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.
There is a second reference to Jesus in the works of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus. In Antiquities 20.200, he describes how, in AD 62, the high priest Ananus was deposed because he had illegally "convened the Sanhedrin [the highest Jewish religious court / governing body]. He had brought before them the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, who was called James, and some other men, whom he accused of having broken the law, and handed them over to be stoned."
Notice the following points from this quotation from Josephus:
• Jesus had a brother called James
• James was executed by the Jewish leaders in AD 62
• There were claims that Jesus was the Messiah (that is, the Christ).
There is one other important point to notice from this quotation. Most scholars do not doubt the authenticity of this second reference to Jesus. Yet this passage refers to Jesus as the "so-called Christ". This brief comment appears to link back to Josephus' earlier reference to Jesus, and may even show that what he originally wrote there included some such comment as 'Jesus the so-called Christ.' Several of the books listed include some discussion of these passages from Josephus.
Eggsalent poast Alter2Ego! I dowt yoo will konvinse the athiist tho.
I still find it interesting that IF Josephus even wrote part or all (which I doubt strongly) this passage in question, there is NO mention of one of the cornerstone teachings of mainstream Christianity and that is, that Jesus is the literal son of god or god himself. Why was this missing?
Oh, and Eusebius was a forger and propangda minister for emperor Constantine. Eusebius, did you know this before you chose that screen name? I'm just curious.
....and you should not visit so many Bible apologist sites. They aren't called 'Liars for Jesus' without good cause.
Even if Josephus did mention Jesus, it is not evidence that Jesus existed. Josephus was not alive during the alleged lifetime of your Jesus. He can only relate hearsay. Hearsay needs to be corroborated with other verifiable evidence. In the case of Jesus there is none.
For the third time. Do you consider the fact that Josephus mentioned Hercules to be evidence for a real Hercules in the same way that you consider Josephus' alleged mention of Jesus to be evidence for a real Jesus?
Also, would you be so kind as to go back through the thread to all the posts that I have addressed specifically to you and identify this symbol (?). It is called a question mark and it indicates that I am asking you a question. Common courtesy demands that you answer.
The Gospels sure do conflict with each other so that apologists rationalize their silly harmonizations with their it may be's as even the most advanced theologians do. Joshephus first passage is mostly a Christian interpolation [ lie] . And as he wasn't privy to any real knowledge about Yeshua, anything he reports comes from Christians. All those other accounts amount to nothing also as they ,too, depend on unverifiable matters.
Folks, rational people would never find reliable those fables! Hearsay is unreliable. Miracles just don't happen, and people sure do rationalize why they don't happen now! Uniformatianism is a scientific, reliable principle whilst revelations reveal people's own imaginations.
Rational people just cannot accept everything that proud liar states! Insane..,yes.
In a dead thread today, I added more information. Answer it here,not there.
See the new one God cannot exist!
Last edited by carneadesthatesstratoofga; 03-08-2012 at 11:32 AM..
Reason: added info.
....and you should not visit so many Bible apologist sites. They aren't called 'Liars for Jesus' without good cause.
Even if Josephus did mention Jesus, it is not evidence that Jesus existed.
It is not proof that he existed, but it is absolutely evidence. It's not particularly compelling evidence, but it is evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
Josephus was not alive during the alleged lifetime of your Jesus. He can only relate hearsay. Hearsay needs to be corroborated with other verifiable evidence.
So you advocate for history relying on eyewitness testimony and verifiable evidence? That makes for a remarkably thin textbook.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
In the case of Jesus there are none.
There's no proof, but there's plenty of evidence. It's all a matter of how the evidence is interpreted, and how one deals with the gaps in the historical record. The simple fact is that early first-century Palestine is not very thoroughly covered in the historical record, and what is there has agendas that do not bear particularly on the figure in question. This is by no means evidence for Jesus' existence, but it explains why there are gaps in the record. We have to deal with those gaps rather than attempt to marshal them in and of themselves in support of one conclusion or another.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rafius
For the third time. Do you consider the fact that Josephus mentioned Hercules to be evidence for a real Hercules in the same way that you consider Josephus' alleged mention of Jesus to be evidence for a real Jesus?
The existence of a narrative about Jesus' life and death in the correct area within a few decades of the purported events constitutes an entirely different kind of evidence from a reference to a mythological character from hoary and unknown antiquity. This is a very, very weak dismissal of the value of Josephus' testimony.
So you advocate for history relying on eyewitness testimony and verifiable evidence? That makes for a remarkably thin textbook.
Maybe, but it beats hearsay every time.
Quote:
There's no proof, but there's plenty of evidence. It's all a matter of how the evidence is interpreted,....
...and whether or not the evidence is objective and verifiable.
Quote:
The simple fact is that early first-century Palestine is not very thoroughly covered in the historical record,.....
....which is surprising don't you think, considering there was supposed to be someone there that could perform miracles the like of which had not been seen before or since?
Thanks for that info on Tacitus btw. I'll look into it over the next few days.
Every Christmas Eve, several of the leading and credible national TV media outlets announce, very solemnly, that an unidentified flying object has been "confirmed", outbound from over the North Pole (a Rooskie bomber perhaps?). It always turns out to be a rather slow moving and overloaded item, and later hi-rez photos have "confirmed" what is in in fact, a reindeer-pulled sleigh!
What, you want to take on the reputation of Walter Chronkhite or the other talking heads? The ever-pert but undeniably honest Katie Curic? Brian WhassHisName???
Anecdotal evidence ain't of much value (esp. when it's combined with the "I'm so Awe-Struck, so that proves my God is out there!") approach to proof of your Gawdy-Gawd.
Such vague and highly varied historical accounts notwithstanding, those weakly associated yet absolutely claimed miracle achievements have since been properly and objectively evaluated as having very rational explanations, often associated with now-confirmed astronomical explanations.
Yup, your friend Jeebusss likely did exist as a clever well-travelled minstrel, but as the undeniable miracle-working Son'o'God???
Not so likely, esp. since all the ever-more glorified stories of his accomplshments were created decades later following the children's "telephone game" means of the ancient, myth-improving "accurate" () rich oral tradition method.
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.
Here's how it works!
) rich oral tradition method.
