Question:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I must disagree with you on a multiple of points. There is no man who lived during the time of Christ that is better documented in history than Christ, and that excludes the Scriptural references. There is no doubt that Christ existed. Totally incorrect. Here’s some of the recent series that demonstrates otherwise:
<SNIP So there’s the truth of those Jesus ’sources’. There’s more…..inquire if interested.
As a legal scholar (please write me privately if you wish to examine my credentials), I am always hesitant to embrace "negative evidence" (aka "negative hearsay"). The author of this post seems to forget that that the absence of conclusive proof does not necessarily equate with phenomenal reality. In other words, if no one claims (or few people claim) that such-and-such event occurred, this does not necessarily mean that such-and-such event did not occur. This differs considerably from direct evidence (i.e. "I was there, and it didn’t happen that way). Similarly, "planet" accounts for the vested interests of the early Christians as a possible factor, yet completely ignores the fact that the Jewish elite of the 1st century possessed a considerable stake in the status quo. Additionally, "planet" ignores another important factor in historical interpretation. The Roman historians of the 1st century did not possess a modern sense of historiography. As any classical scholar knows, the Hellenistic and Roman cultures viewed history as a branch of literature, not a branch of science; accuracy was merely one factor among many, such as style, dramatic merits, etc. Further, all ancient cultures (even that of Imperial Rome) considered history relevant only in the sense that it impacted their own culture/ethnicity. For example, of the thousands of British client-kings that ruled during the Roman occupation of Britain, we know the names of only a few dozen (i.e. Caractacus, Boadicea, etc.). These few were mentioned by historians only because their revolts led to the commitment of thousands of additional troops; in other words, the daily lives of Roman citizens in the core of the Empire were impacted. My point: the crucifixion of Christ was not significant to mainstream Roman culture at the time. As such, one would not expect *any* commentary by Roman historians of the 1st century. In other words, the most significant testimony (both for historical and spiritual purposes) of the life of Christ remains the Bible. I see no problem in this. Considering the fact that the Masoretic text of the Holy Scriptures (i.e. the Old Testament as used in Judaism) reflects the fact that the Septuagint Old Testament was faithfully translated, one must consider the internal consistency of the texts. That is, the prophecies of the OT clearly indicate that Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ. Assuming that one could seriously maintain that the early Christians manufactured the New Testament out of whole cloth, no so-called "rational" person could possibly believe that the entire Jewish community cooperated with a fraud that undermined their entire legalistic structure. In conclusion, God, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit remain rational in character. That is, God is neither chaotic nor irrational. However, one cannot come to faith through reason alone (see John 6:44/Matthew 11:27). As such, this sort of discussion remains purely academic. I have written all of this for the benefit of believers, so that they might have some aid in building up the body of Christ. I realize that the author of the previous post has already reached a decision and only seeks to rationalize that conviction. As such, I will pray for you, "planet", as I am assuming that you will not do so for yourself. PEACE AND LOVE, DSL
Response:
masses! The sources you quote are either very strongly allied to anti-christian beliefs or hopelessly out of date. Scweitzer has long since been proven to be in error. You should expand your reading to others like John Domenic Crossan, Charles Smith and others who write from a more objective view point
Are these people chaired, or teach in a seminary, or apologetics? Serious question. As to expanding one’s reading, I’ve gotten the impression that you don’t read anything that displays the xian works in anything but a favorable light. and are far more up to date amoung current Jesus Historians.
