Did Jesus Exist? by Bart Ehrman

Well, most of us here seem to quickly find what you write completely indecipherable, so we quit in frustration, and your behavior becomes more and more trollish. We seem to be able to communicate with each other clearly, but we're all increasingly confused by what you write. Sorry, but that is our reality, confusion when we try to talk with you.

That is one interpretation.Most would say EvC is packed with people with a fundamentally unscientific mindsetEvC is packed with posters who don't even struggle with their complete, total lack of critical thinking skills.I am not great at debating techniques, and one expert on debating critiqued me a few years back.But you guys are hopeless.You refuse to follow an argument or datum to it's logical end.You refuse to engage with evidence you don't want to respond to.You only want to debate the evidence you feel is weak enough to destroy.(The reason why miracles and the supernatural keeps getting brought up, when historians have already rendered that type of evidence generally lacking and thus have ALREADY pushed it to the side)(Percy and now Tangle have brought it up)(Tangle has talked about nothing but the supernatural, but it is not what we should be bringing up. It is off topic)

The quest for the historical Jesus generally does not deal in miracles (there are vision type issues, that are relevant to the Historian, but it is not interpreted as supernatural by the historian, so far as I know).This is a debate ONLY on whether Jesus existed as a man.Miracles and the supernatural should not be allowed to be discussed in this thread.(The only exception that should be allowed is if one points out what historians and science have concluded, via studies)This is a strawman that is being set up by dishonest posters, and it is designed to disrupt the discussion

Really?
No one can understand your posts and now you resort to vile personal attacks.Again, I am sure mods will take care of this. How about you leave me alone.

Yep, I was giving you MY interpretation of MY interactions with you and MY interpretations of your behavior with other participants here at EvC. Most of who, I don't know who you mean. I was commenting on how discussions with with you always go, NOT how much knowledge any participants posses. Well, that explains why you resort to insults and name calling when we cannot follow your argument or refuse to follow you down obscure rabbit holes. Because I cannot understand what you are talking about, and I rapidly lose interest in your insults. That's because since I could not understand you, so I did not know you presented any evidence. Well, here I was not debating at all, because I was commenting on your repeated behavior in every debate topic I have seen you participating in. If you don't like what people have to say, the solution is simple, ignore them, don't engage with them.Every time you show up here you have a massive chip on your shoulder, why bother if you despise us that much?And BTW is there any subject that you are not the absolute top planetary expert in?

It is very much a set of verses that alone probably falsifie the JESUS DID NOT EXIST theory.And Carrier and Price know it is a challenge to the theory.They are very honest about it.They don't bring in strawman arguments.They confront the issue.The JESUS DID NOT EXIST theory is - essentially - admitted to be false, if proponents of the theory ignore Romans 1:1-4 text.Carrier said it counts as evidence for historicity.He said this verse (Romans 1:3) should be scored as twice as likely to be penned, by Paul, when he penned it, if Jesus was a historical man, verses a non-existent person who never lived.

I'm a participant and can play no moderation role, but you might try posting to Report Discussion Problems Here 4.0.

He said one should always be honest in debate, and absolutely avoid the tactic of ignoring an opponents stronger arguments, while only responding to weak ones, then claim to have actually responded.He clearly considers that worse than no response at all.If character and integrity were all that won an argument, then Carrier would carry the day, every day.It is too bad he is very probably wrong, ultimately, on the larger Jesus Myth debate, because his debate tactics are often exemplary examples of the best behavior we can ask for.He prefaced those remarks to his debate with fellow Jesus Myther, Robert M Price.Both clearly have a scientific mindset. Both are stand-up characters. Their good character alone could almost creat a personality cult of a faction of followers. Honestly.Both have to deal with Romans 1:1-4You can tell both know it isn't pretty.It is downright ugly for the Jesus Myth theory.But at least they are honest and use sound methodology. Sound arguments with a sober admission that the consequences are severe - for the JESUS NEVER EXISTED theory - if Paul was writing to early Jesus-following communities who understood him to be a man.Romans 1:1-4Romans
Chapter one
Verses one to four
+Not to ignore)