Why not just type out a rebuttal that refers to the subject matter instead of insinuating that the poster in question is more ignorant of the research than you are? Lots of folks who are not "authorities" are well-read and may, in fact, be quite astute in their opinions . . . how about you?

 

I'm sure there were lots of them. It was a common name. I'll bet there were Jews named Yeshua crucified during Passover in 26 AD. That doesn't mean they were the Messiah.

 

Maybe it does.....maybe it doesn't.

I don't see many stories about any of the others though.

 

My problem with him is the fact that he never just admits that something is his opinion. He speaks as if he "knows" when he doesn't and his posts have shown that he doesn't even have the capability to.

Saying "Jesus never existed" without adding that it is your opinion/belief is no better than people saying that he existed without admitting it's their belief.

 

Here's one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlBiLNN1NhQ&feature=related

(By the way, it's Eric Idle's birthday today! Happy Birthday!!!)

 

There are several lines of thought that Jesus was just a man... JUST a man...
I believe that he was a man and the son of God....
I totally agree that We would have lost interest in this story long ago if it wasnt real and true in some sense....

As family traditions get handed down and morph.. family histories change stories from generation to the next.. The story of Jesus would have also morphed.........
This is the one book... well one of several that have held true thru the centuries...

man I can ramble...

 

provide historical evidence for his existence. note 'historical' not 'religious'

 

Is it OK to point out the content of the vast amount of study that has amassed on the subject without expressing an opinion either way?

 

talking of opinions.......

You'd need to prove that of course.....

which you can't do.


So, your stance is all based on your own supposition, which, obviously, you are entitled to.

It doesn't do you many favours though.

 

why do you believe that?

 

I can't prove a negative!!!

 

You do understand that you are challenging the very definition of the fallacy I mentioned, yes? If I've used it out of context, please enlighten me . . . but I'm fairly sure I used it correctly.

 

I think you'll find that both the Bible and the Koran count as historical.

 

I'm not the one claiming anything either way; you are. You're the one who needs to prove it, or shut up. I don't need for Jesus to have existed, and it's clear that you need for him to not have.

The point is to be objective. That's what a discussion is all about. I'm all for historical discussions. I am however, not all for unfounded claims and childish bullshit.

 

Bullshit.

You claim he didn't exist, so either prove it or admit it's your opinon/belief.

 

Which Bible?

 

Fallacy.....as in falsehood?

fal·la·cy (fl-s) n. pl. fal·la·cies 1. A false notion.
2. A statement or an argument based on a false or invalid inference.
3. Incorrectness of reasoning or belief; erroneousness.
4. The quality of being deceptive.

 

i was thinking the same thing. there are a verifiable shit load of characters from old stories that aren't factual or hopelessly exaggerated myths

To name a few:

Santa Claus

Tooth Fairy

Elves

Margaret Thatcher's twat

Unicorns

 

Any of them which mention Jesus.

 

I just re-read all of King Nothing's posts before you tried to slap him down for being so opinionated and, in fact, he expressed not a single personal opinion of any kind. He posted a link, asked a question and quoted CS Lewis. :-| That was it.

I think you may have jumped the gun - clearly indicating your own prejudice.