OOBDude did a fine job, it must be said, in basically
butchering the "Josephus" account referencing Jesus
(In Don's "Jesus' legitimacy: A reply to Dude" thread.)
Don has made considerable use of the Josephus account
in his defense of the historical accuracy of the Gospels.
Don, here is your task now. They say that the best
defense, is a good offense. But it appears that you
have taken a cannonball below the waterline, and it
is time to get the bailing crews into action!
You must give a defense, of the validity of Eusebius
(Roman Church Historian, 264-340 A.D.) as an
honest and impartial source. (This is to stave off
the assertion that Eusebius fraudulently inserted
his own "commentary" into the Josephus writings.)
Are you up to the task???

B-man

Brendan,

You and Dude miss the two key points. (1) Josephus's allusion to james as "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ" disparages Jesus and would not have been invented by a Christian apologist.  It is almost univerally accepted as genuine by scholars.  Josephus and James lived in Jerusalem at the same time.  This in intself is convincing evidence that Jesus at least existed.

(2) Texts of Jssephus circulated in different translations, some of which escaped any Christian tampering.   The Arabic version is a case in point.   It lacks the implication that Josephus believed in the miracles and resurrection of Jesus that are proclaimed by Jesus' disciples.  So the 2nd fuller reference to Jesus in Josephus is essentially genuine.  That is the scholarly consensus!

As for taking the offensive, I havenot even started yet.  So far, I've just established that Dude himself is incapable of refuting ANY of my basic points.

Don

Brendan,

You and Dude miss the two key points. (1) Josephus's allusion to james as "the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ" disparages Jesus and would not have been invented by a Christian apologist.  It is almost univerally accepted as genuine by scholars.  Josephus and James lived in Jerusalem at the same time.  This in intself is convincing evidence that Jesus at least existed.

(2) Texts of Jssephus circulated in different translations, some of which escaped any Christian tampering.   The Arabic version is a case in point.   It lacks the implication that Josephus believed in the miracles and resurrection of Jesus that are proclaimed by Jesus' disciples.  So the 2nd fuller reference to Jesus in Josephus is essentially genuine.  That is the scholarly consensus!

As for taking the offensive, I havenot even started yet.  So far, I've just established that Dude himself is incapable of refuting ANY of my basic points.

Don
*****************
The above notwithstanding,
You still must now vindicate Eusebius as a paragon of honesty,
reliability, and academic integrity, Don. And you KNOW why.
It is because Eusebius is rightly called (by the Church) the "Father of
History." If Eusebius is shown to have been NOT beyond reproach
as a historian, then we must cast a doubtful eye on ALL ancient documents bearing reference to Jesus which had EVEN THE POSSIBILITY of passing through his hands.
Can we be sure they were not tampered with? Indeed, in such
event, can we even be sure that the BIBLE ITSELF was not "cut
and edited" to the tastes of the all-powerful "Historian of Orthodoxy?"
Such is the nature of your task. At this point... well, if you want to be imagined by Dude (and someone else perhaps) WITHOUT a big pair of red clown shoes and a rubber nose, you will at least make the honest effort to undertake said task. The situation has come down to that, my friend...

B-man

B-man,

Nonsense!  First, Eusebius has nothing to do  with the transmission of the biblical text.  Second, church historians are very familiar with his tendency (like Acharya) to recast history in the terms that ere relevant to his day.  For example, he traces the structure of the Vatholic herarchy of his day back to the time of Peter.  This is an understanble error, but one easily corrected by independent sources.   Third, with respect to Josephus, it is very possible that Eusebius was fooled by a contemporary scribe from whom he ultimately derived his text. I think I proved that there is significant non0Christian testimony for Jesus' existence in the first century.  But that is only the beginning of the unimpeachable case that cah be made fur His existence.


By the way, I could have made a dramatically more potent case for first century proof of Jesus' existeence from pagan sources.  But I have concluded that some of the most impressive evidence that would "snow" this board's non-specialists is fraudulent.   So I apply the same skeptical approach I adopt for New Age claims to early Christian tradition.  Stay tuned for my positive case for Jesus' existence and a more thorough critique of Acharya and her puppet, Dude.  :-)

Don

Quote:

Stay tuned for my positive case and a more thorough critique of Acharya and her puppet, Dude.

