As you know, the Minnesota Vikings cannot have a longterm, high quality, franchise QB. It’s illegal under the Fran Tarkenton Act. The best the team can ever do is a random loaner QB who has one very good year. So Kyler Murray is going to be as good as it gets until we nab Baker Mayfield in 2028.
This one would be a good oath for faculty and staff at the middle school, high school, and college levels to recite before we have meetings. A student rep could always be on hand to make sure we at least went through the motions.
May I see it?
I think Naz has obviously had a super shitty year personally, and that reality is probably under discussed as a factor in the team’s overall performance.
That's quite hilarious. I would have been so happy knowing it came out well in the end!
Disagree. They will do neither tonight. But they will win or lose very early tomorrow morning, EST (The Best Time Zone For Winning And/Or Losing).
kinda fascinating how many people in this thread seem to assume that "maybe Jesus was not a real person" is, or should be, part of the scholarly debate on very early Christianity. There's a lot debated in that realm--"was Jesus actually a real dude" is not one of the debates anymore. It just is not.
I'm not confused, and "tentatively agree" is an inaccurate characterization of the scholarly consensus. You are definitely correct that brand new evidence pointing in a different direction would change the consensus--that's always true! But it's not relevant in this case. I do think it's...
Scholars agree with you!
why you're so vociferous on this topic or where you get your information, but among the many things that actual historians debate about Jesus/early Christianity, "was Jesus a real person or did someone make him up?" is not one of the questions debated. Maybe that will change, but not at the moment.✌️
who existed at that time and place. Paul's writings, a fragment or two from Tacitus, and the existence of what historians sometimes call the "Jesus movement" (distinguishing Jewish followers of Jesus like Pete and James from Paul/Christianity) are also evidence for that consensus. I have no idea...
I didn't say what you wrote in your second sentence. It's rough having an online conversation with folks who argue against things that were not said. What Josephus wrote about Jesus is one piece of evidence, among others, that have led to a clear scholarly consensus that Jesus was a real person...
It has been four seasons of this, no doubt. I also think that this season has been "worse" than the last two in that respect, even though their position in the standings is better this year than last. Last year they did really hit a groove by this point of the season (I'm pretty sure).
As a Vikings fan, I am (oddly) equally fine with signing him or not signing him. Signing him clearly seems like the right move, but I will not be upset if it doesn't happen.
Historians (not theologians—historians) of this topic disagree with you. And it’s been awhile, but I have looked at Josephus in particular. You can think what you want, but the historicity of Jesus is not a scholarly controversy. (I say this as an atheist, just to be clear.)
But scholars/experts agree on any number of questions regardless of what “we” (non-experts) think. The historicity of Jesus (that he was a real person at that time and place) is a good example. We do a disservice to the scholarship when we suggest otherwise. It’s good to say when we do know things!
Unless something has changed radically in the last 20 years or so, and I’m fairly certain it has not, what you’re saying here is simply not correct. Scholarly debates are frequently “settled,” and this is one of those. But I’ll leave it there, because it’s easy enough to read up on it.
an overwhelming scholarly consensus on a historical topic after obsessive, exhaustive research, we can just say that and leave it there. I don't think it makes sense to make it sound like a potentially open question when, according to the best historical research, it simply is not.
I hear what you are saying, but this is one of the most obsessively studies topics in ancient history, looked at by a bunch of scholars who know 1,000 times more about the topic than we do. The existence, baptism, and crucifixion of this guy "Jesus" are not doubted by these scholars. When there's...
Any way we might want to say it, the fact is that we are pretty much certain that Jesus was a real historical figure. There are many historical topics that are seriously debated and contested among scholars--the historicity of Jesus simply is not one of those (and has not been for quite some time).
Yeah it's definitely more than "most likely." I studied this stuff fairly seriously with a prof in-the-know (long ago as an undergrad). There just isn't much question that Jesus was a real, Jewish man of that time and place who was: 1) baptized; 2) crucified. But that's about all we know for sure.
I think it's very interesting for anyone interested in history (so ideally all of us!). Jesus was a real dude, but he was a Jewish man interested in talking to other Jews about Jewish society and faith. Paul turned that into something *very* different. It's fascinating, kinda nuts, and important!
Also, the overwhelming consensus among scholars is very much that Jesus was a real historical figure. The historicity of Jesus--as a Jewish man alive at that time and place who was crucified--is well established and is supported not only by Paul's writings but also those of Josephus and Tacitus.
Yeah and now I’m starting to think they should hold out for a first no matter what. I don’t like the idea of trading Greenard to begin with, but now with the Crosby situation and Hendrickson off the market, it certainly seems like you should be able to get more for him.
The Baltimore Ravens have backed out of their trade agreement for Maxim Crosby. The Los Angeles Raiders will have no further comment at this time.
Oh man I had not heard about that--that really sucks. (Oddly, I do think "Isis the Band" is kind of a dope band name had they still been active and really wanting to continue.)
You were here first!
It's kind of important! My MIL's name is Karen and sometimes I feel bad for her (mostly not though!), but this one feels worse. We might see a major "Albert spike" the rest of the decade (but if it happens I think we should call it an "Albert Alert" because that's a good word combo--that's just me).
One of the very bad things about AI that is not discussed enough is the way that it has degraded the otherwise perfectly good name, Al.
This post is dedicated to my friend Al, and indeed to every righteous Al out there, whose good name has been tarnished by AI.
