Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?

[Zack Williamson]

@adolf-lim said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

umm there are also historical texts aside from the Bible that supports the existence of Jesus. Some of these authors are non-Christians like the Roman Senator Tacitus. He recorded the execution of Jesus by Pontius Pilate.

And yes, The first edition of Bible never ever existed on this earth. The whole book is interpolated more than 1000 times. This book is full of contradiction, errors and most important changes.

Recorded ? Jesus died on AD 30 and Tacitus was born on 56 AD. That means he was not even born when Jesus died. He wrote Annals in 116 AD. 116- 30= 86 years gap wow !

Edited- Tecitus wrote about “christos” (in 117 CE) and christos were being executed by Pilate. He could have used name ‘Jesus’ but not his religious title ‘Christos’. The second point you could note is, the reference of Tacitus’ was never mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian in 3rd century. Tertullian was the one who quoted Tacitus’ great deal. I have a strong evidence https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/http://www.textexcavation.com/documents/zaratacituschrestianos.pdf which shows the tacitus’ oldest copy was modified to change “Chrestianos” (i.e. "Chrestians" - the followers of Chrestus) to Christianos" (i.e. "Christians" – the followers of Christ). Generally, it was modified or manipulated in 1468 because there was no mention prior to it.
Copy-pasted. Enjoy !

And here is a proof how christian term came into existence-
https://relevantmagazine.com/god/where-christian-name-really-came/
Earlier followers of churches, never be called Christians. It was most often used as "saints", not as Christians.

[Zack Williamson]

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Kaneki-kun said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

😂y'all searching for Jesus on the internet 😂🤦🤦🤦. When you can just get on your knees (even if you don't at least believe) and ask Him to show himself to you.

YOU WANNA SEE JESUS CHRIST? Well then PRAY and WAIT ON HIM the truth is in every single humans heart but y'all too deaf to hear it.

For those of you who believe, believing is good but it's not enough, get to seek Him. Get to know Him!! The internet is just a confusion device, Jesus Christ is in everyone's heart knowing constantly for you guys to open the door. Me personally I Know Jesus Christ is real, He brought heaven to man, He is God (I Am) made man, Jesus Christ is God in the flesh. God was with man in the flesh! but man was too filthy to recognize Him, too blind and too Deaf! I know God doesn't exist but He IS . God IS (you need to meditate on the Bible (kjv) to be able to make sense out of this)

Y'all looking for prove of Jesus and God is real? Just search your hearts respectively, not google (lol).

I've been trying to get this point across to Vex too :grin:

You wouldn't be worrying for lack of Jesus found in some registry, if you had direct experiential contact with Him. You can indeed find Him in your heart, and indeed, as not just the kjv points out, but even many philosophers note that God does not exist: the verb existing is only valid for anything other than God. Instead God is.

There is a three year studies on prayers which are enough to show prayers do not work. In a hospital, there were two groups were kept. First who did not pray. Second who prayed. Doctors never prescribe any type of prayer for those patients who suffer from various diseases. Their conclusion was prayer makes people thoughts' negative. Prayers make people more anxious and it caused higher rate of postsurgical heart arrhythmias for second group. This experiment was done on total 1800 patients who were going under bypass-surgery.

Last point- proofs and evidences come from two different realms. Burden of proof implies on someone who claims about someone's existence. Here is a whole article for positive, negative claims and burden of proof fallibility.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof

I gave you one fossil evidence article in this debate. Here is a quote of that article-
I think because of the powerful appeal of a silver bullet, knockdown argument that would destroy Christianity if true. And it’s even better than true from the perspective of a habitual debater; it’s supremely defensible in argument. The two are not always the same.
"The “YOU prove to ME Jesus existed” stance, as with “Atheism is the default” puts the other guy on the defensive and makes him do all the work." When really, “Jesus never existed” is a positive claim, even if it can be phrased as “Show me evidence Jesus existed”. Of course, that evidence does exist. It’s called Christianity.

Ofcourse I sent you wrong article. Sorry. As he says he thinks it is a positive claim. I had another article which I wanted to send you. There was a missing copy-paste of weblinks. Below one was actual weblink-
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

I don't think you have a proof of his existence. Therefore, there is no reason to debate on this topic anymore.

[pe7erpark3r]

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I agreed to make a new debate, and now you spam this here with a flood of information, I cannot possibly answer, because I do not have the time... You really seem to have a lot of time. I think you could use it in better ways.

If you ever want a real debate you can join in on the other one.

[pe7erpark3r]

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I also think you really missunderstand the idea of a negative claim, as a surefire way to win this debate...

A negative claim requires as wikipedia says "the absence of reliable sources to assert their validity".

Of course this now I will counter with giving evidence to why the sources we have are indeed reliable. Bit by bit we can argue this through, if you want. For I do have the arguments to convince people. I might not be able to convince you, but I don't have to convince my opponent to win a debate :yum:

[pe7erpark3r]

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

So to say it clearly again: If you want to debate with me, we can do it slowly, argument by argument, after agreeing on a set of rules.

If you just want to spam a huge load of information as to why you are right... well have fun alone :yum:

[pe7erpark3r]

Ofcourse I sent you wrong article. Sorry. As he says he thinks it is a positive claim. I had another article which I wanted to send you. There was a missing copy-paste of weblinks. Below one was actual weblink-
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

I don't think you have a proof of his existence. Therefore, there is no reason to debate on this topic anymore.

