The majority of scientists agree, and say that there is enough proof, That Jesus was...

[lesliedellow]

I have a few problems with the wording that you used. First off when you use the word "denier" you are assuming that Jesus was proven to have existed and that has not happened beyond a reasonable doubt.

When atheists want to come up with a historian who doubts that Jesus ever existed, it is invariably one and the same nam they always come up with. Why should that be, if not for there being a severe shortage of such individuals?

 

[Ana the Ist]

When atheists want to come up with a historian who doubts that Jesus ever existed, it is invariably one and the same nam they always come up with. Why should that be, if not for there being a severe shortage of such individuals?

Here you go...

http://vridar.org/whos-who-among-mythicists-and-mythicist-agnostics/

 

[HitchSlap]

When atheists want to come up with a historian who doubts that Jesus ever existed, it is invariably one and the same nam they always come up with. Why should that be, if not for there being a severe shortage of such individuals?

There are others who promote the Jesus as myth hypothesis to be sure, but Carrier's work is unparalleled in this field.

 

[bhsmte]

When atheists want to come up with a historian who doubts that Jesus ever existed, it is invariably one and the same nam they always come up with. Why should that be, if not for there being a severe shortage of such individuals?

At this point i believe jesus was likely a real person, but there is more than one historian that questions his existance and it is gaining steam.

One reason may be, it has always been considered unthinkable that Jesus did not exist.

 

[lesliedellow]

There are others who promote the Jesus as myth hypothesis to be sure, but Carrier's work is unparalleled in this field.

Indeed. I remember watching one of his videos on youtube, and one of the comments written underneath was, "I'm an atheist, but this guy's research is terrible."

 

[HitchSlap]

Indeed. I remember watching one of his videos on youtube, and one of the comments written underneath was, "I'm an atheist, but this guy's research is terrible."

I'm an atheist, but this guy's work is unparalleled.

Now what?

 

[lesliedellow]

At this point i believe jesus was likely a real person, but there is more than one historian that questions his existance and it is gaining steam.

No it is not gaining steam. Thr History of Religions Scchool was put to bed in the thirties, until the internet came along, and atheists started quoting a certain professor of German as if he was a historian of first century Palestine.

 

[lesliedellow]

I'm an atheist, but this guy's work is unparalleled.

Now what?

If it is so unparelleled why can't he persuade any of his colleagues to agree with him? Atheists can dig up a maverick historian (he has never actually been employed as such) in just the same way creationists can find rogue biologists.

 

[HitchSlap]

If it is so unparelleled why can't he persuade any of his colleagues to agree with him? Atheists can dig up a maverick historian (he has never actually been employed as such) in just the same way creationists can find rogue biologists.

A better question, why haven't any scholars written a scholarly rebuttal?

 

[Armoured]

I didn't know where to put this, I created it for doubters and non-believers and I know there is plenty of them here, admins can move it if they want...

The majority of scientists and educated people agree, and say that there is enough proof, That Jesus was an actual, real person that existed and walked the earth around the time the Bible says he did...

If he was an actual, real person that existed around the time that the Bible says he did, then why is it such a stretch to believe that the Bible writers were NOT LYING about the things Jesus said and did as is written in the scriptures?

The things Jesus did are possible, as recent discoveries in Quantum Physics are discovering...

Why is this so hard to believe?

Comments?

God Bless!

science has an opinion on the historicality of Jesus? Citation?

 

[lesliedellow]

A better question, why haven't any scholars written a scholarly rebuttal?

For the same reason biologists don't write books rebutting creationists, and physicists don't write books rebutting EU theorists. They have got better things to do with their time.

 

[HitchSlap]

For the same reason biologists don't write books rebutting creationists. They have got better things to do with their time.

Except he's using established and accepted academic methods for his ananlysis and conclusions, and in print for all to see. Was there a specific method or assertion you had issue with when you read his book?

 

[lesliedellow]

Except he's using established and accepted academic methods for his ananlysis and conclusions, and in print for all to see. Was there a specific method or assertion you had issue with when you read his book?

Did I say that I had read his book? I haven't read Of Pandas and People either. If people who know what they are talking about rise up as a man and say that the latter is rubbish, I tend to believe them.

 

[HitchSlap]

Did I say that I had read his book? I haven't read Of Pandas and People either. If people who know what they are talking about rise up as a man and say that the latter is rubbish, I tend to believe them.

Ok.

 

[pshun2404]

Because then we would have to believe that the Emperor Vespasian cured someone of blindness by spitting on his eyes, and this was proof that Vespasian was divine.



citation needed.

Vespasian probably washed of the crusted residue of good ol "red eye"

 

[Neogaia777]

One reason may be, it has always been considered unthinkable that Jesus did not exist.

I think so, I think that is the reason and only reason, the idea is very seductive to non-believers carried away by Satan's lie...

 

[Neogaia777]

science has an opinion on the historicality of Jesus? Citation?

Historians do...

 

[bhsmte]

Historians do...

Historians are not scientists.

Historians are supposed to follow the historical method, but each historian is free to apply more emphasis or less to certain portions of the historical method and is why some reach different conclusions.

 

[PsychoeDial]

I didn't know where to put this, I created it for doubters and non-believers and I know there is plenty of them here, admins can move it if they want...

The majority of scientists and educated people agree, and say that there is enough proof, That Jesus was an actual, real person that existed and walked the earth around the time the Bible says he did...

If he was an actual, real person that existed around the time that the Bible says he did, then why is it such a stretch to believe that the Bible writers were NOT LYING about the things Jesus said and did as is written in the scriptures?

The things Jesus did are possible, as recent discoveries in Quantum Physics are discovering...

Why is this so hard to believe?

Comments?

God Bless!

Can't all Jesus' miracles be explained naturally?
https://carm.org/questions/about-jesus/cant-all-jesus-miracles-be-explained-naturally

I'd suggest if you didn't want to attract those opposed to the faith for this question you might put it in the Christians only forum.
Reason being, the anti-religious, anti-Christian, are going to give you plenty of reasons why they don't believe. Though they do believe in spending years in a religious Christian community to repeatedly do that.

Further, non-sequitur will enter in because the topic itself can't be allowed to remain on point by those opposed to a sincere discourse.

God Bless.

 

[bhsmte]

Can't all Jesus' miracles be explained naturally?
https://carm.org/questions/about-jesus/cant-all-jesus-miracles-be-explained-naturally

I'd suggest if you didn't want to attract those opposed to the faith for this question you might put it in the Christians only forum.
Reason being, the anti-religious, anti-Christian, are going to give you plenty of reasons why they don't believe. Though they do believe in spending years in a religious Christian community to repeatedly do that.

Further, non-sequitur will enter in because the topic itself can't be allowed to remain on point by those opposed to a sincere discourse.

God Bless.

Do you mean, the non believers may ask some challenging questions?