Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesus was tried by Pontius Pilate before His crucifixion. I don't know if that means a Jew would have had the same status as an Italian citizen. Probably not. They were an occupied people.
The gospels report such a trial, but it seems likely to have been the invention of the writers since non Roman citizens had no right to any sort of trial, much less one presided over by the Roman Prelate himself.
Roman citizenship for provincials was a reward for special service or loyalty to the Empire. It certainly was not extended to trouble making members of the peasant class. The Romans had a zero tolerance approach to such people, they were not tried, they were caught and executed.
The gospels report such a trial, but it seems likely to have been the invention of the writers since non Roman citizens had no right to any sort of trial, much less one presided over by the Roman Prelate himself.
So if you don't like Gospels, you can just blow them off. Inconvenient to your narrative. That's probably why I'm wasting my time talking to you.
An interesting topic in itself. This is not entirely accurate however - Jesus existence is documented in several non-christian and non-religious sources (Roman and Jewish documents from that time). Very few non-christian or agnostic historians currently deny the existence of a man names Jesus that was crucified during that time.
Can you name some of them? As far as I know there is NO reference to the historical Jesus at all. There was mention of a "rebel" by Josephus however he never named Jesus (the prophet). Also some christian apologist in Russia attempted to fabricate some of Josephus' work and insert Jesus into it but that was found to be a falsification of documentation.
Not true. No mention of Jesus appears in a Roman source until long after the supposed death.
If you believe otherwise, please provide your source. You might wish to get up to speed here by reading the section called "Greco-Roman Pagan sources"
in this link. Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Of that time - 1st and 2nd century, ok within a 100 years of his death. I used a broad definition. Not contemporaries of Jesus, but recent enough for historians of that age to rely on other written records or testemants, possibly first hand accounts.
It's a debatable topic for sure.
Of that time - 1st and 2nd century, ok within a 100 years of his death. I used a broad definition. Not contemporaries of Jesus, but recent enough for historians of that age to rely on other written records or testemants, possibly first hand accounts.
It's a debatable topic for sure.
Romans were very meticulous when it came to keeping records, yet they never wrote about this event. Sort of weird, no? Also the only people who wrote about him 100 years after the fact where his supposed followers. Don't get me wrong, I believe he existed, just not in the time they said he did and I do not believe Jesus was his name. That is a title, not a name. Funny, the old testament makes mention of him being with Moses and Aaron on Sinai (Jesus is a Greek word, in his language the name would have been Joshua). I am not a christian so I am not 100% familiar with christian doctrine, but I know they try to explain this event away by saying Jesus wasn't with them (Moses and Aaron) physically but spiritually. They labeled it with some word that starts with a T (cant remember the word). So in my estimation (going back to the original topic). "Jesus" couldn't have been a Roman citizen, because he would have, had to have existed at that time (the time of the Roman Empire) to have been one.
Romans were very meticulous when it came to keeping records, yet they never wrote about this event. Sort of weird, no? Also the only people who wrote about him 100 years after the fact where his supposed followers. Don't get me wrong, I believe he existed, just not in the time they said he did and I do not believe Jesus was his name. That is a title, not a name. Funny, the old testament makes mention of him being with Moses and Aaron on Sinai (Jesus is a Greek word, in his language the name would have been Joshua). I am not a christian so I am not 100% familiar with christian doctrine, but I know they try to explain this event away by saying Jesus wasn't with them (Moses and Aaron) physically but spiritually.
WIld Style - yes true. I don't claim to be a religious authority. Someone with more knowlege will have to respond. Good topic by the way. Might be more fitting in the religious forum, but then again those topics can get too passionate there.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
