No historical Jesus

[Ana the Ist]

Hello...

This is a proposal for a debate on the existence of a historical Jesus. I'll be taking the position that there isn't enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus. My opponent will be taking the position that there is enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus.

I'm defining the term "historical Jesus" as a Jewish guy named Jesus who began the christian religion.

Standard rules, links allowed, 3 posts each, one week between posts (with a one week extension if requested).

 

[anonymous person]

State your case.

 

[Ana the Ist]

State your case.

This is the part where you say you accept. Then a mod sets up a room.

 

[anonymous person]

I accept.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Sorry it took me so long to get here; it has been a busy week.

Proposed Stipulations:

Title: Formal Debate on the Existence of the Historical Jesus.

Topic: Is there or is there not enough evidence to reasonably believe in an Historic Jesus.

Participants: Ana the Ist will be taking the negative, anonymous person the affirmative.

1. There will be three alternating rounds rounds (three posts each, for a total of six).
2. Ana the Ist will begin, with anonymous person responding.
3. Post size will be limited to 500 words per post.
4. Members will have one week to respond (may be extended by one week on request).
   
5. Outside sources may be quoted, but be mindful that the Copyright rule applies here; as do the Community Rules of Christian Forums.
6. Start date (to be determined).
7. Since Apologetics type discussions are currently prohibited here at Christian Forums, the peanut gallery thread will be moderated by staff in the sub-forum in Formal Debate.

Did I miss anything? Any modification or amendments?

I need both of you to agree to the stipulations before we can begin.

Mark

 

[Ana the Ist]

Sorry it took me so long to get here; it has been a busy week.

Proposed Stipulations:

Title: Formal Debate on the Existence of the Historical Jesus.

Topic: Is there or is there not enough evidence to reasonably believe in an Historic Jesus.

Participants: Ana the Ist will be taking the negative, anonymous person the affirmative.

1. There will be three alternating rounds rounds (three posts each, for a total of six).
2. Ana the Ist will begin, with anonymous person responding.
3. Post size will be limited to 500 words per post.
4. Members will have one week to respond (may be extended by one week on request).
   
5. Outside sources may be quoted, but be mindful that the Copyright rule applies here; as do the Community Rules of Christian Forums.
6. Start date (to be determined).
7. Since Apologetics type discussions are currently prohibited here at Christian Forums, the peanut gallery thread will be moderated by staff in the sub-forum in Formal Debate.

Did I miss anything? Any modification or amendments?

I need both of you to agree to the stipulations before we can begin.

Mark

500 words seems small...especially with so much ground to cover. Can we make it 1000? I don't want to end up short addressing anything...but I'll do my best to be brief if a.p. will. I'll post within a week.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Lol now that I think about it...that's gonna be a tough peanut gallery to moderate. All posts would have to relate to the quality of debate posts and not their content.

 

[anonymous person]

I am ready for the debate to begin and agree with the terms.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

500 words seems small...especially with so much ground to cover. Can we make it 1000? I don't want to end up short addressing anything...but I'll do my best to be brief if a.p. will. I'll post within a week.

1000 it is!

Lol now that I think about it...that's gonna be a tough peanut gallery to moderate. All posts would have to relate to the quality of debate posts and not their content.

Not really; I'm going to give them the same amount of scope that you guys have; we are just keeping it in a "controlled environment"

I am ready for the debate to begin and agree with the terms.

I will set this up sometime tomorrow.

Thanks guys for your understanding in my tardiness.

 

[Ana the Ist]

1000 it is!



Not really; I'm going to give them the same amount of scope that you guys have; we are just keeping it in a "controlled environment"



I will set this up sometime tomorrow.

Thanks guys for your understanding in my tardiness.

No worries Mark...we all have lives off of C.F.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Formal Debate thread has been created, and may be found here:
Formal Debate on the Existence of the Historical Jesus

Once you have posted, please send me a message; these post are moderated so I, or another member of staff will need to approve them.

Happy posting!

Mark
CF Admin

 

[TheyCallMeDave]

Hello...

This is a proposal for a debate on the existence of a historical Jesus. I'll be taking the position that there isn't enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus. My opponent will be taking the position that there is enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus.

I'm defining the term "historical Jesus" as a Jewish guy named Jesus who began the christian religion.

Standard rules, links allowed, 3 posts each, one week between posts (with a one week extension if requested).

Id be willing to be your debate partner . I accept the position that there is overwhelming evidecnes for Jesus Christ. I would like to mention though, that, Jesus didn't come to 'start a religion' ; he came to start a fresh personal relationship with God our theistic Creator thru securing our salvation , allowing the means to be an Overcomer of moral degradation, and so we can concretely know we will spend eternity with the Creator whom he claimed to be. Christianity isn't a religion per se, rather, it is a lifestyle versus jumping thru religious hoops and trying to appease God by pulling up on ones own bootstraps. There is a significant difference between the practicing of religion and what I have described (although to the Outsider , it may be mistakingly one of the same) . Dave.

 

[DennisTate]

Hello...

This is a proposal for a debate on the existence of a historical Jesus. I'll be taking the position that there isn't enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus. My opponent will be taking the position that there is enough historical evidence to reasonably believe in a historical Jesus.

I'm defining the term "historical Jesus" as a Jewish guy named Jesus who began the christian religion.

Standard rules, links allowed, 3 posts each, one week between posts (with a one week extension if requested).

Since the debate is probably over would you like to continue this as a discussion?

I can go into meetings of people with Rabbi Yeshua - Jesus in a higher dimension of space time in modern near death experiences if this is of interest to you?

This is an unusual form of "evidence" but I find it fascinating.

For example.... little Colton Burpo impresses me as a highly credible witness who added some details that it would seem to me would have been nearly impossible for him to just make up at such a young age.