The Historical Jesus: Making Rock Soup
Uploader Comments (IWannabeJew)
All Comments (12)
-
@IWannabeJew i just simply neeeed to see the movie. i'm far better at absorbing visuals with audio than reading alone. although if i obsess on a topic (which can happen) i can read and absorb very well. my first study of biblical hebrew was 3 weeks and i had 42 of 50 total lessons memorized and fluent...then i "crashed" and never picked up the momentum again. after a few years i have forgotten substantially more than i remember. sad.
-
@wayman29 the same thought came to mind. Apparently there are 4 or 5 different authors of the Torah. Who was there to witness Moses and the bush. We only have "Moses" word ?
-
@wayman29 Nor does it follow that because one questioned historical figure actually existed that all questioned historical figures actually existed, which is essentially one of the "arguments" of those who BELIEVE in the Ahistorical Jesus.
Finally, Jews don't worship Moses and the Torah is something that they can hold in their hands. In other words, SOMEONE wrote it. Jesus wrote nothing.
your metaphors in the video and the wording and logic in the written responses strongly suggest you are in fact a kindred aspie. i havent gotten to ceasars messiah yet, but i'm very excited to see it. i didnt know it was out yet, last i checked, it was still in production. guess i'm way behind.
aviyahu01 1 year ago
@aviyahu01 I've got the old edition, without the added material of this new one. I intend to get the new one, too. Atwill revealed lots of new information on the forum of his website over the last few years, so some of it may be incorporated.
IWannabeJew 1 year ago
@aviyahu01 I've only read the book. I haven't seen the movie.
IWannabeJew 1 year ago
Also, the "moses" comparison is accurate. We argue that "well SOMEONE existed, so why couldnt his name be moses?", same thing with this "jesus" person. Is there are evidence that Hillel existed outside "jewish" writings ? do people that DIDNT beleive Hillel attest to his existence? because a person that did believe he existed is biased towards saying he did (is the logic being used) lol
pianokid100 1 year ago
@pianokid100 Again, it does not follow that just because one doubted personality DID NOT exist that another doubted personality ALSO did not exist. Nor does it follow that because one doubted historical figure actually existed that ALL doubted historical figures actually existed.
In other words, instead of dealing with the absence of historical evidence for the Jesus of the Not Testament, you are deflecting attention to a completely separate case. "Don't look at my dirty laundry, look at..."
IWannabeJew 1 year ago
there are several figures that have only one source claiming the persons existance. Nobody calls into question whether or not Confucius. Mohammed, etc. Also, people say that jesus only has one source that claims his existence, the "NT", but the NT is actually several sources, and thats not counting the other writings that attest to his existence, such as the didache, or the gospel of the hebrews. When one follows the sources to the earliest, you find very human jesus, but a person that exists
pianokid100 1 year ago
@pianokid100 BULLSHIT. The Christian Gospels are dated to the time of the destruction of the Temple and beyond. Go watch YaleCourses.
Why are they dated then? Because the same Roman Flavians who destroyed the Temple also created Christianity. Atwill soundly proves this in Caesars Messiah. The ONLY people who reject the CM thesis are those romantics and Machiavellians who don't want to see Christianity and the Historical Jesus industry come crumbling down.
IWannabeJew 1 year ago