Quote:

  Romans would take plaster masks of Emperors (so future generations would have a mold - sculptors would use these molds at times to produce busts) and we have Caesar's own writings, we have contemporary enemy attestation (Cicero) to who he was.  We know for a fact that Caesar was a man.  There is absolutely no doubt to this.  This is 100% certainty.

Only if by '100%' you mean 'rounded up from 99.999...%'. I'm talking about the methodology of statistics. In these kinds of statistical claims, it is not possible to claim exactly 100% certainty. Since historical scholarship relies on empirical statistics, you cannot claim exactly 100% certainty. Sorry, you just can't. But hey, it's up to you. I'm just saying that this kind of claim is going to lead you down many detours.

 

Quote:

Your claim: Jesus being Jewish(a) explains the Judaic influences present in the gospel writings(b).

(a) implies (b)

You presuppose (a)

Therefore, (b) is accurate.

 This is begging the question, otherwise known as circular reasoning.

Uhm, no that's not what I said. I said the gospels are written within the jewish context, and that explains the Judaic influences present in the gospel. A claim no different that saying a writer being a devout catholic, explains the christian influences present in his writings. 

And the Jesus of the Gospels, the Jesus of history is a Jew, a jewish teacher in fact, and as such his thoughts are also influenced by the Jewish worldview. 

 

 

Quote:

Luke was written in Greek and has a lot in common with the Homeric epics. As it was written in the greek context, should I not pay attention to the fact that his Jesus has more in common with Odysseus and Achilles than with an itinerant Jewish rabbi?

Now all you have to is prove that the "Jesus of history" probably existed.

Yea, and I'm guessing salvation, redemption, sin, Jewish messiah, 1001 refrences  to OT passages, Jesus as Jewish Rabbi, the Pharisees the Sadducees, passover, davidic lineage, etc....etc....etc... are all part of the Greek context? The Gospels are a product of  a jewish worldview, there is no denying this. 

Now, if even if what you claimed is true, it would only show the first century Jewish worldview had greek influences.

And this silly thing about Jesus being Odysseus I go over, in my new thread, which is a continuation of this win minus the excess.

Here's a link to it, if you haven't found it yourself:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/14997

 

 

 

 

Quote:

am not a 'Jesus mythicist' any more than I am a 'Darwinist' or 'Evolutionist'; I'm a skeptic.

'Jesus existed!' is a positive claim. If you wish to make that claim, the burden of proof lies with you.

   

I suggest you think more on what your saying. Evolution happened is a positive claim. So is the Jesus Myth Hypothesis, to whose adherers we label mythicist. Jesus was a historical person is a positive claim, so is a claim that Jesus is a purely mythical and fictive being. 

I, like you, see it as fairly pointless to label myself as an evolutionist, but if someone who likes to use my acceptance of a evolution, as a reference  point, common language might lead  him to labeling me an evolutionist, just as we label  creationist as creationist, or 9/11 conspiracy nuts, as 9/11 conspiracy theorist. You and I are both Darwinist and Evolutionist if by the term we mean accepters of the theory of evolution, even if we desire to use no such labels on ourselves. And accepters of the Jesus myth hypothesis, are mythicist, if they desire no such labels on themselves. 

I don't know where your from, but in my neck of the woods, we call a duck a duck, even if the duck doesn't like to be called by a name.

 

 which is a continuation of this win minus the excess.

 

Quote:

It's called plagiarism.  You can be put in jail for that.  Expelled from a university.  You're educated?  Yeah, okay.

Yea, it looks like the pot’s calling the kettle black:

Is Rook Hawkins Plagiarizing: [link removed by Mod]

Of course when David from Myspace showed that you plagiarized somewhere else.

You said that this: “Biggest Cop-Out Of All Time.”

 http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/the_rational_response_squad_radio_show/the_rational_response_mail_bag/637

I didn’t properly cite a source, and on a number of occasion neither have you. So what, let’s move on. I’ll make sure to be more careful next time.

Quote:

Warning: This violates 2.1. Antagonism in the forum rules.  This is your last warning.  We've been more than patient with you, especially concerning how you treat people on this board.  Continue to violate this, and you'll be gone from this message board.

Yea, and I’m guessing this doesn’t:

Quote:

You're a loon, that's what you are.  And are a disgrace to human life. 

Yep, you’re the big dude with the mod power. You can say whatever you want, and try to censor others who do the same. But that’s fine. I’ll start to moderate my tongue.

I can see that our discussion has gotten out of hand, and I’m willing to acknowledge my hand in this. I was unnecessarily provoking. So perhaps we can start over. I finished quite a lengthy response to your previous post. It’s far more polite, far more to the point, and I covered an extensive amount of ground. It’s quite polite to you, though I do take some playful jabs, but you should be light hearted enough not to mind.

The Mythicist that I’ve ran into on forums are not as informed as me, not because they are less intelligent than me, but because they have no desire to pursue even a hobbyist interest in ancient history, and are not to eager to venture past the shallow.

And  this is why, I came to this forum, and called you out, because I figured you’d offer me the challenge I was looking to spurn my brain juices. And you have, and so I am thankful for that.