5 reasons to suspect Jesus never existed...

[_Everybody Wang Chung]

Jersey,

It matters nothing to me about how nice you think you are. What matters, as Chap so aptly articulated, is what are your qualifications.

So far, I'm not seeing much...............

My qualifications concerning what?

Exactly.

[_Jersey Girl]

My qualifications concerning what?

Exactly.

Answer the question.

[_Jersey Girl]

What in the world can you contribute toward substantive conversation??

What on earth are you talking about?

[_Chap]

Jersey,

It matters nothing to me about how nice you think you are. What matters, as Chap so aptly articulated, is what are your qualifications.

So far, I'm not seeing much...............

My qualifications concerning what?

In the context of this thread, and of the post by you to which I referred, this is a rather silly question, that seems to have for its main motive the wish to avoid the obvious issue:

Who on earth is this person, that she feels able to pontificate loudly in advance on who will or will not be able to say anything sensible on the topic of this thread? What are her qualifications for doing so?

(And why do so many threads end up being about this person?)

[_Jersey Girl]

In the context of this thread, and of the post by you to which I referred, this is a rather silly question, that seems to have for its main motive the wish to avoid the obvious issue:

Who on earth is this person, that she feels able to pontificate loudly in advance on who will or will not be able to say anything sensible on the topic of this thread? What are her qualifications for doing so?

(And why do so many threads end up being about this person?)

Why do so many threads end up being about this person? Are you confusing me with someone else?

I don't see many threads ending up being about me, in fact I've see only two since my return that were either addressing my return as a separate topic or within an existing thread. This thread isn't about me. My own posts aren't particularly about me, but are about my observations. So, if you think that this thread is getting to be about me, you might ask yourself and others who have chosen to address me personally instead of attempting to address the topical questions that I posed.

I didn't "pontificate" much less did I do it "loudly", unless you can actually hear me.

So, back to my assertion that Aristotle and Kish are qualified to discuss this topic. My assertion is based on having read their previous comments/interactions regarding the historical Jesus. I certainly have seen no other posters so well equipped to do so and surely, not on this thread.

I don't doubt that there could be more, I just haven't seen them.

Would you like to explain why you yourself have chosen to make me a subtopic or would you like to get back on topic?

[_Jersey Girl]

Aristotle is overstating his case in that quote. Julius Caesar's physical existence, for example, is much better attested by the network of evidence than Jesus. It's Ok to argue that based on available evidence and how the existence of historical figures is inferred, it is likely that Jesus existed without having to assert extreme confidence. Jesus's existence is about as well attested as Socrates - maybe a little worse - to put it in perspective. Socrates acts as a good analogy because he also has mythic qualities wrapped up in commentary and questions about when his voice ends and where the authors writing about him begins.

EA, hey thanks for your comments. I just briefly scanned the thread that Brackite linked. I did see that I posted on it. I know that during my banning, I read a related thread wherein Kish was a participant and I believe Aristotle was a participant also. I'll try to find that thread and review it, see how it matches up to the Aristotle comments on Brackite's linked thread.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

What in the world can you contribute toward substantive conversation??

What on earth are you talking about?

Exactly.

V/R
Doc

[_EAllusion]

There are obviously numerous threads on the subject. Here's a big example:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31586

[_Jersey Girl]

There are obviously numerous threads on the subject. Here's a big example:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=31586

EA, I think that's the one! I remember reading it for days on end. Thank you!

ETA: Yes, that's it. That thread is simply gold.

[_Chap]

There are obviously numerous threads on the subject. Here's a big example:

http://mormondiscussions.com/phpBB3/vie ... =1&t=31586

Certainly. But this is a discussion board, not a learned journal.

If we want to talk again about something that has already been discussed, we can (though nobody who is bored by it needs to join in). I realize of course, that you are not saying we can't.

Having said that, I find the hypothesis that there was no actual person called Jesus who preached and was put to death involves far more difficulties and demands for supplementary hypotheses than the suggestion that yes, there was such a person, but the accounts of him in early Christian writings are very far from giving us good historical evidence for what happened in his life.