Reply to If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "If Jesus wasn’t a real historical figure, where did Christian theology come from? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The poster demanding “hard” evidence doesn’t have a degree and has never participated in higher education on any level. [/quote]

Yet s/he's insulted to be compared to Holocaust deniers and flat earthers when anybody points out that she's way outside the consensus among actual scholars.[/quote]

More ad hominems.

We have physical evidence and eye-witness reports. [b]And no one here has denied he existed.[/b]  [/quote]

Enough with the games. We can all see through your word games.

You think there's some chance, let's say 1-10%, that Jesus did NOT exist. That's why you keep moaning about the lack of archeological evidence.

So, obviously, whether or not you say "I deny," you think there's room for denial.

[/quote]

Again, I think he most likely existed. There is compelling evidence.

We don't have hard evidence though - not surprising given the time/location/person.

We do have hard evidence for the Holocaust and the shape of the earth. Not really a meaningful comparison, even if someone were denying his existence. 
[/quote]

“hard evidence” is not a scholarly or academic term.

That’s a term you are using to make your own criteria up. [/quote]

What term should we use for “independent, eye-witness accounts or archaeological artifacts”? 
[/quote]

Historians classify the different types of evidence they use into four groups: Written Evidence, Oral Evidence, Visual Evidence and Physical Evidence.

Sorry, no “hard evidence” classification. That’s your term, and as you are not a scholar, academic, professor, historian, researcher, etc, you haven’t the slightest clue what you are talking about.

You are probably the same pp who uses (incorrectly) the legal term “circumstantial evidence,” which is not a kind of evidence scholars, historians, researchers, academics, professors, etc, use in their work.

[/quote]

I guess you are really fixated on language because there is no “hard evidence” to discuss. 
https://www.reference.com/world-view/difference-between-hard-evidence-soft-evidence-e56c8e2e5f14efdf
[i]“Overall, the main difference between hard and soft evidence is that hard evidence is always preferable to softer alternatives, for the simple fact that even the best soft evidence cannot outweigh hard evidence in any form. That said, there is still value to soft evidence, especially in the absence of hard evidence.

Soft evidence can refer to anything from simple word of mouth or argumentation, to authoritative opinion on a given subject. The highest form of soft evidence tends to be supporting opinions from an authority with certifiable credentials. While random guessing also qualifies as soft evidence, it is generally not worth pursuing given that even the highest form of soft evidence are still just that: soft.

Soft evidence does still have value, but only in the absence of hard evidence. If there is no supporting hard evidence, then the best available forms of soft evidence should be used in the meantime.

A further problem with soft evidence is the appeal to authority. While most of the time an authoritative opinion will be valid, it is not always the case. There is a danger of placing too much faith in an authoritative source, as it is important to remember that even though it is the highest form of soft evidence, it still does not outweigh hard evidence.[/i]

I used the general definition. 
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/circumstantial
[i]containing information, especially about a crime, that makes you think something is true but does not completely prove it[/i]

Were you the PP unfamiliar with elementary-school level probability terms? Hope that video was helpful for you. 
[/quote]

You linked to the most generic website possible, and threw down some knowledge written by “Staff Writer.”

lol[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics