Christmas

[Canton Kev]

Ah, so the references to Tiberius and Pontius Pilate (which would date the crucifixion to around 30AD) by the Roman historian Tacitus would not count as independent evidence in your opinion then? It's a shame that you had to resort to such a belittling comment. I know most of the posters on this MB would love to be able to prove that Jesus never even existed but somehow he inconveniently just won't go away will he!

Jesus the bloke probably did exist. Jesus the bloke who rose from the dead, walked on water, fed 500 people with a fish, cured the incurable, etc probably did not. Most people like solid proof of some sort to believe in such things so if you could produce some (actual proof and not just some writings from the bible) then I’m sure a lot of the posters on here would be rational and humble enough to accept that with solid evidence Jesus both existed and performed miracles as the son of god.

But since you’ve already handwaved away the discussion about his birth, “why should the precise date matter”, no doubt hard evidence shouldn’t matter either as long as you simply believe.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

Jesus the bloke probably did exist. Jesus the bloke who rose from the dead, walked on water, fed 500 people with a fish, cured the incurable, etc probably did not. Most people like solid proof of some sort to believe in such things so if you could produce some (actual proof and not just some writings from the bible) then I’m sure a lot of the posters on here would be rational and humble enough to accept that with solid evidence Jesus both existed and performed miracles as the son of god.

But since you’ve already handwaved away the discussion about his birth, “why should the precise date matter”, no doubt hard evidence shouldn’t matter either as long as you simply believe.

Unsubstantiated stories from the Bronze Age at a time when most people were illiterate.

[Gofer Blue]

Jesus the bloke probably did exist. Jesus the bloke who rose from the dead, walked on water, fed 500 people with a fish, cured the incurable, etc probably did not. Most people like solid proof of some sort to believe in such things so if you could produce some (actual proof and not just some writings from the bible) then I’m sure a lot of the posters on here would be rational and humble enough to accept that with solid evidence Jesus both existed and performed miracles as the son of god.

But since you’ve already handwaved away the discussion about his birth, “why should the precise date matter”, no doubt hard evidence shouldn’t matter either as long as you simply believe.

I think you have missed my point. I asked why should the PRECISE date matter - I think you will find that this is one of those hair-splitting discussions which sceptics will naturally seize upon. Does it really matter if academics suggest a range of 2 to 3 years on an event which occurred two thousand years ago? There is a good summary of the evidence here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_of_birth_of_Jesus.

None of the early non-Biblical references to Jesus deny his existence. Even TBG doesn't deny it!

[Canton Kev]

I think you have missed my point. I asked why should the PRECISE date matter - I think you will find that this is one of those hair-splitting discussions which sceptics will naturally seize upon. Does it really matter if academics suggest a range of 2 to 3 years on an event which occurred two thousand years ago? There is a good summary of the evidence here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Date_of_birth_of_Jesus.

None of the early non-Biblical references to Jesus deny his existence. Even TBG doesn't deny it!

And neither do I. I’ve not denied his existence, so try answering my actual questions. Should precision matter? If you’re going to put unwavering faith in a higher being then yes I think so. If the simple event such as Jesus’ birth can’t be accurately confirmed or agreed upon then surely the less believable miracles are thrown into doubt?

[Gofer Blue]

And neither do I. I’ve not denied his existence, so try answering my actual questions. Should precision matter? If you’re going to put unwavering faith in a higher being then yes I think so. If the simple event such as Jesus’ birth can’t be accurately confirmed or agreed upon then surely the less believable miracles are thrown into doubt?

Of course precision matters where precision matters. I have a PhD in a scientific discipline so I am well aware of that. However here we are discussing the life and times of a person who lived just over two thousand years ago, not some sort of scientific experiment! I suspect we both know that hair-splitting arguments about exactly when said person was born (plus or minus a year or two) are merely deflective tactics which attempt to stifle further debate.

With regards miracles etc – of course I have no proof in the scientific sense as we only have the writings of the New Testament. If you want to believe that these are invented fairy stories then that is your choice of course. I prefer to believe that these are actual eye witness accounts which were written down some years after the events in the same way, as for example, the personal memories of WW2 veterans that were recorded many years after the actual events. Many of these personal stories (as opposed to the large scale military events such as D-Day for example, which are well-documented in photographs or film archives) cannot be verified because the men they fought alongside either died during the war or in the interim. Would you dismiss their accounts on the basis that what they say cannot be independently verified? My Dad never spoke much about his WW2 experiences but what he did say I had no reason to disbelieve although he had no “evidence” that any of it was true.

[lardy]

Of course precision matters where precision matters. I have a PhD in a scientific discipline so I am well aware of that. However here we are discussing the life and times of a person who lived just over two thousand years ago, not some sort of scientific experiment! I suspect we both know that hair-splitting arguments about exactly when said person was born (plus or minus a year or two) are merely deflective tactics which attempt to stifle further debate.

With regards miracles etc – of course I have no proof in the scientific sense as we only have the writings of the New Testament. If you want to believe that these are invented fairy stories then that is your choice of course. I prefer to believe that these are actual eye witness accounts which were written down some years after the events in the same way, as for example, the personal memories of WW2 veterans that were recorded many years after the actual events. Many of these personal stories (as opposed to the large scale military events such as D-Day for example, which are well-documented in photographs or film archives) cannot be verified because the men they fought alongside either died during the war or in the interim. Would you dismiss their accounts on the basis that what they say cannot be independently verified? My Dad never spoke much about his WW2 experiences but what he did say I had no reason to disbelieve although he had no “evidence” that any of it was true.

I guess if your dad said he chatted to a snake or fed 5,000 people with five quid of shopping then you might question him...

[Gofer Blue]

I guess if your dad said he chatted to a snake or fed 5,000 people with five quid of shopping then you might question him...

Nah, I always believed my Dad!

[lardy]

Nah, I always believed my Dad!

Fair play

[Croesy Blue]

I guess if your dad said he chatted to a snake or fed 5,000 people with five quid of shopping then you might question him...