Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[kban1]

flute:

When you say histrocity of jesus is an accepted fact, I hope you are distingushing between the facts that

there is acceptance that a figure called Jesus existed
and there is significant controversy as well as dispute amongst scholars and historians as to whether the historical Jesus was similar to the figure as depicted in the new testament ?

[flute]

flute:

When you say histrocity of jesus is an accepted fact, I hope you are distingushing between the facts that

there is acceptance that a figure called Jesus existed
and there is significant controversy as well as dispute amongst scholars and historians as to whether the historical Jesus was similar to the figure as depicted in the new testament ?

of course ...parts of new testament is definitely cooked up by later day christians to establish the religion ( in fact against jesus's own thoughts/philosophy IMO). But then, this type of virtual assasination of personality was done in case of Buddha too ( think of idol worshipping of buddha)and to some extent Sri Rama too ( think of uttar ramayana written hundreds of yrs after valmiki's original effort).

[Cover Point]

flute:

When you say histrocity of jesus is an accepted fact, I hope you are distingushing between the facts that

there is acceptance that a figure called Jesus existed
and there is significant controversy as well as dispute amongst scholars and historians as to whether the historical Jesus was similar to the figure as depicted in the new testament ?

infact DaVinci's books will tell you that significant part of the new testament is actually cooked up. The current bible was finally "assembled" about 300 years after the death of Christ. You cant get Palin to say the same thing 2 days in a row .... this in a digital age of recordings and such. There is sufficient chance that 300 years would change the texts substantially!

[ruchir]

Flute sir --

I will first ask you to calm down and read my comments with a calm mind.

there is proof being giving by historians for jesus existence..you need to look at the proof and analyze the same before taking a stand. You are taking a stand in vacuum by refusing to dwell into the evidence presented by historians. WHY,
WHY are you saying jesus never existed without caring to look at the evidence presented by historians?

I have searched internet throughly, and I have not found one shred of archeological evidence that Jesus ever walked the earth. The closest  is the Shroud of Turin, which was proved to be a hoax.

So enlighten me, my friend. What proof are you talking about, that historians are giving of Jesus existence?

SO, if I say Dinosaurs never existed, the onus is on you to prove it? are you serious? based on current knowledge, it is a well accepted fact that Dinosaurs existed, if I counter it, I have to present the evidence, not you. Same way, historicity of jesus is an accepted fact among most of the historians, if you disagree, the onus is on you, not me or historians.

Sir, I said if there was a debate that Dinosaur exist in year 2010... do you understand what I am saying? I am saying that if we were debating that Dinosaurs still exist in this day and age, then the one who says that they exist is the one who has the burden of proving it.

I am taking example of a hypothetical debate. I am saying that if the debate is over the EXISTENCE of something then the person who says that this thing exists is the one who has the onus of providing proof. Because it is impossible to provide proof that something does not exist.

That's why since you say historians have proof that Jesus existed, please show what proof you are talking about. I could not find any on internet.

what is your logic behind above quote? what archeological and linguistic evidence are you talking about here? what similar evidence in case of Sri Rama are you talking about? details my friend details..statements mean nothing, your analysis makes the difference. dwell into so called archeological & linguistic evidence for jesus and ram and methodically arrive at a conclusion of how there is similar evidence or lack thereof in case of both great men and then your view holds water, not otherwise.

I am saying I could not find any archeological evidence that proves existence of Jesus, except Shroud of Turin which was proved to be a hoax. So please please tell me which website to look at.

[flute]

Flute sir --

I will first ask you to calm down and read my comments with a calm mind.

there is proof being giving by historians for jesus existence..you need to look at the proof and analyze the same before taking a stand. You are taking a stand in vacuum by refusing to dwell into the evidence presented by historians. WHY,
WHY are you saying jesus never existed without caring to look at the evidence presented by historians?

I have searched internet throughly, and I have not found one shred of archeological evidence that Jesus ever walked the earth. The closest  is the Shroud of Turin, which was proved to be a hoax.

So enlighten me, my friend. What proof are you talking about, that historians are giving of Jesus existence?

SO, if I say Dinosaurs never existed, the onus is on you to prove it? are you serious? based on current knowledge, it is a well accepted fact that Dinosaurs existed, if I counter it, I have to present the evidence, not you. Same way, historicity of jesus is an accepted fact among most of the historians, if you disagree, the onus is on you, not me or historians.

Sir, I said if there was a debate that Dinosaur exist in year 2010... do you understand what I am saying? I am saying that if we were debating that Dinosaurs still exist in this day and age, then the one who says that they exist is the one who has the burden of proving it.

I am taking example of a hypothetical debate. I am saying that if the debate is over the EXISTENCE of something then the person who says that this thing exists is the one who has the onus of providing proof. Because it is impossible to provide proof that something does not exist.

That's why since you say historians have proof that Jesus existed, please show what proof you are talking about. I could not find any on internet.

what is your logic behind above quote? what archeological and linguistic evidence are you talking about here? what similar evidence in case of Sri Rama are you talking about? details my friend details..statements mean nothing, your analysis makes the difference. dwell into so called archeological & linguistic evidence for jesus and ram and methodically arrive at a conclusion of how there is similar evidence or lack thereof in case of both great men and then your view holds water, not otherwise.

I am saying I could not find any archeological evidence that proves existence of Jesus, except Shroud of Turin which was proved to be a hoax. So please please tell me which website to look at.

sorry ruchir, this is no going anywhere..I cannot play neither historian nor history teacher. My only claim to you is that historicity of jesus is an established fact. But, you are turning it around and asking me to play historian for you. thanks, but no thanks.

[ruchir]

Flute -- Hey, no sweat. We can agree to disagree on this one. I will accept that it is not possible for you to prove the historicity of Jesus on an internet forum.

[flute]

Flute -- Hey, no sweat. We can agree to disagree on this one. I will accept that it is not possible for you to prove the historicity of Jesus on an internet forum.

it was nice discussion though..

[ruchir]

Flute -- Hey, no sweat. We can agree to disagree on this one. I will accept that it is not possible for you to prove the historicity of Jesus on an internet forum.

it was nice discussion though..

True, and I got some education in return.