You seem to believe everything as long as you find an article that fullfills your criteria for reliable. However that article is simply wrong. Your other article was right.

I hope you do know that many authors of articles are wrong, even the reliable ones? I hope you do know that many scientists and historians are wrong? I hope you do know that believing an article or a scientific paper because it conforms with your opinion cannot be called rational, right?

Applying the "burden of proof" to history just simply does not work. You can only apply the "burden of evidence" to history and then weigh up the propabilities. Thus our new debate positions are actually better.

So to say it clearly, this is my last post in this debate. You do not need to answer what I wrote here. If you want to debate, come to the new one, and we'll look at all the arguments I just touched.

If you do not want to debate but instead be right, then do not debate and most importantly do not learn from those who are of other oppinion than you, no matter how rational their reasons :grin:.

[GhősT RiDeR]

@Vex-Man Julian as Emperor rejected the newly dominant religion of Christianity and fiercely sought to discredit and to reverse its influence. He wrote and/or commissioned an entire treatise rather savagely disparaging Christianity and its founder Jesus, with intent to discredit the religion, using the extant historic record from the first century to his time.
But in doing so he never disputed Jesus’ historical existence and even somewhat separately offered to prove it.

[Zack Williamson]

@GhősT-RiDeR

@GhősT-RiDeR said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man Julian as Emperor rejected the newly dominant religion of Christianity and fiercely sought to discredit and to reverse its influence. He wrote and/or commissioned an entire treatise rather savagely disparaging Christianity and its founder Jesus, with intent to discredit the religion, using the extant historic record from the first century to his time.

Julian II was born on 330 AD and Mr. Jesus supposedly died on 30-34 AD. I take 34 AD for you. 330-34 = 296 years. He was certainly not an eye-witness of Jesus because he was born after 296 years of jesus' alleged death. Second, he did just collect Christian belief system, heresy from 2nd century and repeated in his writings. Third, some of his writings have been already lost while some are not. Fourth, there were 30 contemporary roman and jew writers who did not give a damn about jesus. Their books were even more popular than the Bible. Fifth, none of the independent writer, theologian or king recorded earthly jesus' history in 1st century. How can you say he collected their writings from 1st century ? Could you name one of them ?

But in doing so he never disputed Jesus’ historical existence and even somewhat separately offered to prove it.

Appeal to authority- person 'A' does not believe in 'X' religion. 'Y' is the founder of 'X'. Person 'A' thinks Y historically existed, even tho he is a non-believer of 'X' religion.

[Zhyper777]

@Vex-Man The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur.

What do Christian writings tell us?
The value of this evidence is that it is both early and detailed. The first Christian writings to talk about Jesus are the epistles of St Paul, and scholars agree that the earliest of these letters were written within 25 years of Jesus’s death at the very latest, while the detailed biographical accounts of Jesus in the New Testament gospels date from around 40 years after he died. These all appeared within the lifetimes of numerous eyewitnesses, and provide descriptions that comport with the culture and geography of first-century Palestine. It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and place – under the aegis of the Roman empire – where there was strong suspicion of Judaism.

What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

Did ancient writers discuss the existence of Jesus?
Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

How controversial is the existence of Jesus now?
In a recent book, the French philosopher Michel Onfray talks of Jesus as a mere hypothesis, his existence as an idea rather than as a historical figure. About 10 years ago, The Jesus Project was set up in the US; one of its main questions for discussion was that of whether or not Jesus existed. Some authors have even argued that Jesus of Nazareth was doubly non-existent, contending that both Jesus and Nazareth are Christian inventions. It is worth noting, though, that the two mainstream historians who have written most against these hypersceptical arguments are atheists: Maurice Casey (formerly of Nottingham University) and Bart Ehrman (University of North Carolina). They have issued stinging criticisms of the “Jesus-myth” approach, branding it pseudo-scholarship. Nevertheless, a recent survey discovered that 40% of adults in England did not believe that Jesus was a real historical figure.

[Zack Williamson]

@Zhyper777 @Zhyper777 said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man The historical evidence for Jesus of Nazareth is both long-established and widespread. Within a few decades of his supposed lifetime, he is mentioned by Jewish and Roman historians, as well as by dozens of Christian writings. Compare that with, for example, King Arthur, who supposedly lived around AD500. The major historical source for events of that time does not even mention Arthur, and he is first referred to 300 or 400 years after he is supposed to have lived. The evidence for Jesus is not limited to later folklore, as are accounts of Arthur.

Your analogy is bit absurd here. King Arthur was not a historical figure. He is declared a fictional character by all the historians. In contrast to Arthur, the most (not all) historians concur Jesus was a historical person. We do have a fossil evidence of Julius Caesar but we do not have any fossil evidence of Jesus. Eh ? As far as I know "historical consensus" word does not exist but "scientific consensus" does. I chose my thesis "Jesus was a fictional character" and went against the majority of historics. But majority can be wrong and minority can be true. Our history is full of those examples and even our democracy where "the guy chosen by majority" is often corrupt and biased. I would add 2 more points here- 1. Arthur was not a contemporary man of jesus. However, moses certainly was. And the first follower of moses came out after exactly 20 years of jesus' death. Luddite movement was started after 18 years of Ludd's alledged death, yet ned ludd is a fictional character.
Therefore you have just done composition fallacy.

