User:Radath/sandbox


 * Smeat75 said "I'm not going to argue about putting the word "probably" in there" 21:40, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Wdford said "If we selectively use a definition that limits the CMT to "there was no such person ever" and then shoot it down as fringe, we invite the other side of the argument to reinsert the well-established view that the gospels are known to be BS. How is that an improvement? 15:00, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Bill the Cat 7 said "I don't think it really matters if the word "likely" is used or not ..." Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Wdford said "I suggest therefore that we implement Proposal v11 already, with the word "likely" or "probably" added in where appropriate." 16:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Bill the Cat 7 also said "I would support something to the effect of "highly unlikely JC didn't exist". And my main reason for this support is that in history, especially ancient history, nothing is certain 0% or 100%. It's all about probabilities." 17:39, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Smeat75 said "I actually object more to "Jesus of Nazareth as depicted in the gospels" than anything else" 18:07, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Ckruschke said "I supported several of the others above and thought Version 9 was good to go ... seems like we are splitting hairs at this point." 18:09, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Martijn Meijering said "Looks acceptable to me" 19:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Martijn Meijering said "I propose we go with v9 now and see how that goes. We can always reopen the discussion later if anyone wants to." 21:18, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Smeat75 said "I was all ready to support this as I thought it was going to be v9, "CMT...is the proposition that Jesus of Nazareth probably did not exist, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity" with a change of "probably" to "highly unlikely" so it would read "CMT...is the proposition that it is highly unlikely that Jesus of Nazareth existed, or if he did, he had virtually nothing to do with the founding of Christianity". That I would support." 23:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Harpur, The Pagan Christ 2004: In the light of everything we have examined, can we say with any authority that Jesus of Nazareth actually existed as a historical person? I have very grave doubts that we can." (p.40)
 * Hitchens, God is Not Great 2007: "The best argument I know for the highly questionable existence of Jesus is this..." (p. 40)
 * Price, The Christ-Myth Theory and its Problems 2011: "I will argue that it is quite likely there never was any historical Jesus" (p.25) "Let me summarize the major factors that lead me to accept the Christ Myth as the most likely hypothesis to explain the data." (p. 425).
 * Carrier, Arguing Jesus Didn’t Exist Should Not Be a Strategy 2013 http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4733 : "I conclude that, using probability estimates as far against my conclusion as are at all reasonably possible (probabilities I believe are wildly too generous), there could be as much as a 1 in 3 chance that Jesus existed. When using what I think are more realistic estimates of the requisite probabilities (estimates I believe are closer to the truth), those chances drop to around 1 in 12,000" .... "So please. Learn from science. Dump the strategy of arguing that Christianity (or the New Testament, or this or that teaching, or anything whatever) is false “because Jesus didn’t exist.”"