Stahrwe:


There is no rationalization required to make the comments you listed above. The cold hard reality is, there is no corroborating evidence for those items. They can be dismissed with intellectual responsibility. The same is not true for dismissing biological evolution. There is evidence for the theory, a lot of evidence. In fact, there is so much evidence that the majority of the religious community has realized it is foolish not to accept it. To dismiss biological evolution, you would have to rationalize away the evidence. For many ridiculous biblical claims, there is no evidence. There is nothing to rationalize away.

Stahrwe:


The bible is a man-written fiction story. Even if you believe it's true, alone it isn't enough. It must be corroborated. Josephus' corroboration has already been examined. It's flimsy and nowhere near solid enough to offer support, for many reasons. Actions perpetrated against the Christians may very well be corroborated in other documents, I won't dispute that. However, I'm not a scholar here. The same is true of the early Christian writings, but you have to realize they are likely the same people that contributed to the writing of the bible. There is no rationalization required to make the connection that the ideas they write may very well be taken from the bible in the first place. This wouldn't make it corroboration, it would make it duplication.

It's interesting that you're able to find your lack of evidence amusing. This shows the power of a warped worldview to rationalize things into the way you want them to be. The truth is, these things aren't anywhere close to sufficient evidence for anything but the most mundane biblical events. I'm not saying everything in the bible is false. The best way to pawn off a fiction story is to include elements of truth. The more fantastical claims the bible makes are what I'm referring to. They are preposterous, and completely without supporting evidence. I have no doubt that many of the actions perpetrated against Christians by the Romans have happened. These events are not what are under scrutiny.

There’s no reason to dismiss the evidence, such as Josephus’ writings and the writings of early Christians. Evidence is evidence. However, it must be analyzed objectively so we can place a fair value on what it supports. The best position is to say that it has an authentic core, but was later embellished by Christian scholars. To say that it has an authentic ‘core’ doesn’t say where Josephus gained his information. His writings were around the same time the bible was being written, so what he’d written could very well have been secondhand. Objectively, we can’t say either way. If we were to rationalize, we would jump to our respective ends of the spectrum. With the doubter saying Josephus’ writings were definitely secondhand, and the believer saying they were definitely authentic. Again, we shouldn’t rationalize, we should remain objective. Which means, the authenticity is up in the air, and therefore the evidence is sketchy. Alone, it does not support the claim the Jesus existed.

So, we must go out in search of the other hundreds of non-biblical documents which talk of Jesus, all by separate scholars from the time period of Jesus’ life, each corroborating the other. Since, if Jesus did indeed exist, such writings would be ubiquitous. So, where are these writings? Well, there are none. In light of this lack of corroboration, the sketchiness of Josephus’ accounts is magnified. The reasonable and objective conclusion is to say that Jesus never existed, with no rationalization required.

It is clearly a work of fiction.

It recounts stories of supernatural events which do not occur. Coroborating "evidence" tends to be different portions of the same book used to support eachother, or scholars of this fictional book and their interpretations of it.

Why does religion require faith? Because it doesnt make any sense. Because it asks you to believe fantastic things which plainly do not occur. Because there is no substantial evidence in support of its claims. And because even a limited foray into critical thinking usually destroys religious belief.

Not sure where the original post was or is, but this is germane



Most of the copies we have of material composed from the first century are copies that date from about 1000 ad. That is not the case for the OT or NT. There are hundreds of copies which date close to that time. The advantage of that is not only do we have copies of documents dating from a time near their original composition, but the number of copies, from different locations, permits comparison for accuracy. One might ask why the autographs are not extant. They may be and not discovered yet, or they may have been destroyed. A tradition among Jews was that when a torah became soiled it was destroyed in a respectful manner. The same practice may have been done with the NT.





In the centuries following the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem (70 CE), the Jewish people began writing two versions of Jewish thought, religious history and commentary. One was written in Palestine and became known as the Jerusalem Talmud. The other was written in Babylon and was known as the Babylonian Talmud.
We read in the Jerusalem Talmud:
"Forty years before the destruction of the Temple, the western light went out, the crimson thread remained crimson, and the lot for the Lord always came up in the left hand. They would close the gates of the Temple by night and get up in the morning and find them wide open" (Jacob Neusner, The Yerushalmi, p.156-157). [the Temple was destroyed in 70 CE]
A similar passage in the Babylonian Talmud states:
"Our rabbis taught: During the last forty years before the destruction of the Temple the lot ['For the Lord'] did not come up in the right hand; nor did the crimson-colored strap become white; nor did the western most light shine; and the doors of the Hekel [Temple] would open by themselves" (Soncino version, Yoma 39b).

These events signified to the Jews that God was displeased with them. The western light is associated with the term Servant Lamp and was a representation of the Messiah. For forty years they could not get it to light. All the other lamps in the menorah would but not that one. Odd.

For forty years when they drew lots to select the scape goat it was always the goat on the left. What are the odds that you will get 40 heads in a row tossing a coin? 2 to the 40th power. Same here.

I’ll leave the other phenomena for you to ponder.

Do a bit of math, Temple destroyed in 70 AD, subtract 40 from 70 and you get 30, the year Jesus was crucified. Why would the Jews record these oddities if they weren’t true? They reflect badly on the nation. They did not explain them. The explanation seems clear and evidence that something important happened around 30AD.

Interbane, get out your “D” but I doubt you will be able to claim another Christian forgery.

Josephus
Tacitus
Pliny the Younger
Talmud
“Thallus (52AD)
Thallus is perhaps the earliest secular writer to mention Jesus and he is so ancient that his writings don’t even exist anymore. But Julius Africanus, writing around 221AD does quote Thallus who had previously tried to explain away the darkness that occurred at the point of Jesus’ crucifixion:

"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun." (Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

If only more of Thallus’ record could be found, we would see that every aspect of Jesus’ life could be verified with a non-biblical source. But there are some things we can conclude from this account: Jesus lived, he was crucified, and there was an earthquake and darkness at the point of his crucifixion.

