1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

JESUS CHRIST: Myth or Historical Person?

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Alter2Ego, Aug 27, 2012.

  1. #1
    ALTER2EGO -to- EVERYONE:

    A favorite argument by non-believers is that Jesus Christ's existence is confined to the pages of the Judeo-Christian Bible. When presented with documentary evidence of his historical existence, Bible critics then use another ploy: they attack the credibility of those who confirmed the existence of Jesus Christ and/or they attack the credibility of what was written about Jesus Christ.

    Below are three non-Christians from the 1st Century AD who mentioned Jesus Christ in their secular writings. The questions for debate are at the end of this post.



    PERSON #1:
    Name and Occupation: Cornelius Tacitus, Roman Historian

    DOB to Date of Death: A.D. 55 to A.D. 120

    Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile

    What He Said: He confirmed that CHRISTUS (a common misspelling of Christ at the time) was executed by Pilate.

    Highlights on Tacitus: A Roman historian who lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors, Tacitus has been called "the greatest historian of ancient Rome."



    PERSON #2:
    Name and Occupation: Flavius Josephus, Jewish Historian

    DOB to Date of Death: 37 AD -- Died after 100 AD

    Attitude Towards Christianity: Apathetic (could care less about them)

    What He Said: He confirmed that Christ who performed miracles was executed by Pilate.

    Highlights on Josephus: A Jewish historian of priestly and royal ancestry who recorded Jewish history, with special emphasis on the 1st century AD (the century in which Jesus Christ lived and died). He has been credited by many as recording some of the earliest history of Jesus Christ outside of the gospels. Flavius Josephus belonged to the group of Jewish religious leaders--the Pharisees--responsible for Jesus' death.

    Flavius Josephus joined the zealots who rebelled against Roman rule between 66 and 74 AD, becoming a leader of their forces in Galilee, and living through the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. He was captured by the Romans, and would have been executed, but he went over to their side and ended up becoming the Roman emperor's Adviser on Jewish Affairs.



    PERSON #3:
    Name and Occupation: Pliny The Younger (born Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus), Roman Governor

    DOB to Date of Death: 61 AD to 112 AD

    Attitude Towards Christianity: Hostile. He executed Christians

    What He Said: Referred to Christ as a "god of the Christians."

    Highlights on Pliny: Pliny condemned Men, Women, and children to death if they refused to curse Christ and if they refused to deny they were Christians.



    DISCUSSION QUESTIONS:
    1. All three of the individuals described above were people in powerful positions who were anti-Christian and belonged to groups that actively killed Christians. All three individuals belonged to organizations that were responsible for Jesus' death. What did they have to gain from mentioning the existence of Jesus Christ in their writings--thereby confirming his earthly existence?

    2. Flavius Josephus, a Jew, was born a mere four years after Jesus was executed. He became a Jewish Pharisee as an adult, in addition to becoming a respected historian and advisor to the Roman emperor. Do you see anything significant to his being a Pharisee, a historian, and Roman emperor advisor--and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?

    3. Cornelius Tactitus was known as the greatest historian of his time, during which he lived through the reign of over a half-dozen Roman emperors. Do you see anything significant to his resume and the fact that he mentioned Jesus Christ in his writings?
     
    Alter2Ego, Aug 27, 2012 IP
    Jeffreyw likes this.
  2. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    They all mentioned Hercules too. Do we then accept that Hercules was a historical person...because he was mentioned by Josephus, Pliny and Tacitus?

    No he didn't mention your Jesus in his writings. It is accepted by scholars on both sides of the argument that the mention of your Jesus in 'Antiquities' is a Christian interpolation. How do we know? Well...

    1. Josephus was a Jew and as such would never have referred to anyone as 'Christ'
    2. There was no mention of the passage by the early Church fathers. One of them, Origen, had the task of scouring the works of secular historian to find evidence of 'Jesus' yet he didn't mention the passage by Josephus, which he surely would have done had it been there.
    3. Most damning of all, the passage did not appear in any copies of Antiquities until 300 years AFTER Josephus was dead. It first appeared when the great Christian forger Eusebius got his grubby little hands on 'Antiquities'.

    The conclusion is that the passage is just another example of Christianity desperately seeking evidence for their man-god and finding none.... inventing it.

    Tacitus does nothing more than repeat the stories that were being spread by Christians. His work is not, even remotely, verification that the stories that 2nd century Christians believed, were true. Tacitus was merely echoing popular opinion about 'Jesus' and had no independent source of information.

    As for Pliny, he only writes about how to deal with Christians. The fact that Christians existed in his time does not verify the existence of any 'Christ'.

    What Christians should be asking themselves is, if their man-god really did exist, why do no contemporaneous historians mention him? There were plenty of them around...

