I Want Proof Jesus Even Existed

by Farkel 199 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • mP
    mP

    mP -> Leo

    I see a trend in your answers, you continue to state that xianity was everywhere, and yet have prsented no proof.

    I have tried to present many interseting reads, nobody can accuse me of not giving references. Now its your turn to demonstrate that xians, not jews, gnostics etc actually existd in the thousands you claim. Stories or traditions cant really honestly be accepted, they are well full of too many lies.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_martyrs

    While the persecution-martyr theme was prominent in the literature of early Christianity, none of several major martyrologies was finally canonized.

    Although the general consensus of scholars is that relatively few Christians were actually executed, [citation needed] the experience of persecution and martyrdom would be memorialized by successive generations of Christians and thereby become a central feature of their self-understanding continuing even to modern times. Thus, many Christians would come to view persecution as an integral part of the Christian experience. The implications of this self-image have had far-reaching ramifications, especially in Western cultures.

    ..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catacombs_of_Rome

    The Catacombs of Rome (Italian: Catacombe di Roma ) are ancient catacombs, underground burial places under or near Rome, Italy, of which there are at least forty, some discovered only in recent decades. Though most famous for Christianburials, either in separate catacombs or mixed together, they began in the 2nd century, [1] much as a response to overcrowding and shortage of land. Many scholars have written that catacombs came about to help persecuted Christians to bury their dead secretly. The soft volcanic tuff rock under Rome is highly suitable for tunnelling, as it is softer when first exposed to air, hardening afterwards. Many have kilometres of tunnels, in up to four stories (or layers).

    The Christian catacombs are extremely important for the art history of early Christian art, as they contain the great majority of examples from before about 400 AD, in fresco and sculpture. The Jewish catacombs are similarly important for the study of Jewish art at this period.

    ...

    Christian catacombs

    The first large-scale catacombs were excavated from the 2nd century onwards.

    ..

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius

    In the 5th century, the Christian historian Socrates Scholasticus described Eusebius as writing for “rhetorical finish” and for the “praises of the Emperor” rather than the “accurate statement of facts.” [43] The methods of Eusebius were criticised by Edward Gibbon in the 18th century. [44] In the 19th century Jacob Burckhardt viewed Eusebius as 'a liar', the “first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity.” [44] Ramsay MacMullen in the 20th century regarded Eusebius's work as representative of early Christian historical accounts in which “Hostile writings and discarded views were not recopied or passed on, or they were actively suppressed..., matters discreditable to the faith were to be consigned to silence

    .

    So basically one of the main guys telling us about early xianity is a downright liar, those ar e the words of scholars not mine.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire#Martyrdom

    stimates for total martyred dead for the Great Persecution depend on the report of Eusebius of Caesarea in the Martyrs of Palestine . There are no other viable sources for the total number of martyrdoms in a province. [37] Ancient writers did not think statistically. When the size of a Christian population is described, whether by a pagan, Jewish, or Christian source, it is opinion or metaphor, not accurate reportage. [38]

    Ah church father honesty ..

  • mP
    mP

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Christians_in_the_Roman_Empire#Martyrdom

    Under Domitian

    According to some historians, Jews and Christians were heavily persecuted toward the end of Domitian's reign (89-96). [63] The Book of Revelation, which mentions at least one instance of martyrdom (Rev 2:13; cf. 6:9), is thought by many scholars to have been written during Domitian's reign. [64] [65] Eusebius, a scholar of biblical canon, wrote that the social conflict described by Revelation reflects Domitian's organization of excessive and cruel banishments and executions of Christians, but these claims may be exaggerated or false. [66] Many historians, however, have maintained that there was little or no persecution of Christians during Domitian's time. [67] [68] [69] The lack of consensus by historians about the extent of persecution during the reign of Domitian derives from the fact that while accounts of persecution exist, these accounts are very cursory or their reliability is debated. [61]

