The Existence of Jesus Christ

Iasion - Roughly 80 years after the alleged events Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.Jabez - and Josephus calls Pilate a procurator in Antiquities 18.5.6 as well. So what?http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/tacitus.html#tacproc

ramoss - Do you have a source about that from other than the very bad appologist, J.P. Holding (aka, Robert Turkel)? The only claims to that either are from Holding, or people who refer to him.Jabez - ramoss I've looked at a few things things he's written and don't have a problem with his material but find him to be quite smug.From http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/ant-18.htm , the beginning of chapter 3:"1. BUT now Pilate, the procurator of Judea, removed the army from Cesarea to Jerusalem, to take their winter quarters there, in order to abolish the Jewish laws. So he introduced Caesar's effigies, which were upon the ensigns, and brought them into the city; whereas our law forbids us the very making of images; on which account the former procurators were wont to make their entry into the city with such ensigns as had not those ornaments."I see that number 3 in that chapter is the testimonium. From chapter 2 : "He was now the third emperor; and he sent Valerius Gratus to be procurator of Judea, and to succeed Annius Rufus....When Gratus had done those things, he went back to Rome, after he had tarried in Judea eleven years, when Pontius Pilate came as his successor.Holding may have given an incorrect reference because it shows Antiquities chapter 18.5 stops after .4; But in 18.6.5 it says "And, as a further attestation to what I say of the dilatory nature of Tiberius, I appeal to this his practice itself; for although he was emperor twenty-two years, he sent in all but two procurators to govern the nation of the Jews, Gratus, and his successor in the government, Pilate."

Speaking of the phrase "put out of the synagogue" the New Interpreter's Bible says "In a highly influential study, J. Louis Martyn proposed that this phrase refers to a practice of excommunicating perceived heretics from the synagogue. This practice was formalized in the Benediction Against Heretics (Birkath ha-Minam), a benediction introduced into the synagogue liturgy sometime after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE and probably between 85 and 95 CE." (The New Interpreter's Bible, Volume IX p. 504). Unless their are records that show the specific date it can't be determined exactly when the practice of putting people "out of the synagogue" began.I've read that Ireneaus was a disciple of Polycarp who knew John from Ephesus and may have been his disciple. About 180 AD Irenaeus wrote "The Gospels could not possibly be either more or less in number than they are. Since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is spread over all the earth, and the pillar and foundation of the Church is the gospel, and the Spirit of life, it fittingly has four pillars, everywhere breathing out incorruption and revivifying men. From this it is clear that the Word, the artificer of all things, being manifested to men gave us the gospel, fourfold in form but held together by one Spirit." (Against Heresies 3.11.8)Greek scholar Daniel Wallace gives a short but good examination of the authorship of John's Gospel at Page not found | Bible.orgIn John chapter 5 there's a story of an invalid who was healed by a pool called Bethesda. In 1886 archaelogists excavated the ruins of the pool. It would have been destroyed in 70 AD but John wrote of it in the present tense. Speaking of John 5:2 Wallace states (a) "the verb is (ejstin) cannot be a historical present, and (b) the pool was destroyed in 70 CE. By far the most plausible conclusion is that this gospel was written before 70 CE." On the gospel itself he says "The author uses the historical present more than any other gospel writer (161 times) and in such a way as to indicate vividness of portrayal. One should note the especially heavy use in chapter 4 and the passion narrative. This suggests the vivid recollections of an eyewitness."In the 1930's French archaeologist Pere Vincent found Gabbatha (the Stone Pavement) which is mentioned in John 19:13. Archaeologists have also unearthed the pool of Siloam (John 9:7,11) and Jacob’s well at Sychar (John 4:5). There are pictures of the pool of Siloam and the pool of Bethesda at LMU BuildWarren Berkley makes some good points about John's knowledge of the area of which he wrote:"....he knew that Bethany was only fifteen furlongs away from Jerusalem (11:18). He knew that Ephraim was near the wilderness (11:54). He knew that the Garden of Gethsemane was on the other side of the brook Kidron (18:1). He knew that there was a paved area
outside of the praetorium (19:13). He was aware of the region of Samaria and that Jacob's well was located in Sychar (4:5-6), and that it was deep (4:11). Again, archaeologists have found this well. He knew about the sacred mountain of Samaritan worship (4:20-21). He was
aware of Galilee (1:44,46; 2:1,2). Another interesting feature of John is that, when compared with the Synoptics, his Gospel consistently gives more references to chronology, geography, topography, and
the like. As recently as 1961 an inscription was discovered in Caesarea, providing for the first time extra-biblical corroboration of Pilate as Judea's prefect during the time of Christ."The Authenticity of the Gospel of John

