Dear Chrys

I note you refer to Hector Avalos and Robert M Price as examples of highly qualified people who question the existence of Jesus.

I cannot offer any superior qualifications, but I can offer the opinion of Paul, in his writings to the Corinthian believers.

In writing, he was coming from a position of personal transformation which resulted from an encounter with the risen Lord Jesus.

He writes:

When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. 2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3 I came to you in weakness with great fear and trembling. 4 My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit’s power, 5 so that your faith might not rest on human wisdom, but on God’s power. 1 Cor 2:1ff

Was Paul qualified academically to run his own version of the "Jesus is just a rabble rouser" seminar?

I rather think so:

If someone else thinks they have reasons to put confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee; 6 as for zeal, persecuting the church; as for righteousness based on the law, faultless. Phil 3:5

He adds:

"Under Gamaliel I was thoroughly trained in the law of our fathers and was just as zealous for God as any of you are today." Acts 22:3

COMMENT:
Christ will not be found in academia, or by academia but in humble recognition of His eternal reality when He calls to us in our heart of hearts.

That Josephus mentions Jesus does not point to his existence.

The fact is virtually all references in contemporary historians (Pliny the Younger, Josephus, Tacticus, Suetonius) were scant and were

....(i) to non-specific names such as "Chrestus", "Christus"; or

... (ii) just references to his followers - often called "Christianos" (e.g Pliny the Younger; Tacticus).

Your claim "almost all early non-biblical references to Jesus and Christians are hostile to him – Josephus Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger, and early rabbinic traditions in the Talmud" - is debatable, and even then does *not* "strengthens the credibility as evidence" of his historical existence.

Origen later wrote Josephus did not beleive Jesus was the Christ.

The lack of "arguing that Jesus did not exist or was not crucified" by the contemporary historians of the time is not evidence he existed.

Citing scholars of religion or Dawkins (the eminent biologist cum atheist religious commentator) is just appeal to authority - a fallacious approach.

Citing belief that Jesus existed for the Christian story about Jesus is just circular "argument" - a fallacious approach.

The fact is ... all non-Biblical references by historians of the time are scant.

ALGOREisRICH [Saturday, 18 Dec 12:51:17 PM]

Paul writes ideological epistles to followers as far-flung as Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, Phrygia, Anatolia, and Thessalonica. The gospel stories have not been written. Paul has met Peter and the gang. The Corinthians, Ephesians, Romans etc know nothing about the founder of their religion who walked recently among only the peoples of distant Judaea and Galilee.

Paul is a zealous christian, preaching the christian message...but actually says nothing about the message that this Jesus preached? Is this not remarkable? A message without the founder's message? Without a single saying?

Even when the saying would clinch an argument or press home his message? So many times he skips over what the gospels later said Jesus taught, and quotes the Old Testament. Not even about the more elemental parts - the end times, the resurrection of the body.

These early preachers were often at each other's throats, desperately jostling with each for the religiously correct high-ground, often building their epistles around backbiting. Yet Paul repeatedly passes over opportunities to bring quotes to bear that would carry the ultimate authority.

Another irony is there is no evidence for Paul outside the Bible, either.

@ Cornflower, I have no reason to think
that the author invented the "Seaview
Community Christian Church Carols by
Candlelight" in order to have a whinge
about Christians. She tells us that she
changed the name of the event "to protect
the guilty" and that her Council had handed
the formerly secular event "to the first
church prepared to sponsor it in return for
proselytising privileges."

Although I've never actually attended a
"Carols by Candlelight" event because I
assume that they are all more or less
Christian in content, my point was that
it would be a bit silly to go to one and
then complain that it had been taken over
by Christians.

Maybe I'm not cynical enough, but while I
mostly disagree with the author's central
premise, I think it's going a bit far to
imply that she made the whole thing up.

ALGOREisRICH I see you may struggle with the understanding of what atheism may mean. It is a non belief in God so quoting from the bible may make you feel better most people who are atheist or non believers will not really care they may laugh or mock you. I feel you may have missed the point of what the author may be trying to get across which is Christians have taken over Christmas.

This is a perspective which I disagree with as I have already mentioned. Maybe it is best to stick to the topic instead of attacking or assuming bible quotes will make much difference. Is there not some Christian post or person who could do with your knowledge of the bible?

I have a food for thought for yourself and other Christians who troll a blog like this please could you go and read Judges 21:10-24 NLT, this is about Jabesh-gilead and events around this. Also what about Numbers 31:7-18 NLT Midianites and their 5 kings a interesting passage. Or here is another one Joshua 7:15 NLT, or (2 Kings 23:20-25 NLT), Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT I mean this one is great really shows true Christian values no :)

In fact I would like a reader of the bible king james verison if possible or which ever version as there are a few :0 to write an opinion piece defending if you can these passages from the bible. If not please stop quoting it. I shall quote back and randomly select passages out of the bible just like other atheists who may have more of a understanding of religion especially for some the Christian religion.

If you have a issue with what the author wrote then discuss it if you like it then discuss it. If not then move along dear Christian or your lord may do this to you Ezekiel 21:33-37 NAB.

talisman,

You sly dog, I was giving you full credit for a rather clever shy at Aunt Sally*.

Your 'happy clapping' was a nice touch, a real put down for those religious simpletons, eh what? Heh, heh, especially after your storytelling intro for your esteemed self to set the scene.

BTW, are you really CJM as suggested recently and did you catch that narrow columns disorder from someone on that other blog 'Cystitus', or whatever it was called?

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aunt_Sally

Smile, it is the festive season.