Your going to critique me?  Like, my life and who I am?  I thought this debate was about Jesus.  Wait, do you think I'm Jesus?  Oh you must think I'm Jesus.  Nah, I'm not Jesus.  I'm not Acharya's puppet, either.  But I'd rather be a puppet of a nonbiased reasonable person such as her than a puppet of a 2000 year old group of people who wrote a bunch of fairy tales with their fingers crossed hoping some people who were blind to their own greatness would blindly follow whatever garbage they said and wrote.  

[Dude:] "Your going to critique me?  Like, my life and who I am?...Oh you must think I'm Jesus."
______
Come to think of it, you do have a New Age messianic complex. You obviously are unfamiliar with standard academic parlance: to criiique A is to express criticisms of A's position on an academic issue in dispute.

[Dude:] "I'm not Acharya's puppet, either."
______________________________________

I forgot.  You don't notice subtlties like smilies.   So you can joke about Sweden-"barf" and call him a "retard," but I can't joke about your issues.  Sorrrrrry!  If you're not her puppet, then why spam all that crap from her website?  Instead, assimilate it, express it in your own words, check the original ancient sources, and let's have a civil discussion.   As it is, I have thoroughly refuted your earlier quotes from her and, over an extended period of time, will deal with your new spamming from her site.  I do have a life, you know.  I'm still looking for a direct engagement with ACTUAL relevant ancient sources from you.
 
[Dude:] "But I'd rather be a puppet of a nonbiased reasonable person such as her than a puppet of a 2000 year old group of people who wrote a bunch of fairy tales with their fingers crossed hoping some people who were blind to their own greatness would blindly follow whatever GARBAGE they said and wrote."
______________________________________________________

Acharya unbiased?  Her bias places her firmly in the category of New Age kook in the eyes of modern critical scholarship.  I respect the scholarship of agnostics if they have a firm grasp of the relevant texts.  As I shall continue to show, she obviously does not.   You imply that I'm a puppet.  I'm very well read in New Age and paranormal literature; wheras you are practically a biblical and historical illiterate.  That 's why you need to spam so much.  By the way, when I refer to the scholarly consensus, I know what I'm talking about.  Harvard teaches mainstream secular scholarship and I've attended the annual scholarly meetings of the American Academy of Religion for many years.  I'm going to take my sweet time, dismantling your rambling pastings.  I will also continue to remind you of your failure to address my key points until you do.  See keep fieeding me more amunition.  

You started this; so enjoy!
Don      

Don

I congradulate you on having a strong basis for your beliefs.  I understand that having your level of education on the topic of religion and the bible has accessed you to more than enough pieces of evidence which back up your beliefs.  Please understand that I only have a few engineering classes under my belt so far, and being a new art student, I probably will never be able to fullfill your requests for siting ancient documents.  I also will probably never gain the amount of knowledge you have for the Bible and Christianity in general.  I have decided that I have been backtracked by this topic from my main purpose on this site.  Nothing can be gained by these Jesus threads by anyone.  The evidence you bring up can be refuted by scholars just as easily as you refute the evidence of scholars on the opposite side of this debate.  Therefore, it is up to the individual to decide which side is right, and I have obviously made my mind up before even starting this thread.  My OBEs this morning and the intensely spiritual learning experience I just underwent during an altered state this evening made me connect once again with my true reason for being on this board and my goal in this life.  Hence, I no further need to, or wish to continue on with this topic.  Feel free to lay your evidence out if you must, however I have risen above and beyond this pointless squabbling and will no longer contribute to it.  Good luck, tell Jesus I said What Up!

Don old boy...
You claim that the materials on Acharya's website (some pretty
good stuff, I might add... I went and read most of it, will go back
and finish what's left later) is "crap"?
If so, why is it that... an ancient, dusty, musty, poorly organized, foggy
old book dodgily based on the oral traditions of the ancient Ibirii... people who were SO ignorant, they'd wipe themselves after a
bowel movement with their bare hands, and then EAT with those
same bare hands after WIPING THEM ON THE GROUND (water
being to scarce to "waste" for hand-washing!) - people who were
SO PRIMITIVE, they were barely more advanced than NEANDERTHAL
MEN... people to whom GOAT-HERDING was high culture... who would kill non-combatants in war by "Divine Command", but by SAME "Divine" order save the pre-pubescent girls for their "Uncle DiddlyFingers" pedophilic jollies... why is it that this ridiculous, almost unreadable book they created is NOT crap, but Acharya's work IS???????????
Tell me THAT!

B-man

B-man,

As you know, I have repeatedly sought a foundaton for dialogue with your own spiritual quest.  But you never admit to having one. Still, your continued presence on an afterlife site raises questions: Why are you here?  What help do you hope to find on this board?  Ostensibly, you seem to be here only to have one of us tell you what you want to hear--that you can enter painless annihilation after death.   But posters here try in their own way to respond on the basis of paranormal evidence and experience and have been unable to offer you the self-destructive assurance you seek.  So why do you remain here?  Matthew has perceptively observed that your continued presence is an unconscious cry for help.  I agree.  But only the help that leads to a life-changing spiritual experience would be meaningul for you, and you are not yet open to such experiences.  So the next best thing is to engage you in dialogue over experience-based books about the afterlife that might open your mind to spiritual experiences.   But you refuse to read any afterlife book, whether Christian or non-Christian.  Sometimes you make intelligent comments about the relevant issues and also ask intelligent questions.   So why won't you humor us and actually read a topic-related book of your choosing?  You could critique it and we could respond.  Perhaps that way, you  might make spiritual progress or at least gain closure in confirming your materialist perspective.   Why is your ostrich role your only animal model?  Take your head out of the materialistic sand and see if corisosity really does kill the cat.   What do you have to lose?    Failing that, at least read the paranormal evidence described in my thread on ADCs vs. Memory Loss.

Don

B-man,

As you know, I have repeatedly sought a foundaton for dialogue with your own spiritual quest.  But you never admit to having one. Still, your continued presence on an afterlife site raises questions: Why are you here?  What help do you hope to find on this board?  Ostensibly, you seem to be here only to have one of us tell you what you want to hear--that you can enter painless annihilation after death.   But posters here try in their own way to respond on the basis of paranormal evidence and experience and have been unable to offer you the self-destructive assurance you seek.  So why do you remain here?
*****************
2 Reasons, Don.
#1. I like reading about weird stuff, and talking to weird people, I'm
a pretty weird guy myself. Good enough?
#2. Maybe I WILL be able to find evidence here, that after-death consciousness (which has always given me the heebie-jeebies)
ISN'T the no-way-out, military draft situation... maybe there IS
a way out, and I can deduce it, even if nobody else here believes
it. This forum addresses an issue which has long been a thorn in my side. Since I didn't ask to be created, it makes me ANGRY that I might have been created for use as a torture-toy after I die. (Wouldn't that pi$$ YOU off, Don..?)
"Cry for help"? What sort of help might this be? What can you, or
Doc, or anybody else "do" for me? (Once upon a time, you might
have been right. But that was a long, long time ago, before it dawned on me that everybody else was just as clueless as I am, really... it's just that a lot of them have fooled themselves into thinking that they have "The Answers.") So I guess if you want to know why I'm here, just look at my answers above (especially answer #1.)

B-man

P.S. What do you MEAN by "New Age", anyway??? You
seem to have contempt for anything which isn't A. Abrahamic
and B. traditional...
Do you think that because something has been believed
in for a thousand years, makes it more valid? Bullsh*t is
bullsh*t, whether it is fresh and steaming, or dried-up,
crumbly, and fossilized...
And all this in an era of history when we are probably
going to lose the entire Enlightenment to guess what...
ABRAHAMIC FUNDAMENTALIST REVISIONISM.
Maybe you'll get a nice post with the Thought Police around
2015 A.D. or so, Don. You've definitely got the mindset...

Brendan,

OK, your offered an answer--a vague one, but still an answer  But you ignored my other question: Why won't you read a book of your choosing about afterlife evidence and then discuss it here?   Expanding your reading horizons just might alter your priorities and desires.  For you, I would suggest a non-Christian book like David Fontana's "Is There an Afterlife?  A Comprehensive Overview of the Evidence."  No afterlife book has more "weird stuff" experienced by "weird people."  So this is a book that satisfies your criterion.

Why a non-Christian book?  Because you have clearly been badly disillusioned by your youthful encounters with Fundamentalist Christian churches.   Still, you give the impression that the Fundamentalist model is the most probable afterlife scenario.   So why not explore non-Christian alternatives that lack associations with your psychological baggage?  

You remind me of Clyde, the huband of the music director of a church I used to pastor.  Clyde was a nice guy who took our youth out on fun activities like model airplane flying.  But he would never atttend our church with his wife.  Why not?  Because in the past Clyde had been a member of a very legalistic Fundamentalist church.  He developed a drinking problem and his church was more judgmental than compassionate in their reaction to his problem.  He knew very well that my church was completely accepting of people, despite their past problems.   Still, any church reminded Clyde of his bitter experience with that church.

His was the only church that refused to participate with the other area churches in our joint Lenten and Thanksgiving services.  The services were always followed by a free feast in which half the town got to know each other and have a fun time of fellowship.   We told Clyde's church that they could stand up and say anything they wished, including explaining why they doubted we were "saved," but still they declined.  They didn't want to sit on the same platform as godless liberals like myself and the lcoal Catholic priest.  

Don

This board is here for people (intelligent people) to talk with other (Intelligent people) about a very valuable and interesting subject.

I'm sorry for any hostility that I may have set in motion with my previous posts, but it is getting pretty annoying to keep seeing these Jesus posts pop up on this forum.

Don I am 100% sure that the bible is Nonsense.

I consider myself pretty intelligent I have an IQ of 162 which seems to get higher everytime I take a test and I surround myself with other intelligent people whenever I can.

That is why I love this board!!

It is a wonderful mix of Idiots, people who can't give up old (Damaging) traditions and people like Myself and Dude AND TIM!!

Now I am not calling you an idiot  ;)

But the reason me and Dude can't fight you word for word is because all you are going to do is quote the bible.

I haven't taken the time to read the bible and never will.

therefore you will always SEEM to have the upper hand in an argument.

The reason I back out of arguments with you is because it is just immensely frustrating to have to hear more Bible nonsense or personal attacks, because someone thinks the thing you have pretty much based your whole life upon is nonsense.

Something that annoyed me about one of your posts was you asked chum why he was here?

Why are you here!!!

you are totally and completely enveloped in the Religious fairy tale of christianity.

Created by people who thought it would be a good idea to kill tons of people for the great reason of different gods.

Before I go into another one of my rants I am going to ask you something.

Really Don why are you here?

You reject pretty much everything on this board that doesn't relate to your religion.

I honestly think you are just here to convert weak minds into your beliefs.

Don if your going to be here at least try to broaden your horizons.

The constant verbal wars between u me dude and chum will get us nowhere and just waste precious time in a world where time is running out.

Lets try to work together!

Let us try to figure out this planet this UNIVERSE.

Fighting is the reason this world is so close to destruction!
Lets not let it happen to this board.

Truce?

Don is a true seeker, not a bible thumper.  He may be passionate about his beliefs in christianity, but in general many of the ideas Don expresses regarding the afterlife, the nature of heaven, the possibility of soul retrieval would in general be frowned upon by most literal bible thumping fundamentalists and many practicing christians.  

Don has put his considerable powers of reason to good use in studying near death experiences, mediums, after-death communications - all of which show an open mind to the universe, and not a strong desire to simply win debates.  He bought and uses the Gateway Hemisync CDs; again a decidedly nondenominational and liberal thing to do.  

There have been bible thumpers on this board before; Don is not one of them.  I know this by his posts and spirit.  He has pointed to various sources as admitting that nonchristians can be good souls who are found in heaven.  This is an idea seen in virtually no fundamentalist's view.  

Intelligence is a wonderful thing, but flaunting one's IQ or academic credentials are meaningless on a board like this if a person says the that they are sure that the bible is 100% nonsense, but they never have, and never will read it.  One then is discussing a book based on heresay, and assumption.  And when you assume, you make an "ass" of "u" and "me".  Don and I have both attended IV league universities; but this is the first time I have even mentioned it.  I would never mention my IQ/academic degrees as a reason to believe a point that I'm making.  

