Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

ARGUMENT FROM LACK OF APOCALYPSE
(1) Jesus predicts the apocalypse in the gospels
(2) No apocalypse happened
(3) This was so incredibly embarrassing that it must have been a real prediction
(4) Therefore, Jesus existed

ARGUMENT FROM THE FIG TREE
(1) Jesus curses a fig tree in the gospels for not having figs, even though it is not fig season
(2) No one would make up something that absurd
(3) Therefore, Jesus existed

ARGUMENT FROM "EMMANUEL"
(1) Matthew says the angel told Mary her son will be named Emmanuel
(2) He was actually named Jesus
(3) This complicates the story unnecessarily
(4) Therefore, Jesus existed

ARGUMENT FROM JOHN DICKSON
(1) Today's ardent Jesus-deniers remind me of a reckless gang throwing puerile insults at a gentle giant, oblivious to the fact that they are way out of their league.
(2) The study of the historical Jesus is one of the West's most focused, rigorous and voluminous academic inquiries into an ancient figure.
(3) Students will probably find as many historical tomes on Jesus of Nazareth as on Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great combined.
(4) It is a vast discipline operating on entirely secular principles of linguistic, literary and historical analysis.
(5) The discipline does not ground its basic assumptions regarding historicity in rigorous methodology, taking them for granted and preferring to rearrange the deck chairs on their Titanic (with rigorous study into Second Temple Judaism being used to paint lots of various possible HJ pictures).
(6) But this is ABC News, and I'm John Dickson!
(7) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM WOODY ALLEN'S GREEK LOGIC CIRCLES
(1) The Greeks were men.
(2) The Greeks were homosexuals.
(3) God became a man.
(4) God was homosexual?
(5) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM SERIOUSNESS
(1) Nobody takes the hypothesis of the non-existence of the historical Jesus seriously.
(2) I mean it.
(3) I really, really mean it. For serious! Come on guys! Quit it!
(4) Therefore, Jesus existed.

Peter Kirby wrote:ARGUMENT FROM JOHN DICKSON
(1) Today's ardent Jesus-deniers remind me of a reckless gang throwing puerile insults at a gentle giant, oblivious to the fact that they are way out of their league.
(2) The study of the historical Jesus is one of the West's most focused, rigorous and voluminous academic inquiries into an ancient figure.
(3) Students will probably find as many historical tomes on Jesus of Nazareth as on Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great combined.
(4) It is a vast discipline operating on entirely secular principles of linguistic, literary and historical analysis.
(5) The discipline does not ground its basic assumptions regarding historicity in rigorous methodology, taking them for granted and preferring to rearrange the deck chairs on their Titanic (with rigorous study into Second Temple Judaism being used to paint lots of various possible HJ pictures).
(6) But this is ABC News, and I'm John Dickson!
(7) Therefore, Jesus existed.

This started like an "argument from Joseph Hoffmann"

ARGUMENT FROM MARA BEN SERAPION
(1) I'm clueless about the good arguments that this composition is a fourth century rhetorical exercise from a Christian scribe.
(2) I see here that this source was written anywhere from 73 AD to as late as the third century.
(3) Let's go with 73 AD.
(4) Wow! He mentions the "wise king" of the Jews that got killed! That's Jesus!
(5) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM PLINY THE YOUNGER
(1) Pliny says nothing about Jesus or Christ at all in any kind of historical terms whatsoever.
(2) Pliny does say that Christians sing hymns to their god Christ.
(3) Therefore, Jesus existed.

ARGUMENT FROM LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA
(1) Lucian writes in the late second century.
(2) Lucian satirizes Christians.
(3) Lucian explains to his audience the story Christians tell about their origins.
(4) Therefore, Jesus existed.