Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (230409)	4/23/2005 10:27:14 AM
From: SilentZ	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573207

>Most of those who deny Jesus' existence place a very high standard on the proof of his existence, much higher than, say, the proof that any of the Roman Caesars ever existed. All we're asking for is ONE piece of contemporary evidence, one historian or writer who was alive at the time he was, one official record... the Romans did keep official records of their Caesars. >To me, that's more objective than those who feel a need to deny Jesus' very existence, perhaps IMO because they're either desperate or they just want to stick it to those "Jesus freaks." I have no need to deny it... I'm looking to reconfirm it. History is important to me. -Z

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (230409)	4/23/2005 3:17:08 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573207

Ted, let me put it this way. Most of those who deny Jesus' existence place a very high standard on the proof of his existence, much higher than, say, the proof that any of the Roman Caesars ever existed. The only justification for such a double standard is formed on the basis of this statement, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." Ten, I don't think asking for some evidence to prove he existed is placing a high standard of proof on his life nor is it "extraordinary" in any way. Up until two weeks ago, I believed all the stuff about what happened in Jesus's life....even to some degree, the miracles he performed. Suddenly, I am told not only are those miracles in jeopardy but the actual person may well be a figment of someone's imagination. You can understand why I might feel some shock and asking for some legitimate proof. The only problem is that these particular skeptics can't separate the extraordinary claim of Jesus' Lordship from the mundane claim that Jesus existed as a real human being. Most non-believers can, which is why they have no trouble believing that Jesus existed, even if they don't believe he really is the son of God. To me, that's more objective than those who feel a need to deny Jesus' very existence, perhaps IMO because they're either desperate or they just want to stick it to those "Jesus freaks." They don't feel the need to deny his very existence but rather there is simply no evidence that he existed at all. That's huge. Can you understand what that might mean to some people who have had some doubts? In fact, I suspect the people who have come up with this extraordinary turn of events want desperately to believe he did exist. Most people would....the story of Jesus helps validate what we are doing on this planet. His teachings give humanity some purpose. His life and death as alleged also suggest that we do not become just fertilizer when we die. I suspect the people who are disputing his existence care very much about this issue. I suspect they are hoping someone proves them wrong. After all, if you don't care about some one or some thing, why go through all that work? Can you imagine the amount of research and digging that had to be done to able to make such significant statements with any certainty? BTW being right in this argument is not much of a win. I suspect that's why it's always simmered on the back burner. ted