I don't have time to read online books. (I have enough of my own backlog of hardcopies.) If you have a point to make, make it as succinctly as you can.

If you don't read other books Boxcar, you'll never get exposed to new ideas...surely you are not one of those narrow minded persons who get all of their viewpoints from one source, are you....?

If you can't distill your online books into succinct, coherent points in a forum like this, you're wasting your time here. If I stopped to read everything under the sun -- all alternative views -- I would never get a chance to study things of genuine interest to me.

Well, duh! Do I really have to spell it out for you? Do you really have to be told that stuff written centuries after the alleged event by authors who do not identify their sources are in no position to attest to the historicity of the event? Do you really expect me to come down to your level of gullibility?

Ok. I'll spell it out for you.

• Scripture proves nothing.
• Writings by authors who do not identify their sources, or who cite only sources whose existence cannot be verified, prove nothing.
• Writings by authors who have a vested interested in perpetuating the myth prove nothing.

You are trying to shift the burden of proof. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The alleged resurrection is a super-extraordinary event and requires super-extraordinary evidence. Your evidence, if you can call it that, is tenuous and flimsy.

You made the claim. You prove it. You come up with evidence that is convincing.


You want "best attested?" Here are a few candidates.

• The reign of Ramses II.
• The conquests of Alexander the Great.
• The measurement of the size of the earth by Eratosthenes.
• The Second Servile War (i.e., the Spartacus Revolt).
• The conquests of Julius Caesar.
• The assassination of Julius Caesar.

From The Irish Origins of Civilization

"1.Judeo-Christianity is an adulterated form of Druidism and Amenism
2. Atonism is the basis for the monotheistic elements of Judeo-Christian Theology
3. Members of the Flavian dynasty of Rome worked closely with leading Jews (Atonists) to establish the Christian religion
4. The so called "jews" who worked alongside the Roman nobility, and who directed their operations, were Atonists. Specifically, they were the leaders of the Order of Melchizedek (Akhenaton)
5. The founder of Atonism was Pharoah Akhenaten (Amenhotep IV). He appears in the Old Testament as Moses
6. Akhenaten's Atonists were members of the Hyksos dynasty of kings and princes..."

Yeah, you do because you are so duplicitous, as you have just proved again. Always moving the goalposts.


Again, Jesus' existence is accepted by most scholars in this world. Some eyewitnesses to his life, death, burial and resurrection actually wrote parts of the NT -- John and Peter. Luke traveled with Paul and had the eyewitness accounts of the apostles Paul met with -- plus other eyewitnesses. Paul also saw the risen Christ and he wrote at least seven epistles. It is also very likely that Matthew is the Jewish tax collector Levi who came to faith in Jesus. (It was very common in the ANE for a person to have two first names!) Mark was very good friends with Peter and undoubtedly drew very much of his material from the apostle, etc.

In short, Jesus' existence is extremely well attested to. It is no wonder that no ancient writer or historian ever disputed his existence. Not even the Christ-hating Jews in the Babylonian Talmud denied his existence. And if anyone didn't want Jesus to exist, it would have been them!

Now...do you actually have a point of substance to make about your talking points above?

Each one is already a significant point of substance...or don't you understand this...?

Nothing having anything to do with religion has a significant point of substance.

And so you waste your time in this thread for what reason, specifically? Why not seek important topics out that might provide you with an opportunity to actually make a point of substance for once in your life?

No...not really. I'm not biting at the bait.

[YT="Donall and Conall"]0d4FHHf00pY[/YT]

Why don't you?

The gospels of the NT were all written anonymously, and nothing in them identifies, in ANY way, who the authors were...or with which other "gospel authors" these anonymous writers "associated".

Oddly enough...the author of the "Gospel of Thomas" fully identifies himself in the text as "Thomas O Didymos", who was "Doubting" Thomas...an acknowledged disciple of Jesus. But that gospel, although written by an authentic Jesus disciple, did not please the Church...so, it was despised and subsequently rejected. As a result, the "anonymous gospels" were accepted as "fact"...while the text written by the legitimate disciple was called "heretical"...and thrown away. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction. :faint:

now that was funny.