Hamas legalizes Crucifixion

[Avinash_Tyagi]

mrstickball said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

 I never said it destroyed his credibility, only cast doubt on it, only made it uncertain, also it is unlikely that Jesus's brother would live to the 80's-90's AD, as people died much earlier back then, heck even to the 60's AD would have been a feat for a man who was a contemporary of Jesus

 

True but it wasn't until the fighting that it really became them seeking independence, even earlier what they were seeking was fair representation.

 

Also while I don't blame Israel for going to war, I do blame them for targeting civilians, if you allow civilians to be targeted in war, then there was nothing wrong with 9/11 it was just a brilliant military strike, no matter how many civs are killed

James was younger than Jesus....He lived about 30yrs after Jesus' death. Josephus mentioned James at length, as he was the head of the Christian Church in Jerusalem until 62AD when he was murdered by the Jews via stoning. If you read Josephus' works, his work 'Antiquity of the Jews' was the written history of the Jewish faith, and how Christianity had effected it. If Christianity did not exist by 93AD....Then I sincerely question why Josephus would mention something that did not exist? Either Josephus was a liar, and every other book he wrote, would be struck as invalid (he wrote earlier than 93AD, as his first book The Jewish Wars was written in 74AD). He was born in 37AD, so he may have met James in person, or interviewed people that knew James and Jesus, personally.

Also, I'd really love to know how Israel is the one targeting civilians. Last I checked, Israel was boming Hamas targets, and the civilians were in collateral damage - but not the targets.

 

 When Hamas targets are in the middle of civilian areas, then you're targeting civilians, most weapons aren't precise enough to hit only one target

 

Yet you are supporting my argumetn, James was dead in 62, and Josepheus didn't have his work out until the 90's AD, so 30 years after james, once again we are dealing with very long time periods between these people's deaths and any writing of them, so it doesn't lend much credence to the fact that these were first hand accounts, rather it seems to indicate that these people did not know each other and were merely relating stories that they had heard.  This is where the uncertainty arises, because that era was much more primitive, with more dubious forms of communication and record keeping, so we have little evidence to support the vailidity of the writings.  Therefore they cannot be accepted as certain on their own, only with some outside proof can we accept the certainty of Jesus's existence