    Often, reference is made to the execution of Flavius Clemens, a Roman consul and cousin of the Emperor, and the banishment of his wife, Flavia Domitilla, to the island of Pandateria. Eusebius alleges that Flavia Domitilla was banished because she was a Christian, leading some modern interpreters to suggest the same. However, Dio's account 67.14.1-2) only reports that she, along with many others, was guilty of sympathy for Judaism, [70] and Suetonis does not mention the exile at all [71] According to Keresztes, it is far more probable is that they were converts to Judaismwho attempted to evade payment of the Fiscus Iudaicus - the tax imposed on all persons who practiced Judaism. (262-265). [64] In any case, no stories of Christian persecution during Domitian's reign reference any sort of legal ordinances [61]

    Strnage not quite the same message you were asserting before. I think it would be fair to say that your comments about Flavia Domitilla, are worng, as the quoted text above paints quite a different picture. It mentions jews. It also says nothing about xian persecution. Jewish yes, xian no.

  • Pistoff
    Pistoff
    Strnage not quite the same message you were asserting before. I think it would be fair to say that your comments about Flavia Domitilla, are worng, as the quoted text above paints quite a different picture. It mentions jews. It also says nothing about xian persecution. Jewish yes, xian no.

    All of your posts in this thread follow the same pattern; if you find one source, in this thread mostly wiki's and the rest from fringe writers, one source that describes a few dissenters, you conclude an absolute and feel the need to ridicule other's posts and say they are stupid, are full of opinions and you accuse the other posters of not reading your citations. Just because we don't agree with them or with you doesn't mean we haven't read them.

    In this case, it is about the Flavians. While interesting, the wiki does conflict with other sources; that makes it interesting, but not conclusive.

    The best we can say about what happened in antiquity is that it has a high degree of probability, since we have no proof. It is not a black and white issue.

    But this question of the persecution of the Flavians is a sideshow. You assert, without proof, that the Romans were behind the writing of the bible.

  • mP
    mP

    p:

    All of your posts in this thread follow the same pattern; if you find one source, in this thread mostly wiki's and the rest from fringe writers, one source that describes a few dissenters, you conclude an absolute and feel the need to ridicule other's posts and say they are stupid, are full of opinions and you accuse the other posters of not reading your citations. Just because we don't agree with them or with you doesn't mean we haven't read them.

    mP:

    Sweeping statement, one source eh ?

    Its a shame you most of your reply here is well personal attacks. At no stage have you ever actually addressed or corrected a single mistake. Its your privlege to make any person commentaries you want, however if you are going to enter a debate or similar then try and be grown up and actually discuss the topic. Its also fair to that you also notice the failings of others.

    I mean how exactly are you going to say talking about BP and Moby Dick in anyway corrects any factual observations or facts that i have presetned. I await your reply.

    Of course i gave the example of Josiah and his fabrications but so far no response. I will however wait before i condemn.

    ...

    p:

    But this question of the persecution of the Flavians is a sideshow. You assert, without proof, that the Romans were behind the writing of the bible.

    mP:

    Of course you havent read any of my posts, thats why you cant show a single error in my assertions. I never asserted that the F were persecuted. Leo said they were and i showed scholars give quite a different view pt of what actually happened.

    I did show other examples of similar misrepresentations , but of course why let facts get in the way of a bit of fun. At the very least you coul dhave been honest and admitted the mistake. Honesty in religion, its hard to find...

  • Pistoff
    Pistoff

    mP must be omniscient; he can just tell I haven't read his posts.

    I have, sad to say; I have suffered through your misspelling, non sequiturs, dead end paths, red herrings and unnecessary insults.

    You cut and paste from wiki as if we should all gasp, smack our foreheads and cast aside our views erroneously shaped by years of research and reflection; Wikipedia! Atwill! Yes, the Romans are all behind it! Eureka!

    Tell us, what else? We are waiting, waiting; what else do we have so so wrong? Who else are we ignoring?

    Please help us to know as much as you.

