What the heck new evidence for Christ?

[sooda]

I know that. Why he brought it up is an amazingly poor example. It does not support his case.

I do agree that Jesus was probably a real person. That he was a wizard of any sort I do have a problem with.

Me too. I think he was a Holy Man. I don't think he walked on water.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lots and lots of early Christian writings didn't make the cut. Here's a list.
Early Christian Writings: New Testament, Apocrypha, Gnostics, Church Fathers

And those are just the ones that we know about. Some Christians have used the fact that the existing writings are rather homogeneous as evidence for the Bible. They are ignoring the fact that many works have been purged. That has not been done with other ancient writings so they naturally have more variation. The lack of variation is therefore not evidence for the Bible. It is only evidence for the purge.

 

[Subduction Zone]

@THE HOOD APOLOGIST , abusing the rating system is also against the rules here. I have not reported you because I have broken the rules more times than I would like to remember. But if you keep this up someone will report you for this activity. I do like new blood. It keeps the discussions interesting. I would not like to see you banned due to an inability to "play nice".

 

[sooda]

And those are just the ones that we know about. Some Christians have used the fact that the existing writings are rather homogeneous as evidence for the Bible. They are ignoring the fact that many works have been purged. That has not been done with other ancient writings so they naturally have more variation. The lack of variation is therefore not evidence for the Bible. It is only evidence for the purge.

I sometimes wonder... The Hebrews weren't rich or powerful.. even their pottery was plain.. and they were competing with Babylon and Egypt and Assyria.. Maybe that's why they exaggerated and embellished their stories.

 

[lukethethird]

Me too. I think he was a Holy Man. I don't think he walked on water.

I think he did walk on water, which is why I doubt he really existed.

 

[sooda]

I think he did walk on water, which is why I doubt he really existed.

I sure hope Jesus existed.

 

[lukethethird]

I sure hope Jesus existed.

Why, to this day it's made no difference?

 

[sooda]

Why, to this day it's made no difference?

Who knows?

 

[ManSinha]

I think he did walk on water, which is why I doubt he really existed.

Circular argument?

 

[lukethethird]

Circular argument?

How so?

 

[ManSinha]

How so?

You are trying to say (I presume) that because walking on water is an impossibility ergo Jesus could not have existed?

I am saying he did other things such as preach other than walk on water - so really the argument for one cannot be used to refute the truth of the other

 

[lukethethird]

You are trying to say (I presume) that because walking on water is an impossibility ergo Jesus could not have existed?

I am saying he did other things such as preach other than walk on water - so really the argument for one cannot be used to refute the truth of the other

Of course it can.The Son of God became of flesh on earth and all manner of teachings were put into his mouth, that is how theology/mythology works.