Pliny the Younger (61-113AD)
Early Christians are also described in secular history. Pliny the Younger, in a letter to the Roman emperor Trajan, describes the lifestyles of early Christians:

"They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."

This EARLY description of the first Christians documents several facts: the first Christians believed that Jesus was GOD, the first Christians upheld a high moral code, and these early followers et regularly to worship Jesus.

Suetonius (69-140AD)
Suetonius was a Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. His writings about Christians describe their treatment under the Emperor Claudius (41-54AD):

"Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus (Christ), he (Claudius) expelled them from the city (Rome)." (Life of Claudius, 25:4)

This expulsion took place in 49AD, and in another work, Suetonius wrote about the fire which destroyed Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians for this fire and he punished Christians severely as a result:

"Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief." (Lives of the Caesars, 26.2)

There is much we can learn from Suetonius as it is related to the life of early Christians. From this very EARLY account, we know that Jesus had an immediate impact on his followers. They believed that Jesus was God enough to withstand the torment and punishment of the Roman Empire. Jesus had a curious and immediate impact on his followers, empowering them to die courageously for what they knew to be true.

Tacitus (56-120AD)
Cornelius Tacitus was known for his analysis and examination of historical documents and is among the most trusted of ancient historians. He was a senator under Emperor Vespasian and was also proconsul of Asia. In his “Annals’ of 116AD, he describes Emperor Nero’s response to the great fire in Rome and Nero’s claim that the Christians were to blame:

"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 Judea, 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."

In this account, Tacitus confirms for us that Jesus lived in Judea, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and had followers who were persecuted for their faith in Christ.

Mara Bar-Serapion (70AD)
Sometime after 70AD, a Syrian philosopher named Mara Bar-Serapion, writing to encourage his son, compared the life and persecution of Jesus with that of other philosophers who were persecuted for their ideas. The fact that Jesus is known to be a real person with this kind of influence is important. As a matter of fact, Mara Bar-Serapion refers to Jesus as the “Wise King”:

"What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?...After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men...The wise king...Lived on in the teachings he enacted."

From this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus. We can conclude that Jesus was a wise and influential man who died for his beliefs. We can also conclude that his followers adopted these beliefs and lived lives that reflected them to the world in which they lived.

Phlegon (80-140AD)
In a manner similar to Thallus, Julius Africanus also mentions a historian named Phlegon who wrote a chronicle of history around 140AD. In this history, Phlegon also mentions the darkness surrounding the crucifixion in an effort to explain it:

"During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon." (Africanus, Chronography, 18:1)

Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen (an early church theologian and scholar, born in Alexandria):

“Now Phlegon, in the thirteenth or fourteenth book, I think, of his Chronicles, not only ascribed to Jesus a knowledge of future events . . . but also testified that the result corresponded to His predictions.” (Origen Against Celsus)

“And with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place . . . ” (Origen Against Celsus)

From these accounts, we can add something to our understand of Jesus and conclude that Jesus was crucified under the reign of Tiberius Caesar and had the ability to accurately predict the future!

Lucian of Samosata: (115-200 A.D.)
Lucian was a Greek satirist who spoke sarcastically of Christ and Christians, but in the process, he did affirm that they were real people and never referred to them as fictional characters:

"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account....You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property." (Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13)

From this account we can add to our description and conclude that Jesus taught about repentance and about the family of God. These teachings were quickly adopted by Jesus’ followers and exhibited to the world around them.

Celsus (175AD)
This is the last hostile ‘pagan’ account we will examine (although there are many other later accounts in history). Celsus was quite hostile to the Gospels, but in his criticism, he unknowingly affirms and reinforces the authors and their content. His writing is extensive and he alludes to 80 different Biblical quotes, confirming their early appearance in history. In addition, he admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the early 2nd century! Here is a portion of his text:

“Jesus had come from a village in Judea, and was the son of a poor Jewess who gained her living by the work of her own hands. His mother had been turned out of doors by her husband, who was a carpenter by trade, on being convicted of adultery [with a soldier named Panthéra (i.32)]. Being thus driven away by her husband, and wandering about in disgrace, she gave birth to Jesus, a bastard. Jesus, on account of his poverty, was hired out to go to Egypt. While there he acquired certain (magical) powers which Egyptians pride themselves on possessing. He returned home highly elated at possessing these powers, and on the strength of them gave himself out to be a god.”

Celsus admits that Jesus was reportedly born of a virgin, but then argues that this could supernatural account could not be possible and offers the idea that he was a bastard son of a man named Panthera (an idea borrowed from Jews who opposed Jesus at the time). But in writing this account, Celsus does confirm that Jesus had an earthly father who was a carpenter, possessed unusual magical powers and claimed to be God.

Hostile Non-Biblical Jewish Witnesses
In addition to classical ‘pagan’ sources that chronicle the life of Jesus and his followers, there are also a number of ancient hostile Jewish sources that talk about Jesus. These are written by Jewish theologians, historians and leaders who were definitely NOT sympathetic to the Christian cause. Their writings are often VERY harsh, critical and even demeaning to Jesus. But there is still much that these writings confirm.

Josephus (37-101AD)
In more detail than any other non-biblical historian, Josephus writes about Jesus in his “the Antiquities of the Jews” in 93AD. Josephus was born just four years after the crucifixion. He was a consultant for Jewish rabbis at age thirteen, was a Galilean military commander by the age of sixteen, and he was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Under the rule of roman emperor Vespasian, Josephus was allowed to write a history of the Jews. This history includes three passages about Christians, one in which he describes the death of John the Baptist, one in which he mentions the execution of James and describes him as the brother of Jesus the Christ, and a final passage which describes Jesus as a wise man and the messiah. Now there is much controversy about the writing of Josephus, because the first discoveries of his writings are late enough to have been re-written by Christians, who are accused of making additions to the text. So to be fair, let’s take a look at a scholarly reconstruction that has removed all the possible Christian influence from the text related to Jesus:

“Now around this time lived Jesus, a wise man. For he was a worker of amazing deeds and was a teacher of people who gladly accept the truth. He won over both many Jews and many Greeks. Pilate, when he heard him accused by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, (but) those who had first loved him did not cease (doing so). To this day the tribe of Christians named after him has not disappeared” (This neutral reconstruction follows closely the one proposed in the latest treatment by John Meier, Marginal Jew 1:61)

Now there are many other ancient versions of Josephus’ writing which are even more explicit about the nature of his miracles, his life and his status as the Christ, but let’s take this conservative version and see what we can learn. From this text, we can conclude that Jesus lived in Palestine, was a wise man and a teacher, worked amazing deeds, was accused buy the Jews, crucified under Pilate and had followers called Christians!

Jewish Talmud (400-700AD)
While the earliest Talmudic writings of Jewish Rabbis appear in the 5th century, the tradition of these Rabbinic authors indicates that they are faithfully transmitting teachings from the early “Tannaitic” period of the first century BC to the second century AD. There are a number of writings from the Talmud that scholars believe refer to Jesus and many of these writings are said to use code words to describe Jesus (such as “Balaam” or “Ben Stada” or “a certain one”). But let’s be very conservative here. Let’s ONLY look at the passages that refer to Jesus in a more direct way. If we do that, there are still several ancient Talmudic passages we can examine:

“Jesus practiced magic and led Israel astray” (b. Sanhedrin 43a; cf. t. Shabbat 11.15; b. Shabbat 104b)

“Rabbi Hisda (d. 309) said that Rabbi Jeremiah bar Abba said, ‘What is that which is written, ‘No evil will befall you, nor shall any plague come near your house’? (Psalm 91:10)… ‘No evil will befall you’ (means) that evil dreams and evil thoughts will not tempt you; ‘nor shall any plague come near your house’ (means) that you will not have a son or a disciple who burns his food like Jesus of Nazareth.” (b. Sanhedrin 103a; cf. b. Berakhot 17b)

“Our rabbis have taught that Jesus had five disciples: Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. They brought Matthai to (to trial). He said, ‘Must Matthai be killed? For it is written, ‘When (mathai) shall I come and appear before God?’” (Psalm 92:2) They said to him, “Yes Matthai must be killed, for it is written, ‘When (mathai) he dies his name will perish’” (Psalm 41:5). They brought Nakai. He said to them, “Must Nakai be killed? For it is written, “The innocent (naqi) and the righteous will not slay’” (Exodus 23:7). They said to him, “Yes, Nakai must be kille, for it is written, ‘In secret places he slays the innocent (naqi)’” (Psalm 10:8). (b. Sanhedrin 43a; the passage continues in a similar way for Nezer, Buni and Todah)

And this, perhaps the most famous of Talmudic passages about Jesus:

“It was taught: On the day before the Passover they hanged Jesus. A herald went before him for forty days (proclaiming), “He will be stoned, because he practiced magic and enticed Israel to go astray. Let anyone who knows anything in his favor come forward and plead for him.” But nothing was found in his favor, and they hanged him on the day before the Passover. (b. Sanhedrin 43a)

From just these passages that mention Jesus by name, we can conclude that Jesus had magical powers, led the Jews away from their beliefs, had disciples who were martyred for their faith (one of whom was named Matthai), and was executed on the day before the Passover.

The Toledot Yeshu (1000AD)
The Toledot Yeshu is a medieval Jewish retelling of the life of Jesus. It is completely anti-Christian, to be sure. There are many versions of these ‘retellings’, and as part of the transmitted oral and written tradition of the Jews, we can presume their original place in antiquity, dating back to the time of Jesus’ first appearance as an influential leader who was drawing Jews away from their faith in the Law. The Toledot Yeshu contains a determined effort to explain away the miracles of Jesus, and to deny the virgin birth. In some places, the text is quite vicious, but it does confirm many elements of the New Testament writings. Let’s take a look at a portion of the text (Jesus is refered to as ‘Yehoshua’):

