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]<a href="https://ibb.co/ckT1GyT"><img src="https://i.ibb.co/2WKyDFK/7526-A80-A-D147-41-F8-9-AB9-8-D6-CA8493323.jpg"  ></a>[/quote]

DP. Once again, all but 1-2 out of many thousands of scholars are satisfied that the evidence we have—whatever you call it, hard or soft—proves Jesus certainly existed.

You’ve been asked why you disagree with the vast scholarly consensus and what your own scholarly credentials are. You’ve remained silent on your own credentials. And you’ve made fallacious arguments about scholars taking the gospels as gospel truth, and hilarious arguments about how Bart Ehrman is somehow biased in favor of finding Jesus existed.

Do you have any real credentials in the field? Do you have any criticisms that stand up to ridicule?[/quote]

We don’t have hard evidence, archeological artifacts or eye-witness accounts. Only soft evidence.

Based on the various interpretations of secondary sources it seems [b]very likely[/b] that he existed. 
[/quote]

You disagree with the vast scholarly consensus that Jesus certainly existed.

You’re unable to say why. Repeating that he “most likely” existed isn’t a why.

Try again?[/quote]

I've explained countless times.

Because we currently don't have any primary sources/archeology artifacts/independent, eye-witness reports. 
[/quote]

Non-Christian sources that are used to study and establish the historicity of Jesus include Jewish sources such as Josephus, and Roman sources such as Tacitus. These sources are compared to Christian sources such as the Pauline Epistles and the Synoptic Gospels. These sources are usually independent of each other (i.e., Jewish sources do not draw upon Roman sources), and similarities and differences between them are used in the authentication process.

Christian sources, such as the New Testament books in the Christian Bible, include detailed stories about Jesus, but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the biblical accounts of Jesus. 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.

The Gospels, which tell about the life and ministry of Jesus of Nazareth, are historical documents. They were written around 60-90 A.D., so close to the time Jesus lived, and they give detailed information about the life, ministry, and death of Jesus.[/quote]

Yes, that is the best “soft evidence” we currently have and why we can say he most likely lived. 
[/quote]

The Society of Flat Earthers is sending you a membership card. [/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