    How do you cut and paste with such style and elan?

  • mP
    mP

    P:

    The purpose of pasting links to wiki is its a good start to get people thinking. As opposed to your style of providing absolutely no citations to anything. I thoroughly believe in letting people read and decide from themselves instead of telling them what to think. Given you give opinions on multiple occassions without a shread of proof that would make yo fit in the later category.

    The past 150 years the views on the authenticity of the BIble have changed from being an absolute book of truth into one riddled with problems. Scholars today all know that the Moses story never happened. Josiah invented Deut that is a fact. Kings and leaders have been inventing visions from God from the beginning of time for their own selfish powerhungry means. The sad thing is Josiah got caught out when that Egyptian arrow killed him.

    Its funny that Josephus writings are always quoted by xians as proof of Jesus and all sorts of other things, and yet they plain out ignore the other inconvient truth when he stated that Caesar was the Messiah. The joke is the NT has been of most benefit to Rome for most of the past 2000 years. The Popes dont care about sinning, their history of sex, drugs, murder, money and more shows that they know the inside joke, because the deterant of Gods wrath hardly concerns them. The exact same thing is true of all OT heroes. David broke all of Gods law with impunity because he could and because he knew God did not exist. This pattern is self evident. If theres one thing that consistet in the etnire bible from start to end, its not Gods love, or kindess which is often absent, but rather its the old tired message from the leaders telling the masses to obey them, whilst they do as they wish without fear or worry.

    History is always written by those who can write, poor people in ancient judea were to busy farming and herding goats to worry about inventing a god. Priests who want to keep their scam in Jerusalem going on the other hand did. We can also see from that most Jews never returned from Babylon as a sign that they werent terribly impressed by the draconian madness tht was judaism.

  • panhandlegirl
    panhandlegirl

    I have been wanting to read 'Did Jesus Exist' By Bart Ehrman. Has anyone here read it? Was it a worthwhile read?

    stillthinking, I have not read this book by Ehrman, but I have read "Misquoting Jesus" by him and it was an eye-opener and a worthwhile read. I will be reading "Did Jesus Exist" as soon as I can purchase it.I suspect Ehrman is always a good read.

    PHG

  • Pistoff
    Pistoff

    mP:

    First, I am not a christian, certainly not in the sense that I believe Jesus performed miracles or was resurrected or is ruling anywhere or is anything other than dead; I am not trying to prove my opinion about anything, just expressing it.

    My opinion has been shaped by what I have read:

    The Lost Gospel, Burton Mack

    The Origin of Satan, Elaine Pagels

    The Gnostic Gospels, Elaine Pagels

    Adam, Eve and the Serpent, Elaine Pagels

    The Bible Unearthed, Israel Finkelstein

    Jesus, A Mediterranean Peasant, John Dominic Crossan

    Who Killed Jesus, John Dominic Crossan

    Who Wrote the Bible, Richard Friedman

    The Letters of Paul, can't remember the author

    Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman

    Jesus, A Revolutionary Biography, Crossan (condensed version of Mediterranean Peasant)

    Excavating Jesus, Crossan

    (Here is what Wiki says about Crossan, this should help you see how Crossan views things:

    "Crossan suggests Jesus was an illiterate "Jewish Cynic" from a landless peasant background, initially a follower of John the Baptist. [citation needed] Jesus was a healer and man of great wisdom and courage who taught a message of inclusiveness, tolerance, and liberation. "His strategy . . . was the combination of free healing and common eating . . . that negated the hierarchical and patronal normalcies of Jewish religion and Roman power . . . He was neither broker nor mediator but . . . the announcer that neither should exist between humanity and divinity or humanity and itself." [ 6 ]

