View Single Post
  #9  
Old 06-27-2013, 04:23 PM
martureo martureo is online now
He/Him
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: DC Metro/Maryland
Posts: 15,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by JB3 View Post
interesting tactics, though surprisingly unrelated to the topic despite all your ridged analysis of what adheres to a topic and what doesn't.

My basic point is that nothing Jesus actually wrote has survived.
1) Jesus didn't write anything that we know of. You are operating on the presupposition that he did.

2) Whether he did write or not is not important. Except those to whom shock value is important.
Quote:
What we have are third person accounts,
We have first person, second person, third person.

But who cares about accuracy in claims anyway?
Quote:
years later, most deifying him, most presenting him as the focal point of a new religion.
Glad you finally dropped the "centuries later".
Quote:
Contemporary non religious accounts are also spotty
Well, since non-biased accounts for anything during that time period were a bit more than "spotty" I'm not sure what that wins you.
Quote:
so we have very little feel for the man,
Except we have plenty to go off of. You just don't know about it or remain in denial.
Quote:
just a mountain of what people think, and most of that much later.
Much later? What the heck does that mean? And compared to what?

Do you even know what accounts of things we have in the ancient world? In comparison Jesus is the best and most widely accounted for figure in the ancient world. Bar none.
Quote:
Take for example Joseph Smith. We have a huge group of people who believe a mountain of nonsense DESPITE blatantly clear contemporary information still floating around in abundance.
As someone who has studied Mormonism for at least a decade and interacts with LDS on a weekly basis I find your analogy both inaccurate (mostly due to the anachronistic viewpoint you keep suffering from) and insulting.
Quote:
Not that Joseph Smith in any way compares to jesus, but we don't really know do we? what if he was a big scam artist? how do you disprove that? Personally I don't think he was, but then again, there is no way to disprove any theory of that kind.
Then such theories are useless.
__________________
Onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat

I recondition w123/w126/w124/w140/r107/r129/ steering boxes!


1984 300D "Elsa" odo reset 6/2011 147k
1983 300TD "Mitzi" ~268k OM603 powered
1995 E300 "Adelheid" 262k [Sold]
Reply With Quote