on another blog, I discussed with an atheist, who first squeezed out of the "under Most historical evidence has Jesus-figure never existed as a historical figure ".
I explained that what a historical person or, what historical fact than it was about, is it unreasonable to most historical evidence to substantiate that particular person or the fact. Rather than repeat my example, I take another. Cena Trimalchionis is a novel. Or rather, the novel Satyricon, Cena Trimalchionis is just the most famous kapitlet.Den billed with it gifvetvis nothing her action. But it occupies the new rich party people, slaves and freedmen, men with erectile dysfunction and the worship of Priapus to cure them were well-known phenomenon. So Cena Trimalchionis billed nothing that there were Christians or that Jesus existed. But Buffy coats - what I know so far - not that Bertrand Russell was or that Obama is fine or that Angela Merkel is. Just to vampires and teenage problems were known at the beginning of 21 first century and is sometimes associated. So it is always with "the most historical sources." Every classify certain things, nothing else. If every single thing silence most sources.
Come as Bertrand Russell's famous thékanna of speech.
Outside Saturn ring hovers a thékanna in orbit that we have no view, therefore, that it is too far away. - "Of course nothing will!" - "Prove it!"
Now Russell's objection would be a nice parody of the argument of an agnostic who recognizes no ngt evidence that God is fine, just as Russell did, and in which case that nothing is even willing to consider a eventuel god would be with Jesus or the miracles to be done, but still nothing to exclude that starvation may be a god anyway. But Russell's tea-pot, I say 'the proof of the tea-pot, or give you ". And if Russell (or rather ngn pupil or disciple's disciple, for he was haunted, he would hardly repeat the mistake he ended up in hell for ghosts-witnesses) answer anything about that I should treat my God, or give me, I reply: fain it!
My argument is nothing that an elephant can be found in the basement even if no one has seen it or no one heard it or no one felt its legs or trunk or der-operate in the basement. My argument is that "the elephant in the basement" actually faced. But gifgvetvis not of "the majority of historical sources", since such universelt penetration is incredible.
I. ofs is true that Jesus faced in most historical sources written in the Vest since he lived on earth, by reference to the reference, but then tell us already about Jesus as a "religious figure in the distant past ', somewhat as atheist probably considers may be fiction in which case that. We speak of historical evidence about Jesus' historical figure in the recent past. "The recent past may be limited to the first century. After St. John, Ascension, no one had lived as a contemporary of Jesus. What I have is that the annals of time there - several of the independent sources that he found, no source to the contrary, and lots of sources that simply leave this derhän. As Cena Trimalchionis.
Cena Trimalchionis is an evidence that the Satyricon was a writer. We have a number of sources, I have Inganäs idea which, to call the writer Petronius. Tacitus as historians billed to Petronius existed in a master elegantiarum to Nero. And Nero billed by its förfölgelse against Christians - also of the historian Tacitus (see his Annales XV.44. That Christian - evt. Under torture, that says nothing - declared themselves as * accused of Nero as the instigator of Rome's fire and tortured deom in every way *) - that at that time, approximately 30 years after Jesus' death and resurrection, there were Christians. And they förfölgdes after Rome's fire at imperial decree.
How many sects do you feel about myself as having hyfsadt many members now, which go back to the person who died 30 years ago, according to what they say themselves, and yet there were no further back than ten years ago and whose founder 30 years ago is pure invention? No, just that!
Among the Christians who förfölgdes then, there were two college to Petronius, and Tacitus, that two writers. St. Peter and St. Paul. They were also entitled prominent in the sect. Well, they were now more college to Petronius, that is a novelist, or Tacitus, that is history-clerk? Actually, not quite either one or the other. Rather, to another well documented contemporary writers, Seneca, his Epistulae Morales. The skrefvo namely on how we should live. On the contrary, they took quite often statements of a certain Jesus, as Peter himself has seen udner jordelifvet and that Paul was speaking after the resurrection.
So, if Jesus nothing available, I have St. Peter and St. Paul have been, or are they fiction? And if they now would be a fiction from a much more recent Christian, how could Tacitus say that Christians förfölgdes of fomenting Rome's fire?