You realise that Jesus historians is an oxymoron don’t you. First of all, in spite of your following claims, there is no hard historical evidence that the claimed lad existed, just like it’s claimed dad. Not one concrete shred of evidence. It has been long proven that there was indeed a historical figure named
No, sorry, it hasn’t. Though I will grant you it has been long claimed, for close onto 2,000 years, give a decade or so. Jesus by scholars that aren’t blatantly anti -Christian. They use references both within the New Testament, and outside sources to draw there
1st major glaring error, you can’t use an unsupported document to prove itself. Circular logic & special pleading not withstanding, if there is no outside evidence for a claim, then there is no justification that it is true. It is conceivable that a man could whiz across the mouth of the Mississippi river, but I would have to see it if you claim it to be so. And I would insist that it be done on a dead calm wind day. conclusions, including Josephus whom you are so eager to discredit. By
Sorry, Josephus has been discredited by history. Consider, there is no claim for a first hand account of actual observation. Consider that pages & chapters were dedicated to rouges & vagabonds. Consider Harod was taken to task & all his screw ups exposed & documented. Consider less than 5 full sentences for an individual claimed to be the most important individual in the history of the planet at the time. Sure Josephus wrote all about the lad, right, honest reverend, well, maybe not, actually not. There is some speculation the passage is an interpretation, but forgery is more like it. Consider, the first & only mention was by Eusibus, a known forger. Consider, no early church father made mention of the passage, though several did mention the works of Josephus. No, don’t consider. it might make you wonder & question. demystifiying the figure of Christ one can by analysing the New Testament
Nope, you need documentation outside any article that makes claims of the nature that the xian myth does. Rather along th lines of me stating there was no Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce. I can make the claim, but history would embarrass me if I did. this is the same thing you are doing. Making claims that history says are not true. This is an argument common to those of the xian writ. Just because you assume the writ to be true does not mean others blindly agree. uncover the Historical figure, or "man". One of the first things a scholar of The Historical Jesus must do is remove his own pre-disposition towards a particular view point and go about analyzing the sources without imposing a subjective interpretation to it.
To bad they can’t do that, but then, as asked earlier, who are these men. Names I’ve not heard of, though admit my knowledge is not limitless. If they are anything like the others I’ve read claiming the kid existed, then they are not doing a good job of research, but are in fact looking for anything to back their claims. A human trait I fess, but that is not straight talking & unworthy for any scholar. Before you bring it up, I reckon other scholars have done the same, but unlike biblical claimants, most publish in peer reviewed journals, science, archaeology, anthropology, scientific disciplines of all sorts. Consider that there is no science of metaphysics & you start to catch on. Do you have a better day tomorrow than you’ve had today. J.P. Roberts
Planet America’s researched sources & comments snipped for brevity. Philosophy: Questions that may never be answered. Religion: Answers that may never be questioned,
Response:
You realise that Jesus historians is an oxymoron don’t you. First of all, in spite of your following claims, there is no hard historical evidence that the claimed lad existed, just like it’s claimed dad. Not one concrete shred of evidence.
Could you supply some hard historical evidence for the existence of Aristotle? I don’t believe he ever really existed.
Response:
The sources you quote are either very strongly allied to anti-christian beliefs or hopelessly out of date. Scweitzer has long since been proven to be in error. You should expand your reading to others like John Domenic Crossan, Charles Smith and others who write from a more objective view point and are far more up to date amoung current Jesus Historians. It has been long proven that there was indeed a historical figure named Jesus by scholars that aren’t blatantly anti -Christian. They use references both within the New Testament, and outside sources to draw there conclusions, including Josephus whom you are so eager to discredit. By demystifiying the figure of Christ one can by analysing the New Testament uncover the Historical figure, or "man". One of the first things a scholar of The Historical Jesus must do is remove his own pre-disposition towards a particular view point and go about analyzing the sources without imposing a subjective interpretation to it. J.P. Roberts