What do Christian writings tell us?

Christian writings are not independent at all.

The value of this evidence is that it is both early and detailed. The first Christian writings to talk about Jesus are the epistles of St Paul, and scholars agree that the earliest of these letters were written

Paul did not write about Jesus’ life and teachings in the epistles. Peter, Paul and other epistle writers did not write Jesus’ bio-geographical details and the time of his existence. They do not even mention Bethlehem, Nazareth, Galilee, Calvary or Golgotha or any other pilgrim or any other holy site, his miracles, his moral teachings, his virgin birth, his disciples, his empty tomb. Btw Paul himself never met with an earthly Jesus and he knew Jesus thru scriptures and revelations.
2 Corinthians 11:5 and 12:11 – Paul asserts he is not inferior to the super-apostles
Gal 2:11- He apparently opposed peter
Gal 2:6- he stated no one (including apostles in Jerusalem) added anything into his message. This gave a chance to skeptics to say peter and James never met with Jesus. Paul himself accepted that his revelations did not come from an earthly man but from a saviour.
Paul in Galatians 1:11,12 — “I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

within 25 years of Jesus’s death at the very latest,

True

while the detailed biographical accounts of Jesus in the New Testament gospels date from around 40 years after he died.

There was no such word like gospel till 140CE. Papias was the first guy who mentioned the word Gospel. Yet he referred to Mark and Matthew only. All four gospels were not mentioned before 180 CE. That means there is no evidence out of the bible for term gospel before 140 CE.

These all appeared within the lifetimes of numerous eyewitnesses, and provide descriptions that comport with the culture and geography of first-century Palestine.

Mark was an earliest gospel, his author was not local to Palestine because he had lack of knowledge of Palestine's social situations and geography. Luke copied error of mark in Luke 8 but Matthew changed the men’s number and location in Matthew 8.

It is also difficult to imagine why Christian writers would invent such a thoroughly Jewish saviour figure in a time and place – under the aegis of the Roman empire – where there was strong suspicion of Judaism.

Because Pilate was a cruel king and he became like a tire to fix air like Jesus. All four gospels contradict one-another numerous times. Either it is birth of Jesus or the death of him, all 4 gospels try to rule out one-another. i.e. Matthew 2:1 states Jesus was born before 4BCE but Luke 2:1-4 states he was born after 6BCE. Matthew, Mark and John did not know about the census. A preposition must be true if it does not contradict itself. Therefore you cannot even decide when he was born or resurrected. Mark says Jesus died on the 9th hour on the afternoon of Passover, the 15th of Nisan by the Jewish calendar. But John says he didn't even die on that day. John tells us (three times) that Jesus is tried and executed the day before, on the Preparation Day for the Passover, the 14th of Nisan (19:14, 31, 42). To make matters still worse, all four Gospels insist this happened on a Friday. But was it Friday the 14th or Friday the 15th?

What did non-Christian authors say about Jesus?
As far as we know, the first author outside the church to mention Jesus is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, who wrote a history of Judaism around AD93. He has two references to Jesus. One of these is controversial because it is thought to be corrupted by Christian scribes (probably turning Josephus’s negative account into a more positive one), but the other is not suspicious – a reference to James, the brother of “Jesus, the so-called Christ”.

First, Josephus was not even born when jesus existed. Josephus was born on 37 but Jesus died on 34. He was not an eye-witness.
Second, the term ‘who was called Christ’ was a forgery too. This term was awful and was inserted by a transcriber. There was a christian (Eusebius) who tried to prove his existence and it was interpolated by him in 325CE. This text is completely out of the context and it interrupts the story line. The next passage begins from “About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder.” it was explicitly referred to prev paragraph when Pilate did a massacre of mob of Jews in Jerusalem. The style of these texts was not same but different from other writings. P.s. Josephus did write minor-minor people extensively but he did not write about Jesus extensively. I made a proof aka logical conclusion on that-
P1- Josephus wrote extensively about minor-minor people
P2- He did not write extensively about Jesus
C- Jesus was not even a minor guy.
PPS - Mr. Vossius who had found original manuscripts of Josephus, has said there was no such word like "Jesus" in it.

Neither Acts nor James the just did mention an event like this passage did.

In the last of this passage, jesus was referred to
the son of damneus and he was decorated as a high priest by Ariappa.

Jews were so angry (due to stoning of James) that they requested Ariappa to fire Ananus. Since christians were supposed to be a sect of Jews, why would they get angry over Christians ?

About 20 years after Josephus we have the Roman politicians Pliny and Tacitus, who held some of the highest offices of state at the beginning of the second century AD. From Tacitus we learn that Jesus was executed while Pontius Pilate was the Roman prefect in charge of Judaea (AD26-36) and Tiberius was emperor (AD14-37) – reports that fit with the timeframe of the gospels. Pliny contributes the information that, where he was governor in northern Turkey, Christians worshipped Christ as a god. Neither of them liked Christians – Pliny writes of their “pig-headed obstinacy” and Tacitus calls their religion a destructive superstition.