Something interesting I found:"The Israeli Professor Sukenik discovered in 1945 a sealed tomb outside Jerusalem, in a suburb called Talpioth. It had escaped spoliation, and its contents were intact. There were five ossuaries, or bone caskets, in the tomb, and the style of their decoration confirmed the indication of a coin found there that the tomb was closed approximately AD 50. On two of these ossuries the name of Jesus appears clearly; one reads, in Greek, Iesu Iou ('Jesus, help'), the other, in Aramaic, Yeshu' Aloth (? 'Jesus, let him arise'). The theological implications of these crudely scratched inscriptions, written within twenty years of the crucifixion, are truly remarkable. They point to Jesus as the Lord of life, who can help even when a loved one has died. They point to Jesus as the risen Son of God, who can raise the Christian dead from their graves. It would be difficult to imagine any archaeological finds which could more clearly illustrate the clear faith of the early church in the Jesus whom many of them had known personally as a historical figure walking the streets of Palestine a few years previously."churchtec.org.uk

You're welcome Randman. One of my favorite apologists is Sam Shamoun and he has a lot of information at http://answering-islam.org.uk/Shamoun/documents.htmrandman - It's interesting because it appears on this thread we have folks that argue that Josephus is accurate despite a number of glaring mistakes, admitted by all scholars, and then discount John which exhibits such a tremendous level of cooroborating evidence.Jabez - good point. On that webpage Shamoun quotes scholar F.F. Bruce who wrote "The evidence for our New Testament writings is ever so much greater than the evidence for many writings of classical author, the authenticity of which no one dreams of questioning. And if the New Testament were a collection of secular writings, their authenticity would generally be regarded as beyond all doubt. (F.F. Bruce, The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable? 5th rev. ed. [Grand Rapids, MI: Inter-Varsity Press, 1988], p. 15)"ramoss - Because, frankly, a lot of the very religious sites are very biased.Jabez - I have found the same to be true about many Atheists and Evolutionists. Thanks for posting what C.K. Barret had to say about that although I wonder why he says Iesous Aloth rather than Yeshu' Aloth.

Thanks for the welcome and the tips.

Besides the problem of trying to connect Luke, Paul and the disciples with Krishna or Mithrias those who don't believe Jesus really existed face other problems. If a handful, or hundreds, of people who were the first Christians made up this allegedly non-existent Jesus their "fable" could have and would have been squashed by the Jews of that day.Those who wrote the New Testament said that Jesus fulfilled the Messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. The idea of a mythical figure fulfilling these prophecies would have outraged the Jews of the first through fourth centuries and they would have ABSOLUTELY made it known that there was no person named Yeshua of Nazareth who was crucified and rose from the dead. But what did the Jews do? About 200 B.C. they changed Psalm 22:16 to "Like a Lion are my hands and feet" when they created the Masoretic text. They understood the implications of this verse and wouldn't accept that Jesus is the Messiah. The LXX (or septuagint) was written about 200 B.C., four hundred years earlier than the MT, and in the LXX it says "they have pierced my hands and feet." In the Dead Sea Scrolls, which were written centuries before the Masoretic text, it says "They have pierced my hands and my feet." ps22cheat.htmlAlso, if Luke, Paul and the disciples learned of Mithras from Roman Soldiers and based this alleged Jesus myth on Mithras, Roman Soldiers could have easily made it known that this was a copycat and they had not crucified and guarded the tomb of any Yeshua of Nazareth. Funny....after persecuting and killing the early Christians, Christianity eventually became the official religion of the Roman empire. Hmmmmmm.Then there's the question of motive. Were there early Christians that were arrested, flogged and killed for something that they knew was a lie? If so it begs the question why? Motive, motive, motive?

