[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="notconspiracy"]
(precis)loads and loads of stuff (/precis)
notconspiracy
Listen, all this stuff you write - it does not make sense.
You say that the authership of the gospels in unknown, then you say it is known in the 2nd century.
See you don't make any sense at all.
You say my links don't include alternative histories that ignored Jesus. You deny this, although its clearly there in the link.
etc, etc.
Remember I said you would not read my links? I was right...
There is no point discussing things with you as you seem unable to discuss things.
1: I said that it is ultimately unknown who wrote the gospels, but there is good evidence that suggests that the traditional authors are the authors, but its unknown because they are anonymous.2: citing histories that ignore Jesus is a fallacy called "argument from silence" historians dont write about EVERYONE and EVERYTHING.
"There is no point discussing things with you as you seem unable to discuss things." I seem to have been doing this fine.
So the gospels are of unknown origin. Bang goes all your evidence.
Your assertion that the authors are the authors is clearly miguided, as the majority view of Christian theologens is that nearly all the gospels were not written by those to whom they were entitled.
2 - where do you get this idea of a fallacy from. Roman cover ups? Gnostic defience? Another likely scenareo for unreported events is that they did not occur. The Roman beaurocracy at the time was able to record events that clearly challenge the stories from the scriptures. The beurocracy produced solid written dated evidence.
You have not been doing fine, We have not began to discuss why we believe what we do - we are still trying to establish the basis for your beliefs - and after too many pages - for tonight - with you - I give up.
The annals are also unknown. are you willing to throw those out?second: could you cite a source for most scholars regarding the traditional authors as not the authors of the Gospels? and could you cite the reasons why?
third: You have written records that say "Jesus, or Christus did NOT exist"? because I happen to know that any historian that mentions Jesus attests to his existence.
You give up? *sigh of extreme frustration* I dont think you are actually understanding my argument.
and I can give you evidence outside the Gospels that proves the 6 facts.
1: Jesus' crucifixion: Tacitus writes this in his annals, and Josephus writes about this in his Antiquities.
2: Empty tomb: 3 lines of evidence, A: Jerusalem factor. the first place where the disciples spread chrsitianity was Jerusalem. Jesus had been publically crucified just days earlier. If the tomb were not empty, the Pharisees could have produced the body and falsified christianity
B: Enemy attestation. The only argument proposed by detractors of Christianity was that The body of Jesus was stolen from the tomb, or that there were grave robbers. They all imply that the tomb was found to be empty
C: Testimony of Women. the first people to witness the empty tomb were women according to the Gospel records. the Gospel authors would not have fabricated the story if they used such an embarrasing witness
3: appearence to the twelve: This is documented in a creed which Paul quotes in 1 Corinthians 15.
4: appearence to James. Also documented in the 1 Corinthians 15 creed. Josephus also talks about the Martyrdom of James, brother of Jesus
5: Appearence to Paul (road to damascus?) discussed in the Acts of the Apostles, and Paul alludes to this in his epistle to the Galatians (I think it was galatia)
6: Belief of the disciples. This is undisputed. They were martyred for their faith. One has to explain the origin of this belief, or WHY they believed it.
Exactly why would some be martyred for something that wasnt true
Log in to comment