Re: Why Are Historicists So Certain That Jesus Existed?
Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:11 pm
Here is the comment you are responding to, John T:John T wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:29 pmThe shoe is on the other foot and you don't like it?neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:04 pm
John T, why don't you try to be nice? Why all the "childish name calling" (that you say you deplore in others) and hostile sarcasm and put-downs? Why not try to be civil?
As I warned from the get go I was going to give a tit for tat, a taste of your own/mythicist medicine, so to speak.
Perhaps now you should ponder your own lack of civility, sarcasm and put-downs?
Any time you want to return to civility and argue the merits, all you have to do is, simply do so.
Just a thought.
John T
Now kindly identify for me where I was lacking civility or engaging in sarcasm or put-down. If you are going to be giving tit for tat then please do so and don't engage in groundless projection of your own abusive manner.neilgodfrey wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 1:04 pmBy this logic Eusebius is quoting a line that Josephus wrote more than once in different writings. In other words, at least once in a work by Josephus now lost to us and in a passage since removed from Antiquities, or in two works now lost to us . . . .
I think twenty books making up Antiquities constitutes a plural, no? But then maybe Eusebius meant that Josephus wrote that line in several of those books, or also in Wars -- and in every case it just happened to have since been lost?!
Alternatively, we could get a better grasp of what was understood by the expression translated as "these writings".
John T, why don't you try to be nice? Why all the "childish name calling" (that you say you deplore in others) and hostile sarcasm and put-downs? Why not try to be civil?