Yeshua Never Existed . . . Change my Mind

Bart Ehrman is not your witness. He believes Jesus existed. He believes the opposite of what you say ...
 
Magic mushroom time of year, lol
 
RJM said:
Bart Ehrman is not your witness. He believes Jesus existed. He believes the opposite of what you say ...
Click to expand...
Erhman does a good job of criticizing most things about historical Yeshua

He may have stated he believes that Yeshua existed but has yet to provide any real evidence

He also no longer accepts Christianity

Therefore, he does not accept Yeshua as the Son of God thing
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Therefore, he does not accept Yeshua as the Son of God thing
Click to expand...
Oh right. So that's your point? Bart Ehrman does not believe in God -- so of course he does not believe Jesus was the son of god
 
So why dodn't you change the thread title to something like "Yeshua was not the son of God ... change my mind"?
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Erhman does a good job of criticizing most things about historical Yeshua
He may have stated he believes that Yeshua existed but has yet to provide any real evidence
He also no longer accepts Christianity
Therefore, he does not accept Yeshua as the Son of God thing
Click to expand...
OK, but those are two altogether different matters.

Jesus the man existed.

What you are actually challenging is the "Son of G!d thing."
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
RJM said:
So why dodn't you change the thread title to something like "Yeshua was not the son of God ... change my mind"?
Click to expand...
Because there's no evidence Yeshua physically existed, if someone can provide that evidence then we can move onto him not being the son of Yahweh or anything else divine.
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
Because there's no evidence Yeshua physically existed ...
Click to expand...
The majority of 21st Century historians do not support what you say. I prefer to believe people like Ehrman who read Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic etc, and are familiar with all the documents and scraps -- who work for prestigious universities in international contact and ongoing research on daily basis with other respected scholars and historians ... so ...
 
RJM said:
The majority of 21st Century historians do not support what you say. I prefer to believe people like Ehrman who read Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic etc, and are familiar with all the documents and scraps -- who work for prestigious universities in international contact and ongoing research on daily basis with other respected scholars and historians ... so ...
Click to expand...
Of course you do . . . but do let me know when any of these 'experts' provide some archeological artifact that proves Yeshua's physical existence
 
RJM said:
The majority of 21st Century historians do not support what you say. I prefer to believe people like Ehrman who read Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic etc, and are familiar with all the documents and scraps -- who work for prestigious universities in international contact and ongoing research on daily basis with other respected scholars and historians ... so ...
Click to expand...
There are plenty of scholars who dismiss Yeshua's existence as well . . . Kenneth Humphrys wrote an entire book destroying this alleged claim

He also successfully criticizes Erhman's book

Review: Bart Ehrman – Did Jesus Exist?

Sacred pageant of celestial origin, miraculous birth, astounding deeds. Uncompromising exposure of the counterfeit origins of Christianity and of the evil it has brought to the world.
www.jesusneverexisted.com
 
'Amir Alzzalam said:
There are plenty of scholars who dismiss Yeshua's existence as well . . . Kenneth Humphrys wrote an entire book destroying this alleged claim

He also successfully criticizes Erhman's book

Review: Bart Ehrman – Did Jesus Exist?

Sacred pageant of celestial origin, miraculous birth, astounding deeds. Uncompromising exposure of the counterfeit origins of Christianity and of the evil it has brought to the world.
www.jesusneverexisted.com
Click to expand...
Then you can stop quoting Ehrman to support your argument?

Of course there are those who disagree. The question is how well they are regarded by other historians?
 
RJM said:
Then you can stop quoting Ehrman to support your argument?

Of course there are those who disagree. The question is how well they are regarded by other historians?
Click to expand...
It's not a popularity contest, it's about bringing actual physical evidence to the table, not simply conjecture and theory.

Ehrman does the right thing in most of what he claims, he poses both sides in a semi-unbiased way as scholars tend to do.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RJM
Ok so . . . I believe there hasn't been adequate evidence brought forth that proves Yeshua physically existed.
However, that does NOT in any way prove he didn't exist, I'm not beyond admitting that.

For argument's sake let's say Yeshua did exist during the time he was supposed to
I don't see any evidence that would make him the Son of Yahweh, or any kind of Divine Being, or Messiah as claimed he was/is.

Change My Mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top