Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 2.33 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-07-2016, 10:47 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 09:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 08:45 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Fossils require very special conditions, and as a result, the vast majority of dead organisms do not get fossilized. However, in fossil beds where the conditions were right, paleontologists find thousands upon thousands of fossils.

Likewise with towns and buildings. Towns have buildings -- multiple buildings -- and if conditions are such that buildings would be preserved, you would expect to find more than one. If conditions were not right, the farm wouldn't be there either. If the farm was preserved and was part of a town, other buildings should have been found. They were not.

What part of "a farm is not a town" do you not understand?


lol, your suggestion here might be somewhat valid if the area in question remaining untouched for 2000 years, rather than built upon, pillaged, etc. for a number of centuries. In fact the only reason we have the remains of the farm is a result of that particular area remaining undeveloped.

We have pottery, coinage, graves etc.. around that area to indicate that it was inhabited by more than just a single farm.

And please leave you anachronistic semantics reserved for someone else, if we're arguing of the English meaning of town, cities, farms it's irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No "anachronistic semantics" are needed. At no time in history has a single farm ever been considered a "town".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
20-07-2016, 10:58 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 10:32 AM)natachan Wrote:  I disagree. Christ is a title, and as you note was often used for a good number of those in antiquity.

I have never noted that. In fact, I have persistently urged those in this conversation to bring just one instance of written historical evidence of a person other than Jesus who has been entitled as Christ in the same fashion as Jesus. ie; Jesus the Christ, Jesus called Christ.

There is not one.

Quote: All this says is that they believe their anointed one was killed by Pilate.

It doesn't state any such thing. It proclaims it with a positive statement of fact.

Quote:There are no details to tie this to an actual event except the name Pilate.

That's why you opinion is invalidated, you are seeing things from either a Christian or anti-Christian perspective, as opposed to a strictly historical perspective.

It shows us the following:

1. Pontius Pilate crucified Christ.
2. Tiberius was the Caesar at the time.
3. It happened in Judea (a strictly Roman reference to a province as opposed to Israel. It was named after Herod Archelaus's Tetrarchy of Judea.)
4. Other sources reveal it had to happen in Judea sometime between Ad 26 - Ad 36 due to Pilate's assignment to Judea, and Tiberius' reign.
5. Immediately after the crucifixion, a "mischievous superstition" broke out in Judea, an obvious reference to the resurrection.
6. The Christians got their name from this same Christ who was crucified.

You will need to re-think your "Pilate only" position, as it grossly understates the reality.


Quote: It would read exactly the same if this was just a story put around by Christians.

Re-asserting this will never make it true. It's an opinion that flies in the face of both reason and the evidence.

Quote:This passage is flimsy. It is the ne phrase that can be read as simply a statement of what this sect believed. And this is THE BEST extra-biblical evidence of this person. It's lousy.

You continue to assert that Tacitus is writing from a position of belief, when it is obvious he is writing a Roman history book. You have no evidence of this to justify any reason to hold to this position.

You can believe what you want, but proving your belief has merit is an entirely different thing, and you have no proof whatsoever to merit what you believe.

Just like religious people have no evidence of a god.

Quote:I think that there was an originator. Contemporaries, poets and observers, note that there were apocalyptic preachers in this area at the time. In fact it appears they were common. I remember a piece, I can't remember which poet wrote it, about the frequency of these preachers. We also know of several messianic Jewish preachers around this time. Some of their stories bear parallels to the Jesus story, including that of John the Baptist.

Again, no one else was ever entitled as Christ other than Jesus.

Quote:I find it likely that the person who we will call Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher. I think it is likely that he either met, or was in some way associated with the sect that was around John the Baptist. It is possible that he was crucified by Pilate. Pilate was not a nice man and was known for killing people for little or no reason. I think his story was then embellished and exaggerated.

Exactly. This we can agree on, except for the evidence that indicates this same Jesus is exactly who Tacitus is talking about.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:12 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 10:21 AM)ohio_drg Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 10:08 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  And that's exactly why this works against you. Christians would be proclaiming the name of JEEEESUSSSS loud and clear and if Tacitus would have said "Jesus" THEN you would have more reason to be suspicious, and so would I. So would anybody.

The precise reason- I believe- that Tacitus used "Christ" is because of what the word "Christ" actually means. Yes, the standard understanding is that it refers to a savior of the Jews, but in Judaic theology a Messiah will also be a king.

Tacitus is saying "Christ" because at that time the Christians were still considered to be a sub-sect of the Jews as far as the Romans were concerned, and with the constant wars between the Romans and Jews, Tacitus was telling the Roman audience that the Romans had conquered and killed a Jewish king.



Considering that it is a non-Christian non-Jewish account of the crucifixion of Christ by the Romans from the Roman perspective, this passage is unassailable in terms of compelling and credibility.

When was this passage first written?

Circa Ad 111.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:19 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 10:47 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 09:23 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  lol, your suggestion here might be somewhat valid if the area in question remaining untouched for 2000 years, rather than built upon, pillaged, etc. for a number of centuries. In fact the only reason we have the remains of the farm is a result of that particular area remaining undeveloped.

We have pottery, coinage, graves etc.. around that area to indicate that it was inhabited by more than just a single farm.