Hi, Iasion. You said If this is the case then you should be able to refute the points on the Authorship of John's gospel, message 206 of this topic.One thing I want to add about the term procurator. In the Oxford Dictionary of the Bible, under procurator it says "The frequently applied title procurator to Pontius Pilate is due to the historian Josephus who did not always give in Greek the exact translation of Latin Titles." Oxford Dictionary of the Bible by W.R.F. Browning, p.303 Oxford University Press 1996.Under prefect (p. 301) it says "'Prefect' is the title accorded to Pontius Pilate in the inscription from Caeseara, but he is called a procurator by Jospehus. The two terms are almost synonymous."

Jabez - you're analogies are ludicrous; you're not comparing apples and oranges; more like apples and daisies. Let me explain the difference between one of the stories you've mentioned and the gospels. Everyone knows that James Bond is a fictional character and that the author is Ian Fleming. In the movie Diamonds are Forever the character Willard White is based on Howard Hughes - EVERYONE KNOWS THIS!!! If the movie came out several years after Howard Hughes died instead of before he died no one would claim that Willard White is a real person. Fleming's stories were written in the twentieth century and we can easily find documentation if anyone tried to convince people that James Bond was a real person and started a religion based on him.Previously you said Prove it! You claim that it's "rubbish" that the Jews who wrote the MT changed Psalm 22:16 to "like a lion" rather than pierced. The only other possiblity is that it was a scribal error and I give that about one chance in a thousand considering the verse in question. Since you claim this conclusion is rubbish and want proof then prove that sometime in the late first century or early second century the stories of Christ were known to be myths and suddenly became accepted as facts. Your argument completely depends on your unsubstantiated view that the gospels did not exist until the second century. I have seen that website for which you gave a link and am not impressed but will respond to one thing there:"Helms states, "we need to note that part of the purpose of Irenaeus was to attack the teachings of Cerinthus, a gnostic Christian teacher who lived in Ephesus at the end of the first century" (op. cit., p. 162)."It could also be said that the purpose of Irenaeus was to defend the gospels. Commmenting on 2 John 7 in his Word Pictures in the New Testament, the highly respected Greek Scholar A.T. Robertson said "Jesus Christ coming in the flesh." Present middle participle of erxomai treating the Incarnation as a continuing fact which the Docetic Gnostics flatly denied."Some people claim that John and Paul both wrote in a way that promoted gnosticism but if they do a little research they will realize this is not the case. John lived in Ephesus and used Greek terms like 'Logos' because he was using the Greek language to show them who Jesus is. Philo also used the term Logos but that didn't make him a gnostic. If it is your view that Paul's letters were written to promote the gnostic point of view I suggest you do some research into his use of the term Pleroma.Speaking of Irenaeus you said Jabez - why do you think that Against Heresies was a fable? Irenaeus knew Polycarp and there is some debate of whether or not Polycarp was a disciple of John's but Irenaeus wrote that Polycarp knew John. Also, I've read that Ireneaus referred to John as "the beloved disciple" once or twice but wasn't able to find references. Jabez - it proves that the author was not (as some people claim) a Greek but rather that he was well aware of the Judean topography and, more than that, he wrote of things that would have been in ruins when Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 A.D. Those who believe that this wasn't written until the second century are wrong. I have provided strong evidence that it was written before 70 A.D. - you can choose to believe it or not to but the liberal scholars, atheists and skeptics who think that the gospel of John wasn't written until the middle of the second century are wrong.This message has been edited by Jabez1000, 07-01-2005 11:04 AM