    Aulus Perseus
    Coumella
    Dio Chrysostom
    Justus of Tiberius
    Livy
    Lucanus
    Lucius Florus
    Petronius
    Phaedeus
    Philo Judaeus
    Phlegon
    Pliny the Elder
    Plutarch
    Pomponius Meta
    Rufus Curtius
    Quintillan
    Quintus Curtlus
    Seneca
    Silius Italicus
    Statius Caelicius
    Theon of Smyrna
    Valerius Fiaccus
    Valerius Maximus

    ...to name but a few, yet not one of them mentions any 'Jesus' or any of the miracles associated with him. Christians should find it strange that a man who allegedly - travelled from city to city, raising the dead, curing the sick, making blind people see, walking on water, feeding thousands with little food and then having more food left over than he started with, drawing 'multitudes to hear him speak and who was later killed and came back to life - did not get mentioned by ANYONE until some 40 years after he had been dead!! Historians of the era might be expected to at least MENTION a miracle worker and teacher of multitudes. Their silence is significant.

    Consider also Justus of Tiberias, who was a Jewish historian, born in Galilee about the time of the alleged Jesus crucifixion. Justus therefore grew up and lived among men who, one would think, would still freshly remember the teachings of Jesus and his disciples....yet in his two great works, 'A History Of The War Of Independence' and 'A Chronicle Of Events From Moses To Agrippa II', not one single reference was made to any Jesus or the events and miracles attributed to him....a fact that didn't go unnoticed by the theologian Photius. Photius knew both of Justus' books well and commented on this fact with astonishment.

    So, that's Josephus, Pliny and Tacitus debunked. If you feel up to it I can do the same with Suetonius, Mara bar Sarapion, Ignatius, Thallus, Phlegon, Valentinus, Polycarp, Lucien, Gallen, the Talmud...or any of the other favourites that Christians 'claim' to have mentioned their man-god.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2012
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  3. Gomeza

    Gomeza Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #3


    Wow, history re-written for the gullible . . . CHRISTUS? . . . really, does anyone believe this?

    Considering that if Jesus Christ did exist his name would have been Yeshua Ben Yosef at the time of his execution. Christ was not his last name (nor was "of Nazareth" his last name) especially considering that surnames were not used back then, it is a title roughly translated as the "anointed one". Both words in his name Jesus and Christ are anglicized transliterations, though it is not clear when he was referred to as "the Christ", it most definitely was a title awarded posthumously and made "official" at the council of Nicea 325AD.

    You do nothing to refute the argument that there is nothing referencing Jesus Christ that was contemporary to his time. It should raise an eyebrow that a society (Roman Empire) that routinely recorded the most mundane of day to day transactions did not chronicle one single aspect of the life of what would have been the world's biggest celebrity at the time. Everything written about Jesus Christ is in the third person and written decades after his death.
     
    Gomeza, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  4. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #4
    Aaww but guys, you forgot to leave talking points, homework to discuss. What will the church group talk about this Sunday now?

    Here you go...

    1. You are God, that is the ultimate message of the bible. Why should you believe anything else? Do you see anything significant about this revelation?

    2. Other people can read your thoughts and you can read others thoughts. Do you see anything significant about this revelation?

    3. If you think up something great and do nothing about it someone else will pick up the thought and run with it. Do you see anything significant about this revelation?
     
    Bushranger, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  5. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    Either this 'Jesus' character was a divinity who chose to dazzle multitudes but leave no trace, who contrived to influence – not the Jewish people – but a mere handful of shadowy devotees whose successors rapidly split into numerous warring factions; or he is the fabrication of human minds, a construct betrayed at every turn by contradiction and omission.

    What do we think folks?
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  6. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    True enough. Though the Holy Babble says that Nazareth was a "City" (and a city big enough to have a synagogue), there was no city or even a town called Nazareth in the first century CE. Nazareth is not mentioned in any historical records or biblical texts of the time and there is no mention of it by any contemporary historian. It's not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud or the Apocrypha and it doesn't appear in any early rabbinic literature. It's was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulon which mentions twelve towns and six villages. Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus and it's also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud.

    Until the third century CE, Nazareth was nothing more than an insignificant hamlet of a dozen or so houses.
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  7. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #7
    See, I get my messages straight from the horse's mouth... oops horse...sorry God.
     
    Bushranger, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  8. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    Edition No 1473...out soon!
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  9. Alter2Ego

    Alter2Ego Active Member

    Messages:
    164
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #9
    ALTER2EGO -to- GOMEZA:
    Nobody said "Christ" or "of Nazareth" was Jesus' last name. It seems YouTube hasn't been giving you the correct schooling. Otherwise, it would have provided you with the following information.

    1. "Jesus" is simply the English pronunciation of the Hebrew name "Yeshua" or "Yehoshua".

    2. The descriptive name "Christ" is with reference to Jesus' role as the Messiah or anointed one (the only thing you got right).

    3. The expression "of Nazareth" informs others where he is from—the city of Nazareth.



    Wrong--as usual. Throughout the New Testament, Jesus is referred to as "the Christ." The last book of the Bible was written in 98 AD or 227 years before the Council of Nicaea met in 325 AD. In other words, Jesus was being referred to as "the Christ" for centuries before the Council of Nicaea even existed. It was from his descriptive name "Christ" that the word "Christian" was formed. Furthermore, for centuries before the Council of Nicaea, secular historians referred to his followers as Christians.