Now Tacitus mentions no St. Peter and St. Paul. It does, on the contrary St. Irenaeus. And he mentions that St. Peter was a disciple of Jesus, but that St. John was also there. And he is known as a disciple of St. Polycarpus who was known as a disciple of John who was Jesus. So if Jesus was an invention, how is it with Peter and John, authors who claim to have witnessed the life's of our Lord?
If the non-existence, why fine as a collection of a Revelation, a lefnadsskildring of Jesus (as utelemnar childhood), and three letters of Christian conduct tillskrifna John, and two letters tillskrifna Peter? If they existed, but no Jesus, why they died when its apparently common fabrications?
St. Paul mentioned his fine St. Luke - the author of The Gospel (lifsbeskrifning of Jesus, with bits of childhood) and a book about what happened after Jesus ascended to heaven. St. Paul himself wrote fourteen letters. But if Luke found on the der Paul-who penned when the fourteen letters?
And, in addition to Peter, Paul and John all have written that they met Jesus more than once - St. Paul of the revelations after the ascension, but he writes about those who saw him after the resurrection, after having been the disciples before the crucifixion, the other two write out to have been with him before the crucifixion - and in addition to the efterlemnat texts that no one then seems to have taken for pleasure reading in the style of Satyricon have they been mentioned by a groupe of other writers, of which I already mentioned the St. Irenaeus. He also mentions that the Church of Rome - altså sect lokalafdelning in the imperial capital, if you want to be snide - had successors Peter and Paul: Linus, Cletus, Clement, and nine to up to the time when he writes this. All of them killed by kristendomsförfölgande State. And he mentions two other depictions of Jesus' life, along with John and Luke: Luke will be Mark and the Mark Matthaeus. And this St. Mark is also known from other places, like the first bsikopen of Alexandria in Egypt. Yes, Bishop was - so it was over - the default title of a manager of a local or regional detachment of "Christians".
So, if Russell would now wanted to be compared Jesus lefnad with its famous tea-pot outside Saturn's orbit, whose only evidence no is an evidence, but only slightly Russell hatched out in the debate, it would probably be problematic. If he asked me or any other ngn katholik orthodox or how we knew that Jesus lived, was this other person (I am myself fior young to have spoken to Russell) responded the same as I now do:
A) The three synoptic Gospels and their authors, Matthaeus, Mark, Luke, and by Peter, Paul, and indirect through their martyrdom during Nero, bekräftadt of Tacitus;
B) By John, by Polycarpus, by Papias, by Ignatius of Antioch, by Clement, by receiving Churches of Clement and Ignatius letters, and;
C) by St. Irenaeus of Lyon, and the twelve successor of Peter and Paul in Rome as he lists.
Jefviga? Maybe if Jesus divine. Hardly about their mutual relationships, and feeling the of each other. You know that Russell found that Dawkins talked about him, perhaps met him. On the contrary, Dawkins may have been jefvig on afsaknaden of divinity in the universe and that Russell would have been right about that.
The list of the so-called Apostolic Fathers, I enumerated in part, B, partly in C, felt the Catholic Church always. Similarly, the first Protestants, who vividly 1400 years in arrears was trying to make them Protestants. After two hundred years of debate, as omvexlade with religious war, and that the Protestants had a tendency to no win, Protestants began to think it was best to forget about Clemens and Polycarpus in everyday speech. And then began the Protestant England, but also Bayle losing the Christian faith. , What is the reason that Russell had no knowledge of this, he was, as the example of tea-kettle proves Englishman. Wondering why Gramsci, he was a communist and officially atheist, nothing tried by an Italian espresso maker? Perhaps to Rome, St. Peter, St. Paul, Linus, Cletus, Clemens and the others in Clubb were a little too close?
Hans-Georg Lundahl
The library Georges Pompidou
Sta Bernadette of Lourdes' days
18-II-2011
"Atheism is true, for the likes sophisticated Englishmen.
Englishmen are sophisticated, the sophisticated Englishmen are atheist."
Type.
