Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha8207
If you have a problem with folks writing about history but that weren't actually there for the events...that's fine.
Scratch everything you think you know but that you didn't actually see from your memory.
Civil war, hearsay. WWI, inaccurate. Life of George Washington, myth.
All I ask anyone to do, and I've done it MULTIPLE times although not in this thread, is approach ALL matters using the same microscope.
Let me just ask you this stretch, since this will help with the topic, do you believe that there was a man named Jesus, who upset the religious leaders of His day, and caused quite a stir among His people?
|
First, I did not say that I had a problem with people writing history after the fact. This happens all the time.
But, one must ALWAYS examine the sources, whether contemporary or subsequent. Each has its own strengths and weaknesses; none can simply be taken at direct face value. All I am suggesting is that we discuss Flavius Josephus. Or any of the other sources listed, but Josephus is a good one.
Now, as far as your statement that nothing not directly observed can be trusted, this is patently silly. There is plenty of physical evidence for the civil war, WWI, GW, etc. Battlefields with bullets. Many, many, many independantly written diaries, letters, memoirs and newspaper accounts. Photos (or daguerrotypes (sp??)). Old forts. DNA evidence. Advances in technology related to warfare. Skewed birth and death patterns. Tombstones. I could go on, but I think you get the point. If not, choose one thing, and I will elaborate.
I am willing to approach all matters using the same microscope. Absolutely and without a doubt. No problemo there. The problem is that there is really no physical evidence for the existence of JC, contemporary sources are non-existent, subsequent sources sparse, and of dubious value. Therefore, I doubt it.
To answer your question directy as to whether I believe that there was a man named Jesus....
I am not sure. I suspect that there probably was, but there simply is no definitive proof. And much of the biblical narrative simply does not match other, proven, verifiable sources. As a result, I am forced to think that much of the gospel stories are just that, stories.