Please bring GOD back into our lives!!!!

1234568

Comments

  • Byrnzie wrote:
    Suave.27 wrote:
    In all fairness, the only thing the Bible can be used for is to use in evidence that Jesus walked the Earth.

    That's not evidence. The Bible was written approx 50-100 years after the supposed date of Jesus's existence, and none of the dozens of contemporary histories of the period make any mention of him.

    There is zero historical evidence that Jesus ever lived.

    If people think the Bible can be used as an historical document then they must also believe that Moses parted the red sea, and that the Earth is 6000 years old.

    I have watched several docs's on the subject, and I thought that it was general consensus in the historial science community that he did actually exist as a human being, no?
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • I don't know if this has already been mentioned, but I have always felt that, among other things, religion served as a means to control the masses. As organized religion began to establish its roots and in medieval times, the message for the commoner was to dig away in the soil, pay the church, and you'll have a great 'next life'. In the meantime, orgies, decadence and corruption was often afoot with many high and low ranking church officials reaping the benefit of a system designed to support them. Perhaps oblivious to the occurings, peasants still bought into the 'dream'- clinging to the allure of the idea without much questioning given the alternative (a fiery Hell). As the idea became entrenched, it took root in our collective conscience and has been very hard to dismiss. People today snub their noses at Science and choose to believe in a higher power that resides 'somewhere'- monitoring our behaviours.

    Western religions differ quite a bit from eastern religions. Who's to say which is better? Even further, Math and common sense tells us that there's a planet somewhere out there that has life. Is God the supreme power for it too? Or, would some suggest that there is no life outside of Earth and we are really all there is- the center of the universe?

    Trust me when I say I love the idea of God and religion, but I find it really hard to accept such given what I am able to see and the state of the planet. I cling to an agnostic personality, but need much more convincing before I jump in with any conviction.
    "My brain's a good brain!"
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    I have watched several docs's on the subject, and I thought that it was general consensus in the historial science community that he did actually exist as a human being, no?

    Well, no evidence that he lived exists, so I can't see how there can be a general consensus that he did. But maybe there is a general consensus that he lived. But there's still zero evidence to support that view.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicit ... cal_person
    'The existence of Jesus as a historical figure has been questioned by some biblical scholars; among the earliest were Constantin-François Volney and Charles François Dupuis in the 18th century and Bruno Bauer in the 19th century. Each of these proposed that the Jesus character was a fusion of earlier mythologies though Volney felt that confused memories of an obscure historical figure might have integrated into this already existing solar mythology.[38][39]

    In the first half of the 20th century, the views of scholars who entirely rejected Jesus' historicity were based on a suggested lack of eyewitnesses, a lack of direct archaeological evidence, the failure of ancient works, like those of Philo for example, to mention Jesus, and similarities early Christianity shares with then-contemporary religion and mythology.

    More recently, arguments for non-historicity have been discussed by Guy Fau, Prosper Alfaric, W. B. Smith, John M. Allegro, George Albert Wells,[41] Earl Doherty (The Jesus Puzzle, 1999), Timothy Freke and Peter Gandy (The Jesus Mysteries) and Robert M. Price and the idea has been popularized in the early 21st century by some of the writers like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, representing the New Atheism movement.'



    http://new.exchristian.net/2011/08/hist ... jesus.html
    'It is peculiar that one of the central figures of the Christian and Islamic traditions is an allegedly 1st century Jewish preacher for whom there is no contemporary evidence. Not only is there is no evidence that any of the claims contained in the contradictory gospels compiled decades after the events they claim to describe, and indeed after the Christian tradition had already been established by the likes of Paul of Tarsus, are even remotely true, but there is no evidence for a historical Jesus figure. Of course, in the mind of the religious believer this should and does not matter, afterall faith is belief without and often in spite of the evidence and as such the revelation that the entire tale is a myth would only matter if one cared sincerely about matters of evidence and reason. From the point of view of the objective observer however, it is a fact of history that there is no objective contemporary evidence that the person of Jesus ever existed. The only conclusion that can therefore reasonably be drawn is that the entire tale was a fabrication at the end of the 1st century CE to justify a religious tradition which was already in existence and to add royalty and divine merit to what was the concocted cult of a few deluded patriachs.


