Dec 18, 2011 -- 1:47AM, iamachildofhis wrote:

iama: Here is evidence outside of The Bible for the existence, in Israel, of Christ Jesus:

Secular evidence of the existence of Christ Jesus

.

They are all based on hearsay evidence and do not amount to any compelling evidence for the existence of Jesus, and certainly not for what he eventually became in the minds of devout believers (largely thanks to Paul who took hold of this conceptual personage, clothed him, and supplied him with ideas).

Not a single one of the writers given on your list (which, of course, is not yours) gives a source or backs up his claim with evidential material.

And how desperate is it that believers have to go to supposed secular sources in an attempt to justify their otherwise insupportable beliefs?

But let me clarify. I personally have no problem in accepting that there likely was a real historical character behind the legendary and apotheosized Jesus Christ. 

On the Contrary, there ARE First Century Documents from MORE than one Hand re: Thew Lord Jesus (The Christ) of Nazareth ...

Dec 18, 2011 -- 4:23PM, Namchuck wrote:

There you go blathering meaninglessly again, teilhard.

It has nothing to do with anything being "inconvenient", but with convincing and compelling evidence. In regard to some hypothetical "Lord Jesus (The Christ)" there just doesn't happen to be any.

There is no more justification for believing in 'Jesus Christ' than there is for believing in Osiris or Hercules.

Dec 18, 2011 -- 9:54AM, teilhard wrote:

But, see, such Mentions are entirely inconvenient for Folks who for Reasons of their own NEED there to been NO Historical ("Real") Lord Jesus (The Christ) of Nazareth ...

Dec 18, 2011 -- 1:47AM, iamachildofhis wrote:

iama: Here is evidence outside of The Bible for the existence, in Israel, of Christ Jesus:

Secular evidence of the existence of Christ Jesus

.

It is True that there wasn't a First Century CNN News Crew taping Every Thing The Lord Jesus (The Christ) of Nazareth did and said ... (And as far as we now know, He apparently didn't "save" any e-Mails or Cell-Phone Text Messages ...) ...

But Paul's Letters, e.g., date from less than a Generation Post-Resurrection, "Luke" was apparently a Missionary Companion of Paul and reports that he conducted thorough Interviews to arrive at HIS Gospel ...

Rather than worrying and complaining about The Record we DON'T have, I "go with" the Records we DO have ... It's not an All-or-Nothing Question ...

Dec 19, 2011 -- 12:42AM, Namchuck wrote:

All the supposed documents come well after the life of the supposed Christ.

There is now just no way of knowing who Jesus, if he lived at all, actually was.

Dec 19, 2011 -- 12:07AM, teilhard wrote:

On the Contrary, there ARE First Century Documents from MORE than one Hand re: Thew Lord Jesus (The Christ) of Nazareth ...

Dec 18, 2011 -- 4:23PM, Namchuck wrote:

There you go blathering meaninglessly again, teilhard.

It has nothing to do with anything being "inconvenient", but with convincing and compelling evidence. In regard to some hypothetical "Lord Jesus (The Christ)" there just doesn't happen to be any.

There is no more justification for believing in 'Jesus Christ' than there is for believing in Osiris or Hercules.

Dec 18, 2011 -- 9:54AM, teilhard wrote:

But, see, such Mentions are entirely inconvenient for Folks who for Reasons of their own NEED there to been NO Historical ("Real") Lord Jesus (The Christ) of Nazareth ...

Dec 18, 2011 -- 1:47AM, iamachildofhis wrote:

iama: Here is evidence outside of The Bible for the existence, in Israel, of Christ Jesus:

Secular evidence of the existence of Christ Jesus

.

Dec 18, 2011 -- 4:19PM, Namchuck wrote:

iama: Here is evidence outside of The Bible for the existence, in Israel, of Christ Jesus:

Secular evidence of the existence of Christ Jesus

Namchuck: They are all based on hearsay evidence and do not amount to any compelling evidence for the existence of Jesus, and certainly not for what he eventually became in the minds of devout believers (largely thanks to Paul who took hold of this conceptual personage, clothed him, and supplied him with ideas).

Not a single one of the writers given on your list (which, of course, is not yours) gives a source or backs up his claim with evidential material.

And how desperate is it that believers have to go to supposed secular sources in an attempt to justify their otherwise insupportable beliefs?

But let me clarify. I personally have no problem in accepting that there likely was a real historical character behind the legendary and apotheosized Jesus Christ.

iama:  Wait a minute!  You asked for secular sources.

If you study the following charts, you will realize that your objections are addressed:

Ancient Sources Compared to New Testament Copies

.

Dec 19, 2011 -- 1:40PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

Dec 19, 2011 -- 10:45AM, Ken wrote:

Read Luke 1:1-4 carefully. He did not say that he conducted interviews.

 Reading Luke 1:1-4, what are we told by Luke, according to your reading / understanding of the text? What did Luke say?.

I don't know why you're asking me to repeat myself. He did not say that he conducted interviews. If you disagree, please quote the verse in which he says he did.