Proofs That Jesus Existed

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Argument from the criterion of embarrassment

Post by spin »

  1. There are lots of things in the gospels that lots of people say fit the criterion of embarrassment.
  2. That means, despite the fact that they are embarrassing, they have been preserved.
  3. The only reason why someone would preserve an embarrassing fact regarding a trope in a religion is if it were true.
  4. Therefore, Jesus existed.
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
User avatar
stephan happy huller
Posts: 1480
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 3:06 pm
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by stephan happy huller »

Sounds like an argument I'd use
Everyone loves the happy times
User avatar
spin
Posts: 2157
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 10:44 pm
Location: Nowhere

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by spin »

stephan happy huller wrote:Sounds like an argument I'd use
I made it subjective enough. :cheeky:
Dysexlia lures • ⅔ of what we see is behind our eyes
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8601
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Peter Kirby »

ARGUMENT FROM CRACKPOTTERY
(1) The consensus opinion is that Jesus existed.
(2) This consensus opinion is based on a methodology.
(3) This methodology is the one true methodology of historical Jesus studies, which cannot yield contradictory opinions when correctly applied.
(4) A consensus opinion based on a methodology is achieved through the correct application of that methodology.
(5) The opinion that Jesus did not exist contradicts the opinion that Jesus existed.
(6) Therefore, the opinion that Jesus did not exist is not achieved through the correct application of that methodology.
(7) If an opinion is not achieved through the correct application of the one true methodology of historical Jesus studies, it is a crackpot fringe idea.
(8) Therefore, the opinion that Jesus did not exist is a crackpot fringe idea.
(9) If an opinion is a crackpot fringe idea, it is wrong.
(10) Therefore, the opinion that Jesus did not exist is wrong.
(11) Therefore, Jesus existed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8601
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Peter Kirby »

ARGUMENT FROM THE POPE
(1) The Pope is infallible.
(2) The Pope is the Person of the Year.
(3) The Pope is spiritual leader to a billion people.
(4) The Pope is the apostolic successor to Saint Peter.
(5) Saint Peter knew Christ.
(6) The Pope is the Vicar of Christ.
(7) The Pope believes in Jesus.
(8) The Catechism of the Catholic Church includes the doctrine of the incarnation of God in the person of Jesus Christ.
(9) Therefore, Jesus existed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8601
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Peter Kirby »

ARGUMENT FROM THE BIBLE
(1) The Bible says Jesus existed.
(2) Therefore, Jesus existed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8601
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Peter Kirby »

ARGUMENT FROM PREFERRING TO BE POSITIVE
(1) I don't like to think of people as telling falsehoods.
(2) If Jesus did not exist, lots of people would be telling falsehoods.
(3) I don't like to think so.
(4) I'd rather be positive.
(5) Therefore, Jesus existed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 8601
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Peter Kirby »

ARGUMENT FROM PREFERRING MIDDLE GROUNDS
(1) At one extreme, you have the view that Jesus did everything written about him.
(2) At the other extreme, you have the view that none of it is true.
(3) There's a middle ground that just accepts some of it as true.
(4) I'd rather take the middle ground.
(5) Therefore, Jesus existed.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
User avatar
JoeWallack
Posts: 1608
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by JoeWallack »

ARGUMENT FROM GOOGLE SEARCH
(1) https://www.google.com/#q=proof+that+jesus+existed
(2) http://www.ucg.org/science/surprising-a ... existence/
Have scholars found firm evidence of the existence of Jesus Christ, His earthly father and one of His half brothers? An intriguing find bears their names.
(3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus
Most modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed,[1][2][3] but scholars differ on the historicity of specific episodes described in the Biblical accounts of Jesus
(4) http://listverse.com/2013/03/31/8-reaso ... y-existed/
Basically, early Christians were so embarrassed by the crucifixion they did everything they could to turn it into a victory. Hell, they probably wished they had just made him up—it would’ve saved them all a lot of trouble.
(5) Therefore, Jesus existed.
User avatar
Blood
Posts: 899
Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2013 8:03 am

Re: Proofs That Jesus Existed

Post by Blood »

ARGUMENT FROM THE NORMALCY OF TURNING EXECUTED MEN INTO GOD

1. Some guys followed Jesus, a rabbi with anger management issues
2. When Jesus got whacked, they were terribly embarrassed
3. As people typically do in such a situation, they turned the executed man into God
4. This is so crazy that it must be true
5. Therefore, Jesus existed
“The only sensible response to fragmented, slowly but randomly accruing evidence is radical open-mindedness. A single, simple explanation for a historical event is generally a failure of imagination, not a triumph of induction.” William H.C. Propp
Post Reply