And please leave you anachronistic semantics reserved for someone else, if we're arguing of the English meaning of town, cities, farms it's irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No "anachronistic semantics" are needed. At no time in history has a single farm ever been considered a "town".

You know this how?

I know a place we call "7 Mile House" and it only had 1 house, 7 miles from a small city. In fact I know of several places similar to that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:32 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 11:19 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 10:47 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  No "anachronistic semantics" are needed. At no time in history has a single farm ever been considered a "town".

You know this how?

I know a place we call "7 Mile House" and it only had 1 house, 7 miles from a small city. In fact I know of several places similar to that.

And who exactly considers or calls such places "towns"? There are many farms, plantations, houses, etc. that have names attached to them. Doesn't make them towns. The Nazareth that Jesus is said to have lived in is described as a town, with multiple families, a synagogue, etc. This is not at all the same thing as a farm.

Let me also repeat that I am not a mythicist, and I am not claiming that Jesus didn't exist or that Nazareth didn't exist. I think both probably did. My problem is with Tomasia's flimsy evidence. Nothing he has provided proves that Nazareth existed circa 4 BC. I neither know nor care whether or not it did. But he is not making much of a case for his claim.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Grasshopper's post
20-07-2016, 11:34 AM
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 10:36 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Ummm... This is what happens when you excavate a town that has been "built upon, pillaged, etc. for a number of centuries":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho

They found a lot more than one farm and some pottery. They found evidence of at least 20 separate settlements, and were able to distinguish them from each other. And this is older than Nazareth.

Lol, if you want to open up the archaeological evidence to expand to several centuries, as in your Jericho example, rather than a single century. You have silos, grinding mills, etc. dating back to 1500 b.c. indicating substantial settlement in that area.

It's why Nazareth deniers often conceded it's existence prior to the 1st century, but claim it disappeared during the time of Jesus, only to appear again shortly afterwards.

And according to you it was inhabited by a single farm, and I guess bunch of other people who possessed pottery and coinage, but no homes of their own.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:38 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 11:34 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 10:36 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  Ummm... This is what happens when you excavate a town that has been "built upon, pillaged, etc. for a number of centuries":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jericho

They found a lot more than one farm and some pottery. They found evidence of at least 20 separate settlements, and were able to distinguish them from each other. And this is older than Nazareth.

Lol, if you want to open up the archaeological evidence to expand to several centuries, as in your Jericho example, rather than a single century. You have silos, grinding mills, etc. dating back to 1500 b.c. indicating substantial settlement in that area.

It's why Nazareth deniers often conceded it's existence prior to the 1st century, but claim it disappeared during the time of Jesus, only to appear again shortly afterwards.

And according to you it was inhabited by a single farm, and I guess bunch of other people who possessed pottery and coinage, but no homes of their own.

I make no claims about Nazareth or who inhabited it. I only say that your "evidence" is flimsy. The town may very well have existed. But you haven't come close to proving it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:40 AM
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 11:32 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  
(20-07-2016 11:19 AM)GoingUp Wrote:  You know this how?

I know a place we call "7 Mile House" and it only had 1 house, 7 miles from a small city. In fact I know of several places similar to that.

And who exactly considers or calls such places "towns"? There are many farms, plantations, houses, etc. that have names attached to them. Doesn't make them towns. The Nazareth that Jesus is said to have lived in is described as a town, with multiple families, a synagogue, etc. This is not at all the same thing as a farm.

Let me also repeat that I am not a mythicist, and I am not claiming that Jesus didn't exist or that Nazareth didn't exist. I think both probably did. My problem is with Tomasia's flimsy evidence. Nothing he has provided proves that Nazareth existed circa 4 BC. I neither know nor care whether or not it did. But he is not making much of a case for his claim.


Proof and prove are your terms not mine.

If the evidence is compelling enough to indicate it more likely existed than not, to believe that it did exists at the time. That's the extent of my argument.

I'm not here arguing for any sort of absolutely certainty, in which terms like prove and proof might better appropriated for. That's your game not mine.

And by your concession that the town of Nazareth probably did exist at the time, it goes with out saying that you don't imagine as your were suggestive of earlier, that it was occupied by a single farm. Because as you said earlier a single farm doesn't make a town.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:41 AM
RE: Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
Quote:1. Pontius Pilate crucified Christ.


Jesus freak mythology. Pilate, who was real, never heard of your mythical godboy.

He would probably have been delighted to be written into the yarn, though.

You'll have to do a lot better than your fucking gospels, pal.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-07-2016, 11:45 AM (This post was last modified: 20-07-2016 11:49 AM by Tomasia.)
Contemporary Accounts of Jesus
(20-07-2016 11:38 AM)Grasshopper Wrote:  I make no claims about Nazareth or who inhabited it. I only say that your "evidence" is flimsy. The town may very well have existed. But you haven't come close to proving it.

Ah yes, when your argument fails retreat to a lack of belief, absolve yourself of making any claims of your own.

That seems to be what the folks who use to believe Jesus didn't exist, that Nazareth didn't exist, dissolved to, to the entirely ignorable lack of belief crowds.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Tell me, muse, of the storyteller who has been thrust to the edge of the world, both an infant and an ancient, and through him reveal everyman." ---Homer the aged poet.

"In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men. The Light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it."
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: