Quoting L Gilbert:
I guess it would be pretty foolish of me to assume you'd take my word for it! Sorry! my bad!
:newb:
Quoting VanniFucci:
Maybe. But I'm confident. Too bad we didn't have a time machine, that would end the questions. Any theories? lol - How ya been, BTW?
Quoting ScottFree:
How else is it possible people believed in all the pagan gods? What other simple mechanism could have brought that about? And now today we have the exact same circumstance in Jesus!
I know, you told me before. It's biological. Something wrong with me brain. I'm looking into it. My doctor told me that, in regards to the whole "God" question, medical-science is not advanced enough in our age to remove
a priori from my head.
-I'll keep asking though.-
Seriously though, in the meantime, please keep trying to elighten me. You never know, you've opened my eyes to other things before!:smile: Maybe one day, I can enlighten you! (not bloody likely, I'm sure ur thinking! -lol)
In regards to JC, I've been able to find a lot of evidence that he existed.
Quoting ScottFree:
You claim the story is right out of abject ignorance! It is obvious you have never investigated this story yet your ready to bare false witness. Your children and other peoples children will walk away with your delusions. That is the mechanism that allows myth to perpetuate itself - stupid dumb ignorance and a refusal to look at fact.
Ouch. WWJD? I suppose I should turn the other cheek
rofileleft:
The gospel according to non-christians:
In
A.D. 66, Jews in Palestine initiated a revolt against Roman rule that, to put it mildly, the Romans did not appreciate. The emperor sent troops led by general Vespasian to squash the rebellion and regain control of rebel areas. In 67, Vespasian laid siege to the rebel town of Jotapata in Galilee. In the 47th day of that siege, a young jewish revolutionary chose to surrender to the superior Roman army rather than commit suicide—a fate many of his countrymen had chosen. That young man won favor with Vespasian and was later taken to Rome by general Titus, Vespasian’s son, after Titus destroyed Jerusalem and the jewish temple in 70.
That young man was
Flavius Josephus (a.d. 37-100), who ultimately became the greatest jewish historian of his time. Josephus began his historical writings in Rome while serving as a historian for the roman emperor Domitian. It was there that he authored his autobiography and two major historical works. One of those works is his now famous
Antiquities of the Jews, which he finished in about A.D. 93. In book 18, chapter 3, section 3 of that work, Josephus,
who was not a christian, wrote these words:
At this time [the time of Pilate] there was a wise man who was called
Jesus. His conduct was good and (he) was known to be virtuous. And
many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his
disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. But those
who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They
reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion,
and that he was alive; accordingly he was perhaps the Messiah, concerning
whom the prophets have recounted wonders.
That wasn’t Josephus’s only mention of Jesus. In another passage from Antiquities, Josephus revealed how the new high priest of the Jews, Ananus the younger, took advantage of a gap in Roman rule to kill James, the brother of Jesus. It was a.d. 62, and the roman governor Festus died suddenly in office. Three months elapsed before his successor, Albinus, could get to Judea, allowing ample time for Ananus to do his dirty work. Josephus describes the incident this way:
Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he
[Ananus the high priest] assembled the Sanhedrin of the judges, and
brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ,
whose name was James, and some others, [or some of his companions],
and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers
of the law, he delivered them to be stoned.
So here we have not only a first-century reference to Jesus, but confirmation that he had a brother named James who, obviously, was not well liked by the jewish authorities. Could it be that James was martyred because he was the leader of the Jerusalem church, as the new testament implies?
Just how many non-christian sources are there that mention Jesus?
Including Josephus, there are ten known
non-christian writers who mention Jesus within 150 years of his life. By contrast, over the same 150 years, there are nine non-christian sources who mention
Tiberius Caesar, the roman emperor at the time of Jesus. So discounting all the christian sources, Jesus is actually mentioned by one more source than the roman emperor.
(The ten non-christian sources are: Josephus; Tacitus, the roman historian; Pliny the Younger, a roman politician; Phlegon, a freed slave who wrote histories; Thallus, a first-century historian; Seutonius, a roman historian; Lucian, a greek satirist; Celsus, a roman philosopher; Mara Bar-Serapion, a private citizen who wrote to his son; and the jewish talmud.)
Some of these non-Christian sources, such as
Celsus,
Tacitus, and the Jewish Talmud, could be considered
anti-Christian sources. While these works do not have any eyewitness testimony that contradicts events described in the NT documents, they are works written by writers whose tone is decidedly anti-christian.
We learn that they
admit certain facts about early christianity that help us piece together a storyline that is surprisingly congruent with the new testament. Piecing together all ten non-christian references, we see that:
1. Jesus lived during time of Tiberius Caesar.
2. He lived a virtuous life.
3. He was a wonder-worker.
4. He had a brother named James.
5. He was acclaimed to be the messiah.
6. He was crucified under Pontius Pilate.
7. He was crucified on the eve of the jewish passover.
8. Darkness and an earthquake occurred when he died.
9. His disciples believed he rose from the dead.
10. His disciples were willing to die for their belief.
11. christianity spread rapidly as far as Rome.
12. His disciples denied the roman gods and worshiped Jesus as God.
In light of these non-christian references, the theory that Jesus never existed is clearly unreasonable.
How could non-christian writers collectively reveal a storyline congruent with the new testament if Jesus never existed? But the implications run even deeper than that. What does this say about the new testament? On the face of it, non-christian sources affirm the new testament.
While the non-christian authors don’t say they believe in the Resurrection, they report that the disciples certainly believed it.
Without going into too much detail, the truthfulness of the NT writers can be backed up by:
Like I said, compared to other works, the NT is pretty reliable, in regards to when the first copies were made, and how many were made.
Manuscript evidence for superior NT reliabilty.
Also, the fact the writers of the NT gave details about everything from the the local laws, politicians, industry, topography etc. Most of these details are confirmed today.
They included divergent and embarassing details about themselves. You wouldn't too this if you were a liar.
They record difficult and demanding sayings from Jesus. Sayings that can hard to decipher or explain. Or sayings that can be easily misinterpreted. They wouldn't do this if they wanted to embellish who Jesus was.
They include embarrassing detail about Jesus. Things that may not show him in the best light, so to speak.
They carefully distinguish their words from Jesus.
They also referenced facts and eyewitnesses that their readers either already knew or could verify.
The New Testament writers provoked their readers and prominent first-century enemies to check out what they said. Even in regards to miracles.
If that’s not enough to confirm their truthfulness, then their martyrdom should remove any doubt. These eyewitnesses endured persecution and death for the empirical claim that they had seen, heard, and touched the risen Jesus, yet they could have saved themselves by simply denying their testimony.
He definitely existed. Whether or not he was the son of God.... that's another question.
Later guys! :wave:
