Aryan Imperium said:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm
...
I invite people to study the above mentioned site with an open mind and then contribute thoughtful posts on this thread.
Did a historical Jesus exist?
by Jim Walker
... the evidence the Christians present us cannot serve as justification for reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.
First, what do the words “justification for reliable evidence” describe? Since that expression does not make any sense to me, maybe it is with something like this that we can clarify Mr. Walker’s above statement just a bit:
“... the evidence the Christians present us cannot [reliably] serve as ... evidence for [an] historical Jesus.”
Agreed. Both the Jewish and Christian bibles are mostly hearsay – few, if any, first-hand accounts – and with much of their contents being extremely difficult (or even impossible?) to historically substantiate, confirm or corroborate.
However, the overall evidence of Christianity – its centuries of existence, at the very least – certainly can indicate a quiet and sane investigation as to whether an historical “Jesus” – a Scriptural Messiah – ever was, is or will be ... and personally, it is through the debunking of sectarian religion, especially Christianity, that I have become quite convinced: Yes.
All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people ... there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus reveal that [their] authors wrote well after the life of the alleged ... (Jim Walker)
So? Would the fact that no contemporary writing might ever mention me prove that I had never existed? The above only proves that not a single contemporary writing mentions “Jesus” – it does not prove “no ‘Jesus’”.
All documents about Jesus ... from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. (Jim Walker)
Again: That does not prove “no ‘Jesus’”. But beyond that, is it truly possible that all mythical, allegorical or even fraudulent writings are the products of mere imaginations?
Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence ...
(Hearsay does not work as evidence ...)
... therefore, we should dismiss it. (Jim Walker)
Whoa! Even mere hearsay can at least imply or point toward good reason for some conscientious and unbiased investigation, can it not? The fact that a court of law will not convict on mere hearsay does not stop the investigator or detective from beginning right there (with mere hearsay), if necessary, now does it?
We know that mythology can arise out of no good information whatsoever. (Jim Walker)
Actually, I believe it would be more precise to say most mythology arises from no-good misunderstandings or even intentional misrepresentations of otherwise-accurate information. Legends and folklore of all kinds exist as derivatives of at least some things that were actual facts before being “spun” into whatever.
We live in a world where many people believe in demons, UFOs, ghosts, or monsters, and an innumerable number of fantasies believed as fact ...
... and the same reasoning must go against the claims of [an] historical Jesus or any other historical person. (Jim Walker)
In my own opinion, Mr. Walker suffers from the same kind of dilemma he presumes to address:
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation" (author unknown).
So then, is it possible to in any way historically substantiate, confirm and/or corroborate anything whatsoever within the mere hearsay of “the bible”? Personally, I have spent the past few weeks reading several of these books:
http://www.grahamphillips.net/ .
Is anyone else here familiar with the works of Graham Phillips?
Shabbat Shalom.