    Let us be clear, there is not a single piece of physical evidence that a biblical Jesus ever existed, there are no artefacts, works of carpentry or any works allegedly written by the man-god himself. All that the religious tradition has to justify its claims is the very same religious tradition, it’s a house of cards no different to claiming the tale of Little Red Riding Hood is true because the tale of Little Red Riding Hood says so. We now know that the claims about the town of Nazareth are false, that the miracle birth and childhood of the Jesus figure was a later addition to the gospels and does not appear in the oldest Gospel of Mark, that all the tales were written by unknown but non-contemporary authors who lived decades after the alleged events they were describing, that there is no historical record to justify the miraculous events of guiding stars, ripping curtains, the darkened earth, of the resurrection of Saints in the streets of Jerusalem, the alleged census or any other of the concrete claims made in the Gospels which can be tested.

    Every single claim made about Jesus whether in the bible or in the spurious non-contemporary accounts in the decades and centuries that followed are hearsay accounts, compiled after the alleged presence on earth of this man-god and without any source of objective authority or reference. Every single letter in every single book of the new testament was compiled over thousands of different manuscripts and books (many of which have not been included in the Roman Catholic Cannon) centuries later and therefore do not constitute a reliable source of information on which the existence of a historical let alone a biblical Jesus can be alleged. Indeed, this evidence would not survive inquiry in a court of law or a simple act of reasoning, why then it continues to convinces millions of fervent believers is a matter of some intrigue. Indeed, it is structurally no different to belief in Wotan, fairies or Unicorns yet continues to command the ear of countless grown up humans who insist that not only is it true, but that it is divinely true by the power of its own authority.

    None of the New Testament epistle writers describe Jesus as a teacher or a miracle worker, or mention Nazareth. Indeed, despite these epistles being the earliest productions of the Christian tradition which predate the Gospels, there is not a single quote, parable or teaching of Jesus to be found. There is no mention of the disciples and the notion of Jesus is presented as a spiritual eternal god. As Earl Doherty writes in his book “The Jesus Puzzle”, “Christian documents outside the Gospels, even at the end of the first century and beyond, show no evidence that any tradition about an earthly life and ministry of Jesus were in circulation”.

    The Gospels are dated between 70 CE and 90 CE and contain an inconsistent and often contradictory account of the life of Jesus. The fact that the four gospels on which the substantive notion of Jesus is based post-date the epistles of Paul of Tarsus adds to the intrigue of how the earlier Christian traditions came into existence and how these changed over time. With the adoption by the Roman Catholic Church, these fictitious accounts were elevated to the position of infallible godly inspiration and unquestionable history. Yet, they are not authored by the disciples, whose historicity cannot be evidenced, but were written based on the claims of various Church fathers and Christian leaders of the 1st and 2nd century CE, whilst their divine significance postdates their authorship by several centuries. We literally have no idea who wrote these texts and therefore no idea where they sourced their information, we do know that none of the authors even claim to have met the earthly Jesus and that what remains of their writings are the copies of copies of manuscripts that survived long enough for the Roman Catholic Church to incorporate them into Christian scripture.

    There has of late been a apologetic attempt by some Christians to attempt to argue the historicity of Jesus based on extra-biblical sources, however, to make this claim is to either fundamentally misconstrue what is meant with contemporary or confirmatory evidence, or to deliberately misrepresent as evidence for that which it is not. For the avoidance of doubt, there is at present no evidence whatsoever of either the figure of Jesus or the claims made about him. All that exists is historical evidence confirming the presence of Christians in the first and second century CE and confirming some of the fundamental claims of the Christian tradition that had already been formulated at that time. One will note of course that the authorities cited are always the same, indeed, it is significant that after 2000 years of ardent searching this is the best by way of confirmatory evidence that the entire Christian tradition is able to muster. The most often cited examples can be commented on as follows:

    1.Josephus Flavius: He was a Jewish historian and the first non-Christian to mention the Christian tradition or the figure of Christ. Most scholars now agree that Josephus' account of Jesus in his work "Antiquities" was a forgery by the Church Father, Eusebius, however, one can deny Josephus as a contemporary witness by simply noting that he was only born in 37 C.E. and he only wrote Antiquities in 93 C.E.

    2.Pliny the Younger: His work references information about Christian believers and their beliefs, the existence of which is not denied. He makes no mention of the Jesus figure as independent from the claims of Christians and in any event he was born many decades after Jesus is alleged to have lived.

    3.Tacitus: This Roman historian was born in 64 C.E. and therefore not a contemporary witness. His Annals, written in the early 2nd century CE makes an alleged and probably forged reference to a Christ figure, but there is no evidence justifying this reference and again he was not a contemporary of this Christ figure. His references to the presence of Christians in the Roman Empire is merely confirming what we already know and which no serious historian would deny, that there were Christians in the first and second century CE. Again, Tacitus is not a contemporary witness and in his account of Christ is entirely reliant on hearsay evidence.

