Historical evidence of Jesus

[apothanein kerdos]

I have not been here long enough to ask a question in the controversial section of the forum so I will ask it here.

A movie whose purpose is to prove that Jesus Christ never existed and that demonizes Christian fundamentalists is scheduled to open on June 6, 2006

[apothanein kerdos]

Obviously not if you stated that the passage was in a section dealing with Pilate when it was in fact in a section talking about the a Jewish war.

No, it's not. Would you like me to quote it to you? Section 2 and section 4 are dealing with two different events. He isn't even talking about a war but instead about Pilate and the multiple calamities that occured to the Jews during his reign. Section 3 is mentioning that during this time Jesus existed. Josephus is attempting to paint Pilate in a bad light, thus in section three he explains how he killed a just man, an innocent. It fits perfect within the context. I'll bet $20 that you've never even read it.

Other then Josephus which is considered a fraud by almost everyone

LOL, you're kidding right? Almost all legitimate scholars believe Josephus wrote it which is why many of them tend not to rely on Josephus. You have studied the issue, right?

all your other citations say christian exist, not the same thing.

Let me spell it out for you:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) - Annals

"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." Thallus Circa AD 52 (as quoted by Julius Africanas)

One thing I would like to add to this one, he mentions that it grew dark AND there was a major earthquake in Judea as the same time. This is recorded in Luke 23:44-45. To add to it, the crucifixion occured during a full moon...you can't have a solar eclipse during a full moon...yet it is recorded as occuring in history. In fact, Africanas quotes Phlegon as well:

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth

[EricH]

Obviously not if you stated that the passage was in a section dealing with Pilate when it was in fact in a section talking about the a Jewish war.

No, it's not. Would you like me to quote it to you? Section 2 and section 4 are dealing with two different events. He isn't even talking about a war but instead about Pilate and the multiple calamities that occured to the Jews during his reign. Section 3 is mentioning that during this time Jesus existed. Josephus is attempting to paint Pilate in a bad light, thus in section three he explains how he killed a just man, an innocent. It fits perfect within the context. I'll bet $20 that you've never even read it.

Other then Josephus which is considered a fraud by almost everyone

LOL, you're kidding right? Almost all legitimate scholars believe Josephus wrote it which is why many of them tend not to rely on Josephus. You have studied the issue, right?

all your other citations say christian exist, not the same thing.

Let me spell it out for you:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) - Annals

"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." Thallus Circa AD 52 (as quoted by Julius Africanas)

One thing I would like to add to this one, he mentions that it grew dark AND there was a major earthquake in Judea as the same time. This is recorded in Luke 23:44-45. To add to it, the crucifixion occured during a full moon...you can't have a solar eclipse during a full moon...yet it is recorded as occuring in history. In fact, Africanas quotes Phlegon as well:

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth

[apothanein kerdos]

Obviously not if you stated that the passage was in a section dealing with Pilate when it was in fact in a section talking about the a Jewish war.

No, it's not. Would you like me to quote it to you? Section 2 and section 4 are dealing with two different events. He isn't even talking about a war but instead about Pilate and the multiple calamities that occured to the Jews during his reign. Section 3 is mentioning that during this time Jesus existed. Josephus is attempting to paint Pilate in a bad light, thus in section three he explains how he killed a just man, an innocent. It fits perfect within the context. I'll bet $20 that you've never even read it.

Other then Josephus which is considered a fraud by almost everyone

LOL, you're kidding right? Almost all legitimate scholars believe Josephus wrote it which is why many of them tend not to rely on Josephus. You have studied the issue, right?

all your other citations say christian exist, not the same thing.

Let me spell it out for you:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular." Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) - Annals

"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." Thallus Circa AD 52 (as quoted by Julius Africanas)

One thing I would like to add to this one, he mentions that it grew dark AND there was a major earthquake in Judea as the same time. This is recorded in Luke 23:44-45. To add to it, the crucifixion occured during a full moon...you can't have a solar eclipse during a full moon...yet it is recorded as occuring in history. In fact, Africanas quotes Phlegon as well:

Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from the sixth hour to the ninth

[Guest shiloh357]

Should we throw out ALL history books that were not written by eyewitnesses?

[apothanein kerdos]

No, but the topic of the thread is "Historical evidence of Jesus" not people who wrote about him. Hearsay evidence i.e. "heard from a friend of a friend" is not admissible in any court of law or a debate.

C'mon mate, is this what your logical analysis skills have been reduced to? If we can't accept Tacticus' writings on Jesus, then I guess we should throw everything out eh?

Fact is, much of history comes from, "heard from a friend" sources. It's VERY rare to get primary sources that far back in history.

[Guest SavedCoder]

(link deleted)<-- video at the top "are the world's religions rooted in Sun Worship?" ...that lady mentions many of the "rationale" behind the people who claim "Myth".

Supposedly there are dozens of gods who were born of a virgin mary, born 25th, crucified, ressurected, etc. etc...on like 20 different points... these are all pre-christ figures.

...but couldn't Satan have known this and created these figures and pegan gods so the intelectuals would have that to use as their "basis"?

At the bottom of that site, there's a link to "The Human Soul"...the interview at the very bottom proves as a first hand experience that we will meet Jesus when we pass on. This guy died 3 times! this guy is alive today! There are scientists who have proved with experiments there is life after life...and all of them talk about a being that sounds EXACTLY like Jesus in the Bible!!!!

Edited December 28, 2005 by IslandRose

[Scarletprayers]

Maybe they were "omitted" by His followers because the message was about Him bringing eternal salvation to a lost world, not how He liked to go bowling on his day off.

[ted]

Maybe they were "omitted" by His followers because the message was about Him bringing eternal salvation to a lost world, not how He liked to go bowling on his day off.

t.

[apothanein kerdos]

No, but the topic of the thread is "Historical evidence of Jesus" not people who wrote about him. Hearsay evidence i.e. "heard from a friend of a friend" is not admissible in any court of law or a debate.

C'mon mate, is this what your logical analysis skills have been reduced to? If we can't accept Tacticus' writings on Jesus, then I guess we should throw everything out eh?

Fact is, much of history comes from, "heard from a friend" sources. It's VERY rare to get primary sources that far back in history.

The only person reduced to anything is you, because you constantly take jabs at my intellect and then act smug as if you just destoryed my arguments. This is called an Ad Hominum argument and no one with a functioning brain falls for it.

We can accept evidence that is actually from his lifetime, and the fact is most history does come from contemporary accounts and eye witness testemony. That is why there are so many holes the furter you go back, most of what was written was lost or just plain never recorded.

What I find interesting about people trying to prove the existence of Jesus is that their own bible is so vague, let alone anything else. What about Jesus the man? How old was he? When was he born? What did he look like? What were his interests and hobbies? What did he talk about with his friends? What did he do for a living? All these normal things that we ask about everyone the bible is silent about. There are hardly any personal facts about Jesus himself anywhere in the bible and that has always struck me as odd considering how devoted his followers supposedly were to him. Maybe these and other facts were ommited because there were no facts to write because he is another in a long line of mythological figures.

I act "smug" because it's quite plain you have never dealt with history or historical interpretation.

For one, if you exclude the Bible, then you do lose the "eye witness" accounts. This doesn't change the fact that the historical accounts I use are relying on "eye witness" accounts, or those that had recorded the accounts from those there (such as the historians I quote who are using older Roman historical accounts).

You're digging yourself a deeper hole by saying, 'No, none of them are eye witness accounts so we can't rely on them! hahahahahahahaah!" It's childish and has no business being in a discussion on historical accounts. We have "secular" Roman historians telling us that Jesus was real....yet you try and discount it because it's not an "eye witness" account. That's simply absurd and has no basis in interpreting history.