“In the year 3671 (in Jewish reckonging, it being ca 90 B.C.) in the days of King Jannaeus, a great misfortune befell Israel, when there arose a certain disreputable man of the tribe of Judah, whose name was Joseph Pandera. He lived at Bethlehem, in Judah. Near his house dwelt a widow and her lovely and chaste daughter named Miriam. Miriam was betrothed to Yohanan, of the royal house of David, a man learned in the Torah and God-fearing. At the close of a certain Sabbath, Joseph Pandera, attractive and like a warrior in appearance, having gazed lustfully upon Miriam, knocked upon the door of her room and betrayed her by pretending that he was her betrothed husband, Yohanan. Even so, she was amazed at this improper conduct and submitted only against her will. Thereafter, when Yohanan came to her, Miriam expressed astonishment at behavior so foreign to his character. It was thus that they both came to know the crime of Joseph Pandera and the terrible mistake on the part of Miriam… Miriam gave birth to a son and named him Yehoshua, after her brother. This name later deteriorated to Yeshu ("Yeshu" is the Jewish "name" for Jesus. It means "May His Name Be Blotted Out"). On the eighth day he was circumcised. When he was old enough the lad was taken by Miriam to the house of study to be instructed in the Jewish tradition. One day Yeshu walked in front of the Sages with his head uncovered, showing shameful disrespect. At this, the discussion arose as to whether this behavior did not truly indicate that Yeshu was an illegitimate child and the son of a niddah. Moreover, the story tells that while the rabbis were discussing the Tractate Nezikin, he gave his own impudent interpretation of the law and in an ensuing debate he held that Moses could not be the greatest of the prophets if he had to receive counsel from Jethro. This led to further inquiry as to the antecedents of Yeshu, and it was discovered through Rabban Shimeon ben Shetah that he was the illegitimate son of Joseph Pandera. Miriam admitted it. After this became known, it was necessary for Yeshu to flee to Upper Galilee. After King Jannaeus, his wife Helene ruled over all Israel. In the Temple was to be found the Foundation Stone on which were engraven the letters of God's Ineffable Name. Whoever learned the secret of the Name and its use would be able to do whatever he wished. Therefore, the Sages took measures so that no one should gain this knowledge. Lions of brass were bound to two iron pillars at the gate of the place of burnt offerings. Should anyone enter and learn the Name, when he left the lions would roar at him and immediately the valuable secret would be forgotten. Yeshu came and learned the letters of the Name; he wrote them upon the parchment which he placed in an open cut on his thigh and then drew the flesh over the parchment. As he left, the lions roared and he forgot the secret. But when he came to his house he reopened the cut in his flesh with a knife an lifted out the writing. Then he remembered and obtained the use of the letters. He gathered about himself three hundred and ten young men of Israel and accused those who spoke ill of his birth of being people who desired greatness and power for themselves. Yeshu proclaimed, "I am the Messiah; and concerning me Isaiah prophesied and said, 'Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.'" He quoted other messianic texts, insisting, "David my ancestor prophesied concerning me: 'The Lord said to me, thou art my son, this day have I begotten thee.'" The insurgents with him replied that if Yeshu was the Messiah he should give them a convincing sign. They therefore, brought to him a lame man, who had never walked. Yeshu spoke over the man the letters of the Ineffable Name, and the leper was healed. Thereupon, they worshipped him as the Messiah, Son of the Highest. When word of these happenings came to Jerusalem, the Sanhedrin decided to bring about the capture of Yeshu. They sent messengers, Annanui and Ahaziah, who, pretending to be his disciples, said that they brought him an invitation from the leaders of Jerusalem to visit them. Yeshu consented on condition the members of the Sanhedrin receive him as a lord. He started out toward Jerusalem and, arriving at Knob, acquired an ass on which he rode into Jerusalem, as a fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah. The Sages bound him and led him before Queen Helene, with the accusation: "This man is a sorcerer and entices everyone." Yeshu replied, "The prophets long ago prophesied my coming: 'And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse,' and I am he; but as for them, Scripture says 'Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly.'" Queen Helene asked the Sages: "What he says, is it in your Torah?" They replied: "It is in our Torah, but it is not applicable to him, for it is in Scripture: 'And that prophet which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die.' He has not fulfilled the signs and conditions of the Messiah." Yeshu spoke up: "Madam, I am the Messiah and I revive the dead." A dead body was brought in; he pronounced the letters of the Ineffable Name and the corpse came to life. The Queen was greatly moved and said: "This is a true sign." She reprimanded the Sages and sent them humiliated from her presence. Yeshu's dissident followers increased and there was controversy in Israel. Yeshu went to Upper Galilee. the Sages came before the Queen, complaining that Yeshu practiced sorcery and was leading everyone astray. Therefore she sent Annanui and Ahaziah to fetch him. The found him in Upper Galilee, proclaiming himself the Son of God. When they tried to take him there was a struggle, but Yeshu said to the men of Upper Galilee: "Wage no battle." He would prove himself by the power which came to him from his Father in heaven. He spoke the Ineffable Name over the birds of clay and they flew into the air. He spoke the same letters over a millstone that had been placed upon the waters. He sat in it and it floated like a boat. When they saw this the people marveled. At the behest of Yeshu, the emissaries departed and reported these wonders to the Queen. She trembled with astonishment. Then the Sages selected a man named Judah Iskarioto and brought him to the Sanctuary where he learned the letters of the Ineffable Name as Yeshu had done. When Yeshu was summoned before the queen, this time there were present also the Sages and Judah Iskarioto. Yeshu said: "It is spoken of me, 'I will ascend into heaven.'" He lifted his arms like the wings of an eagle and he flew between heaven and earth, to the amazement of everyone…Yeshu was seized. His head was covered with a garment and he was smitten with pomegranate staves; but he could do nothing, for he no longer had the Ineffable Name. Yeshu was taken prisoner to the synagogue of Tiberias, and they bound him to a pillar. To allay his thirst they gave him vinegar to drink. On his head they set a crown of thorns. There was strife and wrangling between the elders and the unrestrained followers of Yeshu, as a result of which the followers escaped with Yeshu to the region of Antioch; there Yeshu remained until the eve of the Passover. Yeshu then resolved to go the Temple to acquire again the secret of the Name. That year the Passover came on a Sabbath day. On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu, accompanied by his disciples, came to Jerusalem riding upon an ass. Many bowed down before him. He entered the Temple with his three hundred and ten followers. One of them, Judah Iskarioto apprised the Sages that Yeshu was to be found in the Temple, that the disciples had taken a vow by the Ten Commandments not to reveal his identity but that he would point him out by bowing to him. So it was done and Yeshu was seized. Asked his name, he replied to the question by several times giving the names Mattai, Nakki, Buni, Netzer, each time with a verse quoted by him and a counter-verse by the Sages. Yeshu was put to death on the sixth hour on the eve of the Passover and of the Sabbath. When they tried to hang him on a tree it broke, for when he had possessed the power he had pronounced by the Ineffable Name that no tree should hold him. He had failed to pronounce the prohibition over the carob-stalk, for it was a plant more than a tree, and on it he was hanged until the hour for afternoon prayer, for it is written in Scripture, "His body shall not remain all night upon the tree." They buried him outside the city. On the first day of the week his bold followers came to Queen Helene with the report that he who was slain was truly the Messiah and that he was not in his grave; he had ascended to heaven as he prophesied. Diligent search was made and he was not found in the grave where he had been buried. A gardener had taken him from the grave and had brought him into his garden and buried him in the sand over which the waters flowed into the garden. Queen Helene demanded, on threat of a severe penalty, that the body of Yeshu be shown to her within a period of three days. There was a great distress. When the keeper of the garden saw Rabbi Tanhuma walking in the field and lamenting over the ultimatum of the Queen, the gardener related what he had done, in order that Yeshu's followers should not steal the body and then claim that he had ascended into heaven. The Sages removed the body, tied it to the tail of a horse and transported it to the Queen, with the words, "This is Yeshu who is said to have ascended to heaven." Realizing that Yeshu was a false prophet who enticed the people and led them astray, she mocked the followers but praised the Sages.

