's no evidence that he was a real person.

you must know more than the historians, then....i'v yet to see one of any repute who seriously questioned Christ's earthly existence/tenure.....

See: probably.

His existence is heavily debated among scholars. Perhaps you'd like to refer me to a source of his existence that isn't the gospel or a christian figure? I know there are Roman accounts, but none of them are conclusive and simply could have been adapted from text and/or word of mouth.

[mister bickles]

His existence is heavily debated among scholars.

well....that's news to me 
what "scholars"?
really....not even the weakest, most liberal "Christian" disputes the Earthly existence of Christ....   

Perhaps you'd like to refer me to a source of his existence that isn't the gospel or a christian figure? I know there are Roman accounts, but none of them are conclusive and simply could have been adapted from text and/or word of mouth.

the Talmud and the Qu'ran both make mention of Jesus Christ;
there are many other sources;
some mentioned in this article

Whom say ye that I am?

[Pongo]

http://www.amazon.com/On-Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason/dp/1909697494

Now you've heard about a real scholar that disputes the existence of Jesus.

[mister bickles]

not good enough 

as per the linked article, you'd need a full professor of Classics, Ancient History or New Testament in any accredited university in the world

[Ghost of V]

not good enough 

as per the linked article, you'd need a full professor of Classics, Ancient History or New Testament in any accredited university in the world

Why? Most Jesus references comes from holy books written after The New Testament.


The Qu'ran was written after The New Testament, so that's not evidence of anything... and the Talmud contains vague references at best. You're going to need stronger evidence than that, bickles.

[mister bickles]

read the linked article;
the extant documentary evidence originates from as early as 50AD;
and....there are plenty of other references that highly qualified people accept as genuine;

the Qu'ran and, especially,  the Talmud constitute hostile witnesses;

in a court of law, such evidence is considered as a major "plus" for the defence, as it were!

for those who don't like reading stuff.......   

☞ note ☜
MacDowell obviously uses a bad analogy in the first few minutes of the YouTube......
"flat Earth"/"round Earth"  ....
(clearly, he's not familiar with the current 'debates')
but his premise is still sound.....
i.e: truth is still "true" irrespective of whether people/the majority of people accept it or not...contra "post-modernism";
i'v read most of MacDowell's recent "(new) Evidence that Demands a Verdict";
what he says about the NT being one of the most reliable of "ancient documents" is true and he backs it up quite extensively in the book.....
the nearest "runner" from the ancient world is, if i recall, Julius Cæsar's The Gallic Wars and the most "recent" copies post-date by several hundred years 
(apropos less than fifty years for the NT!)
there's lots of references/cites in the YouTube "foot-notes";
again: no historian/scholar of repute denies the Earthly existence of Christ;
to claim that Christ never existed is, there-fore, ludicrous if not absurd! 

[Pongo]

not good enough 

as per the linked article, you'd need a full professor of Classics, Ancient History or New Testament in any accredited university in the world

Richard Carrier has a Ph.D. in Ancient History from Columbia University.  Does that meet your requirements?

[mister bickles]

nope!
he needs a FULL proffesor-ship @ a well-recognised (accredited) University.....
as far as that goes, Columbia is OK......
(other) well recognised(accredited) universities would be, say, Oxford/Cambridge/Harvard/Yale/Princeton/University of Melbourne (Australia), Australian National University, the Sorbonne/University of Paris &c...

[Pongo]

But a Ph.D. has the same qualifications as a professor.  Why does picking a job where they teach make them more reputable in your eyes? If Richard Carrier took a job teaching tomorrow, would his book suddenly meet your qualifications?

[Pongo]

You know what, don't bother answering.  This is just a clear case of goal post moving.  You said you've never heard of a scholar questioning the existence of Jesus.  When I showed you one, you changed the definition of scholar to, "has to be a professor."  I'm sure if I took the time to find a professor you would require that they have red hair, or some other equally irrelevant characteristic.

You can take your fingers out of your ears, no scholar* has ever questioned the existence of Jesus.










*Defined as a tenured full professorship of either Columbia University, Oxford, Cambridge, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, University of Melbourne (Australia), Australian National University, or The Sorbonne/University of Paris who is living today, have had multiple (92 or more) peer reviewed and published journals as well as no less than 16 books on the topic with type II diabetes, halitosis, a love of chocolate, and a Libra. (These qualifications are likely to change if such a professor is found)

[markjo]

Made up fictional character based on Harry Potter.

Probably never existed, as there's no evidence that he was a real person.

you must know more than the historians, then....i'v yet to see one of any repute who seriously questioned Christ's earthly existence/tenure.....

See: probably.

His existence is heavily debated among scholars. Perhaps you'd like to refer me to a source of his existence that isn't the gospel or a christian figure? I know there are Roman accounts, but none of them are conclusive and simply could have been adapted from text and/or word of mouth.

Apparently, there is little debate anymore as to whether or not Jesus existed as a historical figure.  It seems that most of the debate concerns the details of His life as documented in the gospels.

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[57][59][60][nb 10][77] There is no evidence today that the existence of Jesus was ever denied in antiquity by those who opposed Christianity.[78][79]
...
There is however widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings,[2] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[61][12][62][2]

[Pongo]

Made up fictional character based on Harry Potter.

Probably never existed, as there's no evidence that he was a real person.

you must know more than the historians, then....i'v yet to see one of any repute who seriously questioned Christ's earthly existence/tenure.....

See: probably.

His existence is heavily debated among scholars. Perhaps you'd like to refer me to a source of his existence that isn't the gospel or a christian figure? I know there are Roman accounts, but none of them are conclusive and simply could have been adapted from text and/or word of mouth.

Apparently, there is little debate anymore as to whether or not Jesus existed as a historical figure.  It seems that most of the debate concerns the details of His life as documented in the gospels.

Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and most biblical scholars and classical historians see the theories of his non-existence as effectively refuted.[57][59][60][nb 10][77] There is no evidence today that the existence of Jesus was ever denied in antiquity by those who opposed Christianity.[78][79]
...
There is however widespread disagreement among scholars on the details of the life of Jesus mentioned in the gospel narratives, and on the meaning of his teachings,[2] and the only two events subject to "almost universal assent" are that Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist and was crucified by the order of the Roman Prefect Pontius Pilate.[61][12][62][2]

Seriously guys, this is a thing:

http://www.amazon.com/On-Historicity-Jesus-Might-Reason/dp/1909697494

Here is a review of it:

http://www.raphaellataster.com/articles/review-richard-carrier2014.html

Here is the summation for those of you too lazy to read it:

"On the Historicity of Jesus is clearly and convincingly argued, extensively researched, solidly referenced, and is essential reading for those open to questioning the historical Jesus, and to those who want to learn how historical theorising ought to be done."

You may also note that the writer of the review meets all Mister Bickles requirements for a Jesus-denying scholar; assuming The University of Sydney is elite enough for Bickles tastes, that is.   

Real scholars are debating the existence of Jesus. It is not a closed case despite what Wikipedia says.