1. Tacitus woo was not born when Jesus died.
2. Tacitus wrote ‘christos’ were executed by the pilate. He could have written Jesus but not his religious title ‘Christos’. The second point you could note is, the reference of Tacitus’ was never mentioned by Origen, Eusebius, Tertullian in 3rd century. Tertullian was the one who quoted Tacitus’ great deal. I have a strong evidence https://web.archive.org/web/20190723132715/http://www.textexcavation.com/documents/zaratacituschrestianos.pdf which shows the Tacitus’ oldest copy was modified to change “Chrestianos” (i.e. "Chrestians" - the followers of Chrestus) to Christianos" (i.e. "Christians" – the followers of Christ). Generally, it was modified or manipulated in 1468 because there was no mention prior to it.

How controversial is the existence of Jesus now?
In a recent book, the French philosopher Michel Onfray talks of Jesus as a mere hypothesis, his existence as an idea rather than as a historical figure. About 10 years ago, The Jesus Project was set up in the US; one of its main questions for discussion was that of whether or not Jesus existed. Some authors have even argued that Jesus of Nazareth was doubly non-existent, contending that both Jesus and Nazareth are Christian inventions. It is worth noting, though, that the two mainstream historians who have written most against these hypersceptical arguments are atheists: Maurice Casey (formerly of Nottingham University) and Bart Ehrman (University of North Carolina). They have issued stinging criticisms of the “Jesus-myth” approach, branding it pseudo-scholarship.

Well, there are many skeptics (not only Michel Onfray) who had published their books to argue Jesus’ non-existence. Bart is a scholar of new-testament but he lost the debate against a mythicist (should I write down his name ?). Bart is a former christian and now he is an agnostic atheist. I do not know about Casey.

Nevertheless, a recent survey discovered that 40% of adults in England did not believe that Jesus was a real historical figure.

True

Man, you have copy-pasted an aticle- https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/14/what-is-the-historical-evidence-that-jesus-christ-lived-and-died 😂. I was thinking first why you were asking questions to yourself first and then answering them yourself too.

Did ancient writers discuss the existence of Jesus?
Strikingly, there was never any debate in the ancient world about whether Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure. In the earliest literature of the Jewish Rabbis, Jesus was denounced as the illegitimate child of Mary and a sorcerer. Among pagans, the satirist Lucian and philosopher Celsus dismissed Jesus as a scoundrel, but we know of no one in the ancient world who questioned whether Jesus lived.

Argument from silence is a nice trick for defence 😉.

You dont know one important point here- Christianity was a jewish sect before 395 AD. Many roman and jew writers wrote a lot about jesus' non-existence. All of those books were burnt in 3rd-4th by Christians because they gained a lot of political power at that movement.

[Angelabay1]

This post is deleted!

[Zack Williamson]

@pe7erpark3r @pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I agreed to make a new debate,

First, I will never change my position. Second, yes I said you to make new debate. You made a new topic and now whole TWS has seen that new topic. It was a nice lesson for you. Next time you will think twice before misinterpreting your opponent’s position with your strawman argument- It is insane to say people historically did not exist with absolute certainty.

Now you have only two options-

1. If you want a debate without misinterpreting your opponent's thesis, you may debate here.
2. If you want a debate with interpreting/misinterpreting your opponent's position, you can debate there (on new thread) with your churches' priests, bishops, popes. It sounds like they love to interpret/misinterpret everything.

and now you spam this here with a flood of information,

Third, the meaning of spam is unwanted email, usually advertisements. I have not put a single advertisement in any post. Well, here is a dictionary for you. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/spam

I cannot possibly answer, because I do not have the time...

If you did not have time, you should not start a debate with using someone else username in a topic.

You really seem to have a lot of time. I think you could use it in better ways.

Nice ad-hominem argument for your defense.

If you ever want a real debate you can join in on the other one.

This is the last debate between you and me on any topic/thesis . I will not join any new debate.

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

I also think you really missunderstand the idea of a negative claim, as a surefire way to win this debate...

Misunderstand*

A negative claim requires as wikipedia says "the absence of reliable sources to assert their validity".

That is your faith says, not Wikipedia does. Here is a screenshot for defining a negative claim -
. Negative claims are statements that assert the non-existence or exclusion of something. My thesis is all about non-existence of a person.

Of course this now I will counter with giving evidence to why the sources we have are indeed reliable. Bit by bit we can argue this through, if you want.

You can argue with me here any time, if you want.

For I do have the arguments to convince people.

So I do.

I might not be able to convince you, but I don't have to convince my opponent to win a debate :yum:

True, you will convince the public with your fallacious arguments. I laud it.

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Original-Satan said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

So to say it clearly again: If you want to debate with me, we can do it slowly, argument by argument, after agreeing on a set of rules.

If you just want to spam a huge load of information as to why you are right...

Again, spam is an advertisement or an unwanted email. You annoy people in PMS, even though they do not want to discuss anything in their PMS. So yeah, you are a spammer.

P.S. you can read TWS community rules for knowing what a spam is.
PPS. When I went offline for two days, I had to refute more than 7-8 arguments. First people do debate with me, then you argue with their own arguments. They too argue with their next arguments. I did not say that I did not have time. I had to refute all of them. This rule certainly attributes to you first.

well have fun alone :yum:

You can rejoin or leave, I do not care.