Now in spite of the fact that the ancient Jews who wrote this did their best to argue for another interpretation of the Life of Jesus, they did make several claims here about Jesus. This passage, along with several others from the Toledot tradition, confirms that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, healed the lame, said that Isaiah foretold of his life, was worshipped as God, arrested by the Jews, beaten with rods, given vinegar to drink, wore a crown of thorns, rode into Jerusalem on a donkey, was betrayed by a man named Judah Iskarioto, and had followers who claimed he was resurrected and ascended, leaving an empty tomb!

A Hostile Summary
OK, let’s review everything we have learned from hostile pagan and Jewish sources that tell us something about this man called Jesus. We’ll do our best to discount the bias that we see in the sources, just as we discounted the pro-Christian bias we think might exist in some versions of the writing of Josephus. But even with the most modest and conservative of reviews, we could write this about Jesus from purely NON-BIBLICAL ancient sources:

Jesus was born and lived in Palestine. He was born, supposedly, to a virgin and had an earthly father who was a carpenter. He was a teacher who taught that by repentance and belief, all followers would become brothers and sisters. He led the Jews away from their beliefs. He was a wise man who claimed to be God and the Messiah. He had unusual magical powers and performed miraculous deeds. He healed the lame. He accurately predicted the future. He was persecuted by the Jews for what he said, betrayed by Judah Iskarioto. He was beaten with rods, forced to drink vinegar and wear a crown of thorns and crucified on the eve of the Passover. His crucifixion occurred under the direction of Pontius Pilate, during the time of Tiberius. On the day of his crucifixion, the sky grew dark and there was an earthquake. Afterward, he was buried in a tomb and the tomb was later found to be empty. He had disciples and followers who upheld a high moral code. One of them was named Matthai. They claimed that he was resurrected and eventually ascended into heaven. The disciples were also persecuted for their faith but were martyred without changing their claims. They met regularly to worship Jesus, even after his death.

That’s Pretty Amazing
Now think about this reconstruction for a minute. This is a TON of information about the man we know as Jesus and all of it comes from witnesses who were HOSTILE to the truth claims of Christianity! And from ANCIENT sources, none the less! Now let’s go back to what we know about the time in which Jesus lived and the climate in which historians and theologians were writing. Remember that:

1. There are amazingly few manuscripts of ANY text written during Jesus' time
2. Historians of this period wrote amazingly little about religious figures anyway
3. Jesus was active for an amazingly short period of time (just three years)
4. Jesus ministered in an amazingly remote corner of the Roman Empire

The key word here in “AMAZING”! it is amazing that there is ANY extra-Biblical information about Jesus at all, let alone this MUCH information about Him. That’s why so many of us who have come to trust that Jesus really did live and really was who He said He was, find that the hostile historical witness is a powerful evidence of the truth of the Bible. “
http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/index/I ... _the_Bible



There is no problem here. First, the actual process of salvation is by GRACE through FAITH. People born prior to Jesus were saved the same way. They had FAITH in God, He had just not revealed Himself in the form of Jesus yet. Again, I point you to Hebrews Chapter 11.

We will address the question of those who have not heard later.



Wait a minute. I was always taught that you can’t prove something doesn’t exist. Therefore you can’t have evidence that something or someone did not exist. Therefore, if you have evidence, however, thin, that must be proof that someone did exist.



You are supporting my side with the above statement.



Not true, see above.



There are records of those events. They became the Gospels.



Just a minor point, there was no year Zero, CE. Went from 1 BC to 1 AD, no 0.
I don’t know what your point is in the above comment. The Bible does not say that the people who were fed knew the source of the food. I am also not sure of your numbers. I have heard that at Passover there were up to 1 million people in and around Jerusalem. At any rate, I don’t get your math. 250,000 divided by 5,000 is 50, not 13.

The population of Bethlehem was small and the number of innocents killed would have been small too. Perhaps is did not rise to the level of Herod’s other atrocities. Whatever the reason, the fact that something recorded in one place is not recorded elsewhere is not evidence of anything, especially given the circumstances. Perhaps the Christian forgers of Josephus couldn’t find the right place to insert it.



How many solar eclipses last for 3 hours?
It was recorded, the fact that there are not other records means nothing.
To expect people to make sense who were planning to kill a man Jesus brought back from the dead (Lazarus) is illogical.

[quote='Interbane"]2.2b Sixty years later

The first secular references to Jesus only appear 60 years after his supposed death in CE 33. This length of time, in a society where few people could read and rumour spread easily, means that any reports are likely to be highly unreliable and must be examined closely.

Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian born in CE 37, appears to be the first secular writer to mention the Biblical Jesus. His Antiquities of the Jews, written around CE 93, describes Jesus as a doer of wonderful deeds and "the Christ" ("the risen one").

Josephus' text only survives in eleventh century manuscripts - 1,000 years after it was written. Many doubt its authenticity and / or argue that the references to Jesus were inserted by later, Christian copyists.

For argument's sake, however, let us assume that Josephus did indeed write that Jesus performed miracles, was crucified and appeared alive on the third day. Though that statement is interesting, however, does not Roman bust said to be of Josephus
help the Biblical cause. It does not prove that Jesus lived in CE 0 - 33; it only proves that Christians believed that they had a leader who lived and died at that time. And belief isn't proof.[/quote]

My head is spinning after reading this. What does a bus of Josephus have to do with anything. And if Josephus wrote of Jesus performing miracles does that not lend credence to what the believers thought of Jesus?

Remember, no year zero.



That is not accurate. The actual composed record dates to 60 ad, This was a compilation of eye witness testimony, notes recorded of events and inspiration. Also, the statement that, “it sheds no light on actual events of 30-33 CE.” Is preposterous, even it the records were slightly inaccurate (a point which I do not cede) they in fact do shed much light on the events. When I read Moby Dick I learn a great deal about whaling.

