Quote (ofthevoid @ 29 Jan 2016 17:16)
Serious question Viv, if you're so convinced that Christianity is fable, why is there a need to constantly invest your time in watching these debates?
Well... I am very interested in History as an academic subject. I enjoy debating in general and I believe that the standards we apply to the validity of most historical claims have not been applied to Jesus.
I'm not convinced that Christianity is a fable. I'm not even convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was not a single historical figure. What I am convinced of is that there is not enough evidence to say that he definitely was and that he falls short of the mark that other figures (Robin Hood is a good example) have been considered likely mythological for not meeting.
It's a subject I find interesting is all. I simply think it's one of the few areas within Christian apologetics and the History of Christianity where there is potential for both a massive shift in opinion and where further debate could actually poduce something meaningful. Unlike regular apologetics like the conmanship of WLC or the continuous ranting of Dawkins where we've hit a bit of a brick wall where there can be very little shift in opinion.
I think the Historicity of Jesus is something that a lot of people haven't given much serious thought - they have just accepted it as fact without examining the evidence or hearing the arguments for and against. I also believe that the arguments against are convincing enough to cause the aforementioned shift in opinion should they be more widely discussed.
Quote (IceMage @ 29 Jan 2016 16:29)
Ehrman is not Christian simply because he actually studied Christianity. If you were interested in the truth you would be interested in his point of view.
This post was edited by Scaly on Jan 29 2016 12:22pm