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]Non-Christian sources, reporting several decades later, were recounting what they had *heard*. So they believed it happened and recorded it. Not that they had actual evidence of it happening.

Most likely there was a man named Jesus behind these stories. But we don’t 100% know for sure.

Why did people believe this story? People like a good story. Especially if there are perks. 
[/quote]

That is true of all ancient history and even modern history? Should we believe nothing but what we see with our own eyes? Should we even believe what our lying eyes show us?[/quote]

We should take it all with a grain of salt. And our confidence should be related to known evidence. Zero contemporary reports? Not quite as confidant.

[i]It’s likely [/i]that Genghis Khan did X. 
[i]We believe[/i] that the Vikings did Y.
[i]It’s likely [/i]there was a man named Jesus.

The only thing we know for sure is that people do like a good story. Even if it’s clearly not based on truth. 
[/quote]

No mainstream scholar today argues against Jesus’ historical existence. In fact, nearly all New Testament scholars today, many of whom are non-Christians and skeptics, consider not only Christ’s existence but his crucifixion to be “historical bedrock.” Critic John Dominic Crossan writes that “Jesus’ death by crucifixion under Pontius Pilate is as sure as anything historical can ever be” (Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography). With similar conviction, atheist scholar Gerd Lüdemann concludes, “Jesus’ death as a consequence of crucifixion is indisputable” (The Resurrection of Christ).

Also it’s “confident,” not “confidant.”

A confidant is person with whom one shares a secret or private matter, trusting them not to repeat it to others.

See: we get the dumb atheists! [/quote]

DP here.  There is a common pejorative I won't use for people who make a big deal out of minor grammatical errors on forums.  This is particularly true in the days of "auto-correct" and poor voice-dictation services on devices.  Stuff happens, especially with homonyms.  It really isn't proper (or nice) to do, particularly when you add an insult to it.

Please note the good intent and polite and respectful tone of this message when and if you choose to reply.[/quote]

#1 the post itself was a lie
#2 when atheists post links to studies about how smart they are vs Christians, they should proofread at the very least when posting. They’ve tooted their own horn. 
#3 nobody cares about your rules. Are you the moderator? 
[/quote]

Which part was a lie?

Try to use your own words and not copy blog posts. 
[/quote]

Jesus existed, not likely existed. That part was a lie. No blog posts copied. [/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