Since we're being objective and holding the evidence to light before assigning belief, let's take a look at some of this fiction you're wanting me to swallow. Rather than this tale of the goat to the left being selected every time being fiction, you believe it's true. What are the odds of this tale being true? You believe in a tale from our ancient history where the odds of it's claim happening are 2 to the 40th power? This isn't evidence that the claim shows something paranormal, it's evidence that the claim is false.



You can't offer a single first hand account!!! These are all derivatives. You're proving my point for me silly, not the other way around. Events as monumental as the bible claims to have happened would be documented. A library of Jewish and Pagan writings from the time of Jesus contain no mention of him nor any of his apostles nor disciples; Arrian, Plutarch, Apollonius, Hermogones, Appian, Damis, Aulus Gellius, Appion of Alexandria, Philo Judaeus, Petronius, Juvenal, Quintilian, Silius Italicus, Phlegon, Pausanias, Dio Chrysostom, Favorinus, Seneca, Dion Pruseus, Martial, Lucanus, Statius, Phaedrus, Florus Lucius, Columella, Lysias, Theon of Myrna, Pliny the Elder, Paterculus, Persius, Justus of Tiberius, Epictetus, Ptolemy, Valerius Maximus, Quintius Curtius, Valerius Flaccus, and Pomponius Mela.

Dating of the Thallus material referenced by Africanus is problematic. Eusebius references a "brief compendium" of world history by this Thallus in three volumes from the fall of Troy (1184 BCE) to the 167th Olympiad (109 BCE). Yet virtually all scholars have conjectured that the latter date is in error and that the original date was either the 207th Olympiad (CE 49-52) or the 217th Olympiad (CE 89-92).[118] Thus, if one accepts that the book referenced by Eusebius is the same book in which Thallus mentioned an eclipse, one could date Thallus' book between CE 49 and CE 180 (when Theophilus mentions Thallus).



I won't dispute these facts. It shows that Christians were around in that time. I believe that, even though since I'm not a scholar, these facts may not be facts at all. That isn't what we're questioning. We're questioning whether or not Jesus existed. There's nothing about him in Pliny's writing. At least Josephus mentioned him(supposedly) as a person.



Actually, the writings do not lead to the conclusions you draw from it. Those conclusions are based on your a priori belief, not an objective analysis of what Seutonius wrote. The only thing this tells us is that there were people who fervently believed in Jesus back then just as there are today. Again, I won't dispute the fact that there were zealotous Christians back then just as there are today.



Decades later and second hand. Don't you realize you're proving my point? There is a gaping black hole of documentation where there should be hundreds of first hand testimonials. All the entire world of biblical scholars can scrounge up are derivatives from decades later, which are likely influenced by the fact that Christianity was already a religion. That Christianity was already a religion doesn't mean there was any historical Christ. The cult formed and grew just like any other cult forms and grows.

Decades later and second hand. It proves no point to say that people from 150-200 AD wrote about things they've read in whatever version of the bible was then current. If I quote you some passages from books by Neitzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra, would you then conclude that Zarathustra was a real person?!?

You have no evidence. This isn't me being pseudo-skeptical or having a knee-jerk atheistic reaction. An objective analysis leads inevitably to the conclusion that Jesus most likely never existed. The evidence that exists is precisely what you'd expect from a mythical figure. Nothing about him from his time. Nothing outside the bible that is first hand testimonial.



Bold above is mine. Thanks for proving my point. You're delusional if you think there was a historical Jesus.

Yes but isn't evolution just a theory in the end ? A theory isn't a fact but every evolutionist I have ever come across acts as if it's been proved conclusively and with just as much righteous zeal as the religionists. It hasn't been proved completely and probably never will be just like we will never truly know what happened to the dinosaurs as there are several theories and much arguing about that too. I have noticed myself how for some evolutionists the argument when dealing with the christian idea is mainly just to start calling the bible a lot of old socks and nonsense. Lol.

I think you should rethink your stance on dinosaurs. Since this is only from a Yahoo news source, I can only imagine a more scientific one would have more information, but it still makes your flippant comment about scientists less flippant and more ignorant.
news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100304/sc_nm/us_d ... s_asteroid

As for evolution and it's only being a theory, yes, it is a "theory," but I think you're a bit misguided on what a theory actually is. A theory is a study of evidence over and over until it is irrefutable, and then to find more evidence that agrees with the first evidence and so on and so forth. In testing a theory, you experiment over and over until you have exhausted all results and all knowledge and have come to as much of a conclusion as is possible. In the case of evolution, the evidence leans extremely heavily in favor of it, with little or no evidence to support any other claim. A theory is heavily tested before it is even called a theory, it is called a hypothesis until it can be assumed that it is most likely true under all expected conditions, and then it becomes a theory, and theory does not mean "not fact." Einstein's ideas on relativity are considered to be "theories," but there is little to disprove them and much evidence to validate them.

I think you might benefit from looking up definitions before making definitive statements about things you don't seem to know very much about.

Evolution is a fact. There is enough evidence for evolution that we can be as sure of it as we are of the sun coming up tomorrow. It is not an absolute fact that the sun will come up tomorrow.

Your mistake in understanding is you think there is such a thing as 'certainty'. Is there? Are you certain of something? I'm sure you are, but I'm also sure it's misplaced. Most people don't realize that absolute truth is NOT achievable. The very best we can do is to come as close as we can. With evolution, we're come as close as we can to explaining how life on Earth has originated. Light years ahead of any claims religion makes. I'm coming closer and closer to being immediately disgusted by people who say evolution is 'only a theory'. I'm starting to understand why people such as Richard Dawkin's are anti-theist rather than atheist. You are either ignorant or stupid to reject the fact of evolution, and it's frustrating to find a never-ending supply of people who do so. I'm not saying this as though it's a belief we should simply accept. Do your own reading, the gargantuan amount of evidence should give you enough humility to keep your mouth closed next time.

