Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Did Jesus exist, Part II
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 286 of 301 (279345)
01-15-2006 11:32 PM
Reply to: Message 276 by jar
01-15-2006 10:22 PM


Re: Professors of history
jar writes:
We had one. I'll see if I can find it. But outside the Bible there is really nothing on Jesus.
Jar, you keep making statements like this that are just not true. There is evidence outside of the Bible, whether you accept it or not. One can say the evidence for Shakyamuni is questionable as well.
JJM makes a good point that accredited scholars, including notable historians believe there's evidence. From what I've read, there are good scholars, who do not dispute Antiquities 20, for example.

Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by jar, posted 01-15-2006 10:22 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by jar, posted 01-15-2006 11:40 PM Buzsaw has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 287 of 301 (279346)
01-15-2006 11:40 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by Buzsaw
01-15-2006 11:32 PM


Re: Professors of history
Yes, and there are others that do question Antiquities 20. The key point is outside of the Bible there is no evidence that Jesus lived until we get to reports from long after the fact.
But suppose we found direct evidence that there was a Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem, was a preacher and teacher, went to Jerusalem and was tried and crucified, how would that support Jesus' divinity?
It's all a matter of Faith.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by Buzsaw, posted 01-15-2006 11:32 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:05 AM jar has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 288 of 301 (279351)
01-16-2006 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by jar
01-15-2006 11:40 PM


Re: Professors of history
jar writes:
Yes, and there are others that do question Antiquities 20. The key point is outside of the Bible there is no evidence that Jesus lived until we get to reports from long after the fact.
But suppose we found direct evidence that there was a Jesus, who was born in Bethlehem, was a preacher and teacher, went to Jerusalem and was tried and crucified, how would that support Jesus' divinity?
It's all a matter of Faith.
1. Jar, your faith point is off topic. This thread is not about the divinity of Jesus.
2. As Faith and I have both tried to tell you, a measure of evidence is there in the first two centries. That you don't accept it does not erase it. I and others have also cited other corroborating evidence, which you may not accept, such as the fact that Roman Emperor Constantine believed he existed, but it is, nevertheless evidence.

Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by jar, posted 01-15-2006 11:40 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 12:14 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 290 by ReverendDG, posted 01-16-2006 12:45 AM Buzsaw has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 289 of 301 (279353)
01-16-2006 12:14 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 12:05 AM


Re: Professors of history
2. As Faith and I have both tried to tell you, a measure of evidence is there in the first two centries. That you don't accept it does not erase it. I and others have also cited other corroborating evidence, which you may not accept, such as the fact that Roman Emperor Constantine believed he existed, but it is, nevertheless evidence.
Yes, we've gone over that.
But it's simply not evidence. For example, I believe Jesus existed. But that's not evidence for or against his existence.
Belief is not evidence.
If Jesus really lived, even if no one believed, he existed.
If Jesus did not really live, even if 100% of the populus believed, he did not exist.
The fact that Paul, or Constantine, or martyrs or saints believed Jesus existed is not evidence of anything except that they believed he existed. It has nothing to do with reality.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:05 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:52 AM jar has replied

ReverendDG
Member (Idle past 4110 days)
Posts: 1119
From: Topeka,kansas
Joined: 06-06-2005


Message 290 of 301 (279356)
01-16-2006 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 288 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 12:05 AM


Re: Professors of history
2. As Faith and I have both tried to tell you, a measure of evidence is there in the first two centries. That you don't accept it does not erase it. I and others have also cited other corroborating evidence, which you may not accept, such as the fact that Roman Emperor Constantine believed he existed, but it is, nevertheless evidence.
ok how does someone believing in someone give evidence to anything, using this logic, santa claus, the tooth fairy, and the roman gods exist
citing constantine believed is just a plain arguement from authority
This message has been edited by ReverendDG, 01-16-2006 12:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 288 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:05 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:54 AM ReverendDG has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 291 of 301 (279358)
01-16-2006 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by jar
01-16-2006 12:14 AM


Re: Professors of history
jar writes:
But it's simply not evidence. For example, I believe Jesus existed. But that's not evidence for or against his existence.
I didn't say belief in itself was evidence.
jar writes:
Belief is not evidence.
I didn't say belief in itself was evidence.
jar writes:
The fact that Paul, or Constantine, or martyrs or saints believed Jesus existed is not evidence of anything except that they believed he existed. It has nothing to do with reality.
As I explained before, after someone posted that the Romans kept precise recores, if the not too far remote Roman Emporer Constantine believed he existed, likely he did, as that would be no more remote than for a notable in colonial days to us. That's not empirical, but nevertheless adds to the collection of corroborating evidence. That thousands were willing to die (not remote) for believing he existed, is one more addition to the collection of corroborating evidence.
Add to that collection of evidence, the quotes from the notable historians, some not remote.
Add to that, for those who are willing to adknowledge them, the fulfilled prophecies concerning him as well as by him. This may not be considered significant to some but, nevertheless strengthens the case.
It has been noted that in spite of the fact that the earlier emperors worked to wipe out the sect,including the scrolls by burning, they failed to extinguish the movement........not likely if it were all a farce and the man didn't exist to begin with.
You can't just sweep all this evidence under the rug like your attempting to do, Jar, by simply repeating that there is none, whatsoever.

Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 12:14 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 1:00 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 298 by Iblis, posted 01-16-2006 1:39 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 292 of 301 (279359)
01-16-2006 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 290 by ReverendDG
01-16-2006 12:45 AM


Re: Professors of history
See message 291, RevDG.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 290 by ReverendDG, posted 01-16-2006 12:45 AM ReverendDG has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 293 of 301 (279360)
01-16-2006 1:00 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 12:52 AM


Re: Professors of history
As I explained before, after someone posted that the Romans kept precise recores, if the not too far remote Roman Emporer Constantine believed he existed, likely he did, as that would be no more remote than for a notable in colonial days to us. That's not empirical, but nevertheless adds to the collection of corroborating evidence. That thousands were willing to die (not remote) for believing he existed, is one more addition to the collection of corroborating evidence.
Are all of those beliefs?
Add to that collection of evidence, the quotes from the notable historians, some not remote.
Are those based on beliefs?
Add to that, for those who are willing to adknowledge them, the fulfilled prophecies concerning him as well as by him. This may not be considered significant to some but, nevertheless strengthens the case.
Well, start another thread on the alleged prophecies and we'll work through them again.
It has been noted that in spite of the fact that the earlier emperors worked to wipe out the sect,including the scrolls by burning, they failed to extinguish the movement........not likely if it were all a farce and the man didn't exist to begin with.
Again, simply acknowledgement that folk believed. Just like Jonestown, like Heavens Gate.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:52 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 1:10 AM jar has replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 294 of 301 (279361)
01-16-2006 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by jar
01-16-2006 1:00 AM


Re: Professors of history
jar writes:
Are all of those beliefs?
Are those based on beliefs?
You're obfuscating with word/phrase games again as per your usual modus, jar, when you get in a tight spot. They are evidence. Belief weighs in as to whether you believe the evidence. One may not believe the evidence that Julius Caesar existed, but that doesn't erase the evidence.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gravity is God's glue that holds his universe together.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 1:00 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 1:12 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 297 by lfen, posted 01-16-2006 1:33 AM Buzsaw has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 295 of 301 (279362)
01-16-2006 1:12 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 1:10 AM


Re: Professors of history
No buz, I think you misunderstand what evidence is.
If I believe 2 + 2 = 5, is that evidence that 2 + 2 = 5?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 1:10 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 1:24 AM jar has not replied

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 296 of 301 (279363)
01-16-2006 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 295 by jar
01-16-2006 1:12 AM


Re: Professors of history
This is a waste of good sleep for me, Jar. You wouldn't acknowledge anything supportive of the Bible is the evidence kicked you in the butt! Take care.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 295 by jar, posted 01-16-2006 1:12 AM jar has not replied

lfen
Member (Idle past 4677 days)
Posts: 2189
From: Oregon
Joined: 06-24-2004


Message 297 of 301 (279364)
01-16-2006 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 1:10 AM


Re: Professors of history
They are evidence.
Buz,
They are evidence of something but of what? Paul's Christ was overwelmingly mystical. Dying for beliefs doesn't mean there was a historical person, only a belief in a God man.
There might have been an actual person whose life inspired the religion. That much is plausible. But what independent historical evidence do we have for him? People were believing all kinds of things in those days, much as they do in these days, come to think of it. Believing extrordinary stuff is pretty typical of people. What we are looking for and not finding is independent confirmation that a rabbi, a messiah candidate lived and was killed by the Romans. That much is plausible but the evidence is very little and of dubious quality.
Later on there was lots of believers in the Gospels and the whole story taught by the church, but a historical argument requires evidence that is contemporary or from his lifetime. Jar is saying that is not very good. What you are left with is what the Church has always claimed that it is by faith. I don't think Jar is resorting to dodges. There really is almost no evidence and the Josepheus cites are contaminated if not wholey the result of later additions.
Someday evidence may turn up. It's not likely but it could happen.
lfen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 1:10 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Iblis
Member (Idle past 3895 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 298 of 301 (279365)
01-16-2006 1:39 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Buzsaw
01-16-2006 12:52 AM


Let's Summarize
Well we are just a few posts short of 13 o'clock and the last 3 pages haven't added much. Let's go over the sources one more time
Philo -- Nothing, not a word, though he seems to be the same religion or philosophy or whatever-it-is as John the Evangelist and would have presumably gotten a kick out of any "Logos" mythology that might have been available
Josephus, Antiquities 18 -- not quoted by Origen though he uses Josephus extensively in his lifelong argument with Celsus regarding the accuracy of Christian records; an obvious insertion in that it appears out-of-context in a list of 3 terrible massacres by Pilate involving multitudes of Jews; extreme hyperbole, about ten times more "purple" than any other passage in Josephus, and using several words not written by Josephus in any of his known writings; not quoted by anyone or appearing in any texts before Eusebius in 340 AD
Josephus, Antiquities 18, Arabic version -- not quoted by anyone before the beginning of Islam, corresponds exactly to Muhammed's view of Jesus
Josephus, Antiquities 20 -- not quoted verbatim by anyone before Eusebius; by verbatim I refer specifically to the "so-called Christ" part, an obvious insertion in that the Jesus being referred to is the son of Damneus, who was made high priest after his brother James' (Jacob's) death
Pliny, correspondence with Trajan -- does not assert historicity, regards Christ as a god of a mystery religion, does not mention Jesus at all, gets his information by torturing deaconesses
Suetonius, Life of Claudius -- mentions a certain Chrestus, apparently alive and instigating a Jewish revolt in Rome
Suetonius, Life of Nero -- mentions Christians (not Chrestians) who are accused of burning Rome, not quoted before Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century, an obvious insertion in that it appears out of context in a list of good things done by Nero
Tacitus -- mentions Christians, their founder Christus who "suffered under Pontius Pilate, crucified dead and buried", and blames Nero for the actual burning of Rome, placing him on the scene when in fact we know he was at Anzio at the time; not quoted before Sulpicius Severus although it like Josephus 18 is a grab-bag of Christian creed elements that would have benefitted from historical support
So, it looks like we need for Eusebius and Sulpicius to be very truthful moral people, not subject to any doubt as to their sense of history or their concept of truthfulness
Sulpicius Severus is the author of the Life of St. Martin, which attributes to the said neo-Pelagian, his own contemporary, far more and weirder miracles than all the gospels together attribute to Jesus.
Eusebius is the author of the Letters of Antoninus Pius, a 4th-century document attributed to a 2nd-century pagan emperor which seizes on the epithet "Pious" to make him a sympathizer, forbidding "tumults against Christians" and containing numerous anachronisms (it has a Greek emperor for one thing, there were none before Constantine). Here is a nice quote from Eusebius regarding his view of history: "We shall introduce into this history in general only those events which may be useful first to ourselves and afterwards to posterity." (Ecclesiastical History, Vol. 8, chapter 2)
Anything I missed?
* turns out there is, here is the title of the 32nd chapter of Eusebius' 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation: "How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."
This message has been edited by Iblis, 01-16-2006 01:44 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Buzsaw, posted 01-16-2006 12:52 AM Buzsaw has not replied

U can call me Cookie
Member (Idle past 4952 days)
Posts: 228
From: jo'burg, RSA
Joined: 11-15-2005


Message 299 of 301 (279366)
01-16-2006 2:32 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by Faith
01-13-2006 11:53 AM


Re: Essenes
The qumran texts describe the life of a people living at the time. When these were found and interpreted, they were found to provide a context for John's life that made that found in the NT quite a bit more meaningful. Conjectural yes, as i said, but still supportive.
Take note Faith, i am not trying to "push" an issue. This is to me, simply an interesting topic of debate; or were we not debating? If you feel otherwise, then so be it. It is of no consequence to me.

So intimate that your hand upon my chest is my hand,
so intimate that when I fall asleep it is your eyes that close.
- Pablo Neruda

This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 01-13-2006 11:53 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Faith, posted 01-16-2006 4:21 AM U can call me Cookie has not replied

Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 300 of 301 (279369)
01-16-2006 4:21 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by U can call me Cookie
01-16-2006 2:32 AM


Re: Essenes
I just don't get this insistence on coming up with interpretations that contradict the traditional. Seems unnecessary and strained.
When these were found and interpreted, they were found to provide a context for John's life that made that found in the NT quite a bit more meaningful. Conjectural yes, as i said, but still supportive.
But I see no lack whatever in the Biblical context for John's life to begin with. I see it as completely meaningful as written. There is/was no need for any other context.
But this is post #300 for this thread and maybe that's enough said anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by U can call me Cookie, posted 01-16-2006 2:32 AM U can call me Cookie has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024