    4.Suetonius: Another Roman Roman historian, born in 69 C.E. makes an obscure mention of a "Chrestus,". Even if it were the case that this was a reference to Jesus, which is disputable, we would merely be dealing with another non-contemporary witness relying on hearsay evidence.

    5.The Jewish Talmud: The attempt by apologists to rely on the Talmud to justify the figure of Jessu is rather bizarre, given that the Jewish tradition distinctly rejects the idea that a saviour man-god came to earth as the messiah. In any event, most Jewish scholars agree that the reference to Yeshu is in fact a reference to Yeshu ben Pandera, who lived in the 2nd centuy CE. In any event, it would be bizarre to claim that the Palestinian Talmud, which came into existence in the 3rd to 5th century C.E., or the Babylonian Talmud, which was written between the 3rd to 6th century C.E can be cited as authority for events in the 1st century CE. Again, to make this claim suggests that one either grossly misunderstands the concept of evidence or that one is deliberately misrepresenting non-Christian accounts for the Jesus figure.

    The fact of the matter is that not a single historian, follower or scribe during the time when Jesus was alleged to have lived, performing miracles and generally upsetting the powers that be with the authority of God, makes any mention of him whatsoever. Given that he is alleged to have attracted great multitudes, argued and debated with the religious and political leaders of his time and healed the sick in great numbers it is utterly staggering that not a single reference can be found of this allegedly divine prophet who not only acted with the authority of God but was alleged to be God. This in circumstances where countless historians who did live during the time of Jesus make not a single mention of the fact that he even existed, I recommend in this regard the work of JE Remsberg “The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidences for His Existence”.

    In summary, the claims about Jesus are as reliable as the claims about Prometheus, Hercules or Wotan and the entire tale is the evidentiary equivalent of Humpty Dumpty and Grandfather Smurf. Of course, if the believers wishes to maintain that an eccentric Jewish preacher existed during the early 1st century CE and that he constitutes their best chance at a fulfilled life, then by all means let them cling to this bizarre insistence. However, let us desist from the false claim that faith can be justified, that half truths and misrepresentations are a basis to maintain the cult of the Nazareen. After all, if there were evidence for a particularly tradition religious tradition, “faith” would become obsolete.

    Unfortunately, those who believe without evidence or reason cannot be challenged in their beliefs with evidence and reason, and one can only be liberated from this primitive indoctrination by the personal choice to consider all matters of existence based on reason and evidence, not to justify one’s preconceptions and wish-thinking but in an earnest quest for what is true. For as Carl Sagan noted, "You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe."
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    396989_2967289467468_1418623422_3013000_395280897_n.jpg
  • Stardog3..Stardog3.. Posts: 1,527
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Suave.27 wrote:
    In all fairness, the only thing the Bible can be used for is to use in evidence that Jesus walked the Earth.

    That's not evidence. The Bible was written approx 50-100 years after the supposed date of Jesus's existence, and none of the dozens of contemporary histories of the period make any mention of him.

    There is zero historical evidence that Jesus ever lived.

    If people think the Bible can be used as an historical document then they must also believe that Moses parted the red sea, and that the Earth is 6000 years old.

    I also, as somebody said, believed the general consensus was that he did in fact walk the Earth, and that they did use the Bible as reliable evidence since the majority of it was dated within 200 yrs. AD, so I spoke from that view point. Not saying I agree...or disagree for that matter.
  • iamicaiamica Chicago Posts: 2,628
    I just wanted to throw something in: the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army in 70 CE, and thousands of people were killed in a brutal siege. It could be possible that there might have been other documents relating to the life and existence of Jesus that were destroyed when Jerusalem was. It's speculation, but it's possible.

    Also - given that literacy rates were low and that Jesus mostly associated with illiterate peasants, this could serve as one explanation for why there are no discovered written accounts of him before Paul's letters (which are roughly dated from the late 40s-60s CE, within 30 years of Jesus' death).