Don is a seeker of spiritual truth, whose methods are different than others.  He has been responsible for introducing several important books and sources to people on this board, including myself, who never would have known of these nonbiblical sources without him.  Many of these texts would be found in the "New Age" section of the bookstore.

I prefer discussion and experience to pure debate - unless the debate results in one or both sides learning useful information as a result of the conversation.  

M

Even when I try to be nice people just won't let me  :'(

Actually Don has bragged about his HARVARD credentials!

YOU just bragged about your Ivy league credentials!

Shall I as well?

Anyways i am not going to engage in an argument with you.

I offered a truce to Don.

An end to the arguments and here u are trying to start another ROFL  ::)

anyways....

I would love to speak to the truth seeker Don!

And yes I have read some of the bible a good bit of it.

what I meant was I don't Study it nor will I ever.

I'm holding back a rant lol.

Ra,

If you want peace, I am happy.  If you read my posts, you'll know that's my style.  I had read your post to Don, and it seemed more like a challenge (glad you held the true rant back), and you said something about him rejecting everything on the board that was not related to his religion (as I pointed out, untrue).

I do now see that after that, you offered an olive branch; if sincere, I am in too.  I have always felt that these exchanges were a distraction from most of the topics too.


Matthew

Yeah  :D

I'm really tired of arguments.

If we all just agree to disagree we will get to the truth alot faster.
It seems like the past couple of weeks have just been one big argument  :'(

Some was my fault though :-[

Matthew, first  thank you for your support.  I completed the following response to Ra before noticing both your two posts and Ra's.  I would revise my thread accordingly, except I detect a striking synchroncity.  I can't recall the "assume" pun you cite being mentioned on this board, though it has often been warranted.  Yet I seem to have composed my allusion to this pun at almost the same time as you did!  I suspect that some ESP is involved here.  Recently, I've been having the odd experience of commenting on other people's random thoughts without realizing it until they pointed it out to me.  Interesting!

[Ra:] "Don I am 100% sure that the bible is Nonsense... I haven't taken the time to read the bible and never will."
________________________________

Phew!  I initially assumed that your ideas get very lonely.  After all, you routinely inject profanity-laced rants into issues that call for a smidgeon of rigor to season one's penchant for bluster.  I usually suspect that 100% certainty about uninvestigated afterlife claims betrays the I.Q. of a geraniun. :-)   So I am heartened to hear you claim: "I have an IQ of 162 which seems to get higher everytime I take a test."

[Ra:] "Really Don why are you here?  You reject pretty much everything on this board that doesn't relate to your religion.  Don, if your going to be here at least try to broaden your horizons.
__________________________________________________________

Not so.  It's dangerous to "assume."  If you "ass/u/me, "  you make an "ass" of "u" and "me."   I have a substantial library of books on the paranomal, afterlife evidence, and New Age thought.  I'd wager I've read more books on these subjects than you have!  I paid about $550 for TMI's Gateway CDs and have often practiced with them.  I've probably had more paranormal experiences than anyone posting on this site and I have discussed many of these in MANY threads almost devoid of biblical allusions.  I've even experienced a few ADCs and recently started a thread on problems of coherence in paranormal evidence for the afterlife.

I am here to gain new insights from astral exploration and other afterlife evidence and to motivate myself to continue my own attempts at exploration.  As I've explained several times, I've experienced the hallmoarks of OBEs--floating near the ceiling, looking down on my body, trying to reconnect by draping my spirit body over my physical body, performing highly emotional retrievals, arguing with dream people that they are merely figments of my imagination, and even poking dream figures with my finger to determine if they feel real.  But after initally succumbing to wishful thinking, I reluctantly concluded that all my experiences are merely vivid lucid dreams that simulate OBEs.  So naturally I try to detect whether alleged OBEs reported here are just as bogus as mine and that concern makes the issue of verification loom large.  I don't dismiss OBE claims here simply on the basis of my own illusory experiences.  

