by JosephAlward 22 Replies latest watchtower bible
REM, yes, its all been "just a hoax".
Yet even if one see's through the deceptions of the MATRIX of this world, dosn't mean that they find out the "rest of the story", or just how deep the rabit hole goes.
In all fables and myths there are seeds of truth.
It is just that most don't take the time to learn to grow a garden. *grins*
Norval
Wow, you are out there, dude. You sound like you are cookoo for cocoa puffs!
rem
"We all do no end of feeling, and we mistake it for thinking." - Mark Twain
There is ample evidence of Jesus outside of the Gospels. These include references by Josephus, the Roman historian Tacitus, the Roman Pliny the Younger, and the Jewish Talmud.
The only reference made by Josephus that is ligit was this
But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought it before the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned
There is one other reference to Jesus in his writings, but it is not original and was added some time after his death. It was not written by him, but by someone trying to make it seem he acknowleged jesus as the Christ, but he did not.
Pliny the Younger, makes no historical reference to Jesus, he does however reference his followers and recants their beleifs, not a historical record of jesus' existence.
The Talmud contains inconclusive evidence of Jesus. The Talmud is a massive compilation divided into two parts, the Mishna and the Gemara. The Mishna was codified by Rabbi Jehudah ha-Nasi circa 200 CE but was not actually committed to writing until the fifth century; it discusses numerous subjects, including festivals, sacred things, etc. The Gemara was completed in the fifth century and is really a commentary on the Mishna. The references made in this writing is at least 2 centarys late to be a good historical record of Jesus, and it is also not clear if this is the one Christ Jesus they are refering to.
Tacitus
But not all the relief that could come from man, not all the bounties that the prince could bestow, nor all the atonements which could be presented to the gods, availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius: but the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their center and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind.There is much debate about this passage, Where did he get is information? It is not known. Here is a quote in arguement to it's accuracy from http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html#tacitus
Scholarly debate surrounding this passage has been mainly concerned with Tacitus' sources and not with the authorship of the passage (e.g., whether it is an interpolation) or its reliability.[83] Various scenarios have been proposed to explain how Tacitus got his information. One possibility is that Tacitus learned the information from another historian he trusted (e.g., Josephus). Another possibility (suggested by Harris) is that he obtained the information from Pliny the Younger. According to Harris, "Tacitus was an intimate friend and correspondent of the younger Pliny and was therefore probably acquainted with the problems Pliny encountered with the Christians during his governorship in Bithynia - Pontus (c. A.D. 110-112)."[84] (Defenders of this position may note that Tacitus was also governing in Asia in the very same years as Pliny's encounters with Christians [112-113], making communication between them on the event very likely.)[85] Norman Perrin and Dennis C. Duling mention a related possibility; they state that Tacitus' information "is probably based on the police interrogation of Christians."[86] Yet another possibility (suggested by Habermas and defended by McDowell and Wilson) is that Tacitus obtained the information from official documents.[87] (I shall say more about this possibility below.) It is also possible that the information was common knowledge. Finally, there is the view (defended by Wells, France, and Sanders) that Tacitus simply repeated what Christians at the time were saying.[88] The bottom line is this: given that Tacitus did not identify his source(s), we simply don't know how Tacitus obtained his information. Holding himself admits, "Truthfully, there is no way to tell" where Tacitus obtained his information about Jesus.[89] Therefore, we can't use Annals XV.47 as independent confirmation of the historicity of Jesus.Again there is no acurate historical eveidence to Jesus.
Now on the subject of Budda and Mohommad
When I mentioned them earlier, I was not refering to their biography, I was refering that they has historical reference, during their time period, not when their life stories were written. If I were to accept written stories about them that were written 100+ years after the fact, then I would have to accept the bible gospels about jesus that were written 30-100 years after his suspected death.
Seedy