    They found the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, which contained documents dated 1,000 years earlier than the oldest copies of the Old Testament that we had up to that time...I think it's entirely possible that there could be many other undiscovered documents out there. But since the Gospels and Paul's letters were written within 70 years of Jesus' death, I don't think they should necessarily be dismissed.
    Chicago 2000 : Chicago 2003 : Chicago 2006 : Summerfest 2006 : Lollapalooza 2007 : Chicago 2009 : Noblesville (Indy) 2010 : PJ20 (East Troy) 2011 : Wrigley Field 2013 : Milwaukee (Yield) 2014 : Wrigley Field 2016
  • Byrnzie wrote:
    396989_2967289467468_1418623422_3013000_395280897_n.jpg

    :lol:
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • LikeAnOceanLikeAnOcean Posts: 7,718
    God is too busy winning football games.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    Suave.27 wrote:
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Suave.27 wrote:
    In all fairness, the only thing the Bible can be used for is to use in evidence that Jesus walked the Earth.

    That's not evidence. The Bible was written approx 50-100 years after the supposed date of Jesus's existence, and none of the dozens of contemporary histories of the period make any mention of him.

    There is zero historical evidence that Jesus ever lived.

    If people think the Bible can be used as an historical document then they must also believe that Moses parted the red sea, and that the Earth is 6000 years old.

    I also, as somebody said, believed the general consensus was that he did in fact walk the Earth, and that they did use the Bible as reliable evidence since the majority of it was dated within 200 yrs. AD, so I spoke from that view point. Not saying I agree...or disagree for that matter.

    when youre trying to sell a religion based on the fact that a particular someone walked the earth, you better make damn sure you can convince the majority that that particular someone 'in fact' did. ;)8-)
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • when youre trying to sell a religion based on the fact that a particular someone walked the earth, you better make damn sure you can convince the majority that that particular someone 'in fact' did. ;)8-)

    Is that a problem? In the US and many other nations, the majority of people actually convinced that Jesus walked the despite a real lack of evidence. I don't think that most people think critically enough to even look at the evidence (or the absence thereof).

    Watching atheists and theists debate is like watching two deaf individuals yell at each other across a large room. Nobody is listening. This debate has never been based on facts or reason.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    when youre trying to sell a religion based on the fact that a particular someone walked the earth, you better make damn sure you can convince the majority that that particular someone 'in fact' did. ;)8-)

    Is that a problem? In the US and many other nations, the majority of people actually convinced that Jesus walked the despite a real lack of evidence. I don't think that most people think critically enough to even look at the evidence (or the absence thereof).

    Watching atheists and theists debate is like watching two deaf individuals yell at each other across a large room. Nobody is listening. This debate has never been based on facts or reason.

    lack of reason and facts doesnt seem to be a problem for the christians.

    im listening... i just dont believe what theyre saying.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    iamica wrote:
    I just wanted to throw something in: the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army in 70 CE, and thousands of people were killed in a brutal siege. It could be possible that there might have been other documents relating to the life and existence of Jesus that were destroyed when Jerusalem was. It's speculation, but it's possible.

    Also - given that literacy rates were low and that Jesus mostly associated with illiterate peasants, this could serve as one explanation for why there are no discovered written accounts of him before Paul's letters (which are roughly dated from the late 40s-60s CE, within 30 years of Jesus' death).

    They found the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, which contained documents dated 1,000 years earlier than the oldest copies of the Old Testament that we had up to that time...I think it's entirely possible that there could be many other undiscovered documents out there. But since the Gospels and Paul's letters were written within 70 years of Jesus' death, I don't think they should necessarily be dismissed.

    There are extensive histories of the period written at the time of his supposed existence - the histories of Josephus, for example, which make no mention of him.
  • EilianEilian Posts: 276
    Byrnzie wrote:
    iamica wrote:
    I just wanted to throw something in: the Temple in Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army in 70 CE, and thousands of people were killed in a brutal siege. It could be possible that there might have been other documents relating to the life and existence of Jesus that were destroyed when Jerusalem was. It's speculation, but it's possible.

    Also - given that literacy rates were low and that Jesus mostly associated with illiterate peasants, this could serve as one explanation for why there are no discovered written accounts of him before Paul's letters (which are roughly dated from the late 40s-60s CE, within 30 years of Jesus' death).

    They found the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1947, which contained documents dated 1,000 years earlier than the oldest copies of the Old Testament that we had up to that time...I think it's entirely possible that there could be many other undiscovered documents out there. But since the Gospels and Paul's letters were written within 70 years of Jesus' death, I don't think they should necessarily be dismissed.

    There are extensive histories of the period written at the time of his supposed existence - the histories of Josephus, for example, which make no mention of him.