* Error in Wikipedia yesterday, and I was stressed, this is what Tacitus writes, in English:
I explained that what a historical person or, what historical fact than it was about, is it unreasonable to most historical evidence to substantiate that particular person or the fact. Rather than repeat my example, I take another. Cena Trimalchionis is a novel. Or rather, the novel Satyricon, Cena Trimalchionis is just the most famous kapitlet.Den billed with it gifvetvis nothing her action. But it occupies the new rich party people, slaves and freedmen, men with erectile dysfunction and the worship of Priapus to cure them were well-known phenomenon. So Cena Trimalchionis billed nothing that there were Christians or that Jesus existed. But Buffy coats - what I know so far - not that Bertrand Russell was or that Obama is fine or that Angela Merkel is. Just to vampires and teenage problems were known at the beginning of 21 first century and is sometimes associated. So it is always with "the most historical sources." Every classify certain things, nothing else. If every single thing silence most sources.
Come as Bertrand Russell's famous thékanna of speech.
Outside Saturn ring hovers a thékanna in orbit that we have no view, therefore, that it is too far away. - "Of course nothing will!" - "Prove it!"
Now Russell's objection would be a nice parody of the argument of an agnostic who recognizes no ngt evidence that God is fine, just as Russell did, and in which case that nothing is even willing to consider a eventuel god would be with Jesus or the miracles to be done, but still nothing to exclude that starvation may be a god anyway. But Russell's tea-pot, I say 'the proof of the tea-pot, or give you ". And if Russell (or rather ngn pupil or disciple's disciple, for he was haunted, he would hardly repeat the mistake he ended up in hell for ghosts-witnesses) answer anything about that I should treat my God, or give me, I reply: fain it!
My argument is nothing that an elephant can be found in the basement even if no one has seen it or no one heard it or no one felt its legs or trunk or der-operate in the basement. My argument is that "the elephant in the basement" actually faced. But gifgvetvis not of "the majority of historical sources", since such universelt penetration is incredible.
I. ofs is true that Jesus faced in most historical sources written in the Vest since he lived on earth, by reference to the reference, but then tell us already about Jesus as a "religious figure in the distant past ', somewhat as atheist probably considers may be fiction in which case that. We speak of historical evidence about Jesus' historical figure in the recent past. "The recent past may be limited to the first century. After St. John, Ascension, no one had lived as a contemporary of Jesus. What I have is that the annals of time there - several of the independent sources that he found, no source to the contrary, and lots of sources that simply leave this derhän. As Cena Trimalchionis.
Cena Trimalchionis is an evidence that the Satyricon was a writer. We have a number of sources, I have Inganäs idea which, to call the writer Petronius. Tacitus as historians billed to Petronius existed in a master elegantiarum to Nero. And Nero billed by its förfölgelse against Christians - also of the historian Tacitus (see his Annales XV.44. That Christian
How many sects do you feel about myself as having hyfsadt many members now, which go back to the person who died 30 years ago, according to what they say themselves, and yet there were no further back than ten years ago and whose founder 30 years ago is pure invention? No, just that!
Among the Christians who förfölgdes then, there were two college to Petronius, and Tacitus, that two writers. St. Peter and St. Paul. They were also entitled prominent in the sect. Well, they were now more college to Petronius, that is a novelist, or Tacitus, that is history-clerk? Actually, not quite either one or the other. Rather, to another well documented contemporary writers, Seneca, his Epistulae Morales. The skrefvo namely on how we should live. On the contrary, they took quite often statements of a certain Jesus, as Peter himself has seen udner jordelifvet and that Paul was speaking after the resurrection.
So, if Jesus nothing available, I have St. Peter and St. Paul have been, or are they fiction? And if they now would be a fiction from a much more recent Christian, how could Tacitus say that Christians förfölgdes of fomenting Rome's fire?
Now Tacitus mentions no St. Peter and St. Paul. It does, on the contrary St. Irenaeus. And he mentions that St. Peter was a disciple of Jesus, but that St. John was also there. And he is known as a disciple of St. Polycarpus who was known as a disciple of John who was Jesus. So if Jesus was an invention, how is it with Peter and John, authors who claim to have witnessed the life's of our Lord?