I’m calling you out on this. You have asked for evidence of Jesus. I provided accounts from Jewish writings which point to a significant event taking place at the time Jesus was active. Instead of addressing the writings your engage in classic Turtle behavior by immediately practicing ‘E’, evade. You reintroduce previously covered objections which have been addressed. It continues to amaze me that the Church, rather than engage in The Great Commission, seemed to busy itself with locating and amending ancient secular writings to support Jesus. It is clear that you have no answer for the Talmud references. BTW 2 to the 40th power is more than 1 in one trillion.



So people believed strongly enough in a man who was dreamed up to risk losing their families, jobs, freedom and lives in horrible ways. That premise defies logic. Perhaps Jews might believe in a made up story about a Messianic fictional leader, but why would gentiles give up their religious beliefs to suffer for a Jewish leader? At one point in the Book of Acts, so much of the population of Ephesus was becoming Christian that it was affecting sales of idols.
Acts 19
The Riot in Ephesus
23About that time there arose a great disturbance about the Way. 24A silversmith named Demetrius, who made silver shrines of Artemis, brought in no little business for the craftsmen. 25He called them together, along with the workmen in related trades, and said: "Men, you know we receive a good income from this business. 26And you see and hear how this fellow Paul has convinced and led astray large numbers of people here in Ephesus and in practically the whole province of Asia. He says that man-made gods are no gods at all. 27There is danger not only that our trade will lose its good name, but also that the temple of the great goddess Artemis will be discredited, and the goddess herself, who is worshiped throughout the province of Asia and the world, will be robbed of her divine majesty."
28When they heard this, they were furious and began shouting: "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!" 29Soon the whole city was in an uproar. The people seized Gaius and Aristarchus, Paul's traveling companions from Macedonia, and rushed as one man into the theater. 30Paul wanted to appear before the crowd, but the disciples would not let him. 31Even some of the officials of the province, friends of Paul, sent him a message begging him not to venture into the theater.
32The assembly was in confusion: Some were shouting one thing, some another. Most of the people did not even know why they were there. 33The Jews pushed Alexander to the front, and some of the crowd shouted instructions to him. He motioned for silence in order to make a defense before the people. 34But when they realized he was a Jew, they all shouted in unison for about two hours: "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians!"
35The city clerk quieted the crowd and said: "Men of Ephesus, doesn't all the world know that the city of Ephesus is the guardian of the temple of the great Artemis and of her image, which fell from heaven? 36Therefore, since these facts are undeniable, you ought to be quiet and not do anything rash. 37You have brought these men here, though they have neither robbed temples nor blasphemed our goddess. 38If, then, Demetrius and his fellow craftsmen have a grievance against anybody, the courts are open and there are proconsuls. They can press charges. 39If there is anything further you want to bring up, it must be settled in a legal assembly. 40As it is, we are in danger of being charged with rioting because of today's events. In that case we would not be able to account for this commotion, since there is no reason for it." 41After he had said this, he dismissed the assembly.



Again, if there had been no Jesus who were they following? Account for both the Jewish Christians and the gentile Christians.

For some reason the fomatting is not cooperating from here on and I have spent enough time trying to fix it.

[quote=”Interbane”]"What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?...After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men...The wise king...Lived on in the teachings he enacted."[/quote]

Stahrwe response:
What? Another example of ‘E’. What has this to do with Jesus? Show me how Jews benefitted from Socrates death, or Spartans, or Persians, or Ethiopians, or Romans, or any of the countries mentioned as being reached by Christians in Acts. Were any of those countries aware of Socrates or his death?I guess I need to come up with a replacement for CRUDE which includes a letter for insipid repetition of previously defeated arguments

[quote=”Interbane”]Fom this account, we can add to our understanding of Jesus. We can conclude that Jesus was a wise and influential man who died for his beliefs. We can also conclude that his followers adopted these beliefs and lived lives that reflected them to the world in which they lived. [/quote]

Stahrwe response
Perhaps we can conclude that about the followers of Socrates, but their influence was confined to a very small geographic area. Jesus, on the other hand influenced not only His followers, but people from all parts of the world and all religions abandoned those religions, at great personal cost to for a relationship with a Savior they had never met, and for whom the apostles could provide NO EVIDENCE. Interesting.

[quote=”Interbane”]Decades later and second hand. Don't you realize you're proving my point? There is a gaping black hole of documentation where there should be hundreds of first hand testimonials. All the entire world of biblical scholars can scrounge up are derivatives from decades later, which are likely influenced by the fact that Christianity was already a religion. That Christianity was already a religion doesn't mean there was any historical Christ. The cult formed and grew just like any other cult forms and grows.[/quote]

Stahrwe response
At least you have abandoned the fiction that the writings were hundreds of years after Jesus. This does not prove your point. The fact that there are significant numbers of writings extant from the early church shows the tremendous influence the church had and the rapidity with which it expanded. The extant documents supporting Christianity are very close to the actual events, and the original autographs of the writings, much more so than other historical writings from the same time.

[quote=”Interbane”]Decades later and second hand. It proves no point to say that people from 150-200 AD wrote about things they've read in whatever version of the bible was then current. If I quote you some passages from books by Neitzsche's Thus Spoke Zarathustra, would you then conclude that Zarathustra was a real person?!?[/quote]

Stahrwe response
You realize that you are not quoting me, right? I reported what others have said, and no, they are not the same. When the need to canonize the NT arose, a committee did not just pick and choose among all the writings to select documents which were convenient, there were criteria for the selection process one of which was that the writings must have had credibility and a provenance to apostolic authorship. Zarathrustra goes back to an ancient religion cotemporaneous with the first century. The Magi were likely practioners of said religion which they subjugated to worship Jesus.

[quote=”Interbane”]You have no evidence. This isn't me being pseudo-skeptical or having a knee-jerk atheistic reaction. An objective analysis leads inevitably to the conclusion that Jesus most likely never existed. The evidence that exists is precisely what you'd expect from a mythical figure. Nothing about him from his time. Nothing outside the bible that is first hand testimonial.



Bold above is mine. Thanks for proving my point. You're delusional if you think there was a historical Jesus.[/quote]

stahrwe resonse
Author Heroditus
Date written 480-425 BC
Earliest copy dates from 900 AD

Thucydides
Date written 460-400 BC
Earliest copy dates from 900 AD

Plato
Date written 400 BC
Earliest copy dates form 900 AD

Demosthenes
Date written 300 BC
Earliest copy dates from 1100 AD

Caesar
Gallic Wars
Date written 100-44BC
Earliest copy dates from 900 AD

Tacitus
date written 100 AD
earliest copy dates from 1100 AD

New Testament
date written 50-100 AD
earliest copy dates from 114 AD

That's what was meant, your response about libraries full is inaccurate.

BTW forget about the 'I', 'E' serves perfectly well..

Significant events taking place at the time of Jesus does not mean Jesus existed. You're not calling me out on anything.



This actually made me look back over the posts. You've addressed none of the issues. A good example is above. You say there were significant events during the time of Jesus. That does not mean Jesus existed. I'm not "reintroducing" anything. The problem is, you haven't addressed the issues, in spite of the delusion that you have addressed them.



They had time to do both, but I doubt much time was spent 'locating'.



It's not the premise that defies logic. It's the people following a delusion that defies logic. They're still doing it today, you're an example.



I don't have that information. Neither do you, even though you claim to. You're also assuming they were following 'someone'. Saul of Tarsus seems a likely candidate. Not him in person, but the mythical Jesus that Saul was ranting and raving about.



No, I haven't abandoned that. Some of the writings were forged hundreds of years later. This is not my claim, it is the likely truth that scholars have stumbled upon that you're in denial about.



I've already agreed with you on that point. This still says nothing about whether or not Jesus was real.



This doesn't mean they didn't alter the writings, or embellish them.



You offer up your clever acronym as if it applies to me rather than you. Is D for denial? It's very fitting.

You asked for evidence outside the Bible, I provided an example of some significant events recorded in Jewish writings, unrecoreded by Christians but explainable in terms of a Christian timeline. You ignored the evidence the first time presented, now you resort to Denial of significance. You fail to appreciate the significance of any one of these phenomina let alone together. Not only did the lot fall to the left hand every year for forty years, Six of seven oil lamps lit and burned for forty years but one refused. The priests poured the same oil into each bowl. Six of the seven lit and burned, why not number 7? We will find in Revelation that the one which would not light or burn was the one in the position where Jesus will stand. Revelation was written without the possibility of John having read the Talmud, and it is doubtful that the Jews wrote the Talmud to confirm a Christian prophecy



op. cit. my above response.



Do you really intend this to be a response?



Such a course of action by Jews is hard enough to explain unless Jesus was involved but to explain why gentiles would as well, what delusion were they following? What delusion made the Jews abandon a thousand year history of abhoring gentiles, or to abandon their dietary laws, or move forward with admitting gentiles into their felloowship without first being circumcised?



Paul and the other apostles made it quite clear that they were not be worshipped and as for following him ,Paul ended up imprisoned in Rome, practically forgotten and complaining that he was an object of shame to believers.



Hmmm, the problem with your premise is that the Gospels and Epistles were bineing copied by the churches and circulated amongst themselves. Forgeries or inaccurate copies would haved been detected and destroyed. People were risking thier lives by becoming Chritians and it was important for them to have reliable documents.



see above. You are about to be coated with pitch and set on fire because you believe some writings. How sure do you want to be that they are accurate?




Get your own.

I am in no way capable to contribute to this argument between you and Interbane, Starhwe, but I would like to point out that Revelation isn't considered part of the Bible and is considered by most scholars, both religious and secular, to be completely fraudulent. With the exception of fundamentalists and evangelicals, most sects of Christianity do not include it in their teachings and worship.

Ignorant and flippant. Brilliant ! Love the reaction.

You honestly believe the miraculous events that you think 'corroborate' the bible happened? These are extraordinary claims. They are of the same type as the bible, and require their own extraordinary corroborating evidence. I'm not in denial of anything, the truth is that the writings borrowed from each other. Maybe it's the intellectual standards I abide by. You're willing to swallow as truth tales from thousands of years ago that were almost impossible to have happened. The claims themselves are evidence against! A one in a trillion chance, and you don't bat an eye. The odds didn't even register in your magic drunk brain that they speak against your evidence rather than for it.

I think this is part of where the miscommunication between us stems from. I made an offhand joking comment about the odds of the claimed events happening. In my mind, the odds are powerful evidence against the event happening. Maybe I assumed you'd make the connection also. To counter such powerful evidence against, you need corroborating evidence. You're supporting the magical happenings of the bible with the magical happenings of Jewish writings. I won't simply accept them as true, forgive me again for having standards. I don't need to deny anything. These are extraordinary claims, and without extraordinary evidence you've got nothing.



No, my fingers slipped. Did you have a rebuttal?



You have evidence of this?



This doesn't mean they didn't alter and embellish their stories. They were insecure in the lack of corroborative writings for their beliefs. That is plenty of motive.



I don't tally debate points. Keep it.

Ahem, ahem, I'm not a great believer in the story of the bible as fact but neither do I believe in evolution as a fact either. To me it's a theory and a theory isn't a fact I feel ?

May I just say in my layman type of view that most of my life I haven't cared either way, I've always been dead happy to sit on the fence on this issue.

But I can't help thinking and have noticed that at parties etc lots of folk tell me they believe in evolution but their only basis for this belief is that they were told about it in school so they just believe what they are told.

I kinda feel you should at least have read Darwins book from start to finish to be able to say with anyauthority wether you think it's true or not. Most people have never even seen a copy of the book ?

"There are only two kinds of people who are really fascinating - people who know absolutely everything, and people who know absolutely nothing."


Oscar Wilde (1854 - 1900) Playwright & Wit