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.
No, they are using arguments created by Christians, and only found in the study of Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Way
And 2 Peter which refers to Jesus as our Lord and Savior is not questioning the existence of Jesus. Perhaps you meant 2 John in which the writer of that short epistle is arguing against those who did not acknowledge Jesus as coming in the flesh. They didn't deny the existence of Jesus, they just denied that he was truly human while acknowledging his deity or divinity.
2 Peter is arguing against gospel Jesus. So they are certainly arguing against that Jesus. What these other Christians were preaching is unknown.
First you'd have to find when and where the miracles were being preformed, then locate the nearest 'secular' historian. (no one began putting stories to papyrus until 30 - 60 years after Christ's death and resurrection)
Philo went to Jerusalem at that time, Justus of Tiberius lived there shortly after, and Pliny the Elder searched the Roman empire for stories about miracles.
Here's a good one: supernatural darkness at Christ's crucifixion verified by three historians--now get this--Thallus, Phlegon, and Africanus!!!!
Thallus: Date unknown
Phlegon:
Died: Late second century AD; unknown
Africanus:
Died: 240 AD
So unless these guys could live to 200 years they would not have witnessed this darkness.
Now about the darkness:
The gospel stories also make a solar eclipse impossible: the crucifixion passover happened during a full moon, and the darkness supposedly lasted three hours (indeed, Julius Africanus claimed it covered the whole world). Such an impossible event would not fail to be recorded in the works of Seneca, Pliny, Josephus or other historians, yet it is not mentioned anywhere else outside of Christian rhetoric, so we can probably dismiss the idea of this being a real event.
Derek, the darkness simply could not have happened. Nobody who might have experienced it wrote a word about it. It's just more Christian exaggeration and frankly outright lies.
Forget Phlegon, he was not talking about Jesus, he was writing about an event in November, 29 AD, in the Turkey. Thallus was probably writing a brief version based on Phlegon's account, and we do not know if Africanus is responding to something written by Thallus about jesus, or he was simply presuming Thallus was writing about Jesus.
Yep, no one wrote anything down about the event for 60 years afterwards. But before that it was talked about a lot; the word spread from Kingdom to Kingdom by commoners who were there the day of Christ.
How do you know these alleged events were talked about?
Forget Phlegon, he was not talking about Jesus, he was writing about an event in November, 29 AD, in the Turkey. Thallus was probably writing a brief version based on Phlegon's account, and we do not know if Africanus is responding to something written by Thallus about jesus, or he was simply presuming Thallus was writing about Jesus.
Re the resurrection a question occurs to me:
If Matthew was off in some foreign country preaching and getting murdered then when did he get time to write a gospel that made it over to Rome. What's the theory, that he wrote the gospel from Ethiopia and then Fed-Ex'ed to Rome so it wouldn't get lost? And check out his martyrdom story. Story sounds suspiciously like Herod, Salome and John the Baptist. These Christians sure did know how to copy each other:
According to tradition, the saint was killed on the orders of the king of Ethiopia while celebrating Mass at the altar. The king lusted after his own niece, and had been rebuked by Matthew, for the girl was a nun, and therefore the bride of Christ.
No, they are using arguments created by Christians, and only found in the study of Jesus.
That's not true. Historians use things such as independent multiple attestation in the study of history. This is not confined to the study of Jesus.
Quote:
2 Peter is arguing against gospel Jesus. So they are certainly arguing against that Jesus. What these other Christians were preaching is unknown.
I don't know how you can make that claim and expect to be taken seriously. The writer of 2 Peter refers to Jesus as 'our God and Savior.' That's ''gospel Jesus.''
Yep, no one wrote anything down about the event for 60 years afterwards. But before that it was talked about a lot; the word spread from Kingdom to Kingdom by commoners who were there the day of Christ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
"it was talked about a lot". wow. how impressive. certainly proves a lot.
I know we don't sit around camp fires or a fireplace and listen to our elders anymore, but that use to be a thing.
Actually no, it is not simple. You want something 'written' (probably in modern english) without first considering the reading and writing abilities, as well as, the culture (and laws) of those of that era. Not to mention you are putting a human characteristic on an entity that isn't human.
The word was out; spread vocally from generation to generation and kingdom to kingdom before they began to write in Latin and/or Armenian.
Go back through the evolution [of] man, then apply your questions. Trust the road to Damascus looked very different in the first Centuries of time, than it does now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Let's toss in the gullibility of people of the era to believe in what is, essentially, "magic stuff".
They believed the law of the land --- by your comment I'm guessing you have never looked into prehistoric and ancient histories or the culture. While I'm not verse on the subject, I've got a pretty good idea of what their lives were like --- there are some countries today, I don't believe change has happened for 'em.
And hieroglyphics? Before words there were pictures drawn on cave walls that told stories; they may not mean anything to us today, but they meant a lot to those that lived in that time. Especially since they believed the high priest-pharaoh in what those symbols represented. And from those symbols came the law of the land, as the pharaoh determined (commoners were not aloud into the sacred caves) for them what their belief would be (name a sun god) and how that belief would be carried out in rituals.
You're trying to have something recorded in a time that there is no possible way to do so, as linguistics and language goes --- and when the people began recording the stories they did so in their cultural way of doing it --- 'orally'. Only those who ruled the people knew how to read and write, everyone else, the commoners followed what they were told to do. Even after Christ, freedom of religion wasn't made remotely possible over the next 300 or so years. (4th century A.D) The Church and State (in Roman times) ruled as one. When the printed version (not without loss of life and the Book burnt down to one) of the ancient stories were circulated --- there goes the power of the Church and State centuries still in the making.
Last I checked there were no wars or struggles of power of the people in Greece associated with Hercules. Until people understand the power dynamics between the people and those in power over them, they will be as Paul on the Road to Damascus.
The Bible is the first recording of humanity, faith or not, they are what they are, so that those fully inspired by God can see the world as it is, not for how they'd want it to be. People will loose faith; that's a given, as those that awaited Moses's return from the mountain top did. But for everything you may believe you have that points to a myth, there are those whose lives have been transformed, they know better. For the others, a golden calf. (not in a literal sense)
If it hadn't been for Christ, we would still be (ignorant) being dictated to by governments overseeing our religion. God sent His Son and that isn't enough for some people. That's not on God, but on the peoples willfulness at being deceived.
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillobyte
No offense, Ellis. You have to learn about history in order to make meaningful comments. For example, the Hindu Veda dates back to 6000 BC long before the Bible came along.
These are just some of the things you have to learn first. You have to empty your mind of all the propaganda that churchmen have fed you over the decades to make you believe Jesus was real. He wasn't.
No offense taken thrill, because I didn't come to know God through a Book or a man made Church. btw: God was here before Hindu. God has led people to do all kinds of things, for be it for me to question what's going on.
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.
