Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8925 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-21-2019 8:04 AM
37 online now:
Diomedes, JoeT, RAZD (3 members, 34 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,160 Year: 15,196/19,786 Month: 1,919/3,058 Week: 293/404 Day: 11/96 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Reconstructing the Historical Jesus
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 560 (464355)
04-25-2008 12:06 AM


Hi Grizz. I've spent the last hour or so on your articulate multiple post attempt to reduce the Lord of Lords and soon coming King of Kings, supreme judge to be of all to the status of long time dead charlatan/impostor/opportunist/liar/blasphemer/hoax figure/false prophet/ etc for which you've received your reward, i.e. a POM from fellow secularists. Humanly speaking, nice job, as seen in the eyes and mindset of secularists who also abhor the possibility of accountablility to a higher authority.

The problem I see with your research and your thesis of what there is out there to search out is all the data which you failed to enter into the study, such as:

1. Specific prophecies relative to the birth, life and crucifixion of Jesus; prophecies written centuries before the fact by OT prophets like Isaiah and King David.

2. Fulfillment of the prophecies of Jesus himself concerning the fall of Jerusalem to occur after his death, the Gentile occupation and the restoration of Israel subsequent to the Gentile occupation of the city.

3. The prophecies of Jesus and the OT prophets of the eventual world wide gospel of messiah being proclaimed including all of the modern tech required for this to be realized.

4. The fact that you quote mined out only specific prophetic scriptures of mine, neglecting to cite those relative to the gathering of all nations into the region of the restored nation of Israel which until modern times has never been fulfilled.

So Grizzly Bear, you've masterfully and painstakenly picked and chosen out of history and current events only what secularizes the articulately prophesied historical Jesus/messiah/lord/coming king/judge, depicting the lord of you and me, very son of Jehovah god, supreme ID majesty of the universe as a lying impostor.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by PaulK, posted 04-25-2008 1:35 AM Buzsaw has responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 560 (464474)
04-25-2008 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by PaulK
04-25-2008 1:35 AM


Blind Assertions
PaulK, you keep on chirping blind assertions relative to my assertions being false or that certain ones have been falsified, but too often all we get of substance from you is your secularist POV regarding them without having falsified them.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by PaulK, posted 04-25-2008 1:35 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Grizz, posted 04-25-2008 8:00 PM Buzsaw has responded
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2008 3:13 AM Buzsaw has responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 41 of 560 (464485)
04-25-2008 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 40 by Grizz
04-25-2008 8:00 PM


Re: Blind Assertions
Grizz writes:

Please don't derail this thread. If you wish to offer scholarly objections to any of the background material presented to this point, please do so; but please give posters the courtesy of waiting until they have actually offered an opinion on the subject before you get worked up and start objecting to conclusions that have yet to be presented.

What?? My reply was to one of three succesive very long messages, one in which you cited quote mines out of my textual data of another thread; quote mines which obfuscated the context excluding pertinent end time data to advance your POV.

Are you trying to tell me that those three long messages weren't enough of your opinion for a reply?

How did I derail the thread, which is about the historical Jesus. I cited prphecies of and by him which have been fulfilled. How is this off topic so as to derail this thread? You quote mined out of my data so as to skew the prophecies I cited. How was my response to that off topic to this thread?

Grizz writes:

Regarding your specific objections, I am not even going to address them at this point as they are quite premature and I have not yet even offered my argument. You will also find there is no need to bring them up again later, as my answers will be made implicitly clear in the arguments that are forthcoming.

Debate is two way, give and take. You presented your lengty thesis on your POV and now you're moaning about my response to it. What do you mean, you haven't even offered your argument?


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by Grizz, posted 04-25-2008 8:00 PM Grizz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Grizz, posted 04-25-2008 9:04 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 43 of 560 (464488)
04-25-2008 9:23 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Grizz
04-23-2008 6:55 PM


Plausables and Probables
Grizz writes:

Although we often use the word history as a synonym for past events, History as a discipline is the attempt to use plausible inductive inferences in response to the question, "What really happened?" The defining term here is "plausible", not "possible." It is certainly possible to construct any number of inferences and scenarios, whether rational or not, that represents a view of the past. Possible does not imply likely, however, nor does it imply certain. Certain is the last thing the History of Antiquity will ever be, regardless of the plausibility of our conclusions.

The oldest manuscripts of the eye witnesses should be the most plausable. Much of your messages 38 to 40 were possibilities relative to the eye witness acounts. My citation of the prophetic scriptures of Isaiah, Psalms, etc were cited to lend plausibility/credibility to the eye witness accounts as per the oldest manuscripts of those accounts relative to the historical Jesus.

Furthermore, the messianic fulfillment of Jesus's prophecy on the Mt of Olives relative to the Gentile occupation of Jerusalem to become a reality soon and to be ended as and end times event which was largely fulfilled in the 1967 six day war, clearly as prophesied in Luke 21:24 lends greatly to the plausibility/credibility that the Jesus who uttered this prophecy was indeed historical.

When attempting to offer plausible inferences regarding the Historical Jesus, I am doing so by appealing to the implicit skepticism which is at the heart of the historical method. In order to reconstruct the past with a necessary degree of objectivity, the Historian must approach any document or source with a degree of initial skepticism. Even when the veracity of a source has been accepted, one still needs to approach the claims contained therein with a questioning mind.

But you're skeptical thesis on this amounted to mostly possibilities from one who has a secularist agenda and from one far removed from the eye witnesses of the historical Jesus's times. I'm not sure how objective your POV is, given that you appear to be reluctant to include all of the evidence supportive to the historical Jesus.

Furthermore, you appear to show hostility to the data which those of us who hold to the eye witness accounts as the most plausable try to introduce into the discussion.

It doesn't matter whether the claim is 'Washington Crossed the Potomac, or 'Moses parted the red sea', it is part of the job description of a Historian to be a skeptic. If you are not a skeptic, you are not doing your job.

But then there comes the skeptical generation who regard political correctness above factuality as we find happening in the history classes of our times. As a result it can be documented that history students today know little about the historical George Washington and other founders of the Republic and much of which they do get can be proven to be false. The same applies relative to the Jesus skeptics to the point that the Historical Jesus Book is outlawed in the schools.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Grizz, posted 04-23-2008 6:55 PM Grizz has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Grizz, posted 04-27-2008 12:08 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 45 of 560 (464514)
04-26-2008 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by PaulK
04-26-2008 3:13 AM


Re: Blind Assertions
PaulK, all I can suggest is that when you encounter problematic input by me that you cease from your habit of bringing them up in the threads but take them to the proper forum and thread for complaints so as for admins to address.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2008 3:13 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2008 11:04 AM Buzsaw has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019