>>9671676 (lb)
Annnnnnd apparently, it's a hoax. Man, that would have been juicy.
Fast Forward to 4:58. The first part of this, though hotly debated still, breaks down what you are saying in a detailed manner.
I'm sure lots of anons have seen this. I'm sure Q has seen it.
LOGIC RULES:
You can't prove any of it ever occurred. No contemporary Roman historian ever recorded anything describing him. All you have are 4 gospels written by people 30+ years after his supposed death, and are all either based on one of those gospels, or from a "Q" source that was never put into the Bible.
Also, the Dead Sea scrolls contain lots of other accounts of supposed history that were never included in the Bible, and also have some conflicts with the accepted compiled books that were included.
Loved his portrayal of Bilbo. Serious question. Are we going to have some sort of new version of "Hollywood" when this is all over, or is that industry going to get changed irrevocably, perhaps become much less relevant? What do anons think?
And it all makes a hell of a lot more sense now than it did then.
Josephus mentioned "Christus" which is a title. He never mentioned Jesus of Nazareth by name, but definitely spoke of his followers (and not in a very good light, mind you).
I didn't pose a question to Q. And yes, I agree with your point that faith is a belief instead of something provable; a fact, as it were. I can look at everything around me and it's evidence enough that intelligent design is how we all got here. What you stated reaffirms my point that none of it is provable.
Dawkins is a moron and often walks his positions back when pressed really hard on some of his claims. Also, these historians that the interviewer is talking about seem to take the Bible as their reference point. Just as a reminder, the 4 Gospels actually conflict on approximate dates/times. This is fact. Also fact is that these gospels were written 30+ years after his death.
So, I say to you, also, enjoy. Refutations are most certainly welcomed.
Got a source for that?