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I must disagree with you on a multiple of points. There is no man who lived during the time of Christ that is better documented in history than Christ, and that excludes the Scriptural references. There is no doubt that Christ existed. Totally incorrect. Here’s some of the recent series that demonstrates otherwise: Truth on Josephus…! X’ians have laid claim to the mention of Jesus in Josephus’ "The Antiquities of the Jews" ( 93 a.d., XVIII 3,3 63-64), as evidence (of the extra-Biblical sort) for Jesus’ existence. Nothing could be more erroneous than reliance on such discredited and flimsy evidence. In the first place, the mention of Jesus is found in what is known as the "Testimonium Flavianum Passage", a clear and obvious interpolation into Josephus’ narrative. No ‘honest’ Biblical scholar would accept the "T.F.P." as legitimate, origional, honest, or compelling. The Passage is clearly and obviously intrusive in the context in which it appears. It’s appearance, in the midst of a story of misfortunes during a Jewish uprising, totally breaks the continuity of the story….which then picks up with the account of how Tiberius expels the Jews from Rome! The Passage is NOT found in the earliest copies of "Antiquities…", and is first ‘discovered’ by Eusebius around 300 a.d.. The fact that Eusibius is considered by some to be "…the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity.", with "…many falsifications, suppressions, and fictions which have been proved in his work…"(Jakob Burkhardt, Leben Konstantins, 1860, pp.307, 335, 347.) should suggest the real source of the "T.F.P". Canon Farrar ("Life of Christ", vol. 1, pp.63) points out that the "Single passage in which Josephus alludes to (Jesus) is interpolated, if not wholly spurious.". The Passage has been thoroughly analyzed and discredited in "Chrestos" (L. Herrmaun, 1970, Belgium). The fact remains, there is NOTHING at all, in ALL of recorded (extra-Biblical) history, to prove that the Biblical Jesus Christ ever walked the face of the earth. Several books that reveal and conclude as much include: "Man and His Gods", Homer W. Smith "The Historical Evidence For Jesus", G.A. Wells (pp.22-23). "The Jesus of the Early Christians" and "Did Jesus Exist?", G.A. Wells "Jesus: God, Man, or Myth", Herbert Cutner "The Quest for the Historical Jesus", Albert Schweitzer "The Life of Jesus, Critically Examined", David Friedrich Strauss "Jesus Outside the Gospels", R. Joseph Hoffman And scores of others….. Nope, the phony-baloney (and copy-cat, god- man) Jesus Christ went totally unrecognized by contemporary and later historians as a real and historical entity. In other words folks, the biblical Jesus Christ never existed outside the myths, legends, folk-lore, and hero-tales contained in the Bible. This might interest you too: Jesus in Talmud….! In their desperation to locate ANY kind of extra-biblical evidence for their Jesus Christ, Christians often propose: …Multiple Jewish sources, attacking Christ and Christians… as evidence for Jesus’ existence. Well, as usual…..X’ians are selling a corrosive, contentious, and corrupt ‘bill o’ goods’ which we’ll now look at somewhat closer than their vague suggestion. What DO Christians have to say on the issue? But first, it might be useful to list some of the Jewish Talmudic references that are often offered by Chriustians as extra-biblical evidence for Jesus Christ: Mary was a whore and Jesus an evil man–Sanhedrin 106a & b Mary played the harlot with ‘carpenters’ (plural)–Sanhedrin 106b (See Herford, ‘Christianity in the Talmud’, pp 48-70) Mary was an adulteress, and Jesus a magician & a fool who carved magic formulas into his own skin–Shabbath 104b Jesus was a magician who worshipped a brick–Sotah 47a Jesus was a bastard born of adultery–Yebamoth 49a & b Jesus teaches a disciple foul insults for priests–Abodah Zarah 17a Jesus was guilty of apostasy and sorcery; he and his disciples deserved execution–Sanhedrin 43a Jesus is being punished in Hell with boiling excrement for mocking the Rabbis–Gittin 56b & 57a Jesus died at age 33-34 because "Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days…"–San- hedrin 106a & b (See Jewish Encyclopedia under ‘Balaam’ for the Jesus connection here.). Jesus, a sorcerer, was ‘hanged’–San- hedrin 43a and 67a The above are the usual Talmud quotations (paraphrased here for convenience) that desperate Christian apologists (grasping for straws!) use as extra-biblical evidence for their God, Jesus Christ. Interested persons can read some of the above citations in the popular Josh McDowell’s "Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ , Chapter 5 and it’s bibliography. But is it really the biblical Jesus and his family who are being addressed in the Talmud? Do X’ians really subscribe to their God being a ‘bastard’, a ‘magician’, a ‘evil’ and ‘mocking’ deceitful person now being burned in boiling excrement in Hell, etc., etc? [Actually, not such a great leap is required insofar as the Gospels themselves reveal "...(Jesus') FRIENDS... went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is BESIDE HIMSELF."(Mark 3:21--- --The Greek word 'paraho' translated 'friends', actually means 'FAMILY'. .And the Greek word 'existemi' translated 'beside himself', means 'INSANE' , 'LUNATIC',and 'WITLESS'.): and of course, we know that Jesus was 'hanged' [ie, NOT 'crucified') according to Acts 5:30, 10:39, and 13:29; Galatians 3:13; and 1 Peter 2:24: and so on and on and on.], Well, the vagueness of the Talmudic passages (some of the ‘evidence’ is in the form of footnotes in the Talmud!) are really quite un-convincing viv-a-vis the biblical Jesus Christ. Some might suggest the above represent convincing arguments AGAINST using the Talmud as extra- biblical evidence for the Jesus Christ whom his believers and supporters know and love so well. On balance then, none of the Christians ‘evidence’ for the historicity of Jesus Christ, as obtained from contemporary historians and the Talmud, stand up to any close examination at all. Instead, we’re witnessing the efforts of people desperate to convince others that their ‘third-rate’ religion (Christinsanity) has any historic basis in fact as applicable to the ‘cowardly’ and ‘witless’ Jesus Christ, God-man extraordinaire found within the New Testament. (END) And this also: Remsburg, in "The Christ" names 42 writers who lived and wrote during the time or within a century after the period when Jesus is said to have existed, and from all their writings only four passages are to be found that might possibly support the histor= icity of Jesus. And of those four passages, not a single one can stand any critical test at all. Christians usually offer eight (8) possible So, let’s see how far ‘off-base’ Christians are this time around: Cornelius Tacitus(55-130 A.D.)–Ann- als XV. 44…..It was not until the 15th century A.D. that the account of "Christus" (Ooooops…. ain’t a proper name!) was ‘discovered’ by Poggio Bracciolini (the suspected author of "Annals"!) in Tacitus’ writings. It was then published by Johannes de Spire of Venice in 1468 A.D. The account was NEVER referred to prior to the 15th century. The account only represents a report by Christians about a "Christus" in about 117-120 A.D. The account refers to Pilate as ‘procurator’ (a term not in general use until perhaps 50 yrs. later. Instead, Pilate would have been until then known as ‘prefect’). The account mentions a "vast multitude" of Christians in 64 A.D. Rome. Hah!! It also mentions "death by fire". Hah!! The Romans did NOT execute by burning. The account has Christians per- secuted for their faith. Hah!! (They WERE persecuted for their political aspirations and sedition……Hmmmmmm, that has a familiar ring, even today!). The account has Christians being burned in Nero’s gardens. Hah!! Another account by Tacitcus has fire victims being HOUSED in Nero’s gardens! Besides, Nero was in Antium, not Rome, during the course of the fire (according to another account by Tacitus!). The worshippers of the Sun-god Serapis (Osiris) were called ‘Christians’ then!! does Tacitus anywhere refer to Christians…. they were utterly insignificant during his life- time! Nowhere in the whole New Testament do Christians even refer to themselves as ‘Christians’.
… read more »
Response:
No matter what we believe, we tend to cling to these beliefs. And, when more and more begin to believe in a system that is non-Christian in nature, it becomes easier to be non-Christian … and belong. GB MCSE, MVP Think outside of the box!
And aren’t those claiming to be tolerant to another’s beliefs the most intoloerant to Christianity! Makes one wonder what their agenda is. It does not appear to be tolerant, loving, caring, nor particularly civil. Check out the kindness and self serving intellectual superiority of *I’m OK, your’re not OK* tone of the next posting. As Christians, we will pray for the poster, as we always have, despite the persecution and unsupported denials. — May God Bless You, Michael Character Counts. It is not hypocritical to set a high goal and occasionally fail. It is hypocritical to set a low goal and occasionally succeed.
Response:
I must disagree with you on a multiple of points. There is no man who lived during the time of Christ that is better documented in history than Christ, and that excludes the Scriptural references. There is no doubt that Christ existed.
Totally incorrect. Here’s some of the recent series that demonstrates otherwise: Truth on Josephus…! X’ians have laid claim to the mention of Jesus in Josephus’ "The Antiquities of the Jews" ( 93 a.d., XVIII 3,3 63-64), as evidence (of the extra-Biblical sort) for Jesus’ existence. Nothing could be more erroneous than reliance on such discredited and flimsy evidence. In the first place, the mention of Jesus is found in what is known as the "Testimonium Flavianum Passage", a clear and obvious interpolation into Josephus’ narrative. No ‘honest’ Biblical scholar would accept the "T.F.P." as legitimate, origional, honest, or compelling. The Passage is clearly and obviously intrusive in the context in which it appears. It’s appearance, in the midst of a story of misfortunes during a Jewish uprising, totally breaks the continuity of the story….which then picks up with the account of how Tiberius expels the Jews from Rome! The Passage is NOT found in the earliest copies of "Antiquities…", and is first ‘discovered’ by Eusebius around 300 a.d.. The fact that Eusibius is considered by some to be "…the first thoroughly dishonest historian of antiquity.", with "…many falsifications, suppressions, and fictions which have been proved in his work…"(Jakob Burkhardt, Leben Konstantins, 1860, pp.307, 335, 347.) should suggest the real source of the "T.F.P". Canon Farrar ("Life of Christ", vol. 1, pp.63) points out that the "Single passage in which Josephus alludes to (Jesus) is interpolated, if not wholly spurious.". The Passage has been thoroughly analyzed and discredited in "Chrestos" (L. Herrmaun, 1970, Belgium). The fact remains, there is NOTHING at all, in ALL of recorded (extra-Biblical) history, to prove that the Biblical Jesus Christ ever walked the face of the earth. Several books that reveal and conclude as much include: "Man and His Gods", Homer W. Smith "The Historical Evidence For Jesus", G.A. Wells (pp.22-23). "The Jesus of the Early Christians" and "Did Jesus Exist?", G.A. Wells "Jesus: God, Man, or Myth", Herbert Cutner "The Quest for the Historical Jesus", Albert Schweitzer "The Life of Jesus, Critically Examined", David Friedrich Strauss "Jesus Outside the Gospels", R. Joseph Hoffman And scores of others….. Nope, the phony-baloney (and copy-cat, god- man) Jesus Christ went totally unrecognized by contemporary and later historians as a real and historical entity. In other words folks, the biblical Jesus Christ never existed outside the myths, legends, folk-lore, and hero-tales contained in the Bible. This might interest you too: Jesus in Talmud….! In their desperation to locate ANY kind of extra-biblical evidence for their Jesus Christ, Christians often propose: …Multiple Jewish sources, attacking Christ and Christians… as evidence for Jesus’ existence. Well, as usual…..X’ians are selling a corrosive, contentious, and corrupt ‘bill o’ goods’ which we’ll now look at somewhat closer than their vague suggestion. What DO Christians have to say on the issue? But first, it might be useful to list some of the Jewish Talmudic references that are often offered by Chriustians as extra-biblical evidence for Jesus Christ: Mary was a whore and Jesus an evil man–Sanhedrin 106a & b Mary played the harlot with ’carpenters’ (plural)–Sanhedrin 106b (See Herford, ‘Christianity in the Talmud’, pp 48-70) Mary was an adulteress, and Jesus a magician & a fool who carved magic formulas into his own skin–Shabbath 104b Jesus was a magician who worshipped a brick–Sotah 47a Jesus was a bastard born of adultery–Yebamoth 49a & b Jesus teaches a disciple foul insults for priests–Abodah Zarah 17a Jesus was guilty of apostasy and sorcery; he and his disciples deserved execution–Sanhedrin 43a Jesus is being punished in Hell with boiling excrement for mocking the Rabbis–Gittin 56b & 57a Jesus died at age 33-34 because "Bloody and deceitful men shall not live out half their days…"–San- hedrin 106a & b (See Jewish Encyclopedia under ‘Balaam’ for the Jesus connection here.). Jesus, a sorcerer, was ‘hanged’–San- hedrin 43a and 67a The above are the usual Talmud quotations (paraphrased here for convenience) that desperate Christian apologists (grasping for straws!) use as extra-biblical evidence for their God, Jesus Christ. Interested persons can read some of the above citations in the popular Josh McDowell’s "Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ , Chapter 5 and it’s bibliography. But is it really the biblical Jesus and his family who are being addressed in the Talmud? Do X’ians really subscribe to their God being a ‘bastard’, a ‘magician’, a ‘evil’ and ‘mocking’ deceitful person now being burned in boiling excrement in Hell, etc., etc? [Actually, not such a great leap is required insofar as the Gospels themselves reveal "...(Jesus') FRIENDS... went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is BESIDE HIMSELF."(Mark 3:21--- --The Greek word 'paraho' translated 'friends', actually means 'FAMILY'. .And the Greek word 'existemi' translated 'beside himself', means 'INSANE' , 'LUNATIC',and 'WITLESS'.): and of course, we know that Jesus was 'hanged' [ie, NOT 'crucified') according to Acts 5:30, 10:39, and 13:29; Galatians 3:13; and 1 Peter 2:24: and so on and on and on.], Well, the vagueness of the Talmudic passages (some of the ‘evidence’ is in the form of footnotes in the Talmud!) are really quite un-convincing viv-a-vis the biblical Jesus Christ. Some might suggest the above represent convincing arguments AGAINST using the Talmud as extra- biblical evidence for the Jesus Christ whom his believers and supporters know and love so well. On balance then, none of the Christians ‘evidence’ for the historicity of Jesus Christ, as obtained from contemporary historians and the Talmud, stand up to any close examination at all. Instead, we’re witnessing the efforts of people desperate to convince others that their ‘third-rate’ religion (Christinsanity) has any historic basis in fact as applicable to the ‘cowardly’ and ‘witless’ Jesus Christ, God-man extraordinaire found within the New Testament. (END) And this also: Remsburg, in "The Christ" names 42 writers who lived and wrote during the time or within a century after the period when Jesus is said to have existed, and from all their writings only four passages are to be found that might possibly support the histor= icity of Jesus. And of those four passages, not a single one can stand any critical test at all. Christians usually offer eight (8) possible So, let’s see how far ‘off-base’ Christians are this time around: Cornelius Tacitus(55-130 A.D.)–Ann- als XV. 44…..It was not until the 15th century A.D. that the account of "Christus" (Ooooops…. ain’t a proper name!) was ‘discovered’ by Poggio Bracciolini (the suspected author of "Annals"!) in Tacitus’ writings. It was then published by Johannes de Spire of Venice in 1468 A.D. The account was NEVER referred to prior to the 15th century. The account only represents a report by Christians about a "Christus" in about 117-120 A.D. The account refers to Pilate as ‘procurator’ (a term not in general use until perhaps 50 yrs. later. Instead, Pilate would have been until then known as ‘prefect’). The account mentions a "vast multitude" of Christians in 64 A.D. Rome. Hah!! It also mentions "death by fire". Hah!! The Romans did NOT execute by burning. The account has Christians per- secuted for their faith. Hah!! (They WERE persecuted for their political aspirations and sedition……Hmmmmmm, that has a familiar ring, even today!). The account has Christians being burned in Nero’s gardens. Hah!! Another account by Tacitcus has fire victims being HOUSED in Nero’s gardens! Besides, Nero was in Antium, not Rome, during the course of the fire (according to another account by Tacitus!). The worshippers of the Sun-god Serapis (Osiris) were called ‘Christians’ then!! does Tacitus anywhere refer to Christians…. they were utterly insignificant during his life- time! Nowhere in the whole New Testament do Christians even refer to themselves as ‘Christians’. Eusebius’ fourth ( and Clement of Alexandria’s third) Century catalog of extra- biblical references to Jesus do NOT mention Tacitus account at all!! And on and on and Evidence for Jesus", p.16, for more detail]. Lucian of Samosata….His quotation about some "…man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced a new cult…" is too nebulous to be given serious attention or concern. Even the Bible N.T. mentions rebels and other Messiahs who paid with their lives for their political aspirations. No biblical Jesus Christ is found in this snippet either. Seutonius (77-140 A.D.)–Lives of the Caesars, 26.2…..Mention is made of "…Christ- ians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition." And in Life of Claudius, 25.4, he mentions a "…Chrestus…" being expelled from Rome with his followers in about the year 49 A.D.!! Hey, talk about rewriting history! Actually, Chrestus was a fairly common name among Roman freedmen. It was also the Roman name for the Sun-god Serapis (Osiris—-see Tacitus above). The Roman historian Vopiscus said "Those who worship Serapis are the Chrestians…". Can someone please point out for us where Christians find the ‘biblical’ Jesus Christ in these snippets!! No eye … read more »
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – <snip all of Leon’s post I must disagree with you on a multiple of points. There is no man who lived during the time of Christ that is better documented in history than Christ, and that excludes the Scriptural references. There is no doubt that Christ existed. Oh come now! We have several people from that era who are *much* better documented. For example, Julius Caesar. We have several examples of his writing, almost every historian in that part of the world mentions him, we have paintings and sculptures that show us what he looked like, and we know a great deal about his family and relatives. The same can be said about most of the Roman Emperors (Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, etc.) Where is all of your historical evidence for Jesus? Perhaps bonning up on history as well as Scripture would help. I have. Have you? Of course. Notwithstanding that there are 5,000 manuscripts that document the New Testament making it the best documented record of that period (and 2 rather suspect manuscripts that most new age Bibles are based upon), there are many others. I am sure that you wouldn
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.