If the non-existence, why fine as a collection of a Revelation, a lefnadsskildring of Jesus (as utelemnar childhood), and three letters of Christian conduct tillskrifna John, and two letters tillskrifna Peter? If they existed, but no Jesus, why they died when its apparently common fabrications?
St. Paul mentioned his fine St. Luke - the author of The Gospel (lifsbeskrifning of Jesus, with bits of childhood) and a book about what happened after Jesus ascended to heaven. St. Paul himself wrote fourteen letters. But if Luke found on the der Paul-who penned when the fourteen letters?
And, in addition to Peter, Paul and John all have written that they met Jesus more than once - St. Paul of the revelations after the ascension, but he writes about those who saw him after the resurrection, after having been the disciples before the crucifixion, the other two write out to have been with him before the crucifixion - and in addition to the efterlemnat texts that no one then seems to have taken for pleasure reading in the style of Satyricon have they been mentioned by a groupe of other writers, of which I already mentioned the St. Irenaeus. He also mentions that the Church of Rome - altså sect lokalafdelning in the imperial capital, if you want to be snide - had successors Peter and Paul: Linus, Cletus, Clement, and nine to up to the time when he writes this. All of them killed by kristendomsförfölgande State. And he mentions two other depictions of Jesus' life, along with John and Luke: Luke will be Mark and the Mark Matthaeus. And this St. Mark is also known from other places, like the first bsikopen of Alexandria in Egypt. Yes, Bishop was - so it was over - the default title of a manager of a local or regional detachment of "Christians".
So, if Russell would now wanted to be compared Jesus lefnad with its famous tea-pot outside Saturn's orbit, whose only evidence no is an evidence, but only slightly Russell hatched out in the debate, it would probably be problematic. If he asked me or any other ngn katholik orthodox or how we knew that Jesus lived, was this other person (I am myself fior young to have spoken to Russell) responded the same as I now do:
A) The three synoptic Gospels and their authors, Matthaeus, Mark, Luke, and by Peter, Paul, and indirect through their martyrdom during Nero, bekräftadt of Tacitus;
B) By John, by Polycarpus, by Papias, by Ignatius of Antioch, by Clement, by receiving Churches of Clement and Ignatius letters, and;
C) by St. Irenaeus of Lyon, and the twelve successor of Peter and Paul in Rome as he lists.
Jefviga? Maybe if Jesus divine. Hardly about their mutual relationships, and feeling the of each other. You know that Russell found that Dawkins talked about him, perhaps met him. On the contrary, Dawkins may have been jefvig on afsaknaden of divinity in the universe and that Russell would have been right about that.
The list of the so-called Apostolic Fathers, I enumerated in part, B, partly in C, felt the Catholic Church always. Similarly, the first Protestants, who vividly 1400 years in arrears was trying to make them Protestants. After two hundred years of debate, as omvexlade with religious war, and that the Protestants had a tendency to no win, Protestants began to think it was best to forget about Clemens and Polycarpus in everyday speech. And then began the Protestant England, but also Bayle losing the Christian faith. , What is the reason that Russell had no knowledge of this, he was, as the example of tea-kettle proves Englishman. Wondering why Gramsci, he was a communist and officially atheist, nothing tried by an Italian espresso maker? Perhaps to Rome, St. Peter, St. Paul, Linus, Cletus, Clemens and the others in Clubb were a little too close?
Hans-Georg Lundahl
The library Georges Pompidou
Sta Bernadette of Lourdes' days
18-II-2011
"Atheism is true, for the likes sophisticated Englishmen.
Englishmen are sophisticated, the sophisticated Englishmen are atheist."
Type.
* Error in Wikipedia yesterday, and I was stressed, this is what Tacitus writes, in English:
Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the goods, and recourse was begged To The Sibylline books, by the direction Of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matron, first, into the Capitol, hadeeth on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.- Källa: Tacitus Annales, XV , scrolla ned rätt långt!
0 comments:
Post a Comment