    How wrong can one man be? Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus who lived in the 1st century AD wrote about Jesus based on documentary evidence from numerous credible sources that were alive at the time of Jesus Christ's life and death—including writings from the Roman Emperors. I will present info to that effect at a later time for the benefit of others reading this thread.

    You've been debunked.



    NEXT !
     
    Alter2Ego, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  10. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    WRONG! As proven above.

    LMFAO @ the irony!
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  11. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #11
    There are no independent historical accounts of any Jesus. There is only three versions of the same story, with each one adding to and embellishing the events contained in the one before and a forth version that disagrees on several major events with the other three. None are original, at least two have been altered, none were written by eyewitnesses and they were not written as an objective account of what happened, but as a means to recruit additional converts.

    So let's put this to bed once and for all. There is NO good, solid independent extra- biblical evidence for a historical Jesus
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  12. ApocalypseXL

    ApocalypseXL Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,095
    Likes Received:
    103
    Best Answers:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    240
    #12
    ApocalypseXL, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  13. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #13
    The history fail is on your side pal. Go back to my post #6 and take note of where it says....

    "....there was no city or even a town called Nazareth in the first century CE. Nazareth is not mentioned in any historical records or biblical texts of the time and there is no mention of it by any contemporary historian. It's not mentioned in the Old Testament, the Talmud or the Apocrypha and it doesn't appear in any early rabbinic literature. It's was not included in the list of settlements of the tribes of Zebulon which mentions twelve towns and six villages. Nazareth is not included among the 45 cities of Galilee that were mentioned by Josephus and it's also missing from the 63 towns of Galilee mentioned in the Talmud."


    We are talking about the first century so as to bust the myth that the character 'Jesus' could have come from the "CITY" of Nazareth.

    You own link confirms that my information is correct when it says....

    ".... However, lack of archaeological evidence for Nazareth from Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Hellenistic or Early Roman times, at least in the major excavations between 1955 and 1990, shows that the settlement apparently came to an abrupt end about 720 BC, when many towns in the area were destroyed by the Assyrians."

    See also...

    "James F. Strange, an American archaeologist, notes: “Nazareth is not mentioned in ancient Jewish sources earlier than the third century AD. This likely reflects its lack of prominence both in Galilee and in Judaea.” Strange originally calculated the population of Nazareth at the time of Christ to be "roughly 1,600 to 2,000 people", but in a subsequent publication, revised this figure down to “a maximum of about 480".

    Do you get it now? Although there may have been earlier settlements in the area up until the 8th century BCE, there was no significant population there from the 8th century BCE until the 3rd Century CE...and there was certainly no "city" there for Jesus to have come from in the 1st century CE.

    See dude? That what happens when you don't read your own links properly, coupled with an innate ignorance of the subject you are trying to debunk....you just make yourself look an arsehole! Please stop it, I'm embarrassed for you.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2012
    pladecalvo, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  14. Bushranger

    Bushranger Notable Member

    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    257
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    200
    #14
    I know God, I know.

    Ok God nps, ahem.. umm.. hey Alter2Ego, I have a message here for you from God. He says to remind you we are ALL his Children.
     
    Bushranger, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  15. popotalk

    popotalk Notable Member

    Messages:
    4,840
    Likes Received:
    522
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    260
    #15
    F*ck Your Sins I'm Going Home !

    [​IMG]
     
    popotalk, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  16. Gomeza

    Gomeza Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #16
    Unbelievable, you highlight portions of my post in red and then everything you say simply solidifies my contentions. Is that your idea of "debunking"? . . you may want to look up transliteration . . .
     
    Gomeza, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  17. Gomeza

    Gomeza Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #17
    Where were these people when I was selling cars? . . . clearly they will buy anything!
     
    Gomeza, Aug 28, 2012 IP
  18. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #18
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2012
    pladecalvo, Aug 29, 2012 IP
  19. pladecalvo

    pladecalvo Peon

    Messages:
    553
    Likes Received:
    4
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    [​IMG]
     
    pladecalvo, Aug 29, 2012 IP
  20. Gomeza

    Gomeza Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    412
    Likes Received:
    14
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #20
    When I was just a lad and attending a catholic mission school, I remember asking why some of the fantastic stories of miracles etc. did not happen today? My teacher: Sister Neverhadaman, answered "they were holy times" . . . the correct answer should have been "mankind was so collectively ignorant, illiterate and superstitious back then that most people were capable of believing such incredible whoppers"

    My point is that there is no excuse for people buying this stuff in the 21st century. If not for relentless social conditioning, indoctrination beginning at an early age and the downright wishful thinking of far too many people, all of this incredible nonsense would have died a natural death ages ago.

    As our collective knowledge base as a species expands exponentially, those who cannot overcome their desire to reconcile what is clearly derived from the limitations of our primitive ancestors must redouble their efforts to make what we now know to be impossible, implausible and ridiculous fit into an increasingly non compliant reality.

    At some point, and if the individual wasting their time on this futile effort does not have the inherent integrity to admit that the countless inconsistencies will never add up, they simply change reality. To them, the truth is whatever they want it to be. Integrity is an aspect their beliefs are completely devoid of.
     
    Gomeza, Aug 29, 2012 IP