alt.education

On Sep 22, 10:01 pm, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> Martin Phipps wrote:
> >On Sep 22, 3:02 pm, Bob LeChevalier wrote:
> >> Christopher wrote:
> >> >>Again, I don't think that most scholars interpret "all the evidence"
> >> >>to indicate any such thing. Indeed, I suspect most Jewish historians
> >> >>and scholars have no problem with a man named Jesus having lived, the
> >> >>issue for them being whether he was "God" or "the Jewish Messiah"
> >> >>which for Jews are two different things.
>
> >> >THEN PROVIDE SOME EVIDENCE OF THIS.
>
> >> Will the Jewish Encyclopedia do?
>
> >> / ?artid=254&letter=J&search=Jesus
>
> >> I contrast to the lack of scholarly support for Martin's claim that
> >> the story is entirely mythical: /wiki/Jesus_myth_hypothesis
> >> <^ The historian Michael Grant states, for example, that, "To sum up,
> >> < modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It
> >> < has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank
> >> < scholars.' In recent years, 'no serious scholar has ventured to
> >> < postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and
> >> < they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed
> >> < very abundant, evidence to the contrary." - Michael Grant, Jesus: An
> >> < Historian's Review of the Gospels (Scribner, 1995)
>
> >Argument from authority. "I do not know any respectable critical
> >scholar who says that ". In other words there are plenty of critical
> >scholars who promote the fact that Jesus as myth but he doesn't
> >respect them.
>
> Your evidence is lacking that there are "plenty of critical scholars".
> I went looking for them, and didn't find them.
>
> >"No serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non
> >historicity of Jesus". Presumably there have been plenty of non-
> >serious scholars who have come forward to state the truth but they
> >have been shot down "again and again" by people who think they know
> >better. What rubbish! Unlike, theologians, scientists deal with real
> >evidence and there is absolutely no real evidence that Jesus existed,
> >fictional gospels and forged histories not withstanding.
>
> Of course like the creationists, you dismiss the methods that scholars
> in the field use to derive evidence when direct evidence cannot be
> observed.

Again, the evidence points to a non-existant mythological Jesus. All
these books about a "historical Jesus" are very telling: we'd take it
for granted that a man named Jesus actually existed if that weren't
thrown into doubt by the lack of evidence that such a man ever
existed.

Martin