[Sticks]

LeatherTrumpet as someone from the same side of the tracks as you, so to speak I was wondering what you are trying to achieve in starting this thread. The outcome was prefictable. It is one thing responding to attacks from that earlier thread that was started with that diagram, but you courted the response you got.

all that happened is a slanging match and some of the things you said did not help matters or the cause.

There is a way of conducting apologetics which takes time to learn. Remember we are told to give a defence for the hope that lies with in us, it does not say go on the attack. If someone challenges us, then we answer them. Pushing it down thir throats does not work. Winning arguments does not equate to winning souls. Remember it's not hard sell but soft sell that achieves most. More flies are caught with honey than vinegar.

As for the question, yes some people do deny that Jesus exist. Even if you take Josephus out of the equation that still leaves us with the writings of Tacitus, Pliny and Polycarp to name a few. You also forgot to mention the Talmud which registered Jesus existance and mentioned miracles, but attributed them to demonic powers.

Historical evidence does point to the historicity of Jesus of Nazereth, what people make of him, then becomes another issue.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Sticks

LeatherTrumpet as someone from the same side of the tracks as you, so to speak I was wondering what you are trying to achieve in starting this thread. The outcome was prefictable. It is one thing responding to attacks from that earlier thread that was started with that diagram, but you courted the response you got.

all that happened is a slanging match and some of the things you said did not help matters or the cause.

There is a way of conducting apologetics which takes time to learn. Remember we are told to give a defence for the hope that lies with in us, it does not say go on the attack. If someone challenges us, then we answer them. Pushing it down thir throats does not work. Winning arguments does not equate to winning souls. Remember it's not hard sell but soft sell that achieves most. More flies are caught with honey than vinegar.

As for the question, yes some people do deny that Jesus exist. Even if you take Josephus out of the equation that still leaves us with the writings of Tacitus, Pliny and Polycarp to name a few. You also forgot to mention the Talmud which registered Jesus existance and mentioned miracles, but attributed them to demonic powers.

Historical evidence does point to the historicity of Jesus of Nazereth, what people make of him, then becomes another issue.

and of course you are correct but there really can be no debate here due to the age and lack of religious knowledge of the posters. It is akin to debating football tactics at the Women's Guild.

Sometimes it is good to remind people that an alternative view to their own is around. But yes you are right.

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

and of course you are correct but there really can be no debate here due to the age and lack of religious knowledge of the posters. It is akin to debating football tactics at the Women's Guild.

Comments like that only inflame and do not add anything to debate. That way you come across as aggressive and arrogant. People see right through to that and you completely undermine anything you may add.

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Sometimes it is good to remind people that an alternative view to their own is around. But yes you are right.

I do remind people there are alternative viewpoints, but I would hpe I did it in a more gentle manner.

LeatherTrumpet, if you want to engage in apologetics, you really need to learn how to do it, not just the facts we need to refute arguments. If you end up casting aspersions on people like you did in this post, you will be seen to have lost the argument.

Again what are you hoping to achieve?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Sticks

Comments like that only inflame and do not add anything to debate. That way you come across as aggressive and arrogant. People see right through to that and you completely undermine anything you may add.



I do remind people there are alternative viewpoints, but I would hpe I did it in a more gentle manner.

LeatherTrumpet, if you want to engage in apologetics, you really need to learn how to do it, not just the facts we need to refute arguments. If you end up casting aspersions on people like you did in this post, you will be seen to have lost the argument.

Again what are you hoping to achieve?

and you see this forum as a place for apologetics?