    Out of his study of cross-attestation and strata of the ancient texts, Crossan asserts that many of the gospel stories of Jesus are not factual, including his "nature miracles", the virgin birth, and the raising of Lazarus. [citation needed] While pointing out the meager attestation and apparent belatedness of the miracles' appearance in the trajectory of the canon, Crossan takes the opposite view, that Jesus was known during earliest Christianity as a powerful magician, which was "a very problematic and controversial phenomenon not only for his enemies but even for his friends," who began washing miracles out of the tradition early on. [citation needed]

    Crossan maintains the Gospels were never intended to be taken literally by their authors. [citation needed] He argues that the meaning of the story is the real issue, not whether a particular story about Jesus is history or parable. [citation needed] He proposes that it is historically probable that, like all but one known victim of crucifixion, Jesus' body was scavenged by animals rather than being placed in a tomb. [ 7 ] Crossan believes in vision hypothesis "resurrection" by faith but holds that bodily resuscitation was never contemplated by early Christians. [citation needed] He believes that the rapture is based on a misreading of I Thessalonians 4:16-18. [citation needed]")

    I have read others, can't remember them tonight

    Online courses I enjoyed:

    Introduction to the OT, Yale, Christina Hayes

    Introduction to the NT, Yale, Dale Martin

    The Historical Jesus, Stanford, Thomas Sheehan

    From those sources, my take is that there most likely was a man behind the myth, but that he is just that: mostly myth. His followers, IMO, made sense of a death that was senseless to them by searching through the OT and applying scattered texts to him, texts that only became messianic when they made them so.

    Still, there was (IMO) likely something about the followers of Jesus that blindsided Paul; it isn't logical to me that it came from a total vacuum. Once Paul enters the picture, the mythbuilding really begins, in my opinion; Paul elevates Jesus to messianic level.

    So, mP, don't put me in the category of those who are staunch believers; I think a historical Jesus is likely, but that nearly all of the stories are embellished fables from his followers, the christology of course is from Paul, and later the Jesus community as they grew and coalesced into a full religion.

    Notwithstanding what any of us here think of Jesus, in the US the Christians have the microphone, don't they? And it is becoming more and more problematic as the body of believers shift to fundamentalism, the belief in Jesus exactly and literally as the gospels depict him.

    That is too bad; it is so easy to show it isn't true, and it suppresses the discussion I think we should be having: religion as an exploration of ethics and community, and whether or not it is time to try to move on, either to openly discuss the myth (myth not in a negative sense, but as a sense of story and place, how we see the past, present and future) or to discuss ethics and morality without religion.

  • still thinking
    still thinking

    stillthinking , I have not read this book by Ehrman, but I have read "Misquoting Jesus" by him and it was an eye-opener and a worthwhile read. I will be reading "Did Jesus Exist" as soon as I can purchase it.I suspect Ehrman is always a good read.

    Panhandlegirl....I got that out from the library and couldn't bring myself to be bothered reading it...LOL But I will get it out again since you recommend it.

    Have you read 'Forged' by Ehrman? Now theres and interesting read too.

    I'm not sure how anyone can have proof of Jesus existence because no one seems to be able to provide anything written at the time he was supposedly alive to support this idea. It just seems like a lot of wishful thinking to me. But hey, if it turns out he did exist...I still say...so what? Still got no proof he DID any of the things he is supposedly said to have done in the bible.

  • Farkel
    Farkel

    dgeggnog, (odd moniker)

    You wrote:

    :If I had such proof, I would rather chew nails than give it to someone that I knew would continue talking such nonsense as I read in your message, but, alas, I don't have the proof you want; no one does. My evidence is based on faith and it's evident from all you said in your post that you are without faith. It must be sad being you, too.

    IF you had proof (obviously you don't) you would chew nails. Since you dont' have proof then start chewing those nails.

    You said:

    :My evidence is based on faith..."

    That is not evidence, you twit. That is bullshit based upon more bullshit.

    :and it's evident from all you said in your post that you are without faith

    Yep. That was the whole point of my topic.

    :It must be sad being you, too.

    Are you are saying that I must be sad because I don't live in Fantasyland(tm)?

    Farkel

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit