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][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This entire thread is 123 pages of one theist trying to make atheists look unreasonable and failing miserably.[/quote]

There are definitely multiple theists here, and sometimes th the even talked to each other.

Don’t pretend, atheist Bart Ehrman is making you Jesus deniers look unreasonable all on his own. He called you guys foolish. The bit about being like Holocaust deniers and flat earthers came from 4-5 separate quotes posted by someone (not me) above.[/quote]

The continued exploitation of the Holocaust to make some baseless comparison is really distasteful. 
[/quote]

If historians think it’s an apt comparison, that’s how deeply they believe Jesus lived as a man. Those who deny this historical fact are delusional as those people who deny the holocaust. They also compare people who deny climate change and people landing on the moon to those who deny Christ’s historical being. If the shoe fits, perhaps you should not put it on. [/quote]

It’s truly tasteless. Particularly since no one here is denying his existence.

Plus we obviously have eyewitness accounts and archaeological artifacts for the Holocaust.

[/quote]

I think it’s truly tasteless to deny the historicity of Christ and to deny the holcaust. Both are awful. [/quote]

No one has denied his existence. Your distasteful posts are off topic. 
[/quote]

+2. It’s gross that people are making these comparisons.[/quote]

It’s a historical comparison and illustrates how people who deny history are the same. They disregard history to further their inaccurate and misleading agendas. [/quote]

It’s not a good comparison, though. That you think it is is ridiculous. And I wouldn’t agree that your agenda isn’t also inaccurate or misleading. [/quote]

Historians and scholars and professors think it’s very apt to compare the two. [/quote]

No, no they don’t. You do. But you’re trying to use a horrifying event in recent, modern history to shut down conversation about a person who existed 2,000 years ago. It’s disgusting. [/quote]

The very logic that tells us there was no Jesus is the same logic that pleads that there was no Holocaust. (Nicholas Perrin)

Most scholars regard the arguments for Jesus’ non-existence as unworthy of any response—on a par with claims that the Jewish Holocaust never occurred or that the Apollo moon landing took place in a Hollywood studio. (Michael James McClymond)

One has to look at historical evidence. And if you… If you say that historical evidence doesn’t count, then I think you get into huge trouble. Because then, how do… I mean… then why not just deny the Holocaust? (Bart Ehrman)

The denial that Christ was crucified is like the denial of the Holocaust. (John Piper)[/quote]

These are not quotes from me. You stated trained historians were not comparing the denial of the historical certainty of Jesus to the denial of the holocaust, that it was something I made up. That’s absolutely a lie. I don’t have the training or education to make that judgement. Professors and trained historians are the ones who believe the comparison is appropriate.

Stop lying about me. Also realize that the reason professional historians make that comparison is because they are certain Christ lived; and the people who deny that fact are bigoted fools.

[/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