    Not sure about that. Josephus wrote of Jesus, as James' brother, and that some people worshipped him in a work dated 93AD. That's no defense of the myth mind you,...Josephus wasn't born until 37AD.
  • arqarq Posts: 8,049
    Eilian wrote:
    Not sure about that. Josephus wrote of Jesus, as James' brother, and that some people worshipped him in a work dated 93AD. That's no defense of the myth mind you,...Josephus wasn't born until 37AD.

    Double check your sources, it's been known for sometime those were later insertions to the text.
    "The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it"
    Neil deGrasse Tyson

    Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?
  • EilianEilian Posts: 276
    arq wrote:
    Eilian wrote:
    Not sure about that. Josephus wrote of Jesus, as James' brother, and that some people worshipped him in a work dated 93AD. That's no defense of the myth mind you,...Josephus wasn't born until 37AD.

    Double check your sources, it's been known for sometime those were later insertions to the text.

    Offer up a reference? I'm not being provocative, I'd genuinely love a reliable refutation of that.
  • ByrnzieByrnzie Posts: 21,037
    Eilian wrote:
    Not sure about that. Josephus wrote of Jesus, as James' brother, and that some people worshipped him in a work dated 93AD. That's no defense of the myth mind you,...Josephus wasn't born until 37AD.

    That was a later interpolation by the early Church fathers.


    Josephus on Jesus

    Josephus is the first non-Christian writer to mention Jesus. He does this in Books 18 and 20 of his Antiquities, from about 93 AD. It is worth giving the reference in Book 18 in full.

    'Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ . And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day'

    For two centuries no Christian used this passage, although many of them quoted Josephus. For example, Origen quoted Josephus when writing 250,000 words against the pagan writer Celsus, but he never uses this passage even when it would have been most useful. In Chapter 6 of Book 1 of 'Contra Celsum', Origen wrote ' ..."Many shall say to Me in that day, In Thy name we have cast out devils, and done many wonderful works." Whether Celsus omitted this from intentional malignity, or from ignorance, I do not know..." Would not Origen have loved to show Josephus as writing that Jesus performed wonderful works?

    In chapter 67 Origen quotes Celsus as follows '...this Jew of Celsus.... continues: "The old mythological fables, which attributed a divine origin to Perseus, and Amphion, and Aeacus, and Minos, were not believed by us. Nevertheless, that they might not appear unworthy of credit, they represented the deeds of these personages as great and wonderful, and truly beyond the power of man; but what hast thou done that is noble or wonderful either in deed or in word?' Wouldn't Origen have loved to answer Celsus's taunt by pointing out that the renowned Jewish historian Josephus said Jesus performed wonderful works.

    It is admitted that the passage of Josephus was tampered with by Christians. Strictly speaking, this rules it out altogether as evidence. If a prosecution lawyer in a court case tried to introduce evidence that had been tampered with by prosecution witnesses, that evidence would be rejected. However, let us examine the claim that we can tell in this short paragraph by looking at the style, which phrases are Josephan and which are Christian interpolations. In passing I note that many Christians deny that we can tell by looking at the style that Paul did not write 1 or 2 Timothy, Titus or Ephesians, although there we have whole letters to work with, not just a few phrases.

    It is worth pointing out that any Christian scribe who had just copied out 17 books of Josephus would be familiar with his style and easily able to express Christian thoughts in Josephan language.

    Josephus only uses the phrase 'a wise man' about Solomon and Daniel. Would a first-century Pharisee bracket a crucified criminal with legendary kings and prophets? It was Christian writers who compared Jesus to Solomon (Matthew 12:42) and praised the wisdom of Jesus (Luke 2:46-52)

    Josephus only used the phrase wonderful works about Elisha. As your email pointed out it was Christians who saw parallels between Jesus and Elijah and Elisha.

    In Mark 6:2 , Jews praise the wisdom and mighty works of Jesus. Can we be sure that Josephus's 'wise man' and 'wonderful works' must be genuine as no Christian interpolator would have had any motive to portray Josephus the way the Gospels say Jews regarded Jesus? I doubt it.

    Josephus's phrase 'the principal men' (ton proton andron) is mirrored in Luke 19:47 - 'the leaders among the people' (hoi protoi)

    The passage of Josephus first appears in 'Ecclesiastical History' by Eusebius in about 320 AD. Eusebius also includes clearly fake letters by Jesus himself. Another quote of Josephus by Eusebius is especially interesting , as we can see how Eusebius would doctor quotes to make them support Christian writings .

    Josephus wrote in Antiquities Book 19 Section 346 'But as he presently afterwards looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger (Greek 'Angelos') of ill tidings...' Eusebius in his History (2.10) omits the words 'boubona - epi schoiniou tinos' (ie an owl on a certain rope) and retains only the 'angelos' or messenger. As it stands in Eusebius, the 'quote' of Josephus appears to support Acts 12:23 which mentions an 'angelos', but naturally does not say this messenger was an owl.

    Eusebius is the first person to say that Josephus referred to 'the tribe of Christians' . Eusebius also said Tertullian referred to the tribe of Christians. He did not. Eusebius also said Trajan referred to the tribe of Christians. He did not.

    To sum up, Josephus's mention of Jesus was unknown for two centuries, is admitted even by Christians to be tampered with and first appears in the work of somebody who produced forged letters of Jesus, doctored quotes of Josephus, and lied about one of the very phrases found in the Testimonium when saying that other ancient writers used it. Almost every phrase expresses Christian, not Jewish, beliefs about Jesus.
  • EilianEilian Posts: 276
    Byrnzie wrote:
    Eilian wrote:
    Not sure about that. Josephus wrote of Jesus, as James' brother, and that some people worshipped him in a work dated 93AD. That's no defense of the myth mind you,...Josephus wasn't born until 37AD.

    That was a later interpolation by the early Church fathers.


    Josephus on Jesus

    Josephus is the first non-Christian writer to mention Jesus. He does this in Books 18 and 20 of his Antiquities, from about 93 AD. It is worth giving the reference in Book 18 in full.

    'Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ . And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day'

    For two centuries no Christian used this passage, although many of them quoted Josephus. For example, Origen quoted Josephus when writing 250,000 words against the pagan writer Celsus, but he never uses this passage even when it would have been most useful. In Chapter 6 of Book 1 of 'Contra Celsum', Origen wrote ' ..."Many shall say to Me in that day, In Thy name we have cast out devils, and done many wonderful works." Whether Celsus omitted this from intentional malignity, or from ignorance, I do not know..." Would not Origen have loved to show Josephus as writing that Jesus performed wonderful works?

    In chapter 67 Origen quotes Celsus as follows '...this Jew of Celsus.... continues: "The old mythological fables, which attributed a divine origin to Perseus, and Amphion, and Aeacus, and Minos, were not believed by us. Nevertheless, that they might not appear unworthy of credit, they represented the deeds of these personages as great and wonderful, and truly beyond the power of man; but what hast thou done that is noble or wonderful either in deed or in word?' Wouldn't Origen have loved to answer Celsus's taunt by pointing out that the renowned Jewish historian Josephus said Jesus performed wonderful works.

    It is admitted that the passage of Josephus was tampered with by Christians. Strictly speaking, this rules it out altogether as evidence. If a prosecution lawyer in a court case tried to introduce evidence that had been tampered with by prosecution witnesses, that evidence would be rejected. However, let us examine the claim that we can tell in this short paragraph by looking at the style, which phrases are Josephan and which are Christian interpolations. In passing I note that many Christians deny that we can tell by looking at the style that Paul did not write 1 or 2 Timothy, Titus or Ephesians, although there we have whole letters to work with, not just a few phrases.

    It is worth pointing out that any Christian scribe who had just copied out 17 books of Josephus would be familiar with his style and easily able to express Christian thoughts in Josephan language.

    Josephus only uses the phrase 'a wise man' about Solomon and Daniel. Would a first-century Pharisee bracket a crucified criminal with legendary kings and prophets? It was Christian writers who compared Jesus to Solomon (Matthew 12:42) and praised the wisdom of Jesus (Luke 2:46-52)

    Josephus only used the phrase wonderful works about Elisha. As your email pointed out it was Christians who saw parallels between Jesus and Elijah and Elisha.

    In Mark 6:2 , Jews praise the wisdom and mighty works of Jesus. Can we be sure that Josephus's 'wise man' and 'wonderful works' must be genuine as no Christian interpolator would have had any motive to portray Josephus the way the Gospels say Jews regarded Jesus? I doubt it.

    Josephus's phrase 'the principal men' (ton proton andron) is mirrored in Luke 19:47 - 'the leaders among the people' (hoi protoi)

    The passage of Josephus first appears in 'Ecclesiastical History' by Eusebius in about 320 AD. Eusebius also includes clearly fake letters by Jesus himself. Another quote of Josephus by Eusebius is especially interesting , as we can see how Eusebius would doctor quotes to make them support Christian writings .