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

Ofcourse I sent you wrong article. Sorry. As he says he thinks it is a positive claim. I had another article which I wanted to send you. There was a missing copy-paste of weblinks. Below one was actual weblink-
https://www.atheists.org/activism/resources/did-jesus-exist/

I don't think you have a proof of his existence. Therefore, there is no reason to debate on this topic anymore.

You seem to believe everything as long as you find an article that fullfills your criteria for reliable. However that article is simply wrong. Your other article was right.

Fulfills*

Ditto rule goes for you. You believed on an article which is well written by a christian. You misquoted Wikipedia for describing a negative claim XD. When you shift the burden on someone whose thesis holds for ‘Non-existence of a person’, we call it “argument from ignorance”.

Friendly reminder- Even thou you may present eye-witnesses in upcoming arguments, they are often considered as bad evidences.
https://www.psychologicalscience.org/uncategorized/myth-eyewitness-testimony-is-the-best-kind-of-evidence.html

I hope you do know that many authors of articles are wrong, even the reliable ones? I hope you do know that many scientists and historians are wrong? I hope you do know that believing an article or a scientific paper because it conforms with your opinion cannot be called rational, right?

Why don’t you check Wikipedia though ? Why don’t you check other websites ?
http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/phil_of_religion_text/CHAPTER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm

http://www.patenttrademarkblog.com/negative-claim-limitations/
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=c25ad9cc-509b-40db-851c-b444abc2ce79

Applying the "burden of proof" to history just simply does not work. You can only apply the "burden of evidence" to history and then weigh up the propabilities.

Probabilities*
Here you go again. Proof can be made thru science, photography, mathematics or logic. I wrote 2 logical proofs for you.

Premise 1- Josephus wrote extensive things about minor-minor people.
Premise 2- Jesus was a minor people (your premise with -nor consider him to be of great importance.)
Conclusion- Josephus wrote extensive things about Jesus.
Conclusion is not true. He did not write about him extensively.

Premise no.1- Whatever the Bible says, is true
Premise no. 2- The Bible says pigs fly
Conclusion- Pigs fly, is true

Refute them if you can otherwise I will declare my win here ;) . Convince to the public how pigs do fly. Give a demonstration of your Biblical truth.

Thus our new debate positions are actually better.

I wont change my position. I have my confidence+reason, you have your faith.

So to say it clearly, this is my last post in this debate. You do not need to answer what I wrote here. If you want to debate, come to the new one, and we'll look at all the arguments I just touched.

I wouldn't come there. If you want a debate with me, you may carry on this topic. I have decided to not debate with you on any other topic or any other thesis.

If you do not want to debate but instead be right,

Says the one who loves to call people “insane” for no reason at all.

then do not debate and most importantly do not learn from those who are of other oppinion than you, no matter how rational their reasons :grin:.

Opinions*
There are many misspelled words. Am I here for correcting your terms or for a debate ? OwO your fallacious arguments are wholly absurd and are not reasonable.

P.S. I did not know people do debate in PMS too. I do not give permission to anyone to disclose personal conversations in the public. You can come up with your starting arguments anyways.

[pe7erpark3r]

@Vex-Man I too have my confidence + reason, and @Zhyper777 has – despite not giving his source – pasted a good article about why most educated people (christian/atheist/other religion) think that Jesus was historical...

Those are really good arguments and thus I declare that @Zhyper777 has won this debate :yum:

And no thank you, really. I do not find a discussion meaningful that does not go through its arguments one by one.

Sorry about posting those 6 words from the PMs...

You know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking that God is... God is infinite mercy. When you sin against him, and you repent and ask forgiveness, he will never mention it again, except sometimes to remind you to stay humble. God Himself is meek and humble, which is why he always speaks so gently, and asks you to open the door of your heart. This is why He does not force you to believe by allowing anybody to proof His existence to you. However his Voice resonates clearly within your soul, when you only so much as utter a word of repentence, of leaving your evil and irrational ways. He will not force you to believe. But He will come by Fire, a purifying Fire of the Holy Spirit raining down on humanity to teach them the meaning of Peace and Reconciliation. You will see your Saviour face to face, the Holy of Holies, who invites mere children into His kingdom, because they have no malice, no evil in them. And they are ready to forgive, because they themselves have been forgiven.

[Zack Williamson]

@pe7erpark3r

@pe7erpark3r said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man I too have my confidence + reason,

Abusive confidence+Faithful reason*
Lets check how much reason you really have. I will bring all fallacious arguments since the starting of this debate-

1. 
   Ad-hominem argument+ strawman argument
2. 
   Straw-man argument
3. 
   Strawman argument regarding to tacitus
4. 
   Argument from ignorance for shifting the burden
5. 
   Argument from popularity
   First post and 5 faithful falllacious arguments!

and @Zhyper777 has – despite not giving his source

You accept "absence of evidence", yet you argue he is the winner- argument from ignorance

– pasted a good article about why most educated people (christian/atheist/other religion) think that Jesus was historical...

Most educated people think Aliens really exist.. But they have no proof of aliens' existence.
Most educated people do think vs most educated prove- 2 different statements.
Education is different from knowledge. Knowledge does not come from education. Plus he has just repeated old arguments of the debate and nothing else. Forget about the winner, he is not even a debater because a debater does not give a speech he argues and counter-argues. Your guy did not counter-argue with me. He has no proof anyways.

Those are really good arguments

If argument from silence, argument from ignorance and argument from repetition were good arguments, the logic could become a religion itself. A true debater is the one who makes new argument, who scrolls up old argument and their replies. Thus I say the best argument was posted by someone else.

and thus I declare that @Zhyper777 has won this debate :yum:

I do not care what your faith declares. PPS. He could not even touch my logical proof.
Here was the logical proof- .
Here I declare I am the winner. Do whatever you can do.

And no thank you, really. I do not find a discussion meaningful that does not go through its arguments one by one.

True but you are talking about yourself. Scroll up and say how many arguments you collectively posted otherwise I'll post their screenshots on here.

Sorry about posting those 6 words from the PMs...

You know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking that God is...

I will replace some words for you-
"you know, I've said before, that faith is something very different from thinking what @Zhyper777's arguments are"- this is how you your faith declares
And here I quote some texts which you wrote to me in PMs- think, learn, understand and whoever does not do that he should kill himself. The world will be better without them. No offence! 😂.
Now I say theists like you do not even try to read what their opponent has written. They love to sing their own song. This is why I repeat myself more than once.

1. Thinking what 'A' is- reasoning. You may reach to false or true conclusion. But at least it is so-called reasoning.
2. Not thinking what 'A' is, yet claiming he loves you, he forgives your sins, he sends you into heaven/hell etc.- faith.

God is infinite mercy.

Ad nauseam. Nothing is infinite except of numbers.

When you sin against him, and you repent and ask forgiveness, he will never mention it again, except sometimes to remind you to stay humble.

Christians often think their all sins are forgivable. Do sins as many as you can do. This is why South Africa (a christian country) is the home of many rapes.

God Himself is meek and humble,

A non-existence entity has no emotion.

which is why he always speaks so gently, and asks you to open the door of your heart.

Open your Bible and read Matthew 17:17
Then Jesus answered and said, O faithless and perverse generation, how long shall I be with you? how long shall I suffer you? bring him here to me.

This is why He does not force you to believe by allowing anybody to proof His existence to you.

If there is a proof, it is rational to believe in him. If there is no proof, it is not rational to believe in him. You can believe in anything, I do not bother with your beliefs.

However his Voice resonates clearly within your soul,

There is no soul. The soul can neither be perceived nor be detected. People who claim to hear his voice have schizophrenia, obsessive compulsive disorder, mutiple personality disorder.

when you only so much as utter a word of repentence, of leaving your evil and irrational ways. He will not force you to believe.

If he doesnt force someone to not believing in him, why does he show his terror on non-believers ?
John 3:18- Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son

But He will come by Fire, a purifying Fire of the Holy Spirit raining down on humanity to teach them the meaning of Peace and Reconciliation.

Your statement contradicts the Bible.

Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. (Matthew 10:34)

You will see your Saviour face to face, the Holy of Holies, who invites mere children into His kingdom, because they have no malice, no evil in them. And they are ready to forgive, because they themselves have been forgiven.

I am not taking hallucinations drugs nor do I have brain injuries. I wished that I could save all the children from those religions. A baby is born atheist. All trash is inserted into his brain by his family.

[Zack Williamson]

@AllAboutGay @AllAboutGay said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@pe7erpark3r Although i am a believer of LGBT, i have some gay opinions about other religions as well
<3

I just came here to say here that Muslims are technically Christians.

You are definitely incorrect. Christians are considered as disbelievers in the Koran so neither is continuity of each-other-

They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent. (Surah- An-Nisa 5:17)

According to the bible, whoever will admit that Jesus is from god will not perish.

John 3:16 speaks about your verse so you are correct- or God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life

Islam agrees that Jesus is from god though it rejects the idea that the one and only god has any offspring. Islam gives high importance to Jesus.

Surah 5 verse no 72 states that whoever associates allah with Jesus will be burnt in fire. As you associate Allah with other Gods, you will be hunted by the Allah.

They have certainly disbelieved who say, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers.

Surah 5 verse no 73 apparently states Christians alike other disbelievers will be punished. The Koran does not only reject the Biblical God but also rejects Christianity's trinity concept (God, holy spirit, son)-

They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the third of three." And there is no god except one God. And if they do not desist from what they are saying, there will surely afflict the disbelievers among them a painful punishment.

Surah 4 verse 47 states followers of religions other than Islam, will be disfigured-
O you who were given the Scripture, believe in what We have sent down [to Muhammad], confirming that which is with you, before We obliterate faces and turn them toward their backs or curse them as We cursed the sabbath-breakers. And ever is the decree of Allah accomplished.

According to a letter by prophet Muhammad (recorded in hadith books like Sahih Bukhari), islam is just a continuation and fulfilment of Christianity and not an entirely new religion.

Fulfillment*
You have distorted the real letter. I can quote the letter from Wikipedia-
Narrated 'Aisha and 'Abdullah bin 'Abbas: When the last moment of the life of Allah's Apostle came he started putting his 'Khamisa' on his face and when he felt hot and short of breath he took it off his face and said, "May Allah curse the Jews and Christians for they built the places of worship at the graves of their Prophets." The Prophet was warning (Muslims) of what those had done.
Where does he say islam is not a new religion but continiuty of christianity ? Source- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad's_views_on_Christians

Also, many gay things done in the name of Islam or Christianity are not actually parts of Islam or Christianity but the results of misconceptions :yum:

I disagree with you. There is no misconception dude. The Islam and the Christianity are two biggest threats to humanity. Although I am not an anti-theist but everyone should know the truth. So first I will grab the Koran and will initialize to read verses-

Surah 4 verse no. 89 orders Muslims to kill disbelievers who try to change their views-

They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper.

Surah 7 verse no 4 describes how many cities of disbelievers are destroyed by Muhammad-

And how many cities have We destroyed, and Our punishment came to them at night or while they were sleeping at noon.

Surah no 8 verses numbers 15 and 16 recommend Muslims to fight with disbelievers and whoever comes back from fight, will be tortured by the Allah-

O you who have believed, when you meet those who disbelieve advancing [for battle], do not turn to them your backs [in flight]. And whoever turns his back to them on such a day, unless swerving [as a strategy] for war or joining [another] company, has certainly returned with anger [upon him] from Allah, and his refuge is Hell - and wretched is the destination.

Surah 8 verse 39 recommends Muslims to persecute every religion except of Islam-
And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah . And if they cease - then indeed, Allah is Seeing of what they do.

Surrah no 8 verses no 59 and 60 instruct Muslims to let not escaping the disbelievers even after a peaceful treaty with them-

And let not those who disbelieve think they will escape. Indeed, they will not cause failure [to Allah ]. And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.

Surah 8 verse no 65 instructs Muslims to provoke disbelievers because Allah has hope that Muslims will win over disbelievers-
O Prophet, urge the believers to battle. If there are among you twenty [who are] steadfast, they will overcome two hundred. And if there are among you one hundred [who are] steadfast, they will overcome a thousand of those who have disbelieved because they are a people who do not understand.

Surah 22 verse 15 suggests those people to suicide who think Allah won’t support Muhammad -

Whoever should think that Allah will not support [Prophet Muhammad] in this world and the Hereafter - let him extend a rope to the ceiling, then cut off [his breath], and let him see: will his effort remove that which enrages [him]?
Whole chapter 22 depicts Allah as a terrorist. It sounds like he is an al-qaedian terrorist- 22:1, 22:2, 22:3, 22:8, 22:9, 22:15, 22;18, 22:19-22, 22:25, 22:45, 22:47, 22:51, 22:55, 22:57, 22:72. This chapter is addressed to Jews, Christians and sabians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Hajj

Surah 28 verses 62-64 state the Allah will taunt Christians on the day of their doom and every Muslim will see how Christians are punished-
And [warn of] the Day He will call them and say, "Where are My 'partners' which you used to claim? Those upon whom the word will have come into effect will say, "Our Lord, these are the ones we led to error. We led them to error just as we were in error. We declare our disassociation [from them] to You. They did not used to worship us. And it will be said, "Invoke your 'partners' " and they will invoke them; but they will not respond to them, and they will see the punishment. If only they had followed guidance!

Surah 61 verse 4 recommends Muslims to fight for the name of Allah-
Indeed, Allah loves those who fight in His cause in a row as though they are a [single] structure joined firmly.

Surah 25 verse 52 orders Muslims to fight against disbelievers-

So, (O Prophet), do not follow the unbelievers but engage in a mighty striving against them with this Qur'an.

Surah 48 verse 29 describes the people with Muhammad are forceful against disbelievers-
Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves.

The Allah orders the Muhammad to be enough harsh with disbelievers (Surah 66 verse 9)
O Prophet, strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites and be harsh upon them. And their refuge is Hell, and wretched is the destination.

Surah 60 verse 1 guides Muslims to fight against disbelievers and the disbelievers should not be supposed as friends in this Jihad-

O you who have believed, do not take My enemies and your enemies as allies, extending to them affection while they have disbelieved in what came to you of the truth, having driven out the Prophet and yourselves [only] because you believe in Allah, your Lord. If you have come out for jihad in My cause and seeking means to My approval, [take them not as friends]. You confide to them affection, but I am most knowing of what you have concealed and what you have declared. And whoever does it among you has certainly strayed from the soundness of the way.

There are total 532 (8.5 percent of the Koran) verses in the Koran reflecting the disdain for non-violence and cruelty, yet people think these all verses are misconceptions. However, this 8.5 percent verses do not include adultery, child abuse, homophobia, slavery, misogynistic, polygamy etc. You can check the authenticity of my verses from Quran.com.

Now I will grab the Bible. I will use English Standard Version or New International Version most of the times.

1. The God commands for every Canaanite's ethnic cleansing. The Canaanites were the people who lived in Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan-
   and when the Lord your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy (Deuteronomy 7:2 NIV) This is what the LORD of Hosts says: ‘I witnessed what the Amalekites did to the Israelites when they hindered them on their way up from Egypt. Now go and attack the Amalekites and devote to destruction all that belongs to them. Do not spare them, but put to death men and women, children and infants, oxen and sheep, camels and donkeys.’