[Ra:] "It is getting pretty annoying to keep seeing these Jesus posts pop up on this forum."
_____________

(1) I seldom start such threads.  Dude made the outrageous claim that he could prove that Jesus never existed.  So I challenged him to back his claim up and then replied to his material and will continue to do so.   Then Chumley, Recoverer, and Juditha started their own threads addressing the Jesus issue.  (2) Alleged retrievals are a primary focus of this site.  The earliest literary evidence for soul retrievals derives from the New Testament and the early church.  OBEs were even a routine part of Catholic worship around 200 AD.   Jesus is a major player in NDEs and even in Robert Monroe's OBEs and one of Bruce Moen's astral explorations.  So who are you to tell me what approach I must take towards afterlife evidence?  If a thread doesn't suit you, ignore it.  That's what I do all the time.

[Ra:] "I honestly think you are just here to convert weak minds into your beliefs."
_______________________________________________________________

I have explained why I am here.  But I admit that Christian witness is also a part of this motivation.  My arguments have exposed New Age bigotry here. As a result, some have PMed me to learn more about Jesus and the Christian life and are now radiant Christians.   I could care less whether you object to this.  In fact, I don't mind if you try to persuade posters to adopt your own spiritual perspective.  The attempt to persuade is part of an honest and open-ended discussion of spiritual issues.  If a perspective is not worth defending, it is not worth believing.  argue the way I do because this has proven effective.

Don

Quote:

The earliest literary evidence for soul retrievals derives from the New Testament and the early church.  OBEs were even a routine  Catholic worship around 200 AD part of

.

Could you expound on this a bit more?  Thanks! :)

Not going to argue with u lol

PEACE!!!

Don.  You are always so insistant on having others read books that go against what they belief to be truth, so they can see both sides of the picture and have a better understanding of the true situation.  So why don't you go ahead and pick up a copy of Suns of God.  You claim that many scholars have criticized her past work, Christ Conspiracy(Most of which are Christian apologists, go figure..)  You say that even Price criticized her work, but of course he took back his criticisms after he learned how closed minded he was being.  Anyway, this book has gotten almost all positive reviews and feedback, especially from scholars.  It provides elaborate evidence for her claims and covers many criticisms from Christ Conspiracy.  I have a feeling you are going to say somthing like... why would I read a book from a New Age kook.  Of course, you say this about anyone who has beliefs that oppose your conservative world view.  However, she has far more credentials than you(as well as an unbiased eye...most of those who negatively reviewed her work are very biased towards Christianity, and of course no biased minds have ever been able to see through their own religion to the truth, no matter how obvious the facts are, they find away to get around them..hmm sounds familiar).  You feel she is a disgrace simply because her work opposes your beliefs.  You also shaped your view of her from negative reviews you have read from people, who some of them never even read her work and reviewed it on strickly hearsay.  So if you do not want to be exposed as a hypocrit, read the facts presented by Suns of God.

Books Rock ;D

Dude,

Check out my latest post in my Reply to Dude thread.  i am a well-pyblished author and consider my qualifications and training far superior to Acharya's.  But only an idiot hides behind self-promoted credentials.  
And my works are relevant neither to the issues under discussion nor the afterlife.  

Again you make silly assmptions.  I have mostly recommended David Fontana's exhaustive "Is There an AFterlife?  A Comprehensive Overview of the Evidnece."  This book is decidedly New Age, but the best fairly exhaustive treatment in print.  Even Heward Storm's "My Descent into Death" has a decidedly New Age edge to it.  I've changed my mind about recommending Malachi martin's book for you.  I think "Hostage to the Devil" would freak you out and I don't want to do that to an impresionable young man like you.

Don  

How considerate.  Of course, if I hopped on your Christian bandwagon I'm sure you wouldn't be making degrading remarks such as that last one.  It's quite alright.  Whether you are hinting at me being a sissy or simply being an ignorant follower, it does not matter.  I refuse to stoop down to your level of subtle insulting.  I love you no matter what you say to me!  

Dude,

Lighten up!  I assume your promise to read Martin means nothing-- like your promise to abandon our combative mode?  Ha!  Well, your posturing won't save you.  but my future critiques of Dude/ Acharya will be a tad more friendly than I initially anticipated.  

Don

Hi Chumley I beleive in Jesus,he loves me and he loves us all and i have only read parts of the bible,but i learned all about jesus from Religious Instruction at school and i have never forgotten the stories of Jesus.

I have seen Jesus and we said the lords prayer together  with my catholic nun spirit guide Theresa.


Love and God bless    Love Juditha