    Josephus wrote in Antiquities Book 19 Section 346 'But as he presently afterwards looked up, he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head, and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger (Greek 'Angelos') of ill tidings...' Eusebius in his History (2.10) omits the words 'boubona - epi schoiniou tinos' (ie an owl on a certain rope) and retains only the 'angelos' or messenger. As it stands in Eusebius, the 'quote' of Josephus appears to support Acts 12:23 which mentions an 'angelos', but naturally does not say this messenger was an owl.

    Eusebius is the first person to say that Josephus referred to 'the tribe of Christians' . Eusebius also said Tertullian referred to the tribe of Christians. He did not. Eusebius also said Trajan referred to the tribe of Christians. He did not.

    To sum up, Josephus's mention of Jesus was unknown for two centuries, is admitted even by Christians to be tampered with and first appears in the work of somebody who produced forged letters of Jesus, doctored quotes of Josephus, and lied about one of the very phrases found in the Testimonium when saying that other ancient writers used it. Almost every phrase expresses Christian, not Jewish, beliefs about Jesus.

    Nice, thanks for that.
  • EilianEilian Posts: 276
    "is admitted even by Christians to be tampered with"

    If you had a book reference with an admission of tampering from a Christian Historian I'd be delighted,...the relatives I debate with will squirm out of the smallest plot-hole.
  • ONCE DEVIDEDONCE DEVIDED Posts: 1,131
    Pope Prius edited the bible in the 16 century
    So it cannot be used asroof of anything other than opinion
    AUSSIE AUSSIE AUSSIE
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Byrnzie wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    I feel a very real kinship to Jesus though and after watching a recent documentary
    feel he was an amazing man.

    Cool. I didn't realize they had video camera's in the first century A.D. Did he have blue eyes and blond hair like in all the paintings of him?

    no it was authentic heritage based on the town he lived and a skull that was found
    in that area ... then a computer generation and an actor who resembled that.

    Can't find a pic of the actor used for reenactments

    but here a pic of the young actor Jesus

    f5fuka0ecvsjxizpi3.jpg
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    pandora wrote:
    It is true there is no evidence at the moment that comes from Jesus' lifetime
    that he existed at all.
    But this was also true for John the Baptist until just recently
    and other poor preachers at that time. Why should there be?

    I don't know a lot about religious history but feel this is probably not unusual.
    Not to be disrespectful, but during his lifetime Jesus was not someone
    who they would write about. His time was short though he touched many with
    his new beliefs. These beliefs, a new hope for the down trodden, one God and a heaven
    to reward those who have suffered awaits us all.
    His life stories were passed down through the generations and chronicled
    a century and a half later. For me that is proof enough he existed.

    A cave was found that some suspect was John the Baptist
    place of worship but of course some are disputing. This 8 years ago or so.

    There will always be disputing and this is where people find their faith or not.

    I have not found that faith as of yet in my life but perhaps one day.

    I feel a very real kinship to Jesus though and after watching a recent documentary
    feel he was an amazing man. He stays with me.

    Whether he was just a man or whether he was sent here
    by God to teach and was given miracles ...and I do believe in miracles! :D
    I don't know
    but I know God and God's love just as Jesus did and as he taught.

    Why do you believe in miracles?
    Because of April 10, 1996 ...

    but I won't be explaining more

    suffice to say miracles happen everyday! :D
  • well, you'd think that if there was a guy walking around healing people with his bare hands and turning water into wine, someone would have jotted something down about this guy.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    this was 2000+ years ago!

    besides that... there were many faith healers ...
    gosh from this documentary it was just a horrible time but so much like today still...
    I couldn't help feeling that.

    And Jesus came to bring beautiful hope, faith to help get these people through
    horrible lives...
    so much injustice, cruelty, violence.
    And the taxes the poor paid so the rich got richer, the opulence sickening.

    He spoke of another life beyond earthly life where all those that had been hurt
    and oppressed would have their own kingdom and be rewarded.
    And those oppressing, killing, would be punished.

    It was just what they needed, gee its just what many still need most especially those
    who live lives of suffering.

    He just wanted to help. He wanted others to know what he knew.
    He wanted them to know the love, the love from God. It is just what they needed.
  • pandora wrote:
    this was 2000+ years ago!

    I agree Pandora, that the message is clearly very positive, but your statement above is precisely why people have a hard time believing it. we hardly believe anything humanity believed from that long ago, especially something without any hard evidence to back it.
    Gimli 1993
    Fargo 2003
    Winnipeg 2005
    Winnipeg 2011
    St. Paul 2014
  • iamicaiamica Chicago Posts: 2,628
    Josephus also mentioned John the Baptist's execution in his Antiquities: 18.5.2. 116-119.

    The passage concerning Jesus in Josephus' Antiquities is controversial; most scholars believe that it was inserted at a later date.

    Tacitus mentioned Emperor Nero's persecution of Christians in 64 CE and a man named "Christus" in his Annals, but these were written circa 116 CE:

    "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. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."

    Thallus wrote a history of the ancient Eastern Mediterranean world up through his own time (circa 52 CE), but his work has only survived in citations by others. Julius Africanus (c. 160-240 CE) quoted a passage of his that described an earthquake and a total eclipse of the sun simultaneously (Extant Writings, 18).

    The Babylonian Talmud, compiled from the 1st-5th centuries CE, mentioned a man named "Yeshu" who was hanged on the eve of Passover (Sanhedrin 43a).

    Lucian of Samostata (c. 125-180 CE) wrote about a man that the Christians worshiped. His writing was from the 2nd century, so it's not contemporary to when Jesus lived, but it's noteworthy: "He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world...Having convinced themselves that they are immortal and will live forever, the poor wretches despise death and most willingly give themselves to it. Moreover, that first lawgiver of theirs persuaded them that they are all brothers the moment they transgress and deny the Greek gods and begin worshiping that crucified sophist and living by his laws." (The Death of Peregrine)

    So there are ancient references, but most of the secular references were, at the earliest, written in the early 100s CE.
    Chicago 2000 : Chicago 2003 : Chicago 2006 : Summerfest 2006 : Lollapalooza 2007 : Chicago 2009 : Noblesville (Indy) 2010 : PJ20 (East Troy) 2011 : Wrigley Field 2013 : Milwaukee (Yield) 2014 : Wrigley Field 2016
  • markin ballmarkin ball Posts: 1,075
    pandora wrote:
    pandora wrote:
    It is true there is no evidence at the moment that comes from Jesus' lifetime
    that he existed at all.
    But this was also true for John the Baptist until just recently
    and other poor preachers at that time. Why should there be?

    I don't know a lot about religious history but feel this is probably not unusual.
    Not to be disrespectful, but during his lifetime Jesus was not someone
    who they would write about. His time was short though he touched many with
    his new beliefs. These beliefs, a new hope for the down trodden, one God and a heaven
    to reward those who have suffered awaits us all.
    His life stories were passed down through the generations and chronicled
    a century and a half later. For me that is proof enough he existed.

    A cave was found that some suspect was John the Baptist
    place of worship but of course some are disputing. This 8 years ago or so.

    There will always be disputing and this is where people find their faith or not.

    I have not found that faith as of yet in my life but perhaps one day.

    I feel a very real kinship to Jesus though and after watching a recent documentary
    feel he was an amazing man. He stays with me.

    Whether he was just a man or whether he was sent here
    by God to teach and was given miracles ...and I do believe in miracles! :D
    I don't know
    but I know God and God's love just as Jesus did and as he taught.

    Why do you believe in miracles?
    Because of April 10, 1996 ...

    but I won't be explaining more

    suffice to say miracles happen everyday! :D

    Like what? I've never experienced a miracle. Please share.
    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win ."

    "With our thoughts we make the world"
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    pandora wrote:
    this was 2000+ years ago!

    I agree Pandora, that the message is clearly very positive, but your statement above is precisely why people have a hard time believing it. we hardly believe anything humanity believed from that long ago, especially something without any hard evidence to back it.
    I agree, very hard to believe and it is hard for me also, why I am not a Christian.
    But its not hard for some and for me personally, I can understand why that is.

    There is so much that is hard to do in our lives, like even to be kind and respectful
    of each other, through those hard things comes extreme satisfaction of
    just doing the right thing for the sake of another.

    A positive message is what Christ gave me, not religion in my case, but the reinforcement
    of my belief in God and Gods love.

    Jesus 'got it' but what was done with it by man 2000 years ago fits in that time,
    in my opinion.
    Now it has evolved and will keep evolving, hopefully, in the spirit of love for all.
  • pandorapandora Posts: 21,855
    Like what? I've never experienced a miracle. Please share.

    imagine what would it take for you, I was an atheist, to believe in God
    and perhaps you will have your answer.
  • satansbedsatansbed Posts: 2,139
    pandora wrote:
    Like what? I've never experienced a miracle. Please share.

    imagine what would it take for you, I was an atheist, to believe in God
    and perhaps you will have your answer.

    or you know you could just tell us...
This discussion has been closed.