However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. (Deu 20:16)

2. The Biblical God orders Christians not to do a treaty with other theists but when the opportunity comes for eating their sacrifice, Christians are allowed to eat them-

Be careful not to make a treaty with those who live in the land; for when they prostitute themselves to their gods and sacrifice to them, they will invite you and you will eat their sacrifices. (Exodus 34:15 NIV).
The Biblical God himself wrote this verse of second commandment-
The Lord said to Moses, “Chisel out two stone tablets like the first ones, and I will write on them the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke. (Exodus 34:1)

3. The Christians were instructed to kill disbelievers when someone else says them, he is going to worship other Gods-

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, “Let us go and worship other gods” (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. (Deu 13:6-10)

The Bible has total 1321 (4.25% of the total) verses for belligerence and many of them are addressed to disbelievers and nonbelievers. You can check all Biblical verse from https://www.biblegateway.com.

P.S. This was an off-topic discussion because the users had to argue about Jesus’ existence and non-existence. None of them is arguing with me so I decided to reply to an off-topic discussion. Otherwise I could love to reply you very early.

PPS. I do not care about the downvotes on this post. Many Christians and Muslims may frown upon it. I debate and write for the truth, not for the upvotes/downvotes.

[GhősT RiDeR]

@Vex-Man Let muslims say Allahu Akbar
Kaboom 💣

[Zack Williamson]

@AllAboutGay
@AllAboutGay said in Vex Debate: was Jesus historical?:

@Vex-Man Yes, according to Islam, Jesus is not exactly the biological offspring of god and not exactly god. But the bible says that the person who will admit that Jesus is from god will not perish.

The Bible says whoever will believe in Jesus, will not perish/die. For the God has sent Jesus (not Christians) to save this world, not to condemn it. We were talking about the wars between Christians vs Muslims, but not Muslims vs Jesus.

that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him. For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. (John 3:15-17 NIV)

Islam agrees that Jesus is from god

Islam rejects-

1. He is a son of God. (According to Koranic verse 5:116)
2. He was crucified.
3. He was raised from death by holy ghost/God/himself.
   Islam only accepts-
4. He was saved by the God

Surah 5 verse 116-
And [beware the Day] when Allah will say, "O Jesus, Son of Mary, did you say to the people, 'Take me and my mother as deities besides Allah ?'" He will say, "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it, You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.

As Islam states only Allah knows what unseen is situated in Jesus’ heart. Thereafter, he is not son of the God. Allah could see the Biblical God if it was situated in Jesus' heart.

and gives high importance to Jesus

The Koran does not give importance to Jesus but rather states he was so common that he slept, ate, felt like humans. Surah 5 verses numbers 69-75 elaborate, “he was just a human being and was tempted by even a Satan once. It describes he was neither a God nor his any type of associate. Christians are believers of an imagination being Messiah who never got divinity.” The whole Christianity is based on the idea of trinity, the gospels' truth and the Koran denies these 2 main concepts. Therefore, Christians are not Muslims or vice-versa.

though it disagrees that Jesus himself is god.

True

So according to the literal bible, a person believing in islam will not perish. So, muslims are technically christians although christians are technically non-muslims.

Not true because the Koran does not consider Jesus as a son of God and it does not believe in Jesus either. So, Muslims are not Christians.

But, i think that people should leave Islam and Christianity and join LGBT❤

It does not affect me because I belong to neither religions. I am a materialist and naturalist.

The Islam and the Christianity are two biggest threats to humanity.

Yes, both Islam and Christianity are homophobic religions.

Absolutely true.

And LGBT=Humanity❤

Humanity consists of 753 crores people not only LGBTQ.

So, you are right.
All humans should join LGBT to achieve universal love❤

#No Comment because I consider LGBTQ is much more better and peaceful than Abrahamic religions

EDIT- I saw your edited post later so I would reply it here.

According to Islam,both Prophet Muhammad and Prophet Jesus are ordinary humans who were sent by god.

Islam agrees on a point that Muhammad got divinity of God but Jesus did never get it. It dislikes and criticizes those people who associate Jesus with Allah/God. (Surah 5 -many verses)

A letter written by Prophet Muhammad:
"In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
From Muhammad the Messenger of Allâh to Negus, king of
Abyssinia (Ethiopia). Peace be upon him who follows true
guidance. Salutations, I entertain Allâh’s praise, there is no god
but He, the Sovereign, the Holy, the Source of peace, the Giver
of peace, the Guardian of faith, the Preserver of safety. I bear
witness that Jesus, the son of Mary, is the spirit of Allâh and
His Word which He cast into Mary, the virgin, the good, the
pure, so that she conceived Jesus. Allâh created him from His
spirit and His breathing as He created Adam by His Hand. I
call you to Allâh Alone with no associate and to His obedience
and to follow me and to believe in that which came to me, for I
am the Messenger of Allâh. I invite you and your men to Allâh,
the Glorious, the All-Mighty. I hereby bear witness that I have
communicated my message and advice. I invite you to listen
and accept my advice. Peace be upon him who follows true
guidance."[Za'd Al-Ma'ad 3/60]

Zad Al-Ma'ad is not written by prophet Muhammad but is written by an Islamic scholar Ibn al-Qayyim who was born after almost all crusade wars. And it was not a letter, it was a book. Btw none Muslim follows him, they rather follow Muhammad (Sunni) or Ali (Shias/Shiites) or Wahab (wahabis) as their true prophets and the book Koran as their doctrine.
Source- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zad_al-Ma'ad